It’s still about the Jobs!
Posted: October 2, 2009 Filed under: Global Financial Crisis, The Great Recession, U.S. Economy | Tags: discouraged workers, Paul Krugman, Robert Riech, Underemployment, unemployment Comments Off on It’s still about the Jobs!
I keep repeating this like a mantra, but an economy that relies on households buying 70% of it’s production, and households that rely on wages for 67% of their income, is not going to get healthy until it creates more jobs. That’s why Robert Riech, Paul Krugman, and this Cajun Country Economist are still stuck on job creation and the unemployment rate. It appears the DJ and other stock indexes are taking notice too. This is from today’s Gray Lady.
The American economy lost 263,000 jobs in September — far more than expected — and the unemployment rate rose to 9.8 percent, the government reported on Friday, dimming prospects of any meaningful job growth by the end of the year.
The Labor Department’s monthly snapshot of unemployment dashed hopes that the pace of job losses would continue to slow as the economy clawed its way back from a deep recession. Economists had expected 175,000 monthly job losses.
“People have been celebrating that we’re through the financial crisis, but the underlying issues are all still there,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. “We’ve lost trillions of dollars in housing wealth, and consumption’s going to be weak. It’s not the ’30s, but there’s really nothing to boost the economy.”
You’ll recall that it’s been two years since the NBER dated the beginning of this Great Recession. That means the U.S. economy has been hemorrhaging jobs for TWO years now. We’ve got it bad and that ain’t good. Robert Reich, President Clinton’s former Labor Secretary has the “Truth about Jobs” in his blog entry today.
Unemployment will almost certainly in double-digits next year — and may remain there for some time. And for every person who shows up as unemployed in the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ household survey, you can bet there’s another either too discouraged to look for work or working part time who’d rather have a full-time job or else taking home less pay than before (I’m in the last category, now that the University of California has instituted pay cuts). And there’s yet another person who’s more fearful that he or she will be next to lose a job.
In other words, ten percent unemployment really means twenty percent underemployment or anxious employment. All of which translates directly into late payments on mortgages, credit cards, auto and student loans, and loss of health insurance. It also means sleeplessness for tens of millions of Americans. And, of course, fewer purchases (more on this in a moment).
Unemployment of this magnitude and duration also translates into ugly politics, because fear and anxiety are fertile grounds for demagogues wielding the politics of resentment against immigrants, blacks, the poor, government leaders, business leaders, Jews, and other easy targets. It’s already started.
That’s right! Because of the way we actually count the unemployed, there are actually a lot more problems out there 
than the unemployment rate measures. All you have to be is employed 1 hour of paid work and that dumps you into the ranks of employed. So that means if you’ve been furloughed, had your hours cut, or had to take up part time employment, you may be miserably underemployed, but your still employed. You also have to be have been actively searching for a job if you don’t have one for the last four weeks to stay in the ranks of the unemployed. You start giving up, you’re considered not in the labor force and by definition not eligible to join the numbers of the unemployed. (These are so-called discouraged workers.)
Support your new Alphabet Soup Agency
Posted: September 19, 2009 Filed under: Global Financial Crisis, U.S. Economy | Tags: Consumer Financial Protection Agency 3 Comments
A central component of the Obama administration’s Wall Street reform policy is creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA). He mentioned it earlier this week in his speech as well as today in his radio address. The banks are not happy about the agency. I thought I’d spend some time on what is being proposed.
Obama emphasized the need for the legislature to move quickly to enact a centerpiece of his plan, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency. (This sentence links to the bill.)
“Part of what led to this crisis were not just decisions made on Wall Street, but also unsustainable mortgage loans made across the country. While many folks took on more than they knew they could afford, too often folks signed contracts they didn’t fully understand offered by lenders who didn’t always tell the truth,” Obama argued. “That’s why we need clear rules, clearly enforced. And that’s what this agency will do.”
The legislature making the CFPA a legal entity is pending in the House. The responsibility for passage and creation of the bill lay with Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) and the Financial Services Committee. Frank is the principal author. The LA Times has a succinct explanation of what the plans are for the new agency.
Why should you care? What might the agency do for you — or to you? Here’s a quick overview:
To begin with, be aware that the agency’s powers and oversight would extend far beyond mortgages and real estate — into all credit cards, debit cards, consumer loans, payday loans, credit reporting agencies, debt collection, stored-value cards and even investment advisory and financial advisory services, to name only part of the list.
It would have the authority to alter long-common practices that nettle consumers, such as mandatory arbitration clauses in the fine print of contracts that automatically send business-consumer disputes to arbitrators rather than to courts. The agency could ban or limit such clauses in specific products if they are shown to tilt against consumers’ interests.
