|
Quartermasters of Inflation
That central bankers are the quartermasters of
inflation is no longer a controversial assertion. That much was admitted by
central banker Alan Greenspan in his speech before the Economic Club of New
York on December 19, 2002 (see: www.federalreserve.gov/BoardDocs). He observed that as long as the gold standard was
in charge of money-creation the price level was relatively stable. For
example, in 1929 it was hardly different from that in 1800. But, after gold
was banned and central bankers were put in charge in 1933, the consumer price
index nearly doubled in two decades. And in the four decades after that
prices quintupled. In other words, under the watch of the gold standard the
dollar preserved its purchasing power for a period of one and one third of a
century, but under the watch of the central bankers it managed to lose 90 percent
of it in half of that time-period.
The Specter of Deflation
Presently the specter
of deflation is haunting the world, so much so that central banker Ben
Bernanke felt obliged to address the problem in a speech before the National
Economists Club in Washington, D.C., on November 21, 2002 (see: www.federalreserve.gov/BoardDocs). He presented a simplistic view of deflation
defining it as a general decline in prices. Actually, it would be more
accurate to say that deflation manifests itself through a general decline in
prices and interest rates. Mr. Bernanke identified the source of
deflation as a collapse in aggregate demand -- a drop in spending so severe
that producers must cut prices on an ongoing basis in order to find buyers.
Of course, this is the view of an unreconstructed Keynesian. But Keynesianism
has been brain-dead for some three decades, so we ought to feel emancipated
from its tyranny. We identify the source of deflation as reluctance of producers
to take the loans that bankers try to push on them through ongoing
interest-rate cuts. Uncharacteristically, producers are pessimistic about
future profit opportunities. Instead of contracting new debt, they scramble
to get out of the old, and try to retrench by reducing inventory.
Guided Tour of the Star Chamber
Messrs. Greenspan and Bernanke claim that the
Federal Reserve has the situation firmly in hand. If deflation were to develop,
options for aggressive monetary policy response such as lowering interest
rates are available. They admit that the zero lower bound on nominal interest
rates presents a problem. Even if debtors were able to refinance loans at
zero nominal interest, they may still feel excruciating economic pain caused
by high and rising real rates due to the falling price level, as shown by
their deteriorating balance sheet. However, Messrs. Greenspan and Bernanke
reassure us that monetary policy will never lose its ability to stimulate
aggregate demand and the economy, zero interest notwithstanding.
Mr. Bernanke gives us a guided tour of the
Star Chamber, showing all the instruments of torture and explaining how they
are to be used. The first of these is the printing press. Under a fiat money
system the central bank generates inflation by this technology allowing it to
create as many dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. But it is not
enough to create fiat money; you must also be able to put it into circulation
or, at least, to make credible threats (sic!) to do so. Normally the
Fed puts newly created fiat money into circulation through asset purchases.
This particular torture instrument is used by the Fed to reduce the value of
the dollar in terms of goods and services. Under a paper-money system a
determined government and its central bank can always generate higher
spending and induce positive inflation, we are told.
Pushing on a String
If this has the result of pushing short-term
interest rates to zero, the Fed will still not be at the end of its rope. It
can further stimulate aggregate spending by expanding the menu of assets that
it buys. If we do fall into deflation, we can take comfort in the thought
that "the logic of the printing press" will ultimately assert
itself. Sufficient injections of new money must eventually reverse a
deflation.
So what may the Fed do if its target rate, the
overnight federal funds rate, has fallen to zero? Why, it will change the
target, that's what. It will stimulate spending by lowering interest rates
further along the maturity spectrum. It will target the two-year rate by
committing to make unlimited purchases of securities maturing in two years or
less. But suppose that deflation is so stubborn that spending is not stimulated
even as the two- year rate is pushed down to zero. Well, then
change the target again, this time, say, to the ten-year rate, committing to
make unlimited purchases of securities maturing in ten years or less. And so
on, ad libitum. Mr. Bernanke says that lower rates over the entire maturity
spectrum of public and private securities should strengthen aggregate demand
"in the usual ways", and thus help end deflation.
