Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 24, 2004
Dow 6,000

“The funding of America is an accident waiting to happen.”

Economist Stefen Roach warns of a near term crash of US assets.

The current account and trade deficit of the US are funded through foreign private savers and Asian central banks who buy US assets. There is an imbalance, when foreign savers increasingly pay for US consumption and an adjustment is needed.

“All the classic symptoms of a US current-account adjustment are now evident. At the same time, the stewards of globalization — the IMF, the BIS, the OECD, and even the Federal Reserve — are now all on the same page in sounding the alarm.

Politics could correct a big part of the imbalances, but tax increases and spending reductions are unpopular with the elecotrate, so this will not happen. The only way Roach sees the correction to be done is by a drop in US asset values, stocks, bonds and the balloned housing market.

When will this happen?

Roach sees signs that hint to the next few months. Each month an additional 86 billion dollars of foreign money gets invested in US assets. The ´official´ share of this money inflow – the buying of US bonds by foreign central banks – has increased from its long term share of 14% to 36%. The share of private foreign buyers of US assets is decreasing. Private foreign investors seam to find better value elsewhere and for now the central banks of Japan and China step in and buy US$ assets do keep their currency from rising and their exports and job numbers from falling.

The last time such an increase of official buying of US assets happened was 1987. Then the “venting” of the imbalances was done between October 13 and October 20, 1987 when the Dow Jones dropped by one third from 2,500 to 1,600. The equivalent now is a drop in the Dow Jones from 10,100 today to 6,400 next Tuesday. As the imbalances are bigger now than 1987, the drop may be well beyond this. Such a “venting” could escalate:

Jens O. Parsson:
Dying of Money: Lessons of the Great German & American Inflations

Until 1922 and the very brink of collapse, Germans and especially foreign investors were absorbing marks in huge quantities. Only the international reputation of the Reichsmark, the faith that an economic giant like Germany could not fail, made this possible. The storage factor caused by the investors willingness to save marks kept the marks from being dumped immediately into the markets, and thereby for a long while held prices in check. The precise moment when the inflation turned sharply upward, toward its vertical climb, was undoubtedly timed by no event, but by the dawning psychological awareness of the German and foreign investor that Germany was not going to back its money. With that, the rush to get out of the mark was on. Like a damn bursting, the seas of marks flooded into the markets and drove prices beyond all bounds. The German government strove mightily to outflood the sea. The sea of marks which had been stored up by Germans and especially by trusting foreigners flooded forth and fought to buy into other investments, foreign currencies, tangible goods, almost anything but marks.

Comments

The world economy is so closely tied to the US economy that the ripples of a dollar meltdown will be felt all over the planet. The dow and the dollar will take much of the world with them. Let’s hope the US-budget will remain able to look after, say, the intercontinental missiles in the midwest and the costly carriers and submarines.
One question would be how long the baisse will last – probably much longer than in 1987, don’t you think? Another question would be which asset will lose the least of its value in relation to all others. AFAIK, there are the cash-and the gold-disciples. (And the precious metals-disciples, natural resources-disciples…) I would think that holding some cash in euros and Swiss Franken would not be a bad idea. But why should this be the first thread at the moon from which I do not learn?

Posted by: teuton | Aug 24 2004 19:31 utc | 1

More minefields for Kerry?

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 24 2004 19:38 utc | 2

Some context to a significant sideeffect of the Dow 6,000 scenario is given in The Bear’s Lair: Houses of cards
It explains in an entertaining way why and how Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac will go bust in an even benign recession with higher interest rates and why the US taxpayer will have to bail out the debt they back – some 4 trillion US$. S&L crises on speed.

Posted by: b | Aug 24 2004 21:33 utc | 3

In response to a question about soaring house prices, Greenspan conceded that in some areas prices have outstripped growth in incomes and rents. “This observation raises thew possibility that real estate prices, at least in some markets, could be out of alignment with the fundamentals.”

Greenspan: Global Recovery Strengthening
If Greenspin says “could be” you can bet they are far out of alignement.

