
	by Mick_Phoenix
	Jun 22, 2008 
	
	from
	
	MarketOracle Website
	
	 
	
	 
	
	 
	
	This week I want to aim the article at those who normally do not frequent 
	financial bulletin boards or sites. You, the reader, need to help me in this 
	cause.
	
	People who read financial BB's are already interested and to some extent 
	(though not always) informed about how certain economic conditions occur and 
	can hold a healthy debate about the cures for such ills. 
	
	However we are a small group of independent thinkers, we exist at the 
	margins where we try and do our best to inform the public about the dangers 
	and benefits of our financial system. How many of us have watched our family 
	and friends adopt a fixed grin and a glazed expression as we try and explain 
	the complicated world of money flows, interest rates, inflation, deflation 
	etc? 
	
	 
	
	We all know the moment when they stopped listening; it was when they 
	started looking over our shoulder to see if there is someone more 
	interesting standing behind us to talk to.
	
	This Weekly Report is for those who glaze over. The trouble is the target 
	audience doesn't read my website or these financial boards. So this week I 
	want you to do a little something for me, send this article to your friends, 
	the ones that now know something is wrong but don't realize what the problem 
	is. It will be available, in full, on my old blog here .
	
	However, before I start the article proper I want to share a little 
	something with you. 
	
	 
	
	In April I wrote a series of articles about G B Eggertsson and how his paper "An interpretation of The Deflation Bias and 
	Committing to Being Irresponsible" was being used by the 
	Federal Reserve as 
	the plan to escape from the deflationary effects of the credit crash. Three 
	of the articles were subscriber only but I have now enabled those articles 
	to be read in full without subscription of any sort at An Occasional Letter 
	From The Collection Agency.
	
	That's it, the second to last mention of my site in this article, you have 
	permission to cut and paste this article from here (see the acknowledgement 
	at the end) if you wish to send on to your friends and relatives who you 
	think need to know what is coming. Reproduction on other sites is allowed 
	too. 
	
	 
	
	This article uses the US and to a greater extent the UK to describe the 
	background. 
	
	 
	
	It is applicable to all countries that allow a fiat currency.
	 
	
	 
	
	 
	
	
	
	How did this happen?
	
	
	You will have heard of the sub-prime defaults, that credit conditions have 
	changed, that banks are struggling. All these things are the not the cause 
	of the current problems but are the symptoms of a system that allowed itself 
	to become a one way bet, a self reinforcing merry-go-round of increasing 
	debt. 
	
	 
	
	
	Let me show you how it works and how it breaks.
	
	Mankind has only ever truly created one thing, fiat currency. Fiat currency 
	is cash, paper and coins that are only backed by confidence, for paper they 
	are promises to pay the bearer, coins have an intrinsic worth depending on 
	the metals used to make them. (Hence why coins have become smaller and 
	lighter over the years, production costs need to be below the notional worth 
	of the coin). 
	
	 
	
	
	Paper has practically no intrinsic worth, except to paper 
	recyclers.
	
	Mankind can produce as much paper and coins as it wishes and since it is all 
	based on promises, these days you don't even need a note, you can 
	electronically promise "cash" too. 
	
	 
	
	
	Think about a mortgage payment. It is 
	paid by an electronic transfer of an amount out of your bank account to the 
	mortgage lender. The "cash" was originally placed in your account to be able 
	to make the mortgage payment by electronic transfer from the account of your 
	employer or your interest bearing savings/investment account. No real 
	paper was used, no bags of coin delivered. 
	
	 
	
	
	It all happened electronically...!
	
	You can see the temptation such a system offers. You can invent money, lend 
	it to others who pay you interest and at the end of the term you get the 
	principal back too. You do not need to have any collateral to make this 
	happen, though we do have regulations for banks that say they must have a 
	reserve amount that is a percentage of the amount of money they invent. 
	
	 
	
	
	As 
	all money in a fiat system is invented and relies on confidence, it doesn't 
	really matter if reserves really exist or not, except to fulfill regulatory 
	requirements.
	
	Let me show you the system in this simplified diagram:
	
	 
	
	 
	
	
	
	 
	
	 
	
	At the basic level the system is that simple. 
	
	 
	
	As long as the costs and 
	defaults are exceeded by the profit made from the interest received your 
	reserves grow and enable higher levels of leverage. You can get very rich 
	doing this.
	
	However every so often in human history events make this simple idea break 
	down. It doesn't matter what the event is but if it makes the costs higher 
	that the interest received then the reserve shrinks. This stops the 
	increasing levels of lending and in severe cases can cause lending levels to 
	fall or even stop altogether.
	
	This is what we call a credit crisis. They have happened before and caused 
	the bankruptcy of many lenders. Those that survived such events usually did 
	so because they refused to allow indiscriminate lending, they applied 
	standards to borrowers, checking to see if they could repay loans and 
	refused to leverage to the maximum potential.
	
	If an economy is reliant on the ability to borrow to achieve purchasing 
	power or increase productivity then a credit crisis has an enormous impact, 
	stopping growth and commercial activity. 
	
