The current economic situation is challenging because it is
bringing up issues that are outside the range of experience of either the
present, or the most recent previous,
generation of politicians.
One would have to back to the 1930s to find
politicians who actually had real life experience of the sort of problems
we face today
In the 1930s, there was
1.) a collapse of confidence, in and
between, banks, which paralysed the economy.
2.) There was a gold standard (currencies had a fixed
exchange rate with gold and the supply of gold was limited) which, like the
euro, precluded countries using
the standard from devaluing or printing money as ways on inflating debts away and thus making
savers pay for the mistakes of
debtors.
3.) There was also a slowdown in the rate at which people
spent money (“velocity” is the economic
term for this), and that
meant there was less bang for
each buck that was printed.
All these things are happening today, 80
years later.
NO RELIABLE MEASURE OF VALUE ON WHICH TO BASE BANKING DECISIONS
The advantage of the gold standard was that
it provided a fixed measure of value. And a banking system needs a fixed
measure of value, which each bank can hold, and which provides it with a guide
as to how much it can lend.
Since 1971, when the US ceased to exchange
dollars for gold at a fixed rate of exchange, the world has lacked a fixed measure of value on which to
found its banking systems. It has
had to improvise.
In the absence of gold,
sovereign debts of Governments were pushed into assuming gold’s role as a fixed measure of value , on the assumption that
Governments always repaid their debts at face value, and if a bank held enough
Government bonds , it was thus ,
by definition, a sound bank.
GOVERNMENT DEBT A POOR SUBSTITUTE
The difficulty was that , unlike gold,
there is no natural limit on
the amount of Government debt. Indeed the United States, and other
Governments, issued large amounts of debt to people, like the Japanese and
Chinese , who wanted to save for the rainy day and were prepared to buy the
debt at ridiculously favourable prices to the borrower. That, in turn, led to an over expansion of the US and
other western economies on the basis of credit fuelled by an oversupply of
Government bonds.
Now the very clever people in the bond markets
have discovered, to their amazement, that Government bonds are not as good as
gold after all. If you have too
much of a good thing, it is not good any more. Here is how their eyes were opened.
THE THINGS THAT SPOOKED THE TRADERS, WHO
HAD NO SENSE OF HISTORY
Political parties threatened to, deliberately and
unnecessarily , default on
Government debts to make a political point. This happened in the US
recently.
Some Governments produced deceptive public accounts to allow
them to issue more debt than they can afford to service. This happened in Greece. Governments generally, and many businesses, simply borrowed too much, at artificially low interest rates .
The fact that none of the highly educated
people in the rating agencies, banks, and accounting firms did not see the risk
that such errors might be made , and price the risk such errors into the interest rate they charged on
Government bonds, was a
result of the “tunnel visioned” specialisation, that passes for education in many our
leading universities nowadays.
We paid a price for the
fact that economics courses focussed insufficiently on economic history and
finance was taught as if it was a branch of mathematical engineering, rather than something inherently under the influence of psychology and politics
All this critique is fine as far as it
goes. But is there a solution?
HOW A EURO BOND MIGHT SOLVE THE PROBLEM
I think we will only get our economies
going again, if we can restore belief in a fixed measure of value ,that can
perform the role that gold performed in the past, and which sovereign bonds
performed until recently.
That is where the proposal for a euro bond
could be helpful. It could be a
lot more than a short term fix.
Suppose all the euro area Governments could
agree that they would all mutually guarantee the repayment of a new collective euro bond,
and that in addition
it would have first call on
(say) a fixed share of all VAT receipts.
Suppose then that this guaranteed
euro bond could only be issued by a euro area
Government in limited
circumstances eg.
1,) that their budget law , and five year
projections, had been approved in
advance by the European Commission and
2.) the euro bond could only
be issued cover a limited proportion of their total borrowing, as
long as their overall debt/GDP ratio was more than (say) 40%.
This would have a number of advantages.
It would guarantee a minimum borrowing
capacity to all euro area states.
It would, however, penalize countries who
had debt /GDP ratios over 40%, because they would be forced to borrow commercially and pay higher rates of interest on
the extra borrowing, which would
be a strong incentive to them to
get their debt level down as quickly as possible to 40% or below.
Because it would be guaranteed by all euro
area Governments, and have a prior call on VAT receipts, the new euro bond would have real
credibility globally, as well as within the EU.
Banks who held such new euro bonds would
now have something of real and certain
value, on the basis of
which they could confidently base
their lending decisions. In
that way, credit would start flowing again, jobs would be created and permanent
structural damage to our economies avoided.
If this happened, Europe, rather than being
the world’s economic problem, could be the provider of part of the world’s
economic solution.
No comments:
Post a Comment