This betrays our central bankers' ignorance of
the nature of the beast. The Fed may be pushing on a string. People may
refuse to spend the money in the "usual ways". It is one thing to
print fiat dollars, and another to make people spend them. No problem, Mr.
Bernanke says. If lowering yields on longer-term securities proved insufficient
to re- start spending, the Fed might next consider offering fixed-term loans
to banks at zero interest, with a wide-range of private assets (including,
among others, corporate bonds, commercial paper, bank loans, and mortgages)
deemed eligible as collateral.
Operation Helicopter-Drop
But the banks may not use the loans at zero
interest in the way intended by the Fed. They may not want to make further
loans to their clients whose prospects to turn a profit are dim at best. The
banks may find it far more attractive to invest in bonds for the capital
gains guaranteed by the central bank's zero-interest policy. Business
lethargy may not react to loans offered at ever lower rates. In this case Mr.
Bernanke recommends the helicopter-drop of money, an idea first suggested by
Milton Friedman. There must be a way to put fiat money into circulation, if
not by hook then by crook! A broad-based tax- cut financed by open market
purchases of securities by the Fed should do the trick. This "manna from
heaven" should re-start spending. The Federal Reserve and other
policymakers are far from helpless in the face of deflation, even if the rate
of interest is already pushed all the way to zero.
Taking Risks out of Bond Speculation
All this talk is old hat, except for the fact
that heretofore it hasn't been considered polite behavior
for central bankers to flaunt their authority to create fiat money in
unlimited quantities, and to boast their power to drive down the value of the
dollar in terms of goods and services. More interesting than what these
gentlemen say is what they don't say. They studiously avoid reference to the
100 trillion dollar behemoth: the interest-rate derivatives market, and to
bond speculation. Derivatives are a tell-tale, revealing the big picture. Far
from trying to prevent or to combat it, the Fed is promoting deflation. It
does, in fact, act as the quartermaster of deflation. Every one of the
torture instruments in the Star Chamber enumerated above is making deflation
worse, not better.
What the $100 trillion derivatives market
shows is that the main feature of deflation is the invisible but nonetheless
real bull market in bonds. Nobody is talking about it, although the bull
market in bonds that started in 1980 has been the largest of all bull markets
of all kinds in all history. Fabulous fortunes have been made and will be
made before it is over, thanks to the Fed that has taken the risk out of
bond speculation.
The speeches of Messrs. Greenspan and Bernanke
are the best example to demonstrate the charge. Speculators are told that the
Fed is prepared to buy unlimited quantities of securities across the entire
maturity spectrum. What is this if not an invitation to get aboard the
bandwagon and share the ride to infinite riches? Come and get the bonds
before we snap them up. Fear not, your investment is absolutely safe. Your
friendly central banker has made bond speculation risk-free. He underwrites
the unlimited capital gains you are going to make on your speculative bondholdings (or on your long positions on bond futures,
or on your call options on bond futures). The figure $100 trillion shows the extent to which speculators have rallied to the call of
the Pied Piper. It measures bets in the aggregate that speculators have made
on ever-increasing bond prices or, what is the same to say, on ever falling
interest rates.
Multiplying Asset Values a Thousand-fold
Of course, interest rates will never go to
zero. They just keep getting halved. The yield on long-term Treasury bonds
was 16% in 1980. It has been halved to 8% and will be halved again to 4%,
according to the script of Messrs. Greenspan and Bernanke. After that the
target at successive halvings will be: 2%, 1%,
0.5%, 0.25%, 0.125%, 0.0625%, etc. As you see, it never gets to 0%. Yet at
each halving, the market value of the long-term bond will practically double.
Suppose that in 1980 you invested $1,000 in a 30-year bond. Suppose further
that the rate of interest would continue to be halved again and again. Your
investment after each consecutive halving would increase in value to $2,000,
$4,000, $8,000, $16,000, $32,000, $64,000, $128,000, $256,000, $512,000,
$1,024,000, etc. On the top of that, by clipping coupons you would be reaping
a nice income, too. Thus, as a rule of thumb, the value of your investment
would be multiplied by a factor of 1,000 as the rate of interest fell to
0.03%. Although this result cannot be guaranteed, the downside risk is nil,
thanks to Messrs. Greenspan and Bernanke. (My example is a simplification for
purposes of illustration. In the actual case bond speculators may use strip
bonds, and they may roll forward the maturity several times.)
