The
financial bubble of the last decade created the housing bubble and along with
it the financial crisis with its ramifications along all sectors of the economy
and the world at large. Specifically in the US,
already overextended consumers
had an unprecedented negative wealth effect to contend with both from a
reduction in the value of more liquid assets such as stock holdings but more
importantly the collapse in the value of their homes to such a level that more
than 50% of all mortgage holders were effectively underwater on what
constitutes most probably their biggest lifetime investment. In other words, if
they were to liquidate at any time and sell their home they would be short on
the amount owed to the bank. Interestingly, most (close to 85%) of these negative
equity mortgages were being serviced and non delinquent indicating that owners
were willing to adhere to mortgage payments on expectation ( I would contend) of
an improvement in their home values.
More
importantly however, is what this has meant to the underlying level of demand
in the economy and what the government should have done to reinvigorate it.
Understandably the FED and government gave precedence to the stability of its
financial system as its first and foremost priority for without a solvent
banking sector the US and the world for that matter would have experienced an
apocalyptic depression. All emphasis then on the financial system which was
successfully revamped and returned to health with the FED’S dramatic actions
including aggressive QE, still with us today. It was hoped that the salvation
of the money lending institutions would also have secured the necessary lending
to households and businesses to remobilise the economy; to no avail. On the one
hand the banks were in no mood to expand their balance sheet in an environment
of conservative restructuring and a consumer already underwater and on the
other a consumer faced with negative equity in a defensive mode with a focused
purpose, to increase the savings rate and deleverage. It is evident that in
such a setting unless balance sheet restructuring takes hold final demand will
at best be weak.
How was
inequality exacerbated from the above phenomenon? Saving stockholders at the
expense of debtors clearly transferred wealth from debtors to creditors. The US
population was asked to bailout the financial system by dramatically expanding
the US’s budget deficit and the FED’S
balance sheet reinvigorating both bond
and stock prices but without a commensurate knock on effect on the
weakest and largest part of the population. This has meant that the ultimate
driver of demand the consumer did not receive any direct help to a healthier
balance sheet. He was left to the unforgiving effects of the market forces of
adjustment. In other words, the consumer would only return to his usual habits
if any or all of the following could take place & in such a magnitude so as
to substantially improve his balance sheet and its prospects: A rise in home
values, debt deleveraging and forgiveness with its accompanying increase in the
savings rate, world growth that would induce cash rich companies to
substantially increase investment and employment to meet this growth in world
demand.
Will
reversing this inequality by pursuing policies aimed at creating the
aforementioned conditions drive demand and ultimately consumption? Without
doubt the liquidity effect aptly described by Paul Krugman is likely to play an
important catalyst. I would in fact call it a wealth effect for it is households
feeling good about returning to positive equity that should induce them to
spend part of this windfall. This would in turn provide impetus to the cash
rich companies to increase the utilisation of their existing factors of production
and perhaps lead them to increased investment. The economic textbooks should
then take over through the multiplier momentum.
The above deals of course with wealth and not income inequality a more complex issue worth discussing in a different blog.
The above deals of course with wealth and not income inequality a more complex issue worth discussing in a different blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment