Fisher: “Fed Could Not Monetize Debt Unless Congress Created the Debt in the FIrst Place.”

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - February 10th, 2011, 8:00PM

Art Cashin points to a fascinating discussion about a speech by Richard Fisher, President of the Dallas Fed. The speech drew headlines on Mr. Fisher’s contention that he would be hard pressed not to dissent on any extension or expansion of QE2.

Kevin Ferry of Cronus Future’s suggested taking a closer look at the speech, not because of the QE2 bit, but because the speech contained rather blunt criticism of Congress and the Executive Branch.

The criticism centered on their handling (or rather non-handling) of the budget and the deficit:

“But here is the essential fact I want to emphasize and have you think about today: The Fed could not monetize the debt if the debt were not being created by Congress in the first place.The Fed does not create government debt; Congress does. Deficits and the unfunded liabilities of Medicare and Social Security are not created by the Federal Reserve; they are the legacy of Congress. The Fed does not earmark taxpayer money for pet projects in local communities that taxpayers themselves would never countenance; only the Congress does that. The Congress and administration play the dominant role in creating the regulatory environment that incentivizes or discourages job creation.

It seems to me that those lawmakers who advocate “Ending the Fed” might better turn their considerable talents toward ending the fiscal debacle that has for too long run amuck within their own house.

A look within the United States makes clear the overriding influence of fiscal and regulatory policy. Monetary policy is uniform across the 50 states; the base rate of interest paid on a business or consumer loan or a mortgage in Michigan, California, Ohio or New York is the same as that paid in Texas. Yet there is a reason that Michigan and California each lost more than 600,000 jobs over the past decade while Texas added more than 700,000 over the same period. There is a reason that the population of Ohio grew by only 183,000 residents over the past 10 years, while Texas grows by that number every five and a half months. There is a reason that with each passing census, the state of New York has been losing congressional seats and Texas has been adding them; a reason that, in the recent census, California failed to gain any while Texas gained four. There is a reason that, as documented in the Jan. 12 issue of the Wall Street Journal, college graduates—the best and brightest of the successor generation—are leaving New York and Cleveland and Detroit and moving to Austin, Texas. There is a reason no state in the union houses more Fortune 500 headquarters than Texas. There is a reason for the disparate employment growth that has taken place in the 12 Federal Reserve districts over the past two decades, data that are documented in the graph at your place setting.

That reason has nothing to do with monetary policy. It has everything to do with the taxation and fiscal and regulatory policies of the states. The cost of capital does not explain the different economic performances of the states; the cost of doing business has everything to do with those differences. However well-meaning tax and regulatory initiatives in the laggard states may have been when they were conceived and levied, they have had unintended consequences that have led to economic under-performance and job destruction.

Similarly, the key to correcting the under-performance of the American economy and American job creation does not presently rest with the Federal Reserve. It is in the hands of those who make fiscal and regulatory policy.

A bit later he turns to how severe the problem may be:

We shall see if the new Congress will prove worthy of the power the American people have “loaned” them, and, together with the president, actually draw the spirits of fiscal reform and sanity from the “vasty deep” to at long last implement meaningful fiscal and regulatory policy that incentivizes private-sector job creation here at home while arresting the hemorrhaging of our Treasury. If they do, then more Americans will find work and be better off, better paid and freer to make their own decisions about the economy.

If they don’t, then woe to our children, their children and the American Dream.
It’s a great and insightful presentation. Go to the Dallas Fed website and pull it up. While you’re there pull up his prior speech filled with more “straight from the shoulder” discussions.

Thanks Mr. Fisher and thank you, Art & Kevin, for the re-direct.

Media Appearance: The Kudlow Report (2/10/11):

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - February 10th, 2011, 6:00PM

>

Back on the Kudlow Report at 7:00 pm this evening with Doug kass. We will be discussing the Markets, Egypt, Kevin Marsh’s resignation, Inflation and NYSE merger.

My takeaway:

• My Market view is here

• This Marsh resignation makes the Fed even more dovish. Good for speculators, bad for savers.

• We have early signs of upticks in inflation — but nothing like the hyperinflation some of the loons are arguing about (Where were these dolts in the 2000s when inflation was rampant?)