Needless to say, bond speculators are very
much alive to the risk-free opportunity to multiply the value of their assets
1,000-fold. Already they have amassed wealth greater than any group of
speculators has ever done in history. Their combined financial resources
exceed that of central banks and governments. Naturally, they have a vested
interest, and the financial strength, to keep the merry-go-round going -- and
they will.
Essence of Deflation
The U.S. government may well be unconcerned
about the fact that the liquidation-value of its debt is escalating
1,000-fold due to the falling interest-rate structure. After all, the Fed has
the printing press to create dollars with which to liquidate any liability,
however large. The producers are not so fortunate. They have to produce more
and sell more if they want to get out of debt before maturity. Producing
more and selling more in a falling interest-rate environment may not be
possible, however. What this shows is that the essence of deflation is not
falling prices. Rather, it is falling interest rates, being pushed down by
bond speculation that has been made risk-free by the central bank. Falling
interest rates bankrupt productive enterprise by rendering it unable to
extricate itself from the clutches of debt contracted at higher rates. The
debt becomes ever more onerous as its liquidation value threatens to increase
1,000-fold.
What these central bankers don't understand is
that, while they have the power to put unlimited amounts of fiat money into
circulation, they have no power to make it flow in the "approved"
direction. Money, like water, may refuse to flow uphill. In a deflation money
shall not flow to the commodity market to bid up prices as central bankers hope that it will. Instead, it shall flow downhill
to the bond market where the fun is, to bid up prices there. When the central
bank makes bond speculation risk-free, then the bond market will act like a
gigantic vacuum cleaner, sucking up dollars from every nook and cranny of the
economy. In putting ever more fiat money into circulation the central bank
cuts the figure of a cat chasing its own tail. More fiat money pushes
interest rates lower; falling interest rates put more pressure on producers
to cut prices, calling for still more fiat money, completing the vicious
circle. The interest rate structure and the price level are linked. Subject
to leads and lags, they keep moving together in the same direction. It is not
funny to watch the Fed chasing its own tail. In doing so it generates a
deflationary spiral that may ultimately bankrupt the entire producing sector.
Like the Sorcerer's Apprentice, the central banker can start the march to
zero interest, but it hasn't got a clue how to stop it when the deflationary
spiral gets out of control.
Falling Interest Rates Squeeze Profits
Paradoxically, falling interest rates squeeze
profits. Conventional wisdom suggests otherwise: lower interest rates are
considered salubrious to business. However, we ought to distinguish between a
low interest rate structure and a falling one. Only the former
is salubrious; the latter is lethal. Falling interest rates reveal that past
investments in physical capital have been made at too high a rate of interest
in view of lower rates presently available. Furthermore, even the low rates
of today will appear too high tomorrow. This explains business lethargy.
Expanding production would appear foolhardy as long as the decline in the rate
of interest continued. Falling interest rates make the cost of servicing past
investments soar. As bond prices rise, the present value of debt will rise as
well. So does the cost of liquidating a liability. These increases hit the
profit margin, regardless whether the fact is realized by the producers or
not. If not realized, the outcome will be that much worse. As the firm is
paying out phantom profits in dividends, it is undermining its own financial
strength already weakened by the falling price level. At one point the firm
will be unable to pay its bills and will be forced to seek bankruptcy
protection. Then there is the matter of the domino-effect. Even perfectly healhy firms are hit by deflation: they may find it
impossible to collect their receivables and go under after their debtors have
-- all because of the falling interest rate structure.
Financial Vampirism
In the view presented here deflation is a huge
wealth-transfer scheme from the producing sector to the financial sector,
denuding the former of its capital, and enriching the latter with risk-free
capital gains. Indeed, the beneficiaries of the falling interest-rate
structure, making risk-free profits thanks to the zero-interest policy of the
central bank, are the principals of the financial sector, chief among them
those of the big money-center banks. Their obscene
profits do not come out of thin air. Their wealth is not newly created
wealth. It is existing wealth siphoned off the balance sheet of producing
enterprise, forced into bankruptcy by the falling interest-rate structure.
