Posts Tagged ‘banks’

De-icer

October 29, 2011

Here is an interesting panel discussion about the Icelandic financial crisis. It is chaired by Martin Wolf (see blogroll), and includes Paul Krugman (see blogroll), Simon Johnson (see blogroll), a deputy director of the IMF, the current head of the Icelandic central bank, and another knowledgeable Icelander.

To recap: Iceland had by some measures the worst financial crisis in the history of the world (Wiki summary here.). However, because there was zero chance the country could bail out its banks — and it is not a Euro area member — they had to go bust, capital controls were introduced, and foreign wholesale funders of the Icelandic banks took the main financial hit. The obvious comparison is with Ireland, which has a similar-size crisis but is in the Euro and partly as a result was forced to go the bank rescue route. So, while Iceland has written off much of its bad debt and is recovering, Ireland is presently set to honour every European cent it owes and faces a decade of painful adjustment.

The event was filmed this week and runs to 1.5 hours. It is just about worth watching the whole thing, but if you don’t have time, scroll through and check these highlights as a taster menu of the way the world has changed — intellectually — as a result of the global financial crisis.

6 mins: Martin Wolf talks about the previously unthinkable phenomenon of the IMF admitting to mistakes.

30 mins: An IMF deputy director actually says: ‘Capital controls were probably the best thing that could be done at the time’. Remember that when the Asian crisis broke in 1997 the IMF was trying to change its articles of association to make a battle against capital controls a centre-piece of its mandate.

57 mins: Martin Wolf talks about the ‘new, cuddly IMF’.

62 mins: The point is made that the lessons of Latin America 1982 and south-east Asia 1997 have were finally learnt such that they could benefit a country (Iceland) whose population is the size of a mid-western town in the US. Roughly speaking, bad US, IMF and World Bank policies were used on approximately 1 billion people in order to learn positive lessons that have been applied to 300,000 people.

89 mins: Martin Wolf talks about the Vickers plan for UK financial sector reform, which he refers to as ‘modern Glass Steagall’. I think it would be fair to say he hopes that this is what it will turn out to be, since the ring-fencing strategy put forward by the final Vickers report has not in fact been tried before.

 

Final thought: the very moment when the IMF is said to have become ‘cuddly’ may be the one when it needs to not be cuddly. Italy, which I continue to believe will require IMF intervention, cries out for the toughest and most invasive kind of IMF action if it is to remain in the Euro area. This includes intervention in institutional areas like legal system reform where the Fund has never previously (to my knowledge) been active. Just when the IMF decided to be nice and listen to Icelandic policy makers, it needs to be Mr. Bad Cop to have any chance with Italian ones. In saying this, I stand by my own preference for Italy to be pushed out of the EU and forced to confront its problems itself — because only that will really force the country to grow up.

Shaggy dog

October 27, 2011

It’s another fudge from Europe. The European Financial Stability Fund has been ‘theoretically’ expanded through approved leverage to perhaps Euro1 trillion. Private holders of Greek bonds will ‘theoretically’ take a 50 percent hair-cut, though no details have really been agreed. Silvio Berlusconi has delivered a letter ripe with fulsome promises of structural reform in Italy, to add to lots of other fulsome promises he made before.

It was clear in recent days the markets were ready to accept some more thin European gruel as ‘good news’. Corporate earnings in the US continue to be strong and the latest US GDP figures suggest the American economy is slowly crawling away from the abyss. The very slow improvement in the US macro numbers is the bigger economic story, albeit less trumpeted in the press.

The European train wreck waiting to happen has been moved back down the line. But not far. In the absence of any substantive structural change in Italy, a train wreck there will be. The base case remains remains an Italian fiscal crisis and IMF intervention in the absence of any EU capacity to address the problem.

In the mean time, Italy’s negotiating position can only be strengthened by the ECB’s continued purchases of its debt (EU debt socialisation by the back door) and by the Greek debt hair-cut (What about us, another ‘young’,  ‘peripheral’ European state?). Time to write about something else for a while.

