Olduvaiblog: Musings on the coming collapse

Home » Posts tagged 'Bank' (Page 2)

Tag Archives: Bank

When A Stock Bubble Goes Horribly Wrong And Hyperinflation Results | Zero Hedge

When A Stock Bubble Goes Horribly Wrong And Hyperinflation Results | Zero Hedge.

Perhaps the most amusing and curious aspect of this entertaining summary of the Mississippi Bubble of 1720, the resulting European debt crisis (the first of many), how bubble frenzies are as old as paper money, the man behind both – convicted murderer and millionaire gambler, John Law, what happens when paper money’s linkage to gold is broken, and how everyone loses their wealth and hyperinflation breaks out, is who the source is. The New York FedPerhaps the Fed-employed authors fail to grasp just what their institution does, or have a truly demonic sense of humor. In either case, the following “crisis chronicle” highlighting how banking worked then, how it works now, and how it will always “work”, is a must read by all.

Crisis Chronicles: The Mississippi Bubble of 1720 and the European Debt Crisis

Convicted murderer and millionaire gambler John Law spotted an opportunity to leverage paper money and credit to finance trade. He first proposed the concept in Scotland in 1705, where it was rejected. But by 1716, Law had found a new audience for his ideas in France, where he proposed to the Duke of Orleans his plan to establish a state bank, at his own expense, that would issue paper money redeemable at face value in gold and silver. At the time, Law’s Banque Generale was one of only six such banks to have issued paper money, joining Sweden, England, Holland, Venice, and Genoa. Things didn’t turn out exactly as Law had hoped, and in this edition of Crisis Chronicleswe meet the South Sea’s lesser-known cousin, the Mississippi Bubble.

Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?

John Law was an interesting figure with a colorful past. He was convicted of murder in London but, with the help of friends, escaped to the continent, where he became a millionaire through his skill at gambling. Like South Sea Company Director John Blunt in England, Law believed that a trading company could be leveraged to exchange the monopoly rights of trade for the ability to make low-interest-rate loans to the government. And like Blunt, in 1719 Law formed a trading company—the Mississippi Company—to exploit trade in the Louisiana territory. But unlike Blunt or the South Sea Company, the Mississippi Company made an earnest effort to grow trade with the Louisiana territory.

In 1719, the French government allowed Law to issue 50,000 new shares in the Mississippi Company at 500 livres with just 75 livres down and the rest due in nineteen additional monthly payments of 25 livres each. The share price rose to 1,000 livres before the second installment was even due, and ordinary citizens flocked to Paris to participate. Based on this success, Law offered to pay off the national debt of 1.5 billion livres by issuing an additional 300,000 shares at 500 livres paid in ten monthly installments.

Law also purchased the right to collect taxes for 52 million livres and sought to replace various taxes with a single tax. The tax scheme was a boon to efficiency, and the price of some products fell by a third. The stock price increases and the tax efficiency gains spurred foreigners to Paris to buy stock in the Mississippi Company.

By mid-1719, the Mississippi Company had issued more than 600,000 shares and the par value of the company stood at 300 million livres. That summer, the share price skyrocketed from 1,000 to 5,000 livres and it continued to rise through year-end, ultimately reaching dizzying heights of 15,000 livres per share. The word millionaire was first used, and in January 1720 Law was appointed Controller General.

The Trickle Becomes a Flood

Reminiscent of a handful of florists failing to reinvest in tulip bulbs as we described in a previous post on Tulip Mania, in early 1720 some depositors at Banque Generale began to exchange Mississippi Company shares for gold coin. In response, Law passed edicts in early 1720 to limit the use of coin. Around the same time, to help support the Mississippi Company share price, Law agreed to buy back Mississippi Company stock with banknotes at a premium to market price and, to his surprise, more shareholders than anticipated queued up to do so—a surprise we’ll see repeated at the apex of the Panic of 1907. To support the stock redemptions, Law needed to print more money and broke the link to gold, which quickly led to hyperinflation, as we saw in our post on the Kipper und Wipperzeit.