This is modern vampirism practiced by the financial sector, aided and abetted
by the central bank, and its victim is the producing sector.
The bear market in stocks is not the cause but
the effect of deflation. The cause is the artificial bull market in bonds
financed by the central bank. If you ask the bond speculator about his
obscene profits while the rest of the economy crumbles around him, he will
shrug: "I play by the rules. And I did not make those rules either."
Bond Speculation Is No Zero-Sum Game
The proof of complicity of the banks in the
bond-speculation-scheme is the $100 trillion derivative monster. No
small-time speculators could create such a Moloch.
It was created by the big money-center banks, for
their own benefit, with complete disregard for the disastrous effect it has
on the producers of goods and services. The total face value of outstanding
bonds falls far short of the colossal figure of $100 trillion. It is against
common sense, and an invitation to disaster, to allow speculative long
positions to exceed total supply. Messrs. Greenspan and Bernanke have no
comment on all this, except to confirm policies that are conducive to further
increasing the debt behemoth and further whetting the appetite of the $100
trillion derivatives Moloch.
We are told that the sum of $100 trillion is
"only a notional amount". However, the profits of the bond
speculators are not notional. They are payable in cold cash. If indeed
interest rates did go down, and the price of bonds did go up, say, one
percent, then the speculators' profit would be $1 trillion in cash. Who is
going to pay that?
Economists will tell you that the profit of
one bond speculator is the loss of another. Don't buy that. It would be true
only if speculation was a zero-sum game, and it was a case of stabilizing
speculation. It is true that some speculative markets answer that
description. An example is the commodity market trading agricultural goods.
It fits the model of a zero-sum game. This is so because
the risks involved in commodity trading are nature-given, having to do
with the fickleness of the weather and the unpredictability of natural
catastrophes such as a flood or a tornado. Human mortals are not privileged
to see the future. Speculators in agricultural commodities make money by
resisting the formation of price trends. But in markets where the risks are
made (unmade!) by man such as the market for bonds and their derivatives,
speculation is not a zero-sum game. There, speculators make money not
by resisting price trends but by riding them. This is the case
of destabilizing speculation.
But if the profit of one bond speculator is
not paid by another, then who is paying it? This is a critical question and it
deserves a careful answer. The other side of the bet of A, the bull
speculator in bonds, is taken by a banker B for hedging rather than
speculative purposes. He has sold the bond to A in order to hedge his
exposure in lending money to C, an entrepreneur in the producing
sector. His risk is that interest rates might rise
before his loan to C matures that would punch a big hole in his
balance sheet. With his hedge on, the position of B is neutral with
regard to changes in the rate of interest. His position is that of a straddle
with a long and a short leg. Losses on one leg are canceled
by profits on the other. Therefore, if there is a loss on B's short
leg, as is virtually certain in view of the "threats" made by Mr.
Bernanke, then it is simply transferred to C, the counter-party to the
long leg of B's straddle. The loss is charged to C. The profit
of bond speculator A is paid by C. This means that, ultimately,
the losers paying the $1 trillion in gains to the bond speculators are the
producers. To add insult to injury, they are kept in the dark about the
existence of Mr. Bernake's casino where the
fleecing takes place.
Power to Create Is Power to Destroy
The producers are sitting ducks in this speculative
shoot-out. They have no choice. They must carry the risk of owning productive
capital, without which there will be no consumer goods for Mr. Greenspan and
Mr. Bernanke, or for you and me. This is an accurate
description of the mechanism whereby the capital of the producing sector is
surreptitiously siphoned off for the benefit of the financial sector as the
rate of interest is driven down to zero. The producing sector is condemned to
bankruptcy. It is a victim of plunder sanctioned by the Criminal Code. This
is the essence of deflation: speculators aided and abetted by the central
bank are allowed to bid bond prices sky-high, in complete disregard for the
havoc that falling interest rates will wreak with the capital accounts of the
producing sector, not to mention losses inflicted on stockholders. The $100
trillion derivatives market is a monument to the folly of man in delegating
unlimited power to the central banker to create as much fiat money as he
wishes. Former central banker Paul Volcker knows. He has been there. He is
quoted as saying that "the truly unique power of a central bank is to
create money and, ultimately, the power to create is the power to
destroy." If the central banker has unlimited power to create, then he
has unlimited power to destroy. And destroy he does, especially the savings
of ordinary people.