Next day update:

Porco cane! Rome auctions some debt this morning and the market still wants 6 percent (FT sub needed)… In fact the cost of Italian public debt has gone up to a new record. Is it possible that people outside the Italian elite are less stupid than they thought?

Sunday bloody Wednesday

October 20, 2011

Italian debt yields are back over 6 percent. So France and Germany react by announcing that Sunday’s last-chance saloon summit on European debt and economic restructuring will go ahead, but won’t reach any decisions. Instead there might be another summit on Wednesday. Or Thursday. Or next weekend. Maybe Sarko and Merkel are hoping the markets will really fall apart so they can be seen to be forced to do something. This is the most likely endgame. But of course if they are forced by a market crisis, France and Germany will react with a bail-out package rather than a new political agreement that puts the EU on a sustainable track to being the world’s most desirable economic bloc to live in. That would involve a political and institutional agreement, not a conclave of thieving banker types trying to structure the EFSF in a sufficiently complex way that the world is conned into thinking that all is well.

While pondering this, I check the press at the end of the day and am saddened to discover that Berlusconi is dead. ‘Maverick dictator with little regard for reality’ says the headline of the obit in the FT (sub needed). It is a bit tough to say of a deceased G8 leader that he ‘had a grandiose vision of himself and of his country’s place in history’. None the less, Italians certainly ‘were impoverished and repressed by his policies but nonetheless forced to pay homage to the illusion that he was a political visionary’. However, surely the FT has got it wrong with the claim that Berlusconi was born in a tent near Sirte in 1942? Wasn’t he born in Milan in 1936?

 

 

 

 

Flummoxed

October 11, 2011

The latest remarks of European leaders about the EU crisis, and the markets’ positive response, leave me at a loss to understand what is going on. The idea seems to be that having a bit more argument about the shape of a Greek debt write-off, and moving forward with the recapitalisation of banks, is all that needs to be done.

The rhetoric assumes that this is a financial crisis. It isn’t. At heart this is a political crisis of the EU. It requires two societies — Greece and Italy — to decide whether they are going to adjust to the requirements of EU- and Eurozone membership. There are good arguments why both these states might want to cut and run. If they really cannot adjust their institutional frameworks to allow them to compete at European levels, they are better off outside the union.

But whatever is decided, the problem is a political one with only political solutions. Martin Wolf (FT sub needed) seems to think the same.

 

 

Who knows more about extortion, Part II

October 5, 2011

You will remember that back at the start of August in Banking the Sopranos I took a look at Italy’s debt profile and suggested that a) the markets were going to realise that Italy is a much worse risk than Spain and b) that the scale of the Italian liability is such that the power of extortion lay with the Italian side in its dealings with the EU. The Italian government then — in a stroke of comic genius — promised to legislate to make itself solvent.

Two months later we have senior IMF officials saying the Fund is ready to buy Italian debt, and northern Europe (Germany) readying to recapitalise banks such that they can survive big write-downs in ‘peripheral’ country sovereign bonds. The Sopranos look to be almost home and dry without even having to make Mrs Merkel an offer she can’t refuse.

But have the Germans really thought this through? Even if German banks had to write down 50 percent of the value of their (Greek and) Italian bonds they could manage with government back-stop of Euro100 billion, or less than 3 percent of GDP. It is a heavy price, but the return would include pushing Italy out of the Euro as a very profound lesson to other EU miscreants (particularly the eastern European periphery) and giving a world-first lesson about moral hazard to the banking sector, which would eventually have to pay off the write-down. People say that Italy is an important market for Germany, but given the condition of the place it is not going to be a growth opportunity for anyone. Sometimes, as the Chinese say, you need to cut a monkey’s head off to scare the chickens.

