The flogging will continue until morale improves

The Federal Reserve recently announced they will purchase another 600 Billion in US Treasury bonds (commonly called Quantitative Easing 2 or QE2)  I am working on a longer email regarding how our current financial situation is very different from previous recessions and recoveries but the Federal Reserve's QE 2 announcement deserved some commentary. 

The markets did not really respond until after reading Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke's article in the Washington Post on November 4:

For example, lower mortgage rates will make housing more affordable and allow more homeowners to refinance. Lower corporate bond rates will encourage investment. And higher stock prices will boost consumer wealth and help increase confidence, which can also spur spending.

In short Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke wants higher stock prices so you'll feel better about yourself and go buy more stuff.  
Will it work?  
I have my serious doubts (as I'll expand upon in later emails).   The banks already have so much unused money they deposit the excess at the Federal Reserve. (973 billion as of October 10)  How is another 600 billion going to change the situation? 

So why is the Fed printing? Because they can and they feel like they can't do anything else. It looks like an easy painless solution but in the long term it will not fix the problem of too much debt in America. 

The problem with QE2 is the money being created is not going where Mr. Bernanke would like it to, the real US economy.  If you look at the market's reaction before and after the announcement one sees the money shifting into commodities and emerging economies while simultaneously weakening the US dollar.   The Fed is taking the easy way out by attempting to prop up and paper over our structural problems.

Lest you think this is merely the ranting of a crazed financial advisor former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker stated the QE2 plan won't help much as well: (Yahoo, November 5, 2010)

Volcker told a business audience in Seoul that the Fed's bond plan is obviously an attempt to spur the U.S. economy but "is not the kind of action that's likely to change the general picture that I've described as slow and labored recovery over a period of time."

The Wall Street Journal (November 4, 2010) expresses caution as well:

The Fed is essentially lending enough money to the government to fund its operations for several months, something called "monetizing the debt."

In normal times, this is one of the great taboos of central banking because it is seen as a step toward spiraling inflation and because it risks encouraging reckless government spending.

Financial markets Thursday responded warmly to the Fed move, but outspoken critics of the policy issued full-throated critiques.

"It is doubtful the Fed decision will produce any results," Brazilian Finance Minister Guido Mantega told reporters following a cabinet meeting with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Officials in Brazil, which averaged 850% annual inflation in the 1990s, have been critical of the Fed's easy-money policies because they are spurring price pressures abroad and could encourage new asset bubbles outside the U.S.

If all else fails, keep doing what you did before seems to be the rule at the Federal Reserve.  By his actions Ben Bernanke is attempting to artificially raise asset prices and reduce the value of the dollar.  We shall see if he is sucessful, but what happens when the crutch of QE money is removed? 

Hugh Hendry Watch -- October 28 on BBC

Hedge fund manager Hugh Hendry was recently on the BBC.  While his comments are directed towards the British economic situation they are very relevant to the situation in America.  Watch the entire clip.




Youtube link

ht InfectiousGreed

Bank lending update

The data initially looks good but a change in accounting rules is the reason and not more lending by the banks.


In Chart #1 you can see the recent large spike in total loans and leases at commercial banks.  New accounting rules forced the banks to place off balance sheet items back on their books.  (I thought the Enron scandal fixed all that? Guess not)


This really throws off the year over year data so don't get excited if you hear bank lending has recently surged.


Just to show you how this decline in lending is unusual Chart #2 shows the series longer term on a year over year change.  As you can see until recently serious declines in lending never happened.


In case you are wondering what the banks are buying instead of lending... they are buying US government securities.

In my opinion this lack of lending by the banks is just one reason the Fed is freaked out and is prepping the markets for QE 2.0.  They are going to flood the market with money to try to get more people to borrow money and buy stuff.  Unfortunately I don't think it will work and I'll be writing about that soon(tm)

Money Money + Money -- Money supply update

The broadest measure of money supply still reported by the Federal Reserve continues falling albeit at a decelerating pace.

While the pace of decline is moderating, broad money (M2 + Institutional Money Market Funds) continues dropping. I wonder if QE 2.0 will put a floor in the decline?

As you can see money supply growth is negative, something not seen during this entire data series.  As a growing money supply implies a growing (real) economy this does not bode well.

Consumers and Credit -- Behaviors may not be changing

One item I follow are aggregate debt levels as well as additional focus on the consumer as they are a large portion of GDP.

A WSJ blog entry from Sept 18 caught my eye and the results of their analysis are very interesting.

Their conclusion is the consumer is not voluntarily deleveraging, rather it is from charge-off and defaults.  This information does synch with how retail sales continue slowly rising even in the face of declining credit. 

From the WSJ:

There are two ways, though, that the debts can decline: People can pay off existing loans, or they can renege on the loans, forcing the lender to charge them off. As it happens, the latter accounted for almost all the decline. Our own analysis of data from the Fed and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. suggests that over the two years ending June 2010, banks and other lenders charged off a total of about $588 billion in mortgage and consumer loans.

That means consumers managed to shave off only $22 billion in debt through the kind of belt-tightening we typically envision. In other words, in the absence of defaults, they would have achieved an annualized decline of only 0.08%.

Interesting data providing for very different conclusions. People will shop until their credit cards are pried from their cold dead fingers.

Latest Chinese Lending Stats: Ignore these numbers!

An odd way to start a post but as mentioned in my previous entry it is hard to know how much lending is truly going on in China these days.  The official data shows a decline in the rate of growth in lending and the government appears to be reigning in credit growth by raising reserve ratios. 

This does not tell the entire story. There is a boatload of off balance sheet lending but there are no 'official' numbers for that.
The WSJ (Sept 28,2010 ) recently commented:

A report from Standard Chartered economist Stephen Green estimates that by the end of August between 2 trillion yuan and 3 trillion yuan worth of loans (the banks don’t formally disclose the amounts) were moved off balance sheets–and outside the PBOC’s formal loan data–in this way. Over the same period, PBOC data showed the banks lending out 5.6 trillion yuan, suggesting the banking system has already passed the central bank’s 2010 target for new credit creation. It also means that the tightening signaled by the loan quota never happened.

Standard Chartered is guessing an additional 50+% of unofficial lending this year. Not a small number.  If the bank regulators crack down on this unofficial lending the rate of true loan growth would fall dramatically.

Foreclosure mess update: Why this is important

Barry Ritholtz clearly explains why this foreclosure mess is so important and how all the cutting of corners by the loan servicing organization has gotten completely out of control.

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/10/why-foreclosure-fraud-is-so-dangerous-to-property-rights/

I could try to paraphrase it but you really must read it ALL to understand why this scandal is more than just some 'goofed up paperwork'

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bank-of-america-halts-all-foreclosure-wsj-2010-10-08?siteid=bnbh
Bank of America halts all foreclosures.  This is a few days old but just the latest in a long march of banks who are calling a full halt to foreclosures.

BofA's sterling efficiency is demonstrated by them foreclosing on a house with no mortgage. Whoops!
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-10-07/man-who-had-no-mortgage-faced-foreclosure-anyway-ann-woolner.html

This is going to get worse before it gets better . . .