Why Are Economists Silent?
I am aware that my warnings will be received
with a great deal of skepticism. The central banker
as the quartermaster-general of deflation? Arrant nonsense! Not only does the
central bank has its own army of research
economists, it also has the benefit of the knowledge and research of the
entire profession. There can be no question that the central bank wields its
awesome power while enjoying the best economic advice money can buy!
Siphoning off wealth from the balance sheet of others is straight out of
science fiction, my critics charge. The allegedly injured party, the
producing sector, hasn't complained that its capital is open to pilferage.
The media in reporting the crash of Swissair and United did not suggest foul
play in plundering the airlines' balance sheets.
Yet you may dismiss my charges only at your
own peril. The awareness is growing that not just the media, but the entire
profession of monetary economists has been bought off by the central banking
establishment in order to put the best possible spin on our fiat money
system. In an interview on December 17, 2002, entitled "Our Dishonest
and Corrupt Monetary System" (www.kitco.com), Dr. Larry Parks
recalled that John Kenneth Galbraith, the Paul M. Warburg Professor Emeritus
of Harvard University, had published a book in 1975 entitled Money, Whence
It Came, Where It Went. In this book the professor wrote: "The study
of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is
used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it." In other
words, Galbraith is saying that when it comes to money, economists lie! Dr.
Parks asks: why do they lie? They have tenure. Why don't they tell the truth?
He concludes that the monetary economists, for the last fifty years or more,
have been bought off. With Nobel-prizes, endowed chairs, research grants,
board memberships, and other perks. Monetary economists have betrayed their
Muse, to serve Mammon.
Off-Balance-Sheet Wizardry
That the profession of the accountants has
been bought off by the financial sector came to light recently in the wake of
the Wall Street accounting scandals. But in spite of the great publicity
given to these scandals by the media, the problem has not been fixed. A few
small-time crooks may have been apprehended, but none of the authors of the
scheme whereby banks are allowed to cook their books has been charged. The
truth is that banks can carry assets, such as bets in the derivatives
markets, "off balance sheet". They do this in order to find shelter
from the scrutiny of depositors, creditors, shareholders; more generally,
from the scrutiny of taxpayers at large. Accountants, regulators, and bank
inspectors know this, but that's a different matter. Apparently, they have
been bribed, too. They are part of the conspiracy. This is how Dr. Parks
describes the fraud:
"Fractional reserve
lending is jargon for creating money out of nothing. That's what that means.
In the case of derivatives, these are bets that the banks make. The banks
today in the aggregate worldwide have made roughly $110 trillion worth of
bets. That's all they are. Banks are making bets and creating money. One of
the things that obscures this for everybody is that
banks alone do not have to reveal their entire balance sheets, as all other
public companies must do under Securities and Exchange Commission
regulations. Banks have the option, with some of their assets, to put them in
a basket that they call "held for investment". When they put assets
in that basket (they could be stocks, bonds, or whatever), then those assets
are held at historical costs, rather than at market value... Nobody else gets
away with this except for them. The reason they get away with it is because
they say, in effect: 'If we had to mark everything to market, there would be
too much volatility in our earnings. We don't want you to find out.' All this
is secret. It's called bank secrecy... There are winners and there are
losers. The losers are the ordinary people who lose their pensions, their
savings, their jobs. The winners are the financial
guys... These guys have no downside... Do you know what the banks took out of
the economy last year? Nearly $400 billion. The Wall Street firms who get
transaction fees for moving the newly created money around took another
roughly $250 billion. Between them they took out nearly three times the
amount of money that the auto industry took out. But from the auto industry
we got 20 million cars. What did we get from these guys? We got cancelled
checks and bank statements. This is monstrous, don't you think?"
