Monday, February 06th, 2012

    You are not currently logged in.

    Username
    Password
     

If You Still Have Money In Your Wallet, Read This

Jan 22nd, 2009 | By James Dale Davidson | Category: Abundance


The More Things Change…

‘Tis time, there must be a line of separation between honest Men & knaves, between respectable Stockholders and dealers in the funds, and mere unprincipled Gamblers.

  • Alexander Hamilton, March 2, 1792

If you still have cash in your wallet, you will recognize Hamilton from his picture on the ten-dollar bill. As America’s first Treasury secretary, he is honored for his role in launching the U.S. currency.

During the Civil War, his reputation was even more "on the money." Lincoln put Hamilton’s portrait on the $2, $5, $10 and $50 notes. 

Incoming Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, would do well to look to Hamilton for inspiration as he tries to do the impossible: re-inflate a bubble that has burst.

It can’t be done. But Hamilton went about as far as anyone in draping the banner of success over improvised interventions designed to jump-start a lagging economy.

In his stint as Treasury secretary, Hamilton faced a panic caused by the bankruptcy of William Duer, a speculator Hamilton had appointed the first assistant secretary of the Treasury.

Hamilton orchestrated a rapid intervention. He ordered the Treasury to buy several hundred thousand dollars worth of federal securities to support the market, and he urged banks not to call in loans. Soon, calm returned.

According to historian John Steele Gordon, "It would be 195 years, until the great crash of 1987, before the federal government once again moved decisively to prevent a panic."

A Lesson from History

Of course, a crucial difference between Hamilton’s tidy response to the panic of 1792 and the situation today is that Hamilton was starting from rock bottom in an economy with few financial assets, little debt and very little circulating money.

In fact, it takes an act of imagination to recognize how  primitive the U.S. economy was when Hamilton joined Washington’s first cabinet on September 11, 1789. As difficult as it is to believe, at this time the United States was poorer than Haiti.

Hamilton faced no little stock of problems, however, as he tried to move the economy towards prosperity.

Among other things, the new country had no financing apparatus in place. There was little or no mechanism of credit to support commerce and industry. There was also a need to formulate rules to govern the eighteenth-century version of market speculation. (This was organized, appropriately enough, in taverns, where most of the early trading of shares and notes took place.)

Hamilton was a great pioneer of American commerce. He founded The Bank of New York in 1784. He was also the founder of the U.S. Coast Guard and the New York Post newspaper.

These are considerable accomplishments for a man who was also a military hero.

During the American Revolution, Hamilton was George Washington’s chief of staff, in which capacity he organized the Continentals’ intelligence services.

He also commanded an infantry assault that captured a British stronghold at the Battle of Yorktown, the battle that effectively ended the Revolutionary War.

And after leaving the Treasury, Hamilton served as the "Senior Officer of the U.S. Army" with a rank of major general.

Hamilton, who was the first delegate selected to the Constitutional Convention, also became a prominent constitutional lawyer. He was the principal author of the Federalist Papers , writing 51 of those 85 famous essays.

By comparison, Geithner is a piker.

A Taxing Issue

He has never started anything to speak of, except a minor fuss in Congress when the distinguished members discovered that he had done something quite enterprising – something akin to tax evasion.

Although he has been employed by government all his adult life, he somehow neglected to pay $42,702 in self-employment taxes while working at the International Monetary Fund from 2001 to 2004.

Now he’s President Obama’s choice for Treasury secretary, which would put him in charge of the IRS.

I don’t know about you, but I find it somewhat encouraging to see signs that Geithner might not be a tax-collecting zealot. Let’s hope he’s not.

Unlike Hamilton, Geithner has been served an alphabet soup (TAF, TSLF, PDCF, TARP, AMLF, CPFF, TLGP, TOP, MMIFF, TARF) of Treasury and Fed programs to reliquify a financial system gagging on excessive debt.

When Hamilton launched the Bank of the United States to finance an eighteenth-century economy, which had only limited and primitive mechanism of credit, it was reasonable to surmise that every dollar of available credit would have a multiplier effect on economic activity.

In fact, each dollar of new debt may have generated two dollars or more of economic activity. Of course, there were no statistical agencies in the new government to capture such data. So we can only guess.

But during my lifetime, statistics have become available to record the declining utility of debt in stimulating the economy.

In the 1950s, when I was a child, each dollar of new debt resulted in $0.73 in GDP growth. By the 1980s, however, the efficiency of new debt in stimulating economic activity had halved. Each dollar of debt resulted in just $0.34 in GDP growth.