• I don’t know what impact Egypt has on markets, though the potential to spiral throughout the Middle East is intriguing

• My view of the NYSE merger is here ; After all they have done for investors, I am sad to “buh-bye and good riddance.”

~~~

Videos posted here

Top 10 Changes at the NYSE Under German Rule

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - February 10th, 2011, 2:30PM

>

The recent a merger chatter between the NYSE and the Deutsche Börse got us wondering: How might life at the NYSE change under their new German management?

10. Effective immediately: No more bell ringing when Chairman David Hasselhoff has a hangover.

9. NYSE changes its tagline to “Das Equities.

8. Sylvia Wadhwa on the cover of the annual NYSE Calendar

7. All Dark Pools will be delicious Bavarian Chocolate

6. Dick Grasso’s honorary new title: der Führer

5. Merger is the last of Germany’s wartime reparations to the Jews (And they really mean it this time!)

4.  The new Art Cashin Biergarten presents ‘Stocktoberfest’!

3. Parisian counter-parties surrender rather than take the other side of trades.

2.  Color-coded lederhosen for specialists, runners and floortraders.

1.  Once a year, pretend Nasdaq is Poland and invade.

~~~

by Barry Ritholtz and Josh Brown

Any other changes we missed?

1929-39 S&P90 Chart

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - February 10th, 2011, 11:56AM

I love this chart from Ron Griess of the Chart Store:  $30 to 4 to 20 to 12! The volatility back then was amazing!

>

1929-39 S&P90

Isaac: Please Let Under-Capitalized Banks Pay Dividends!

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - February 10th, 2011, 8:00AM

Relentlessly shameless bank shill William Isaac gets up off his knees just long enough to pen an absurd FT piece: Banks should be allowed to pay out dividends.

It is such a bizarre statement that we are left truly wondering what color the sky is on his planet.

Isaac seems to be just making it up as he goes along:

“Preventing profitable banks from paying reasonable dividends impedes bank lending and economic growth. It tilts the balance away from the issuance of new capital towards a slow-growth approach.

We made a major mistake in allowing large banks to reduce their equity capital ratios to inappropriately low levels during the boom years. It encouraged lending beyond the ability of capital to cover the risks. At best, we were short-sighted and living on borrowed time (or money).”

Wow, there is so much wrong in just two paragraphs, I don’t know where to begin.

Let’s start with this: There is absolutely no credible evidence that not allowing banks to pay a dividend somehow impedes lending. Nor is there a scintilla of evidence that a lack of dividend payment somehow “tilts” towards reduced economic growth.

What Isaac calls bank profitability is largely a mirage: Thanks to FASB 157, Banks are not required to report their actual financial conditions. How hard is it to appear profitable when you get show only gains, but never have to disclose losses? Who amongst us is so foolish as to really believe this?

Then there is the issue of the 0% interest rates and artificially steepened yield curve. Does anyone actually believe these banks would be flush if they weren’t receiving free money from the Fed?

That is before we get to the issue of the GSEs: Fannie and Freddie have become the banks dumping grounds for every crappy mortgage loan made. This backdoor bailout is little more than emergency funding from the taxpayer to the Banks.

And Isaacs has the unmitigated gall to claim these propped up, subsidized, phony balance-sheet banks are healthy enough to issue dividends? PUH-leeze.

As to how the banks fell into this unfortunate condition, Isaac gets busy rewriting history to support the bankers his cause : It wasn’t WE who made the “mistake allowing large banks to reduce their equity capital ratios” — that was done at the BANKS OWN REQUEST. They ASKED FOR AND RECEIVED the capital reserve waivers via their lackeys in Congress and the SEC. It was their demand — not ours — made to their bought and paid for rent-a-Congress. It was the banks who have made the concept of American Democracy a global joke, replaced with a far more accommodating Corpratocracy.

And, the inappropriately low levels weren’t a coincidence of the banking boom years — they were the cause. Increased leverage means more profits during good times, but more bloodshed during the inevitable correction. Every rookie trader understands the double-edged sword of leverage.

Isaac, apparently, does not . . .

>

Source:
Banks should be allowed to pay out dividends
William Isaac
FT.com, February 9 2011
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/130d27a0-348e-11e0-9ebc-00144feabdc0.html

The Battle of Bull vs Bear

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - February 10th, 2011, 6:30AM

Good Thursday morning.

We woke up in the states to see Futures under pressure, but off their worst levels of the morning. Following a day of 1-2% losses in Asia, European bourses gave up less than 1%, losing 50-75bps.