I say all this as someone whose family assets are largely concentrated in Italy. We have more than most to lose. And yet I think it would be better to throw Italy to the dogs than to move forward with a bail-out that enforces no fundamental structural change. Either Italy should be inside the Euro with a dramatic structural reform programme led by the IMF, or else outside it with a debt reduction but no one to turn to but itself. As I have written before, if Europe wants a more worthy cause for its patience, why not try Turkey?

 

More:

There are FT discussions of latest European bank bail-out plans here and here (sub needed).

10 cents on the Euro

August 20, 2011

Here’s a weekend snapshot of the death throes of Italy’s financial system…

On a five year view, the share prices of the country’s big 3 banks are close to being — in strict terms — decimated. Intesa SanPaolo is worth about 15 cents of what it was, Unicredit 12 cents, and Monte Dei Paschi di Siena has already breached the 10 cent barrier.

Both Intesa and MPS are well below their previous financial crisis lows of March 2009.

On recent trends, next week should see all three big banks in decimation territory. The main reason, as discussed here, is their exposure to Italian public debt.

When a bank’s share price is decimated, what happens? Other banks will not lend to it, lest they fail to get their money back. The interbank market closes its door. That may already be happening since the ECB conceded this week that it extended significant funds to one unnamed institution.

As well as buying up all Italy’s debt as it rolls over, the ECB may in the next few days begin funding all its banks as well.

Still, as Frau Merkel and Sarko like to point out, it’s not like they have agreed to issue Eurobonds.

We should get a number on Monday for what the ECB spent in the full week up to last Wednesday on Italian (and Spanish) public paper. My guess is we are in for a monster. Northern European taxpayers will want to avert their eyes.

My own bank is Monte dei Paschi (motto: ‘Medieval bank, medieval service’). I was in there on Friday, discussing the unannounced interruption of my e-banking service (apparently anyone who had not used it for three months was cut off for ‘security’ reasons; I have now been restored). The friendly staff, in their ridiculously spacious branch, didn’t seem fazed by the fact their employer’s market capitalisation is now less than US$3 billion and headed for zero.

Perhaps they think it will be more fun working for a foreign bank? I very much doubt it will be. When the IMF comes in, MPS has to be the prime candidate for takeover by a foreign institution (HSBC? StandardChartered?). My guess is that Italy will be forced to throw at least one of its big banks to the foreign dogs in order to satisfy the IMF’s deregulation strictures, and number three is perhaps the most likely to go. MPS has so far survived 540 years, but this one may be a year too far (though I do not know to what extent MPS’s incorporation structure provides a defence against takeover… it may appear to provide protection, but when the IMF shows up, all bets are off).

Hold on tight now.

 

Update, Monday 22 August:

The ECB today confirmed Euro14 billion of government bond purchases under its Securities Markets Programme in the week to last Wednesday (11-17 August), less than I had been expecting. Still, we are at Euro36 billion in two weeks, and rising. Meanwhile the Bundesbank explicitly criticises the reactivation of the bond purchase programme in its latest monthly bulletin, jacking up the political pressure in Germany. Stock prices of IntesaSanPaolo and Unicredit continued to fall today, despite a small rebound in European markets; the most bombed-out counter, MPS, rose.

Here is the full history of SMP purchases since May 2010 (ie. Rounds 1 & 2).

Antipasto

August 15, 2011

The European Central Bank has revealed that it spent Euro22 billion buying bonds in the first two days of last week, almost all of which would have been Italian and Spanish paper. Italian and Spanish bond purchases were only authorised from last Monday. I gave a detailed view on the structural story here, on Italy’s unconvincing promises to sort itself out here, and my take on the reality behind last week’s equity panic here.

So: in its first two days the ECB spent almost one-third as much as it did in its (wholly unsuccessful) multi-month bond buying programme for Greece, Ireland and Portugal (Euro74bn). It is nice that the admission comes on the same day that Merkel and Sarko reiterated there will never be any Eurobonds, not ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, jamais, niemals…  (FT sub needed).