Playing with Fire
I am not predicting that interest rates will
keep falling to zero and that the world economy will succumb to deflation. I
just want to sound the alarm that it might, in view of the counter-productive
monetary policy of central bankers. Other scenarios, no less frightening, are
also possible. Paradoxically, the threat of zero-interest (deflation) and that
of infinite-interest (hyperinflation) are separated only by the knee-jerk
reaction of the marginal bond speculator. He may get scared by the threats of
Mr. Bernanke to undermine the purchasing power of the dollar further. As he
becomes persuaded by the "logic of the printing press", the
marginal bond speculator may cut and run. Then other bond speculators,
especially those abroad, could dump their U.S. Treasury bonds, too, and run
for the exit. Quite possibly Mr. Bernanke thought that he was just "fine-tuning"
the purchasing power of the dollar. Under this scenario he would destroy it.
When the central banker threatens to reduce the value of the dollar in terms
of goods and services, as Mr. Bernanke does, he is playing with fire. After
dumping the bonds, people may dump the dollars, too. First the foreign and
then the domestic holders. They need not be reminded that the central banker
has the card to trump deflation -- by triggering hyperinflation. How
desperate must the specter of deflation appear to
Mr. Bernanke that he has seen it fit to flaunt his possession of that card!
Congress, Not the Fed, Has the Solution
It is not too late for the U.S. Congress to
act to fend off disaster. It should immediately take away the unlimited power
from Messrs. Greenspan and Bernanke to create as much fiat money as they
wish, and to drive down the value of the dollar in terms of goods and
services. Not only are the present monetary arrangements blatantly
unconstitutional, they are responsible for the destabilization of the rate of
interest allowing it to swing from one extreme to the other, causing grievous
economic damage along its path. The House of Representatives, to which the
Constitution delegated the monetary powers, can rectify this by going back to
constitutional money. It should stabilize interest rates without any further
delay, and remove the threat of both zero and infinite interest, by opening
the Mint to gold and silver. This is a Republic based on checks and balances.
It has a government of limited and enumerated powers. Neither arm: not the
legislative, not the executive, nor the judiciary may claim to have unlimited
powers under the Constitution. Why should officers of the Federal Reserve be
allowed to make such claims?
Free coinage, a right of the people enshrined
in the U.S. Constitution, would remove the greatest threat this Republic has
faced in its entire history up to now, greater even than that of foreign
terrorists. This is the threat to destroy the capital of the producing
sector, through the machinations of the financial sector, aided and abetted
by the Federal Reserve.
January 1, 2003
Dr. Antal E. Fekete
CORRECTION
I am very grateful to James E. Schoenbeck for calling my attention to a mathematical error
in the example I used in my latest article The Central Banker As the
Quartermaster-General of Deflation. I also used the same example in
earlier articles such as Wrecker's Ball of Swinging Interest Rates.
Mr. Schoenbeck wrote me on January 8, 2003, as
follows:
"Professor:
While I enjoyed reading your article, I take
dramatic exception to your pricing of the hypothetical bond as interest rates
decline. If the interest rate dropped from 16% to 0% overnight, the price on
the 30-year bond with 16% coupon, $1,000 par, would go to $5,800. A nice
increase, to be sure, but nowhere near the 1,000-fold capital gains of which
you talk
While it is true that the value of a 30-year
bond will almost double when the rate is halved from 16 to 8%, it is no
longer true as it is halved further from 8 to 4%, from 4 to 2%, from 2 to 1%,
etc. Below is a table showing how the value of a $1,000 investment in a
30-year bond goes up with each halving (after which the investor takes
profits and rolls out to a new 30-year maturity)
16 to 8%
|
$1,000 to $1,900
|
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
8 to 4%
|
$1,000 to $1,700
|
or $1,900 to $3,200
|
4 to 2%
|
$1,000 to $1,450
|
or $3,200 to $4,684
|
2 to 1%
|
$1,000 to $1,260
|
or $4,684 to $5,855
|
1 to 0.5%
|
$1,000 to $1,140
|
or $5,855 to $6,675
|
0.5 to 0.25%
|
$1,000 to $1,070
|
or $6,675 to $7,142
|
0.25 to 0.125%
|
$1,000 to $1,037
|
or $7,142 to $7,406
|
0.125 to 0.0625%
|
$1,000 to $1,019
|
or $7,406 to $7,546
|
Wouldn't you agree that we are fast approaching
a limit here? The value of the $1,000 investment will stay below $10,000 no
matter how many times the rate of interest is cut into half, and will never
be worth anything like $1,024,000 under any circumstances. Sorry... but
making money is not that easy..."