The agency would write the user-safety rules for virtually all consumer financial products and would have the legal firepower to levy huge fines — tens of thousands of dollars a day per violation in some cases — and prosecute lenders, brokers and others who break the rules.
The agency would be the dominant federal consumer protector in all home real estate settlements. It would regulate “affiliated” title, escrow and financing businesses connected with realty firms and builders. It would oversee equal credit opportunity and fair housing, and would set standards for all mortgage offerings, whether from the biggest national banks or the smallest local brokers. Generally it wouldn’t seek outright bans on mortgage products that carry elevated risks — interest-only loans, for instance — but would require that lenders restrict such mortgages to well-informed applicants who can document that they understand the risks and can afford the payments.
Within its first year, the agency would be tasked with creating consumer-friendly, uniform disclosures for all home purchase and financing transactions, starting with a combined “good-faith estimates” and truth-in-lending statement.
The core idea behind the proposal, supporters say, is to pull together consumer oversight powers that are now scattered among various agencies, and to put consumer interests where they should be — much higher on the priority list than they were during the years leading up to the housing and credit bubble and bust.
Revenge of the Beta Males
Posted: September 15, 2009 Filed under: Bailout Blues, Equity Markets, Global Financial Crisis, president teleprompter jesus, The Bonus Class, The Media SUCKS, U.S. Economy | Tags: Journalism Beta Males, K Street Beta Males, Media Misinformants Comments Off on Revenge of the Beta Males
There’s only a few places in the real world where Beta Males get to whoop it up and extract their revenge on the Alphas that shoved them around during their model-building, star wars loving, well-spent but unhappy youths. Those places would be on Wall Street, what passes for journalism these days, and Washington D.C.. It’s occurred to me that these places contain Beta Males that are natural allies. Since none of these folks ever got to sit at the kewl kids lunch tables in high school, they’ve built their special lunchrooms where no one else can venture without getting hall monitor passes from the former high school hall monitors. It’s also probably why we’ve now built an economy that no longer builds anything useful but gets increasing amounts of money from mathematical gambles and laws that favor insiders. It’s the only area where the Beta Males can dominate. If you can’t play football, at least you can bet on the game, win big, and eventually buy yourself a former cheerleader.
I went out in search of some evidence that we might rein in the market malpractice on Wall Street, and instead found that we’re just as likely to be setting up another financial crisis as not. Maybe I should throw up my hands and follow the lead of George Soros. I should start a hedge fund that bets on the stupidity of Wall Street aligned with the duplicity and complicity of politicians and journalistic misinformants. That way I could buy my own island and avoid the next financial crisis.
It seems bringing translucency to the market (a goal in a true market economy) would only benefit those on the outside looking in and we can’t have that. It might bring the rest of the world back to the lunchroom tables. We continue to have Republicans blocking everything because of their incessant worship of the idols of false capitalism. How can so few understand so little and gum up the works for so many? This quote appalled me.
“The president has offered a reform proposal that would grant broad new authorities to government bureaucrats while intruding in private markets and restricting personal choice,” said Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the senior Republican on the House Financial Services Committee. “The obvious lesson of the events of September 2008 is that we need smarter regulation, not more regulation, not more government bureaucracy, and not more incentives to engage in harmful business practices.”
This is a man truly devoid of intellect and any sense of how a competitive market functions. Removing frictions like information asymmetry, huge single powerful players, or moral hazards makes markets work beautifully. Civilization has regulated its financial markets since Hammurabi for very obvious reasons. How can you come up with real political discourse when the opposition is so obviously factually handicapped?
The Bear Whisperer
Posted: September 14, 2009 Filed under: Bailout Blues, Equity Markets, Global Financial Crisis, The Bonus Class, The Great Recession | Tags: Lehman banruptcy annivesary, moral hazard, President Obama, Wall Street Reform Comments Off on The Bear WhispererBless his little heart. He called for “common sense” rules for Wall Street. He had sharp words of warning for those who 
didn’t learn the lessons from Lehman Brothers and the global financial crisis. Isn’t that nice? We no longer have to “speak softly and carry a big stick”? I guess those were different times and a different president. Now, we get to speak sharply and carry a big brief case full of cash.
Just in case you missed it (or lectured through it like I did), here’s the full text of President Obama’s Wall Street Speech today.
Oh, and let me be the first to say that our President needs to take a basic finance course or maybe it’s Jon Favreau that needs it.