10-livre-banknote

The spillover to the economy was immediate and most notable in food prices. By May 21, Law was forced to deflate the value of banknotes and cut the stock price. As the public rushed to convert banknotes to coin, Law was forced to close Banque Generale for ten days, then limit the transaction size once the bank reopened. But the queues grew longer, the Mississippi Company stock price continued to fall, and food prices soared by as much as 60 percent.

To make matters worse, there was an outbreak of the plague in September 1720, which further restricted economic activity—in particular, trade with the rest of Europe. By the end of 1720, Law was dismissed as Controller General and he ultimately fled France.

Balancing Dispersed Debt Issuance against Central Monetary Policy

One might argue that Law suffered a self-inflicted loss of control over monetary policy once the link between paper money issuance and the underlying value of gold holdings was broken—a lesson that monetary authorities have learned over time. (ZH: they have? where?)  But what if you don’t have direct sovereign authority over banknote issuance or, in more modern times, monetary policy? A challenge that’s perhaps most visible in the Eurozone is how best to balance dispersed, country-specific debt issuance against more centralized authority over monetary policy. In an upcoming post on the Continental Currency Crisis, we’ll see why a united fiscal policy was needed along with the united currency and monetary policies. Could the same be true of Europe? And if so, would a united fiscal policy include Eurozone debt as well as centralized fiscal transfers, or perhaps even collection of taxes? Tell us what you think.

Average:Select ratingPoorOkayGoodGreatAwesome

Your rating: None Average: 4.7 (14 votes)

Subscriptions (0)

UK unemployment rate slips to four-and-a-half year low of 7.4% | Business | theguardian.com

UK unemployment rate slips to four-and-a-half year low of 7.4% | Business | theguardian.com.

Bank of England governor Mark Carney

Under Bank of England governor Mark Carney’s policy of forward guidance, the MPC will not to consider raising rates until unemployment has fallen below 7%. Photograph: Shannon Stapleton/Reuters

Britain’s unemployment rate has slipped to a four-and-a-half year low of 7.4%, edging closer to the “threshold” at which the Bank of England has said it will consider raising interest rates.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) said that unemployment in the three months to October was 2.39 million, or 7.4% of the working age population, down from 7.6% in the three months to September.

Under the Bank’s policy of forward guidance, governor Mark Carneypromised that borrowing costs would remain on hold at least until unemployment has fallen below 7%.

When the policy was announced in August, the Bank’s monetary policy committee expected that to take three years; but their latest prediction is that it could be as soon as 2015.

“The jobless rate is falling far faster towards the Bank of England’s 7% threshold than policymakers envisaged when establishing the marker back in the summer,” said Chris Williamson, chief economist at City data-provider Markit. “Employment is surging higher and unemployment collapsing in the UK as the economic recovery has moved into a higher gear.”

Sterling jumped after the unemployment data was released, rising by almost a cent against the dollar, to $1.635, as investors bet on an earlier-than-expected rate rise. A stronger pound was one of the concerns of the Bank’s nine-member monetary policy committee at their December meeting, according to minutes also published on Wednesday.

The MPC pointed out that the value of sterling has risen by 9% against the currencies of the UK’s major trading partners since March, and warned that “any further substantial appreciation of sterling would pose additional risks to the balance of demand growth and to the recovery”.

The minutes suggested the latest evidence pointed to a “burgeoning recovery” in the UK; but one which was unlikely to prove sustainable unless productivity picked up, finally lifting real incomes. The MPC voted unanimously to leave rates on hold at their record low of 0.5%, and the stock of assets bought under quantitative easing unchanged at £375bn.

MPC member Martin Weale suggested last week that if unemployment is falling rapidly at the point when the 7% threshold is breached, he would regard that as a reason to tighten policy.

The details of the jobs data reinforced the view that the labour market has strengthened markedly over the past six months. The number of people employed across the economy has hit a fresh record high above 30 million, while there are more vacancies than at any time since the summer of 2008, before the UK slipped into recession.

On the claimant count, which measures the number of people in receipt of out-of-work benefits, unemployment fell to 1.27 million in November, its lowest level since January 2009.