Meanwhile sellers of Italian (and Spanish) debt have had their starter and are looking towards the kitchen door. But as they savour the flavour on their palates, what is that rather unusual smell coming from within? I know! It is the aroma of German taxpayer money burning…

Matilda

August 7, 2011

The country with more laws than any other in Europe, and whose institutional failure is based squarely on its inability to enforce its laws, has promised to overcome the financial crisis by… writing more laws.

The main points of Friday’s announcement at the Berlusconi-Tremonti press conference (FT subscription needed) are constitutional amendments requiring a balanced budget and the liberalisation of an as-yet undefined list of professions.

Perhaps Berlusconi and Tremonti forgot that their country signed a European Stability and Growth Pact in 1997 — two years before joining the Euro — that limits national debt to 60 percent of GDP. Perhaps they are unaware that in Italy the law says you must wear your seatbelt and stop at zebra crossings. Perhaps they have not read the constitution they plan to amend, and all the wondrous things it already promises which do not exist in Italy (more below).

It will be a wonder if the markets buy into this bullshit beyond 9am on Monday morning.

The S&P downgrade of US debt (FT subscription needed) allowed the weekend press to spend much of its time speculating if the US faces panic on Monday. I doubt it. Everything is relative and everything, ultimately, is about the capacity to pay.

Which is why, sooner or later, either the IMF comes in or Italy defaults.

There is, I think, a reasonable case that it would be better for Italy to go for a negotiated default and leave the Euro area. An exit is perhaps the one thing that could wake Italians up. (My ideal would be to kick Italy out of the EU completely and — so long as it would concede historic culpability for the Armenian genocide — let Turkey come in at the same time. I think that might just get the message through.)

Infinitely more likely, however, is that Italy continues its historic oscillation between puerile nationalism and running to mummy, in the form of the United States or the European Union. The EU has shown it lacks the discipline to help Italy, and so in any rescue in this crisis the heavy lifting will have to be done by (mostly American) IMF staffers backed by ECB funds. Apart from the fact that most of the money will be European this time, we are I suspect looking at 1945 deja vu all over again. A bunch of foreigners come in and tell Italians how to run their lives. It is utterly depressing that this is necessary. But I hope the guys and girls at the IMF are getting ready, because it will be necessary. I will write more about the task they face when it is clear they are on their way.

STOP PRESS

Sunday evening at 11pm the ECB puts out a press release, point 6 of which appears to mean it will start buying Italian and Spanish government bonds as soon as Monday morning. Guess they believed Matilda more than me then…

ECB Sunday 7 August 2011

MONDAY MORNING UPDATE

Mamma’s here. Those ECB folks grabbed a couple of hours sleep Sunday night, jumped out of bed, and started buying Italian and Spanish bonds (FT subscription needed) as soon as the markets opened Monday. The FT says bond yields are ‘tumbling’. Looked at the other way round, the ECB is offering far better prices than the market and grateful sellers are jumping with joy. What we want to know, of course, is the volume. We should start to get some information later in the day. My base case remains that this will be a very temporary respite.

MONDAY LUNCHTIME UPDATE

Much as I love the FT, I cannot believe how far behind the curve it is on this story today. You are better off reading Bloomberg for free:

Mostly this and then this.

The markets know that the ECB has neither the money nor the cojones for the job in hand and are headed south. G-7 is wittering on about hanging tough and doing everything necessary. It is time for the IMF to cancel all holiday. The end is nigh. I just wish I had cash to buy distressed equities — but I guess this is god’s way of punishing me for being a writer.

Meanwhile…

It wouldn’t be Italy if:

Some magistrate from some town you never heard of didn’t order police to raid the Milan offices of the ratings agencies because the financial crisis is clearly a satanic//American/British/etc conspiracy.

Links in Italian: 

Corriere della Sera reports the presser (Note how Italy’s most cosmopolitan newspaper refers to the US Secretary of the Treasury as Mr Timothy).