	 
	
	This worries bankers who have no 
	wish to join the list of "also ran" names of yesteryear. So they decided to 
	try and protect their business model and move some, or all, of the risk to 
	another sphere of the financial system. 
	
	 
	
	To do this they had to make such 
	risk taking attractive to others by offering compensation.
	
	Again, here is our simple model but with a basic level of protection added:
	
	 
	
	 
	
	
	
	 
	
	 
	
	You can see what has happened; the original bank lending system now looks 
	stronger as the risk is lowered at the expense of some of the interest 
	income. But notice how the model now becomes acceptable to the Insurer who 
	can use the new income to raise their own reserves. 
	
	 
	
	What was a very simple 
	model has now, with one change, morphed into a multi-party system that can 
	be continuously expanded as risk is offloaded to other parties.
	 
	
	 
	
	 
	
	
	
	So what can go wrong?
	
		
			- 
			
			Interest income does not cover costs.
	If the amount of interest charged is too low to cover costs, interest rates 
	on variable products can be raised. If the product is fixed rate then either 
	customers can be encouraged to take variable rates that can be reset higher 
	(after a lower introductory offer) or the debt can be packaged together and 
	sold on to another party at a discount.
 
 
- 
			
			The principal may not be repaid. The bank will invoke its insurance policy 
	to cover the losses if the principal worth is calculated to have dropped 
	below a certain level previously agreed with the Insurer. The payout can 
	then be added to the reserves to ensure the bank complies with regulations.
 
 
- 
			
			Regulations change. 
	
	If the governing body decides that banks need to hold a higher percentage of 
	reserves compared to lending then capital must raised to boost the reserves 
	(e.g. Basel 2). This can be achieved by borrowing, rights or bond issues or 
	by reducing the amount of lending.
	
	Any one of these circumstances alone would not cause bankruptcy. Even a half 
	decent capitalized bank could survive 2 of these events running 
	concurrently. 
	
	 
	
	However if banks (and the Insurers and other lenders) have 
	stretched the leverage out to 20, 30 or 40 times reserve capital and all 3 
	of these circumstances arrive at the same time you then have a credit 
	crisis.
	
	Remember the financial system relies on confidence. If confidence in the 
	survivability of the system or part of the system is impaired then the 
	structure slows and stops. In an extreme crisis the system may well go into 
	reverse. 
	
	 
	
	Sub-prime became the headline for the current crisis but it is just 
	a manifestation of the events above all occurring at the same time:
	
	 
	
	 
	
	
	
	 
	
	 
	
	In many ways the 3 events almost seem to have been perfectly timed to cause 
	the maximum damage, with rates moving higher from 2004 to 2006, just as many 
	sub prime, Alt A and jumbo mortgages began to reset from teaser rates to 
	higher nominal rates. 
	
	 
	
	In 2007 and 2008 capital requirements and the 
	accounting and pricing of assets changed as Basel 2, sponsored by the 
	
	Bank 
	of International Settlements (BIS) came into force.
	
	Certainly anyone in an informed position could have seen that the situation 
	was set to deteriorate rather than stabilize. 
	
	 
	
	Without doubt the effects of 
	these events where under-estimated by those charged with ensuring the 
	Financial and Monetary system remained fit for purpose.
	 
	
	 
	
	 
	
	
	
	How is the financial system made fit for purpose?
	
	
	Let me say that the methods used to make the credit system work again will 
	be the same as those employed previously.  
	
	
	 
	
	
	Right now the world worries about 
	inflation. Inflation is simply too much cash and credit chasing too few 
	goods. Any asset or commodity that is in short supply will attract funds, 
	causing the price of that asset to go higher. 
	
	The traditional method to control inflation is to raise interest rates, 
	causing cash to be saved as returns become attractive and restricting the 
	use of credit as it becomes prohibitively expensive. However there is 
	another method that can be used. 
	
	Think of cash/credit as an asset. If you want the price of an asset to rise 
	you make it scarcer, you restrict the amount available. As cash becomes more 
	valuable the amount needed to buy less scarce assets drops. A s we are 
	talking about cash that means the price of commodities etc falls.
	
	Are central banks restricting the flow of cash into the financial system? 
	
	
	 
	
	
	Here are the latest money supply M4 figures (£ billions) for the Bank of 
	England (The Federal Reserve will follow the same path, in time):
	
	 
	
	 
	
	
	
	 
	
	 
	
	Whilst the growth of M4 continues we can see a 
	slowing in the growth rate. The amount of cash and credit available in 
	sterling is slowing:
	
	 
	
	 
	
	
	
	 
	
	 
	
	This slowing of issuance and availability makes 
	sterling more valuable, especially if the interest rate is attractive (this 
	is the overnight interbank rate for sterling from Jun 07):
	
	 
	
	 
	
	
	
	 
	
	 
	
	Notice the falling interest rate coincides with 
	the slowing of M4 growth? As sterling becomes "rarer" the rate of return 
	required on investment falls. 
	
	 
	
	Sterling itself appreciates, requiring less 
	compensation in the form of interest. If you look back at the M4 growth 
	chart, you can see that the 3 month rate of growth has been lower than the 
	12 month rate for some time (the blip in March was the second round credit 
	crunch effects liquidity "save").
	