Posted by: b | Aug 24 2004 21:50 utc | 4

b – thanks for focusing on the right issues.
See The oil pressure is rising at the Fed for where the end begins: interest rates go up (as they should) because of oil-fuelled inflation fears. This leads to a consumption crash (creditcards being maxed out already) and real estate crash (prices go down because mortgages are suddenly more expensive) in the US which feed each other. The dollar starts to slide as foreign investors “see the writing on the wall” and only slow down their purchases of US assets. The Dow follows.
In 2000, I did a calculation that led me to say that the Dow should fall to 3700 (based on previous crises, 1929 and 90s Japan). Nasdaq duly collapsed, but the Dow has been more resilient. Is it only a question of time?
Again, I will voice my optimism that Europe will weather the coming storm quite well, as it has no external or internal imbalance to speak of.
Wishful thinking?
China will suffer, but not enough to reduce the upwards pressure on world commodity prices (again, see the FT: China fears reliance on food imports: “The leadership is very concerned about food security. They were all young men during the famine of the late 1950s and 1960s. It is not only a strategic issue of dependence on foreign markets for them, it is also a very personal issue of food self-sufficiency,” said one academic who advises the government on food security issues.
The latest official figures show an unprecedented deficit in agricultural trade in the first six months of the year.
Total imports of farm produce in the first half of the year rose 62.5 per cent to $14.35bn. Exports totalled $10.62bn, an 11 per cent increase on the same period a year ago.
The biggest changes were seen in grain imports as strategic stocks fell because of declining annual harvests every year since 1998. In the first half, China imported 4.1m tonnes of grain, or 1.8 times as much as in the same period a year ago.
The level of China’s national grain reserves is a state secret, but several academics said although the harvest this year is expected to exceed last year’s by a small margin, burgeoning demand would ensure that grain reserves continue to come under pressure this year and possibly in 2005.
Chen Xiwen, a senior state council official, said recently that the deficit in grain production compared with demand this year would be about 37.5m tonnes.
Another senior official, who declined to be named, said falling water tables, drying rivers and polluted water sources were taking their toll on the productivity of China’s fields, making it unlikely that domestic grain production could be increased much.

Warmongering? (and I did not mention oil imports…)

Posted by: Jérôme | Aug 24 2004 21:51 utc | 5

It’s pretty scary really because it is unlikely that the US will consider any choices to get out from under other than to try and continue it’s policy of using military might to access energy and mineral resources at below the market rate.
Europe will probably be OK but the UK with it’s policy of backing two horses (the euro and the dollar) will take a big hit. China will take a hit the size of which depends on European and Third World markets ability to withstand the shockwave. In a way long term it will be beneficial to China as it has become over-heated and from B’s figures on food security above, the urbanization of the Chinese population has caused a drop in food production. Any slowing of the manufacturing expansion will help control the flow of people from rural areas and with the increase in food costs brought on by the previous reduction in production; rural communities could become viable again. This will help the centralized administration which has been unable to keep up with the infrastructure demands brought about by this huge internal migration.
And this is where I believe it will get really dangerous for the world. US politicians will not be able resist pointing out that it is only the great defender of freedom that has been seriously hit by whatever foreign conspiracy has destroyed their economy. OPEC would be a good scapegoat. Venezuela and most Middle Eastern counties have been vilified already. Toss in Nigeria for good measure particularly following recent sectarian violence and some pol will convince the ever credulous population that a conspiracy of the oil dictators Chavez, Obasanjo, and Khatami has brought the US down in a mean revenge attack for their defence of freedom.
Think about it; two Muslims and a Socialist, just the sort of mixture that the people have already been primed to hate. The sad fact is that even reasonable people’s principles take a back seat when getting food on the table becomes a struggle. Many US citizens who are currently appalled by their country’s occupation of Iraq may find it easier to wear a economically and morally ‘justified’ war, especially if the president was a democrat.