An editorial in the Corriere is interesting inasmuch as it refers to ‘a wave of speculation’ and ‘irrational’ market movements. Is it irrational to sell off Italian debt? I, personally, do not think so. If Italians do, they have the private savings to fund their debt domestically, so perhaps they should buy up the paper that is being sold. It would be a solid investment for them and it would show their trust in the reforming credentials of their government… Less cynically, I was struck at a party with Italian professionals on Saturday how receptive otherwise very smart people are to the notion that Italy is indeed the victim of some new and terrible global conspiracy.

The constitution:

Background to Italy’s 139-article constitution — one which parliamentary commissions have three times in the era of Italy’s decline tried and failed to simplify and focus.

Official English translation of the constitution.

Italy’s constitution guarantees many wondrous things. Readers of this blog will not be surprised that my personal favourites are:

Art. 10

The Italian legal system conforms to the generally recognised principles of international law.

Art. 54

Those citizens to whom public functions are entrusted have the duty to fulfil such functions with discipline and honour.

Art. 111

The law provides for the reasonable duration of trials.

Banking the Sopranos

August 2, 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For some time I have been meaning to take a look at the structure of Italy’s public debt, and finally I did it. Let me assure you that the picture is every bit as ugly as one could imagine. I don’t mean the scale of the debt, which is known to almost every one. I mean the fact that Johnny Foreigner is totally, utterly on the hook. If this family goes down, we go down with them.

For the record, Italian public debt is currently around 124 percent of gross domestic product. Historically, this debt is the product of large, recurrent government deficits beginning in the 1970s. Over time, the debt load was compounded by the legendary ‘cunning’ (known in some cultures as ‘childishness’) of Italian politicians, manifested in manoeuvres like racking up the highest pension liabilities as a share of GDP in Europe — because it falls to another government, down the line, to pay the bill. So vote buying of one kind or another and a general willingness to mortgage the country’s future produced a large public sector liability.

Next, because of Italy’s history of relatively high inflation, governments were only able to sell their debt by offering short maturities. The buyers of Italian bonds commonly insisted on stuff of less than three years’ maturity. As of this year, Italy has about Euro500 billion of debt — around one-third of GDP — coming due in the next 36 months, compared with the equivalent of less than one-fifth of GDP coming due in that period in Spain. Even Greece has a lower share of GDP coming due in the next three years than Italy. (See the charts below. Note that these data are already a year out of date — they are the most recent I could quickly obtain. As each of the countries rolls more debt over into future liabilities, the bars to the right will rise quickly…)

Before one freaks out about these numbers, you have to remember that debt is really an issue of capacity to pay. Greece has no capacity to pay, which is why the market has already written it off. Until recently, the market said Spain had less capacity to pay than Italy. But now Mr Market is re-thinking.

There is good reason to do so. Spain has an Anglo-Saxon problem. Its banks are bust because of excessive real estate lending — a private-sector debt problem. The solution, sooner or later, will be bank nationalisation followed by a fattening of bank spreads in a less competitive banking system. The raising of the spread between deposit and loan rates quietly socialises the cost of the bail-out without a full-scale political confrontation about who is responsible for the cock-up and who must pay (the people my Etonian banker friend calls ‘the great unwashed’). This is what is already happening in the US and UK. Real estate prices deflate and banks use fat margins on current business to offset losses on their historic mortgage books. It is a long and painful process, but ultimately the mechanism to pay for the banks’ greed and misadventure is relatively easy to put in place.

Italy is a different story. Its debt problem does not stem from a real estate bubble and banking excess. The banking system already restrains competition and banks have traditionally made good margin from lending conservatively. The problem of the Italian banks is instead that — partly as a quid pro quo for a protected, high-margin banking sector — they have been the domestic buyer of first resort of government debt. Domestic financial institutions hold the overwhelming majority of Italian-owned Italian government debt. Put another way, government has been bribing the population to acquiesces in its incompetence and inefficiency, and the banks have provided the funds to allow this to happen. It is a public debt problem, but the banks are are the private sector symptom of it. This is why the shares of Italian banks are getting hammered as the debt crisis deepens.

