Category Archives: Economic stuff

Short history lesson

Moral decay? Or deregulation?

Andrew Leonard is unhappy with my colleague David Brooks for suggesting that rising debt in America reflects moral decay. Surprisingly, however, Leonard doesn’t make what I thought was the most compelling critique.

David points out, correctly, that something changed around 1980 — that consumers started spending a larger share of national income and that debt began increasing. Although he doesn’t point this out, this was also when the federal government first began running substantial deficits even in good years.

David would have you believe that what happened then was a decline in Calvinist virtue. But, um, didn’t something else happen around 1980? Can’t quite remember .. someone whose name begins with the letter “R”?

Yes, Reagan did it.

The turn to budget deficits was a direct result of the new, Irving-Kristol inspired political strategy of pushing tax cuts without worrying about the “accounting deficiencies of government.”

Meanwhile, the surge in household debt can largely be attributed to financial deregulation.

So what happened? Did we lose our economic morality? No, we were the victims of politics.

Under the heading of “Holy Shit!”

Matt Yglesias drops this graph into a short discussion on a recent Krugman column or post.  Note, if you will, the two lines that show a 1 to 1 correspondence.

The institutionalization of militarism.

Income inequality trend – what matches it?

Paul Krugman (and others) have noted recent income inequality figures from  Emmanuel Saez at Berkeley.    Here is the historical perspective graphed…

Two major trends are immediately evident – downwards from the 20s and then upwards from the the mid-70s.  We know what brought the trend down from “the guilded age” but what brought it back up?

I’ve previously noted here Lewis Lapham’s essay “The Tentacles of Rage”. What Lapham describes in this essay matches yjod rise and does so far better than any particular individual or party holding the Presidency or the inititation of any particular policy or the establishment of or dismantling of any particular institution related to governance in the US.

Further, one can see quite clearly how what Lapham describes is presently in full bloom in the broad campaign underway to kill healthcare reform in the US and to bring down a President who likely will, if he is able, move the country back towards the sorts of regulations and perspectives which caused or facilitated the downward trend mentioned above.

I encourage everyone to read the essay with care and with attention to the correspondences between the timeline demonstrated in the graph and the correspondences between the thesis Lapham advances with what we have all experienced since the mid 70s and are still experiencing now.

How much is the healthcare industry spending to lobby congress?

$1.4 million….per day

h/t Greg Sargent at the Plumline

The Reagan legacy

For the more one looks into the origins of the current disaster, the clearer it becomes that the key wrong turn — the turn that made crisis inevitable — took place in the early 1980s, during the Reagan years.

…Now, the proximate causes of today’s economic crisis lie in events that took place long after Reagan left office — in the global savings glut created by surpluses in China and elsewhere, and in the giant housing bubble that savings glut helped inflate.

But it was the explosion of debt over the previous quarter-century that made the U.S. economy so vulnerable. Overstretched borrowers were bound to start defaulting in large numbers once the housing bubble burst and unemployment began to rise.

These defaults in turn wreaked havoc with a financial system that — also mainly thanks to Reagan-era deregulation — took on too much risk with too little capital.

There’s plenty of blame to go around these days. But the prime villains behind the mess we’re in were Reagan and his circle of advisers — men who forgot the lessons of America’s last great financial crisis, and condemned the rest of us to repeat it.

Krugman’s full column here

Update: The following story demonstrates another aspect of the Reagan/conservative movement ideology of  “government regulation bad, unhindered corporate greed good”.  Christopher Cox, former chairman of the SEC and subject of this story, served in the Reagan White House.

During Cox’s tenure, investigators who wanted to subpoena documents or compel interviews faced an increasingly cumbersome process to win the commission’s approval for each case, according to current and former agency officials.

Cox also required enforcement officials to see the commissioners before approaching a company about a civil settlement. In several high-profile cases, when SEC lawyers were ready to ask the commission to authorize lawsuits or approve settlements, Cox postponed the decisions at the last minute, leaving cases unresolved for months, the sources said. At times, as in the Biovail case, the commission eventually weakened the sanctions sought by the enforcement division.

Washington Post story here

John Maynard Keynes

Matt Yglesias recommends Chapter 12 of Keynes “General Theory”

It’s chugging through my printer as we speak.

Evan Thomas, the media as an establishment entity

Many are noting a particular passage from Evan Thomas’ article on Krugman in Newsweek after it was excerpted and underlined by Dougj at  Balloon Juice

I’m tired of arguing about Krugman with everyone, but I’d like to point out a in Evan Thomas’s piece about Krugman in Newsweek:

If you are of the establishment persuasion (and I am), reading Krugman makes you uneasy. You hope he’s wrong, and you sense he’s being a little harsh (especially about Geithner), but you have a creeping feeling that he knows something that others cannot, or will not, see. By definition, establishments believe in propping up the existing order. Members of the ruling class have a vested interest in keeping things pretty much the way they are. Safeguarding the status quo, protecting traditional institutions, can be healthy and useful, stabilizing and reassuring. But sometimes, beneath the pleasant murmur and tinkle of cocktails, the old guard cannot hear the sound of ice cracking. The in crowd of any age can be deceived by self-confidence…

I agree with John that the piece was content-free in general. But I credit Thomas for admitting what role establishment media plays.