In the current decade of runaway credit explosion, the stimulative effect of new debt has halved again. Each dollar of new debt now generates just $0.19 of economic growth.

Of course, these figures (the latest available as of June 30, 2008) don’t tell the final tale. During the second half of 2008 debt exploded, with trillions of dollars in bailouts widening budget deficits to an incredible degree.

The chairman of the Senate Budget Committee says the deficit for the fiscal year ending this fall will be at least $2 trillion. Furthermore, GDP is rapidly falling. And we could see as little as $0.15 of economic growth for each dollar of new debt for the decade.

The Bailout Boys

Given this unfavorable arithmetic, Geithner faces a much more daunting problem than Hamilton faced. The new nominee not only has to help clean up Wall Street, he also has to find a way to make debt stimulate rather than anesthetize the economy.

Rumors suggest that one of Geithner’s ploys will be to create a "bad bank," an official financial institution whose job will be to warehouse bad debt.

Like medieval porters stacking corpses at the church door after a visit by the Black Death, Geithner and his band of bailout economists intend to inter the casualties of the "Plague of the Black Debt" to avoid infecting the balance sheets of healthy banks. It will be an adventure to watch.

Someday centuries from now someone may write an entertaining historical novel that weaves a story about Geithner and his exploits as entertaining as David Liss’s The Whiskey Rebels , an historical fiction that features Alexander Hamilton as a central figure in an entertaining yarn. 

One reviewer described it this way: "A breathtaking, breakneck tale from the interwoven viewpoints of a top revolutionary spy and a brilliant and cunning woman who becomes both his ally and nemesis. This is the powerful portrayal of an era of rampant, freebooting capitalism run amok that lay at the dawn of – and could have destroyed — the new American republic."

Rather than waiting many years for someone to concoct a tale about Geithner and the bailout boys as compelling as this, I suggest you step back a couple of centuries and read The Whiskey Rebels . You will find a well-drawn tale in which fascinating characters face dilemmas as modern as today’s headlines.

Although it is hardly an inspirational novel, The Whiskey Rebels shows two clever protagonists who find ways to rebound from hardship. Both embody "outside the box" thinking.  
 
Follow them and make their adventures your own. In doing so, you may find that it will take you away from the current woes, while giving you valuable perspective on them.

James Davidson

Editor,

Abundance

 

Special

2008 S&A Research Audit Results…

S&A’s best-performing advisory returned 1,458% last year.

Are you getting these picks?

Click here to find out.

Crisis Updates

Bush’s rosy outlook… Bank Armageddon… The "fatal bullet" theory… The incurable economic "runny nose"…

** The Bush administration has released its last Economic Report of the President . Unsurprisingly, it is more optimistic about America’s economic future than other forecasts.

This from Chapter 1:

    The Administration’s forecast calls for real GDP to continue to fall in the first half of 2009, with the major declines projected to be concentrated in the fourth quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009. An active monetary policy and Treasury’s injection of assets into financial institutions are expected to ease financial stress and to lead to a rebound in the interest-sensitive sectors of the economy in the second half of 2009.

In their swan song, Bush’s economic wonks simply cheerlead the Treasury’s bonehead bailouts and the Fed’s high wire "quantitative easing" act. What else were they going to do?

However, last week the Congressional Budget Office published a far more realistic forecast – a 2.2% contraction in 2009. This performance would mark the worst year since World War II.

Of course, the most laughable part of the Bush report is that his team really expect us to believe that all will be well sometime after June.

What gets no mention is the great swindle at the heart of the government’s plan for ‘fixing’ the US economy.

See, there’s growing support now for a Resolution Trust Corporation-style bailout of the nation’s banks.

This would involve the government using trillions of dollars of taxpayers’ money to buy distressed assets from banks.

The problem with this approach, as portfolio manager Whitney Tilson of Tilson Funds recently pointed out, "is that either the government will pay market prices for the toxic assets – in which case, it will simply accelerate the collapse of our financial system – or pay above-market prices, in which case taxpayers will likely suffer big losses."

As I have said before, losses are losses. They do not go away because government throws taxpayers’ money at the problem.

The reality – as difficult as it is to swallow – is that somebody is going to have bear these losses. The only question is who…

Right now, it’s you, the taxpayer.

Because the government, if it goes ahead and starts buying up toxic assets from banks, will have to pay above-market prices or force the banks into bankruptcy.