If you want a non-technical Italian analogy, the situation is as if Paulie Gualtieri had started a bank. The main business of Paulie’s bank is lending money to Tony Soprano so that Tony can buy Porsche Cayennes for Carmela, which keeps their troubled marriage from falling apart. This is a pragmatic arrangement, and Paulie and Tony regard it as very cunning. Of course, Paulie’s bank eventually runs into trouble. When this happens, there is no automatic mechanism to socialise the losses. Instead, Paulie and Tony have to go out on the street and raise new funds by ‘cracking heads’.

Unfortunately, this is where the analogy breaks down. Silvio Berlusconi may be hewn from the same moral block as Paulie Gualtieri and Tony Soprano, but he does not have the same resources in terms of soldiers on the street. Washed and unwashed alike lack ‘respect’ for Sil and his degraded lifestyle (some of them hark back to the days of the legendary capo Bennie Muss, but that ship has sailed…).   Sil’s ‘family’ has been paring expenditure for several years since the global financial crisis broke. But his real problem is that the Italian economy has expanded an average of only 0.2 per cent a year since 2001. And the latest industry surveys suggest the economy is perilously close to contraction this year.

Put simply, there may not be enough money on the street for Sil to shake down, even if he had the wherewithall to do it. Mr Market knows this, and has pushed the price of Italian debt due for roll-over to more than 6 percent. When Greece, Ireland and Portugal exceeded a  7 percent cost of new debt, their bonds started to be sold off so heavily — because people no longer believed that they could be repaid — that bail-outs became inevitable. Italy may entering that arena and the symptom, as mentioned, is that Italian bank stocks are in precipitous decline. (Some of the more obvious investment advice today is: Short. European. Financial. Stocks.)

At this point, I know what you are thinking: the Sopranos had this coming. They’ve been taking the piss for years and, frankly, we’ve got bigger problems of our own to worry about.

Except that I am not sure that we do have bigger problems to worry about…

It is true that Italian banks hold most of the domestic share of Italian public debt. (Ordinary Italians have been far too sensible to load up on this toxic dross, despite any number of government schemes — mostly tax breaks — to encourage them to do so. The public holds only about 15 percent of Italian debt.)

However, apart from that held by Italian financial institutions, there is another vast chunk of Italian state bonds held by a different mob of wholly amoral financiers — foreign banks. Get this: approximately 900 billion euros of Soprano paper has been sold to foreign institutions, most of which represent a liability — if they go bust — to north European taxpayers.

Nine hundred billion euros is not some Greek, Irish or Portuguese morning after; it is a colossal, gob-smacking liability that means the Sopranos can probably make the rest of Europe jump through whatever hoops of fire they fancy. The line that Tony once used on Carmela is the one that Sil will likely use on the ECB: ‘Who knows more about extortion, me or you?’

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Soprano-omics

Take a look at the aggregate numbers, displayed on top of the bars below, comparing debt due for roll over in Italy versus Spain….   (Greece, further down, is like discovering your kids failed to pay for half a dozen ice creams.)


2009 2011        
Japan 218.6 231.9 245.6
Italy 115.1 123.5 128.5
Greece 113.4 126.8
Belgium 97.9 104.9
United States 84.8 97.7 108.2
France 77.4 86.6 92.6
United Kingdom 72.9 89.3 98.3
Germany 72.5 87.8 89.3
Ireland 64.5 87.9
Spain 55.2 66.9
Sources: European Commission, IMF, OECD.