US stocks are looking to open lower, as the bears make another attempt at some downward pressure. It has thus far been a losing battle. These days, opening indications and actual closing prices are two very different animals.

In the face of massive liquidity of QE2, there remains a firm bid beneath this market. So far, losses have been modest to miniscule, with selling pressure well contained. M&A, share buybacks, anything but disappointing earnings are an excuse to put on the rally caps. Even dips are an excuse to buy. (We are running 53% cash on specifc name selling, not overall market calls).

The bears are bloody but unbowed — they know a correction is imminent. But the bulls have heard this line for nigh on two years, and yet still the market still powers higher. The Dow, S&P and Nasdaq are all at multi-year highs. There is a different between being early — a matter of days or weeks — and wrong. So far, the bears have been wrong.

Eventually, the grizzlies must be fed. They have their champions, including various Fed Hawks, who are terrified of an inflationary spiral. Lacker, Plosser and Fisher may be mortal enemies of price instability, but they are friends of Yogi and Boo-Boo and Baloo, well known amongst ursines for their opposition to easy money. And easy money is a bull’s best friend.

Even the most ardent bull knows that this too, will pass. The bears will have their day, before their next bout of hibernation.

The 64 trillion question: When?

>
click for updated futes

Mid-Week Reading

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - February 9th, 2011, 4:00PM

• Has the Nearly 2-Yr-Old Bull Market Topped Out? (Barron’s)

• Steve Ballmer’s change of heart is touching, but it’s five years too late (Beta News)

Martin Wolf: Britain’s experiment in austerity (FT.com)

• It’s Getting Better All the Time: Why the news is so bad even as nearly everything gets better (The Amateur Thinker)

• Economics on the Go: Apps for Economists (Economix)

• How Great Entrepreneurs Think (Inc.)

• Nokia CEO Stephen Elop rallies troops in brutally honest ‘burning platform’ memo? (EngadgetBallmer needs to do one of these . . .

• How the Internet gets inside us. (New Yorker)

• Making dollars and sense of adult content (HotelNewsNow)

• Forgive Me iPhone, For I Have Sinned (CBS) New apps for Confession — and the Catholic Church gives the thumbs-up.

Detailing State Budgets: Massachussetts

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - February 9th, 2011, 2:30PM

Jess Bachman (of Bailout Nation and Death & Taxes fame)  does the most largest, most detailed visualization of a state budget ever. It is an 864 sq in poster comparing hundreds of programs and expenditures from the billions down to the thousands of dollars.

If you really want to see how a state (like Massachusetts) spends it’s tax payers money, this is it.

>
click for ginormous version

via JessNet

Why the Fed Always Seems About to Tighten

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - February 9th, 2011, 11:51AM

Bernanke is getting grilled on Capitol Hill, and the prospects of future inflation is what some of the armchair economists fear.

Just because they missed the biggest surge in inflation in the 2000′s is no reason to dismiss their concerns; there are several factors that suggest eventual inflation is on the horizon. In the US, massive labor under-utilization has kept inflation mostly at bay, but developing nations do not have that worry.

Some Fed Governors are also becoming concerned. See Dennis Lockhart’s Rising Prices, the Cost of Living, and Inflation or Richard Fisher’s The Limits of Monetary Policy or others.

Expectations for higher inflation is being reflected in Fed Funds Futures — which have suggested rates were to start rising sometime in 2009. Here we are in 2011, with ZIRP the law of the land. Hence, why some folks think the Fed is behind the curve.

Check out the chart of Fed Tightening expectations — any day now — from Merrill Lynch, via FT.com:

>

>

See also:
Two Fed Skeptics of QE Say Inflation Underscores Program Risks (Bloomberg)

Source:
The inflation disconnect, charted
Tracy Alloway
FT Alphaville, Feb 09 2011
http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2011/02/09/483331/the-inflation-disconnect-charted/

UBS Wealth Management/Investment Bank Morning Call

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - February 9th, 2011, 8:45AM

This morning, I am the guest speaker for the UBS Wealth Management/Investment Bank Conference call (9:00am ET).

I will be discussing the usual: Long term market cycles, behavioral psychology, quantitative tools, Fusion IQ, etc.

It is their internal morning call (you need to dial in from a UBS number), so if you are a Big Picture reader and a UBS employee, please dial in !

>
click for slide deck

23 queries. 1.257 seconds.