WRITE for ATol ADVERTISE MEDIA KIT GET ATol BY EMAIL ABOUT ATol CONTACT US
Asia Time Online - Daily News
             
Asia Times Chinese
AT Chinese



     
     Oct 3, 2008
Page 2 of 2
Crisis control fit for the TV age
By Julian Delasantellis

Essentially ignored in all this is the probable trillions upon trillions of leveraged structured finance derivative securities whose value depends on the original securities. Nobody really knows how much of these there are; one estimate put the number at around $25 trillion. You can't solve a $25 trillion problem with $700 billion. It's no wonder that Warren Buffet once called derivatives "financial weapons of mass destruction".

The bailout plan will essentially ignore the derivative securities, thinking that buying up the original securities solves the problem with the derivatives. It doesn't. Even if Paulson way overpays on his purchases, say, paying 80 cents on the dollar for securities going in the private market for less than 30 cents, many of the derivative securities were always priced for full payback, so a big problem still remains in a very big market.

What if Paulson got the MBS on the cheap, say, at 20 cents on

 

the dollar? The banks wouldn't like that at all, in selling out that low they'd finally be forced to take the actual hits on their balance sheets they've been dreading having to declare since the crisis began.

The banks call the low, bargain basement values "fire-sale prices". They think the stuff is worth more. Maybe it is. But accepting 20 cents on the dollar to finally get the toxic, radioactive stuff off their books once and for all precludes the possibility that MBS prices could get a lot worse, say to 15 or 10 cents on the dollar. That is the fear that is currently causing the world to shun and flee its financial institutions. With the S&P 500/Case-Shiller home price index still currently in freefall, 20 cents in the hand should be considered a lot more attractive than whatever they think they can get in the bush.

Obviously, paying cheap is also a better deal for the US taxpayer. There is a clear hope that, once the markets have stabilized, the MBS can be sold back into the markets by the government for a profit. As with any investment, paying less at the beginning infinitely increases the probability of success when it comes time to sell.

There are two separate dragons breathing down fire on the world financial system. One is de-capitalization, the fact that loan losses are driving down banks' capital bases and then their ability to lend. The other is deleveraging, the vicious circular process whereby losses on old loans restrict the system's ability to make new loans, which drains the system of new capital, setting up yet another round down.

These phenomena may seem similar or identical, but they're not. Paying up for MBS may seem to recapitalize the banks, but without slaying the deleveraging monster the new capital will surely be sucked away and lost, as has happened to the numerous failed attempts by sovereign wealth funds and private equity to invest in the financial system over the past year.

Just for a moment, imagine that a huge black hole has opened in your living room, sucking in furniture, pets, children and kitchen sink. The bank re-capitalizers would say that all you have to do to make things right is to replace the furniture, pets and family, then things will be normal again.

However, the people who understand deleveraging know that if you don't shut off that huge vacuum of destruction, anything new put into the system will just go the way of the old. That's just not going to be possible paying $700 billion to buy only primary mortgage assets at luxury prices.

Some are saying that the self-evident unworkability and impractibility of all these system-rescue solutions is not evidence of the inherent impotence of government, but of another strategy. The reason it's OK that these plans don't provide a long-term solution is that they don't have to - all they have to do is keep the financial system intact for the 80 or so days until a new American president is inaugurated, one not so hidebound by narrow ideological lenses as is the present incumbent.

If that new president is Barack Obama, he may even be fortunate enough to enter office with a significantly enhanced congressional majority, making the prospect of the partisan gridlock that has so paralyzed Washington decision-making for much of the past 30 years much less likely.

Whoever is the next White House incumbent, I'm sure they will greatly appreciate it when they find that their predecessor has left for them a world financial system in total crisis. In that case, the sweet ambrosia of victory and power the new occupant must have hoped he would drink upon his arrival at the epicenter of power would surely then more closely resemble a bitter and caustic nectar from a poisoned chalice.

What options would then be available to the new president? Amazingly enough, some, and not all; people on the political left are advocating a so-called Swedish solution, after the strategy employed in the Nordic nation in 1992 by then Conservative Party prime minister Carl Bildt.

The Swedish solution was essentially the nationalization of its entire financial system, with the banks being recapitalized by means of wiping out the value of the equity positions of the shareholders. That some in the United States, the country that for the 15 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall proudly proclaimed free-market capitalism as God's chosen course for the human race, are going for a solution even Lenin, in his 1921 New Economic Program, thought needlessly radical, just goes to show that under enough stress, any man, and any ideology, can be broken.

A US media type reported that she was riding a skyscraper lift that had a television placed in its control panels (yes, I've seen those as well; capitalism's final frontier is apparently now somewhere between the 30th and 31st floors) when the news of Monday's defeat of the bailout bill was announced. She reported that everybody onboard cheered the news; one woman actually exclaimed, "Now they'll spend the $700 billion on education!"

What lunacy, on so many levels. The fact that someone would actually think the $700 billion could or would be directed to schools and teachers demonstrates that, no matter what they tell pollsters, this silly lady actually thinks that Americans in fact care that much about schools and teachers.

What about the rest of the people who cheered the bailout's defeat? They're the ones who act like the worlds of finance and the real economy are separate, that they want the money going to some place called "Main Street" rather than Wall Street.

What fatuousness. As if the rest of the country hasn't lived high off the hog this past decade from Wall Street's new and inventive ways of creating and packaging debt and leverage. As if American homes that don't even have indoor toilets or running water don't now have two-meter wide plasma TVs, all paid for through all the new ways Wall Street has devised to get America's grasping hands on China's savings.

Maybe that's the real crisis here, certainly the root cause of the dramas currently unfolding in the Congress. Americans still seem to think that they can adjust 21st century economic policies simply on the basis of what they like or dislike. Television has implanted in their heads this seductive view of the past as being like something from out of a coffee commercial, with small-town folks walking down small-town streets going about their small-town business, with no crime, poverty, depravation, big government or minorities in the frame.

"If only we could get back to that, to those values," they sigh wistfully.

But modern economic crises aren't like that. If you don't believe me, just ask the citizens of Thailand, Malaysia, South Korea and others, thrown into penury and despair by US economic officials and dictums in 1997, as a result of an economic crisis far less serious than what is happening to the Western world's financial world now.

As fate would have it, I'm scheduled to be on a US commercial airliner, cruising down the California coast, around the time of the House of Representatives vote on Friday morning. I may not know the result until I land. Then again, if I look out the airplane window and see hordes of newly unemployed American Visigoths burning and pillaging the once great cities of the US Pacific Coast, I'll know that the bill has once again failed, and the financial markets have reacted as expected.

Julian Delasantellis is a management consultant, private investor and educator in international business in the US state of Washington. He can be reached at juliandelasantellis@yahoo.com.


(Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

1 2 Back

 

 

 

 
 


 

All material on this website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2008 Asia Times Online (Holdings), Ltd.
Head Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East, Central, Hong Kong
Thailand Bureau: 11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110