John Philpott, director of consultancy the Jobs Economist, described the data as “wonderful”. “The quarterly 250,000 net increase in total employment is as big as one might once have expected in a full year. Employment is up in all parts of the UK, except Northern Ireland, with a sharp rise in job vacancies helping an additional 50,000 16 to 24-year-olds into work. And while the overall figure of more than 30 million people in work still leaves the UK employment rate (72%) below the pre-recession rate (73%) it is a landmark worth celebrating,” he said.

Despite the improving conditions in the labour market, there is little evidence that the prolonged squeeze on wages is easing. The ONS said total pay rose at an annual rate of 0.9% in October, or 0.8% including bonuses. That compares with an inflation rate of 2.2% in the same month, suggesting that on average, living standards are continuing to fall. Frances O’Grady, general secretary of the TUC, said: “These are undoubtedly positive figures, but we should not forget how far we still have to go to restore pre-crash living standrards through better pay and jobs”.

Rachel Reeves, Labour’s shadow work and pensions secretary, said: “Today’s fall in unemployment is welcome, but families are facing a cost-of-living crisis and on average working people are now £1,600 a year worse off under this out-of-touch government.”

 

Are The Markets Rigged? | Zero Hedge

Are The Markets Rigged? | Zero Hedge.

Despite being found guilty of and fined for manipulations of every other market in the world (from FX to rates to energy), investors small and large continue to play the markets on the basis that they are fair and balanced. Aside from high-profile insider trades; day after day, the oddly high correlations, the obvious spikes, blips, and front-running are ignored… until now. In this brief documentary,CBC asks the critical question “are the world’s stock markets rigged?” Amanda Lang concludes “there’s a sense among the general public that nobody seems to be maintaining the integrity of the system.” as she highlights case after case “as though everything is rigged!” Conspiracy theory evolves once again into conspiracy fact as the system that’s supposed to benefit many, but actually enriches a few.

 

“Historically, the system works because people have confidence in the rules and believe they are treated the same as anybody else.

 

But it’s getting harder and harder to ignore the stories of powerful people cheating the system for their own gain. As the bad apples add up, it gets harder and harder to ignore a troubling realization — “everything is rigged.””

 

 

 

As we’ve noted before:

Courtesy of the revelations over the past year, one thing has been settled: the statement “Wall Street Manipulated Everything” is no longer in the conspiracy theorist’s arsenal: it is now part of the factually accepted vernacular. And to summarize just how, who and where this manipulation takes places is the following series of charts from Bloomberg demonstrating Wall Street at its best – breaking the rules and making a killing.

Foreign Exchanges

Regulators are looking into whether currency traders have conspired through instant messages to manipulate foreign exchange rates. The currency rates are used to calculate the value of stock and bond indexes.

 

Energy Trading

Banks have been accused of manipulating energy markets in California and other states.

 

Libor

Since early 2008 banks have been caught up in investigations and litigation over alleged manipulations of Libor.

 

Mortgages

Banks have been accused of improper foreclosure practices, selling bonds backed by shoddy mortgages, and misleading investors about the quality of the loans.

 

Banks Warn Fed They May Have To Start Charging Depositors | Zero Hedge

Banks Warn Fed They May Have To Start Charging Depositors | Zero Hedge.

The Fed’s Catch 22 just got catchier. While most attention in the recently released FOMC minutes fell on the return of the taper as a possibility even as soon as December (making the November payrolls report the most important ever, ever, until the next one at least), a less discussed issue was the Fed’s comment that it would consider lowering the Interest on Excess Reserves to zero as a means to offset the implied tightening that would result from the reduction in the monthly flow once QE entered its terminal phase (for however briefly before the plunge in the S&P led to the Untaper). After all, the Fed’s policy book goes, if IOER is raised to tighten conditions, easing it to zero, or negative, should offset “tightening financial conditions”, right? Wrong. As the FT reports leading US banks have warned the Fed that should it lower IOER, they would be forced to start charging depositors.