	 
	
	If the 3 month ROG remains like this then 
	growth of the amount of sterling will continue to contract over the medium 
	(12-24 months) term.
	
	This is an anti-inflationary move by the Bank of England, yet the rhetoric 
	over recent days has been about inflation fears. 
	
	 
	
	The increased rhetoric is 
	to counteract inflation expectations and the fear that a widespread demand 
	for greater wage increases will take hold, as the Bank of England Governor,
	Mervyn King, alluded to in a speech last week:
	
		
		"The immediate cause of the current pickup 
		in inflation is increases in food and energy prices relative to other 
		prices. They are caused by the pressure of demand on the supply of food 
		and energy in the world as a whole. 
		
		 
		
		Part of that pressure may well 
		reflect expansionary monetary policy in the world as a whole. But the 
		rise in commodity prices cannot, by itself, generate sustained inflation 
		in the United Kingdom unless we allow it to. We will not. 
		
		 
		
		So although 
		inflation in the UK will rise in the short term, inflation will then 
		fall back.
		
		
		That means that the rate of increase of other prices and domestic costs, 
		notably pay, must remain low. The MPC does not take that for granted. 
		Surveys - including our own -indicate that expectations of inflation 
		have risen, meaning that inflation is likely to have some tendency to 
		persist. 
		
		 
		
		That is why, as I explained in my letter to the Chancellor, we 
		believe that a slowdown in the economy this year, creating a margin of 
		spare capacity, will be necessary to dampen price and wage pressures and 
		ensure that we fulfill our remit by returning inflation to the target. 
		
		
		 
		
		And growth is now slowing quite sharply - broad money growth is falling, 
		business surveys point to particularly weak output growth in the second 
		quarter and growth is likely to remain subdued for the rest of the 
		year."
	
	
	Read that extract carefully, within it are terms 
	couched for the ears of business and economists. The threat is that if 
	inflation expectations lead to higher wage demands then interest rates will 
	rise. 
	
	 
	
	However King then goes on to explain why he thinks the rising 
	inflation expectations will be quashed:
	
		
		"we believe that a slowdown in the economy 
		this year, creating a margin of spare capacity, will be necessary to 
		dampen price and wage pressures"
	
	
	In other words the cutting of M4 growth rates is 
	being carried out to deliberately slow economic growth. 
	
	 
	
	By restricting the 
	availability of cash and credit the economy will slow to a recessionary 
	level where business will create a "margin of spare capacity" also known as 
	unemployment. 
	
	 
	
	As I mentioned earlier the methods used to make the 
	credit 
	system fit for purpose are and will continue to be the same as those used 
	previously.
	
	The result, for ordinary mortals, will be an increasing difficulty in 
	finding work, a greater fear that current employment may be curtailed and a 
	reluctance to ask for higher wages. 
	
	 
	
	Savings will grow as non-essential 
	spending is curtailed during an uncertain period, further reducing the 
	availability of sterling circulating in the economy. Interest rates will 
	remain high relative to discretionary income until the Bank of England 
	decides that the Financial and Credit systems are once again fit for 
	purpose. 
	
	The recession that will occur over the next 12-18 months is being 
	deliberately engineered. 
	
	 
	
	Any growth in M4 will be redirected from the public 
	to the banks, allowing the banks to repair their depleted reserves. Once 
	these reserves are rebuilt lending standards will be loosened, allowing 
	credit expansion to begin again. By that time interest rates will have been 
	lowered, making the use of credit attractive, encouraging consumption and 
	investment and helping GDP to expand. 
	
	 
	
	Another cycle of boom will then be 
	initiated. 
	
	Less than 12 months ago the phrase "financial innovation" was still given 
	credence, the "end of boom and bust" was still uttered to justify an 
	economic third way. Now both phrases are discredited (pun intended) and have 
	turned to ashes in the mouths of those who uttered them.
	
	I have outlined above the truth of the current situation, how the greed of 
	lenders caused a fatal weakness in the financial system and how ordinary 
	people will have to deal with the results. A recession will be deliberately 
	engineered to slow growth and allow banks to recover. As throughout history 
	those that suffer in economic hard times are not those who profited in the 
	boom. 
	
	 
	
	The masses will bear the burden and wonder what they did wrong to be 
	placed in such hard times.
	
	This article is to inform the public that the only thing they did wrong was 
	to believe the rhetoric, the jawboning that was fed to them during the boom. 
	The current situation is about to get much worse, it will not be due to 
	higher wage claims, lack of productivity or uncompetitive practices. 
	
	 
	
	It will 
	be because the politicians and bankers follow an economic system that is 
	inherently flawed. 
	
	Until the public become educated about the way in which they are used to 
	allow banks and governments to recover from "busts" and change the way they 
	are led, then the banks and governments will continue to operate in their 
	own interest, regardless of what becomes of the people. That education will 
	not occur at the behest of governments or through the increased transparency 
	of banking procedures and methods. 
	
	 
	
	It is up to us to try and let the people 
	know what is happening.