James E. Schoenbeck
j.schoenbeck@rcn.com
I concede that under the simple strategy of
buying and holding the 30-year bond, or continually rolling it over to new
30-year bonds, the $1,000 investment cannot be doubled in value with each
successive halvings of the rate of interest. But
there are other more sophisticated strategies available involving strip
bonds, and derivatives such as: bond futures, call and put options on bond
futures, knock-out calls and knock-out puts, interest-rate swaps, and various
combinations of these which bond speculators can use, and do use, in order to
double their investment (or do even better) every time the rate of interest
is halved. I quote from J. Taylor's Gold & Technology Stocks
newsletter, January 7, 2003, issue (www.miningstocks.com):
"Michael B. O'Higgins was able to turn
$1,000 into $415,302 by being in bonds, not stocks... If you invested $1,000
in the Dow in 1972, that investment would have been worth only $27,347 as of
December 27, 2002. But had you invested $1,000 mostly in bonds during that
time, your initial investment would have turned into $422,819." (Visit www.miningstocks.com for more information on this amazing but true story which can be fully
documented. The point is that lenders make a killing during periods of
falling interest rates at the expense of debtors.)
But even these fabulous profits could not
explain the creation of the $100 trillion derivatives market coming, as it did,
out of nowhere. Individual bond speculators could not possibly accomplish
this feat. It was accomplished by the big money-center
banks. They are responsible for the prolonged agonizing fall of the
interest-rate structure, the flipside of which is the snowballing of the
derivatives monster. They make up the bond market. They run it. They buy the
bonds and interest-rate derivatives before the Fed can buy, since the Fed
buys through services they can provide. If there has ever been socially
devastating insider trading, then this is it.
My point is that Keynesian monetary policy
takes the risk out of bond speculation. It makes it extremely profitable and
a sure bet. This explains the persistent fall in interest rates, and the
snowballing of the derivatives market, all of which spell deflation.
Deflation is not merely falling prices; it is falling
prices plus falling interest rates, squeezing the debtors. This deadly
combination is not an Act of God. It is caused by unlimited speculation in
bonds, with profits underwritten by the central bank.
Keynesian contra-cyclical monetary policy and
"deflation control" is a disaster. Nostrums advocated by Milton
Friedman and other monetarists are equally disastrous. Far from containing
deflation, the central bank is causing it, through its counter-productive
measures such as bond-buying programs widely advertised through speaking
engagements such as those of Messrs. Greenspan and Bernanke, prompting more
and more bond speculators to climb on the bandwagon to have a free ride to
riches. Rather than relieving debt-implosion, this mindless monetary policy
is, in fact, the one identifiable cause of it through the bankrupting of the
producing sector.
Mr. Bernanke made a solemn vow to Milton
Friedman at his 90th birthday party at the University of Chicago. He vowed
that the Fed would not repeat the mistakes it had made in the 1930's in not
whipping and chastizing deflation vigorously
enough. This brings to mind the Biblical story of King Rehoboam,
the son of King Solomon, who answered the people when they petitioned him to
lighten their burden: "My father hath made your yoke heavy; I will add
to your yoke. My father chastized you with whips; I
will chastize you with scorpions." (First Book
of Kings, 12:11.) May God save the producers of this country from the yoke
and the scorpions of the Fed.
January18,
2003
Antal E. Fekete
Professor Emeritus
Memorial University of Newfoundland
e-mail address:.aefekete@hotmail.com
Copyright
© 2003 by Antal E. Fekete
|
|