Wednesday, June 1, 2011

- The Odds Of Complete Collapse



So last summer we stood peering off the brink, with the markets all set to roll keel over mast before bubbling to the bottom. Then the Fed implemented QE2. I personally think QE 2 was useful in that it propped up risky assets. This pushed us back from the brink a bit, and gave the government time to smell the coffee and begin to make rational economic choices. They have since squandered that opportunity. So here we are again. Same people, same brink, same choices.

A few months ago I got in a big argument with one of my more knowledgeable friends about the likelihood of QE3.

“It would be a disaster.” he said “And may mean the end of the fiat money system.”
“You’re right, I replied, ‘but we’ll get it anyway.”
“No, you don’t understand.” He said, “It would be ineffective and would set the stage for hyperinflation, which might inevitably mean the end of everything.”
“You’re right.” I said, “But we’re going to get it anyway.”

We went back and forth like that for a while. Him saying what the right thing to do would be and me agreeing, but not believing the people in Washington would do it.

In short, it was my contention that QE3 would always happen. I believed that after QE2 (which ends this month) risky assets would sell off, and make another round of QE more politically viable. What looks crazy with the S&P at 1400 looks absolutely essential with it at 1050, so I always thought the political wind would change. And with falling S&P would come the rising demand for government to ‘do something’ to save the system. It would be all but universal…not the least of all from those seeking reelection.

So the fed would implement QE3 – not just because they could, but also because we haven’t actually done anything to improve our fundamental growth issues. Higher oil prices still kill more jobs than the subsidized windmill and solar panel companies create. The housing market is a wreckage, unemployment remains lofty and the only thing the Keynesian stimulus package actually stimulated was union jobs, union dues, and Democratic campaign contributions.

The only thing that’s really different now is that we have a lot more debt. The federal government continues to borrow 40c of every dollar it spends, and the number of dollars spent continues to be astounding, so we’ve reached our debt limit yet again.

As I’ve said, I’d be in favor of leaving the debt limit where it is so long as we could be sure the Obama administration would continue to pay all the debt. But to be honest I’m unsure that they’ll do so. In fact, I don’t think Obama is aware of any of the real costs of a default. He sees the political costs to himself of course, but I think he underestimates even those. I think he believes that with some careful spin, even a debt default could be portrayed as his administration standing up to the rich wall street fat cats and making them ‘share the burden’.

Remember, Obama’s economic worldview is based almost entirely on fantasy. In his world, supply and demand are mutable, and the only real constant in economics is the “exploitation” of the lower classes by “the rich”. In his world, he’s the only thing that can prevent this exploitation, and if the rich bond holders are hurt by being forced to give up a coupon payment, then that can only mean that the poor will benefit from it in some small way. I’m sure he believes he can portray it that way if he has to, and to him a US debt default can become one more populist political piece to move around the chess board.

So if we were to try to estimate the probability of a US debt default we need to consider 2 issues. The first is that we need to guess at the odds that the congress will not get the debt limit raised before the federal government runs out of cash. I personally would put the odds of that event at somewhere between 20% and 40%, but feel free to use your own estimate.

Then we need to multiply that by the odds that lacking the funds to pay for everything they want, the Obama administration will elect to pay for windmill subsidies and AFL-CIO giveaways instead of debt coupon payments. I personally would put the odds of something like that at about 80%. So some rudimentary math shows us that at present, my estimate of a US debt default is a cumulative risk of about 16% to 32%. As much as 1 chance in 3. Those are pretty short odds for an event with such utterly cataclysmic consequences. But the American voter wanted hope and change… I would certainly call that a change.

What about the odds of QE3? I’d still put them at 100%...the only issue is when. Given today’s numbers, I’d say the autumn is looking more likely.

3 comments:

frithguild said...

I am not in the industry as you know, but I am a student of history. This one has me concerned.

Home prices in my area dropped off the table last month, without any apparent reason. Nobody is out spending money - I teed off two days straight on public golf courses and had several holes completely open ahead. That's unprecidented.

Monetary policy seems completely ill equipped to address residential real estate deflation and simultaneous comodity and food inflation. Fiscal policy attacks small business on multiple fronts. The only thing left to do while getting hit from three sides is stay inside and hide. That is what seems to be happening.

Hyperinflation seems to require a loss of confidence in government component. Politicians have become so jaded that they laughingly ignore economics and common sense. A poke in the eye to treasury holders ... wow. They are just about stupid enough to do it.

Tom said...

Yeah - those aggregation issues are a bitch. Housing deflates while food and energy inflate so living standards plummet.

But the good news is, even though the odds of catastrophe are higher than ever, I really do believe the odds are against it. In order for Obama to ask bond holders to 'share the burden' all the people who work for him who aren't as economically illiterate will be screaming things at him like "Are you out of your frreakin mind? You're going to go down in history as the man who destroyed America!"

There will be stacks of resignations on his desk from all those ex-Goldman drones he has on his staff, and even the Chinese will be threatening him. It's not going to be easy for him to take an ideological position.

He still might - I don't know how sycophantic his people are. But in my experience you'd do well to bet against the end of the world.

(I'd learn to shoot though all the same, just to be on the safe side. You're welcome at my gun club anytime. Just send me a note.)

frithguild said...

I have never been one to buy into the quick catastrophy thinking. It concerns me that the drones and Chinese will not convince idealogues to take the heat from beneath the pot of frogs because there is a profitable trade.

I sent you a FReep mail