Posted by: Debs in ’04 | Aug 24 2004 23:26 utc | 6

Correction: It was Jerome who provided the data on China’s food security

Posted by: Debs in ’04 | Aug 24 2004 23:28 utc | 7

I have to say, we are in a precarious situation.
But, as always I must disagree on a few points. Jerome is dead wrong if he thinks the EU will not be affected. EU corporation have too many assets in the US. But I do believe the Euro will come out stronger than the dollar. He is right about one thing, the EU has forced fiscal responsibility among EU members.
While Greenspan is pointing toward a housing bubble, I believe these instances of bubble will be isolated. The US population will grow to around 415 million by 2050. As I always say, those people have to go somewhere. Also, those additional people will be the saving grace for the US economy. It is only new citizens that can keep the consumption machine going. Also, they will pay for boomers SS.
I do believe there must be an adjustment in the Japanese and Chinese currencies to ease the current account deficits. Also, when boomers start to retire, the US government will repackage bonds and resell them with acqueisence of Japanese and Chinese central banks for pennies on the dollar.
This is the same thing they did with the South American debt crisis in the 1980s. Remember Brady Bonds? Yes, it will happen.
Do I believe the stock market could fall. Yes, but, what is the federal governement going to tell all of those 401K holders who loss their ass?
I can hear the screaming around the world. I want my money. I have said all along, people must start sticking those dollars in local banks. If they did the US economy would boom.
Oil will see a dramatic decrease in price during the adjustment period. As I said in another post last week. A ten percent reduction in US demand will tank the oil market. And no, we have not reached peak oil.
The bottom line is, will it be bad, no, we can manipulate our way out of it.

Posted by: jdp | Aug 25 2004 0:23 utc | 8

@ jdp
A ten percent reduction in US demand will tank the oil market. And no, we have not reached peak oil.
The bottom line is, will it be bad, no, we can manipulate our way out of it.

Whether we have hit Peak Oil or not is arguable. Suffice to say it’s within the time frame of what we’re discussing. A recent addendum to the argument (posted by b in another thread.)
I find it informative that and credible that a 10% reduction in US demand might tank the oil market, but it might also give us breathing space to find alternatives, not only for energy but for a more adaptive way of life.
That we can manipulate our war out of it in my way of thinking, is realizing that locally or state wide, we can make a difference. I’m looking for pragmatic/practical stuff like this for my campaign and (hopefully) legislative agenda. Think I’ll run with this one.
Thanks.

Posted by: Juannie | Aug 25 2004 2:28 utc | 9

Scary. Real scary. I have heard various rounds of financial doomsaying in earlier decades, but this time around the real-world factors seem more genuinely “on the brink” than before.
Factor into all this stuff increasing climate instability, possible water shortages, etc. and you have some potentially very unstable futures. These “wild cards” are big enough to have all kinds of major effects — a water shortage that crippled US agriculture for several years, for example, could have enormously destabilising effects both domestically and abroad.
I certainly never wanted to live in such “interesting times,” dunno about the rest of y’all. I have read a fair bit about the collapse of the USSR and the rise of the Mafia and the Oligarchs; about the collapse of Argentina; and so forth. it’s just no damn fun living in a country whose economy has recently become toast. the kind of people who claw their way into power and influence during the chaos are, if possible, even more unpleasant than the jerks running the show at present. we all (US denizens) fancy that “it can’t happen here” but I am not so sure.
and I share concerns voiced above, that the semi-literate, excitable, easily-manipulated US TV viewing audience could without much effort be whipped up into a witch-hunting frenzy in their eagerness to find someone (anyone!) to blame for the disaster.

Posted by: DeAnander | Aug 25 2004 5:45 utc | 10

US moves to banish foreign banks suspected of money-laundering

Posted by: Nemo | Aug 25 2004 7:58 utc | 11

Post written August 25, 1929
jdp: indeed I’ve always thought environmentally speaking big depressions are good, less waste, less pollution. But that’s just the cynical in me. Though oil market won’t tank.
“The US population will grow to around 415 million by 2050”
That will happen only if the US rules the world economy. If Dow and $ goes down, the immigration will soon stop as quickly as the foreign investments. Meanwhile, a 415 mio US means that half the people are non-“whites”, Blacks, Latinos, Asians, with the internal struggle for power that would follow.
Still, I think Europe will take a hit, because *everyone* will take a hit. EU will suffer less than the US; in fact far less if it depends only on economic and social matters, but the US may weight in with some new military adventure which may change the overall situation. Whatever, if the $ and Dow go down, UK will enter Eurozone in a few months or become irrelevant.
China and food: 10 years ago, they were saying global warming was good for them and could allow them to grow crop in the Western wastelands, which would get more rain. And more rain in the East means more harvest. Well, I hope they changed their mind, but that talk makes me question their motives for encouraging their current insane rush to the motorcar and other damaging industrialisations.