Don’t let Japan, in the table above showing public debt as a share of GDP, make you feel better about Italy. Japan is a qualitatively different story because almost all its ridiculously large debt is financed by domestic borrowing. Indeed the willingness of the Japanese to pay for the debt at close to zero interest is what allows it to be so big. Italy, by contrast, plans to have its debt and then have foreigners pay for it. (The last column in the table above represents forecasts for 2014… for some reason the date will not reproduce.)

The thought to keep me awake at night:

In order to get out of jail, one Carnegie Endowment economist reckons Italy needs to achieve a primary budget balance (before interest payments) of PLUS-4 percent of GDP and cut real wages by at least six percent (to restore some competitiveness). Is this likely? After Italy joined the Euro in 1999, its borrowing costs were cut from a peak of 10 percent of government revenue before the Euro to under 5 percent because Italy was temporarily afforded German interest rates. This provided an extraordinary one-off opportunity to reduce public borrowing. What happened? Over the next 10 years, Greece cut public borrowing by more than Italy.

Also worth a look:

This recent European Commission study shows that, from 1998 to 2008, exports of goods and services grew more slowly in Italy than in any other member country.

Uncanny:
I post this, log on to the FT, and discover this is the lead story (subscription needed).

Pity for the rich

October 20, 2010

It has been a very long break while I write the first part of a new book. When you are spending all day working on writing, the idea of writing a blog as well becomes rather less attractive. Nonetheless, with all the fun things going on in the world, I am going to see if I can get back into it after the summer break.

Joe Stiglitz (you will need a subscription) has come out swinging with an attack on what has been dubbed ‘QE2’ or a second round of quantitative easing of the US money supply. What is best about his analysis is that it points out the fallacy that monetary interventions are costless (whereas fiscal interventions raise public debt, as we all know). Stiglitz points out that QE1, which involved the purchase of around US$1 trillion of US government bonds and mortgage securities will have a cost down the line as US bond prices fall (or, put another way, as interest rates rise to more normal historic levels). With QE2 set to be of the order of as much as US$2 trillion, the quantitative easing expected to be confirmed in November will involve long term public costs of an even greater magnitude.

Stiglitz points out that fiscal interventions (can) have clear benefits. Of course there is the money you throw down in welfare benefits to those who lose their jobs. But over and above this, you build schools, railways, new energy infrastructure, etc, etc, which has a long term benefit to society. Things may not be the same with the long-run public cost of unconventional monetary policy.

What Stiglitz doesn’t do is to say where the gain from quantitative easing investment is likely to end up. The answer, surely, is that much of it will end up in the hands of the rich. The expectation of QE2 is already driving a big rally in the US stock market. Where QE1 probably prevented rigor mortis in the banking system during the initial shock, QE2 is mainly telling the financial system that stock prices are likely to rise, if only for ‘liquidity’ reasons. From a bullish stock market, the rich benefit disproportionately. The poor see little or no benefit, consistent with a 40-year trend in the US to make the rich richer relative to the poor.

The real gainers from QE2, I think, are going to be the decidedly rich and the super-rich. This is because, unlike the loose monetary policy after 2001 which fed housing bubbles, this time the liquidity is going to drive asset bubbles and stock market bubbles in developing country markets in which ordinary people do not much play. A flood of cheap dollars, passing through the hands of hedge funds which serve the rich, is headed for the stock markets of Thailand and Indonesia, condo purchases in Hong Kong and Singapore, Latin American local currency government bonds, and so on. The financial managers of the already-rich know how to trade these markets, ordinary Europeans and Americans do not.

There was an Asian stock market bubble in 1991-4 during the last great Euro-US recession. But that was largely based on ‘discovery of Asia‘ overexcitement. The emerging markets bubble we should expect next year will be based much more on domestic US monetary policy (remember that interest rates were high in the early 90s). It may serve, indirectly, to force some warranted currency realignments by pushing up the value of currencies that have been artificially held down by government interventions in east Asia. But above all, within the US, the experience is likely to see a large transfer of wealth from the taxpayer to the already opulent.