As dday at  Washington Monthly says:

That’s a good thing to know about the establishment media. It should be in every single one of their stories as a boilerplate at the top.

Indeed.  I’m a bit too tired to draw this out right now but one ought to note that the admission from Thomas and these responses to it bear a striking similarity to the case against the media long made by Noam Chomsky.

Rolling back deregulation, but how far?

A very bright piece by Ed Kilgore on the debate among progressives as to how far Obama ought to go in restructuring and regulating the financial industry

Rolling Back the Madness – But How Far?

Nate Silver and the Republican “budget”

The bright man lives here

Stiglitz writes in the Guardian

The financial crisis that began in America’s sub-prime mortgage market has now become a global recession – with growth projected to be a negative 1.5%, the worst performance since the Great Depression. Even countries that had done everything right are seeing marked declines in growth rates, and even deep recessions. And much of the most acute pain will be felt by developing countries.

continue reading here

Will the Geithner plan work?

Economists Brad DeLong, Paul Krugman, Mark Thoma and Simon Johnston discuss

Find it here

Matt Tabibi – “The Big Takeover”

26763744-26763749-slarge

Everyone has been citing (and raving about) Tabibi’s recent piece on the economic crisis.  Having myself now read it, I’m joining the chorus.  But it is not a happy story.  It’s here.

Krugman

I’ve been a fan of Krugman for many years. His columns and the two books I’ve read have consistently impressed me (a generalist, not an economist) with their intelligence, their careful reasoning and their tendency to accurately assay the present and then predict what we might expect up the line.

But today, I’m hoping he’s wrong.

More Barclay’s whistleblower revelations

Further detailed allegations about tax avoidance schemes set up by Barclays Bank emerged tonight from whistleblowers who said the bank made close to £1bn profit a year from a series of elaborate deals.

The schemes are similar to those detailed in documents published by the Guardian this week which have been the centre of a three-day hearing at the high court, and are the subject of a gagging order.

The internal Barclays memos were leaked by a mole to the Liberal Democrats. The new allegations reiterate claims that the bank’s main purpose in entering into these schemes was to make profit from tax avoidance through an intricate circuit of offshore Cayman Islands and Luxembourg companies. The profits are said to be enormous and the deals so complex that HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) struggles to unravel them.

continue getting pissed off here

Quote of the day – “Big surprise” category

Nobody is going to give it back and then stay,” said one of the firm’s employees. “If they give back the money, then they will walk. And they will walk into the arms of AIG’s counterparties.

As Josh at TPM writes:

What is so damaging about this isn’t the money — which is almost trivially small compared to the many hundreds of billions we’ve already committed. The problem is what appears to be the president’s mortifying impotence in the face of bankers and financiers who created the problem.

As I noted two days ago, Barclays in England successfully stopped the Guardian from continuing to publish (on their site) internal Barclay’s memoranda on huge tax avoidance schemes  read here

It appears that the immense wealth of these institutions combined with their centrality in maintaining the world’s financial system give them an ability presently to leverage whatever the hell they desire with almost zero accountability.  And there appears to be no countervailing  institutions which might police them.

Update: I should have noted it earlier…Barclays is one of the institutions which is receiving US  dollars (via the AIG bailout and perhaps other funding streams as well)

Yikes

No Return to Normal, by James K Galbraith

Read it here

h/t Steve Benen

What planet is Perino visiting from?

On the subject of AIG bonuses

PERINO: And the people who are working there that are middle-class people, are expecting to get this bonus. If they do not get it, maybe they won’t be motivated enough to try to help the company turn around and getting the company to turn around and be more profitable is important for all of us.

The next time we hear Perino suggest she has a grip on what normal Americans are thinking and wanting, we can remember that in her noggin, the “middle class” is home to AIG execs who spend a half million on facials, pedicures and massages at a resort in California and who get bonuses of $1 million through $6.4 million.  A true representative of the people, Perino.


Another reason to heart the big banks

From the Guardian UK

Barclays Bank obtained a court order early today banning the Guardian from publishing documents which showed how the bank set up companies to avoid hundreds of millions of pounds in tax.

The gagging order was granted by Mr Justice Ouseley after Barclays complained about seven documents on the Guardian’s website which had been leaked to the Liberal Democrats’ deputy leader, Vince Cable.

The internal Barclays memos – leaked by a Barclays whistleblower – showed executives from SCM, Barclays’s structured capital markets division, seeking approval for a 2007 plan to sink more than $16bn (£11.4bn) into US loans.

Tax benefits were to be generated by an elaborate circuit of Cayman islands companies, US partnerships and Luxembourg subsidiaries.

The documents had been leaked to Cable by a former employee of the bank, who wrote a long account of how the bank works.

Krugman finds European institutions too weak to adequately deal with economic crisis

Paul Krugman on Europe’s insufficient response to the global economic situation

The clear and present danger to Europe right now comes from a different direction — the continent’s failure to respond effectively to the financial crisis.

Europe has fallen short in terms of both fiscal and monetary policy: it’s facing at least as severe a slump as the United States, yet it’s doing far less to combat the downturn.

On the fiscal side, the comparison with the United States is striking. Many economists, myself included, have argued that the Obama administration’s stimulus plan is too small, given the depth of the crisis. But America’s actions dwarf anything the Europeans are doing.

Sesame Street explains the Madoff scandal