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Aug 25 2004 11:05 utc | 12

Great follow up comments everyone. Yes, the flow of in-migration will slow if the economy slows to much. But not due to the elite classes. Due to a general backlash to in-migration from the bottom 1/3 of citizens struggling and blaiming “those people.”
While we could be on the edge of peak oil, I stiil say world peak oil is 2020-2030. The current oil situation is Bushies baby. There is $10-20 of sticulation in a barrel of oil. The American people must realize the 401K situation. There is a draining of the countries assets.
I don’t believe the world of “Soilent Green” is here yet. But around 2050, I can see it. Hopefully, I’ll be long gone.

Posted by: jdp | Aug 25 2004 11:31 utc | 13

Sometimes headlines are revealing:
Greenspan Says Fed Can’t Tell Whether Housing Bubble Forming
Median home price up $152K in a year
Even sitting in a foam bath Greenspan would not recognize any bubbles.

Posted by: b | Aug 25 2004 16:17 utc | 14

Another economist warns on the foreign ´official´ asset purchases. Paul Kasriel of The Northern Trust: How Long Will Foreign Central Banks Keep Financing Our Treasury Deficit? (PDF)

If these Asian foreign central banks had not purchased these greenbacks and recycled them into U.S. government and agency securities, the dollar would be lower in value vs. their currencies and U.S. interest rates would be higher.

It is only a question of time before rising Japanese wholesale prices morph into rising Japanese consumer prices. A rising yen against the dollar would temper the rise in Japanese wholesale prices, especially rising crude oil prices in yen terms. My bet is that by midyear 2005, the Bank of Japan will have lost its appetite for dollar and U.S. government securities. At that point, the dollar is likely to take a dive and so, too, will U.S. Treasury prices.

The timing looks different then the one in the posted Roach article, but it really isn´t. The stock market is anticipating economic developments and therefore will fall before the dump in treasuries will occure and dollar will tank.

Posted by: b | Aug 25 2004 16:32 utc | 15

Debs in ’04, I wish your scenario were a bit less persuasive. Indeed, you have excellently voiced some of my own worries. With the most powerful (and expensive) military machine on earth, would the US be able to resist the temptation of becoming the best-equipped highwayman in history? I doubt it.
The war on Iraq may be the first of a long series of coming wealth wars. One might ask what’s new here, but for the US, I still tend to think the directness and shamelessness has reached a new dimension. The name Halliburton has not become such a household name for nothing.
Another thing that worries me: There is a tone, an atmosphere, of schadenfreude at the impending economic difficulties of the US – certainly in some circles here in Europe, but I would assume in many other parts of the world as well. It’s time people realize that we all can only lose if the US economy stalls. (Or will it be a chance for the poorest of the poor? After all, what have they got to lose? Jehova, Jehova, Jehova!)

Posted by: teuton | Aug 25 2004 19:36 utc | 16

Teuton: you know, if even “Athenian democracy” couldn’t avoid becoming a mafia don within the Delos League (“We give you protection so that people don’t hit on you, but our service has a price”, meaning of course “Pay us now or we send our army to take all your money”), I feel a bit pessimistic on the possible evolution of the US economy.
The dilemma now is that if the US goes really down, we’ll all lose, but if things go on, we’ll all lose as well. Joe Wilson said it best: “we’re fucked”.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Aug 25 2004 19:56 utc | 17

Quote:
“I have read a fair bit about the collapse of the USSR and the rise of the Mafia and the Oligarchs; about the collapse of Argentina; and so forth. it’s just no damn fun living in a country whose economy has recently become toast.”
***
It’s not that much different then what you already have in USA. It’s a matter of few (organized) individuals being owners of anything and everything significant. You Americans are almost there. Now just add that there is law for small people but not for those individuals and their gang (you are pretty much there too). There is a tax to be paid by you but NOT by them…If you just live your miserable life out of their way you are safe. They’ll even let you entertain your self and a crowd with politic as long as you do not interfere in their business. Do not go there or you’ll be literally dead. I can’t actually think of any significant difference between establishment of Russia and USA at this stage.
Independence of media and judicial system including. It’s only that Americans have much more material “reserve” to go pretty long way denying what’s happening.

Posted by: vbo | Aug 26 2004 13:31 utc | 18

Poverty spreads

Census Bureau says 1.3 million more slipped into poverty last year; health care coverage also drops.
The number of Americans living in poverty jumped to 35.9 million last year, up by 1.3 million, while the number of those without health care insurance rose to 45 million from 43.6 million in 2002, the U.S. government said in a report Thursday.

Posted by: b | Aug 26 2004 16:48 utc | 19