**New York University economics professor Nouriel Roubini drove this point home when he told Bloomberg this week that the US banking system is "effectively bankrupt."

Roubini, one of the few economists who saw the current financial storm gathering, estimates that financial losses from the credit crisis may reach $3.6 trillion.

Losses and writedowns at banks and lenders since the collapse of the subprime mortgage securities in 2007 stand at $1 trillion.

This from Bloomberg:

    "I’ve found that credit losses could peak at a level of $3.6 trillion for U.S. institutions, half of them by banks and broker dealers," Roubini said at a conference in Dubai today. "If that’s true, it means the U.S. banking system is effectively insolvent because it starts with a capital of $1.4 trillion. This is a systemic banking crisis."

** The banks are fatally wounded, and it’s time investors understood this.

President Obama, in his inaugural address, sent out a message of hope. And I commend him for it. It’s the president’s job to inspire hope and try to put America back on its feet again.

But there’s an old Wall Street saying goes, "Hope is not a strategy."

Soaring rhetoric is fine. But it doesn’t erase past mistakes…and it doesn’t solve banks’ balance sheet problems.

As University of San Diego professor Frank Pomroy wrote recently in the Financial Times , "Friday’s bad news from Citigroup and Bank of America confirmed what many experts have long suspected: the subprime losses of 2007 were a bullet that fatally wounded the banks."

Pomroy has hit the bull’s eye.

It’s a fiction that the banks can recover from their fatally stupid decision to stuff their books with toxic subprime-mortgage securities.

America’s big banks are insolvent…kaput…done for…toast. The only thing keeping them afloat now is taxpayers’ generosity.   More from Pomroy:

    The bottom line is that, given declining assets and increasing liabilities, many – perhaps most – big banks are essentially insolvent and have been for a long time. It is incredible that they lost so much money on derivatives but even more amazing that they stayed alive for so long afterwards.

    The banks’ fate was sealed in early 2007, when the value of derivatives linked to subprime mortgages collapsed. A year ago, the crucial triple B rated mortgage instruments that were the surgical focus of the banks’ bad bets had already declined by three-quarters. At that time, some hedge fund managers concluded that the banks were insolvent and took short positions. The smart money said the banks already were dead, or at least close.

    Although sophisticated investors recognised early on that this crisis was about solvency, not liquidity, and that the liquidity crunch arose from fear that banks could not repay their obligations, others came to this view more slowly. The last, as usual, were the credit rating agencies. On Friday, they finally rose to the pulpit to give Citigroup and Bank of America an overdue eulogy, cutting their ratings. Just as their last-minute downgrades of Enron nailed its coffin, these also might be the end, at least for Citigroup…

    Government intervention, like modern healthcare, can prolong the inevitable, but only for so long. Soon we will bury more banks. Their children will survive but they will not. The massive government intervention of recent months merely provides a financial hospice, to give us time to say goodbye.

** But Obama will save us, right?

Wrong.

Obama is a smart guy. But that doesn’t mean he can "lead us out of a recession."

The guy is not Moses. And the mess Wall Street has created for the rest of us is not simply going to roll back before him like the Red Sea.

Obama might help. Or he might make things worse, just as Herbert Hoover did back in the Great Depression, when he took a shot at ‘fixing’ things. (Ditto for FDR: many of the government programs he put in place actually hindered the recovery.)

The reality is America will come out of the recession when it’s good and ready. And not before.

As Russ Roberts, a professor of economics at George Mason University puts it:

    Maybe, just maybe, there is nothing the government can do in the short run to help the economy improve. What if it’s like a cold? There are pretend cures and cures that look like cures because of spurious correlation. But what if there’s nothing the government can do other than avoid mistakes?

    This answer that we are impotent in the face of all the lousy decisions that have already been made and that the price simply must be paid and there is no avoiding a serious recession after we messed up the housing market and destroyed the financial system and then tried to nationalize it without really nationalizing it is simply unacceptable in the face of our hubris as economists and policy makers. 

 


nothing in this e-mail should be considered personalized investment advice. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized investment advice.
We expressly forbid our writers from having a financial interest in any security recommended to our readers. All of our employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

Protected by copyright laws of the United States and international treaties. This Newsletter may only be used pursuant to the subscription agreement and any reproduction, copying, or redistribution (electronic or otherwise, including on the world wide web), in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited without the express written permission of Abundance Letter . P.O. Box 925, Frederick, MD 21705 USA