In fact, while there continues to be a need for government involvement to stabilize the financial system, that necessity is waning. After months in which public dollars were flowing into our financial system, we are finally beginning to see money flowing back to the taxpayers. This doesn’t mean taxpayers will escape the worst financial crisis in decades unscathed. But banks have repaid more than $70 billion, and in those cases where the government’s stake has been sold completely, taxpayers have actually earned a 17-percent return on their investment. Just a few months ago, many experts from across the ideological spectrum feared that ensuring financial stability would require even more tax dollars. Instead, we’ve been able to eliminate a $250 billion reserve included in our budget because that fear has not been realized.
Bottom line: The Banks that didn’t need the money paid it back in a hurry to avoid some one tampering with their executive pay plans. The rest that’s out there (including Citibank’s share) will probably languish for ever or pay ever so slow. POTUS can brag about a 17% return by just simply ignoring the rest of the languishing money and just paying attention to the ones that pay back. After all, Wall Street ignores their toxic assets, why can’t he? Nice to be able to select the AAA tranche of the investment and only count the return on it instead of the entire portfolio. Tsk! Tsk! Tsk!
Speechification Alert
Posted: September 12, 2009 Filed under: Bailout Blues, Equity Markets, Global Financial Crisis, president teleprompter jesus, The Bonus Class, The Great Recession, The Media SUCKS, U.S. Economy | Tags: Barney Frank, L shaped recession, Stagnant economy, zombie banks Comments Off on Speechification Alert
Who stole the Cookies from the Cookie jar?Great illustration in today's New York Times: Banker's and the taxpayer cookie jar
Well, it’s my turn to listen to a Obama Speech. Those speeches usually have the same dizzying effect on me that tennis matches do. Instead of watching balls go back and forth rhythmically while lulling me to sleep, I get to watch the head of the President. Teleprompter Right, 1,2,3 to Teleprompter left, 2, 3 …
So the speech is on bank reform which is something I’ve been on about for months now. It’s the anniversary of Lehman’s demise. Stories abound on the Grey Lady today including this call by Dr. Tyler Cowen of George Mason University. He’s a little libertarian for my taste on policy–even managing a h/t to Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged–but he gets it all in a way that only an economist could.
But we are now injecting politics ever more deeply into the American economy, whether it be in finance or in sectors like health care. Not only have we failed to learn from our mistakes, but also we’re repeating them on an ever-larger scale.
Lately the surviving major banks have reported brisk profits, yet in large part this reflects astute politicking and lobbying rather than commercial skill. Much of the competition was cleaned out by bank failures and consolidation, so giants like Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan had an easier time getting back to profits. The Federal Reserve has been lending to banks at near-zero interest rates while paying higher interest on the reserves the banks hold at the Fed. “Too big to fail” policies mean that the large banks can raise money more cheaply because everyone knows they are safe counterparties.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the birth of a military-industrial complex. Today we have a financial-regulatory complex, and it has meant a consolidation of power and privilege. We’ve created a class of politically protected “too big to fail” institutions, and the current proposals for regulatory reform further cement this notion. Even more worrying, with so many explicit and implicit financial guarantees, we are courting a bigger financial crisis the next time something major goes wrong.
We should stop using political favors as a means of managing an economic sector. Unfortunately, though, recent experience with health care reform shows we are moving in the opposite direction and not heeding the basic lessons of the financial crisis. Finance and health care are two separate issues, of course, but in both cases we’re making the common mistake of digging in durable political protections for special interest groups.
I have to admit that I’ve written about similar concerns, however, I can tell Cowen and I may differ on how to correct the situation. That’s typically true of most economists. We agree on the root causes because of our grounding in shared theory but argue which policy might be best based on our political bent. I continue to argue for the role of government as rule setter and referee. However, I really do prefer independent bureaucrats in the position of auditor and enforcer. Congress, however, still has to write the law. This action, to date, has been missing.
So, MarketWatch has provided a pre-speechification programme so that we can get our score card ready. The speech is supposed to “rekindle” interest in regulatory restructuring. I’m not sure we need restructuring so much as we need laws that recognize the systematic problems we’ve developed in financial markets since quants have turned asset pricing into a physics exercise, financial innovations have become exotic, and the entire set up is now one big cartel waiting to pounce on the unsuspecting business sector and consumer. We now have a small number of banks capable of funding the really big capital undertakings and who knows what priorities or friends they’ll choose to fund over positive net present value projects? This should be enough to send any capitalist running for government regulation. Also, get ready for lack of services and fees that would make a loan shark blush. This should make any advocate for the little guy scream for the same. Today, I am the jade dakini. It’s happening in Europe but I doubt it will happen here.
So, what is Obama said to be inkling tomorrow that will be undoubtedly be sacrificed to the demons of political expediency down the road?
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
dakinikat
ecocatwoman
mablue2
Mama Lopez
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
Recent Comments