In other words, just like Europe is already toying with the idea of NIRP (and has been for over a year, if still mostly in the rheotrical and market rumor phase), so the Fed’s IOER cut would also result in a negative rate on deposits which the FT tongue-in-cheekly summarizes “depositors already have to cope with near-zero interest rates, but paying just to leave money in the bank would be highly unusual and unwelcome for companies and households.”

If cutting IOER was as much of an easing move as the Fed believes, banks should be delighted – after all, according to the Fed’s guidelines it would mean that the return on their investments (recall that all US banks slowly but surely became glorified, TBTF prop trading hedge funds since Glass Steagall was repealed, and why the Volcker Rule implementation is virtually guaranteed to never happen) would increase. And yet, they are not:

Executives at two of the top five US banks said a cut in the 0.25 per cent rate of interest on the $2.4tn in reserves they hold at the Fed would lead them to pass on the cost to depositors.

 

Banks say they may have to charge because taking in deposits is not free: they have to pay premiums of a few basis points to a US government insurance programme.

 

“Right now you can at least break even from a revenue perspective,” said one executive, adding that a rate cut by the Fed “would turn it into negative revenue – banks would be disincentivised to take deposits and potentially charge for them”.

 

Other bankers said that a move to negative rates would not only trim margins but could backfire for banks and the system as a whole, as it would incentivise treasury managers to find higher-yielding, riskier assets.

 

“It’s not as if we are suddenly going to start lending to [small and medium-sized enterprises],” said one. “There really isn’t the level of demand, so the danger is that banks are pushed into riskier assets to find yield.”

All of the above is BS: lending has never been a concern for the Fed because if it was, then one could scrap QE right now as an absolute faiure. Recall that as we showed recently, the total amount of loans and leases in commercial US banks has been unchanged since Lehman, with the only rise in deposits coming thanks to the fungible liquidity injected by the Fed.

Furthermore, contrary to what the hypocrite banker said that “the danger is that banks are pushed into riskier assets to find yield”banks are already in the riskiest assets: just look at what JPM was doing with its hundreds of billions in excess deposits, which originated as Fed reserves on its books – we explained the process of how the Fed’s reserves are used to push the market higher most recently in “What Shadow Banking Can Tell Us About The Fed’s “Exit-Path” Dead End.”

What the real danger is, is that once the Fed lowers IOER and there is a massive outflow of deposits, that banks which have used the excess deposits as initial margin and collateral on marginable securities to chase risk to record highs (as JPM’s CIO explicitly and undisputedly did) that there would be an avalanche of selling once the negative rate deposit outflow tsunami hit.

Needless to say, the only offset would be if the proceeds from the deposits outflows were used to invest in stocks instead of staying inert in some mattress or, worse (if only from the Fed’s point of view) purchase inert assets like gold or Bitcoin.

Which brings us back to the first sentence and the Fed’s now massive Catch 22: on one hand, shoud the Fed taper, rates will surge and stocks will once again plunge, as they did, in early summer, just to teach the evil, non-appeasing Fed a lesson.

On the other hand, should the Fed cut IOER as a standalone move or concurrently to offset the tapering pain, banks will crush depositors by cutting rates, depositors will pull their money from banks en masse, and banks will have no choice but to close on a record levered $2.2 trillion in margined risk position.

 

Too Big To Fail Is Now Bigger Than Ever Before

Too Big To Fail Is Now Bigger Than Ever Before.

 

A SmartKnowledgeU Exclusive Interview with World Bank Whistleblower Karen Hudes: “The World Will Reject Central Bankers” | Zero Hedge

A SmartKnowledgeU Exclusive Interview with World Bank Whistleblower Karen Hudes: “The World Will Reject Central Bankers” | Zero Hedge.

 

Banks Seen at Risk Five Years After Lehman Collapse – Bloomberg

Banks Seen at Risk Five Years After Lehman Collapse – Bloomberg.

 

What will future historians think of our time?

What will future historians think of our time?.

 

Presenting the latest in government oppression…

Presenting the latest in government oppression….

 

%d bloggers like this: