Archive

Archive for the ‘Free trade’ Category

The Consumer is Tapped!

March 23rd, 2009

“The chains of habit are too weak to be felt until they are too strong to be broken.”
–Samuel Johnson

U.S. consumption has driven global growth for years. South Pacific countries sold us their spare capacity which drove and modernized their economies at a seemingly unrealistic pace. Foreigners have been building dollar reserves for decades. Many of those countries have rightly realized that perhaps they should use those dollars to buy U.S. assets rather than hold treasuries. It is one thing to exploit foreign labor, but now foreigners have put their surpluses (their money/capital) to work buying up U.S. assets, thus exploiting us. Touché. Now, profits generated from the selling to the U.S. consumer go oversees rather than staying here.

The consumer was being squeezed on all sides entering into 2008. Higher fuel prices, falling housing prices, stagnant wages, higher unemployment, and rising food costs.

Household debt as a percentage of GDP is almost 100% as the below chart illustrates.

Household Debt

Pundits argued that rising household net worth would allow spending to continue forever and ever as net worth continued it climb in 2004, 2005 and 2006. Now household net worth is falling at an unprecedented rate. In 2008 household net worth declined an astounding to $11.2 trillion to $51.5 trillion (Random Factoid $trillion in household net worth vs. 600 trillion in outstanding derivatives in the U.S.).  In 2007, residential mortgages outstanding, in percentage terms   were equivalent to 78% of US GDP. In 2006 residential mortgages made up an outstanding 36% of total U.S. debt outstanding. When this crisis started in 2007 Gary Shilling said that we would need vacant supply to fall below 600k homes now he estimates that there currently are 2.1 million in excess supply. Shilling estimates that housing prices could fall anther 20% (ughh what’s that going to do to household net worth?).

A sad fact now apparent to most of us, the U.S. consumer is tapped and they are not coming back for years … not months. I am now realizing why the Fed has chosen to monetize this debt, clearly the people who have burrowed(or should I say lent…ah what the hell…both) can’t afford for the Fed not to.

Now let me get this straight…the Fed is going to buy back these mortgages via Fannie and Freddie, an issue treasuries to do so? Now the Fed is going to buy back treasuries (monetizing: printing money) to keep rates down so lenders can then make more loans to people who are insolvent? Meanwhile oil is walking its way back up the ladder towards $100 (granted I believe will break $40 once more) because oil is finite and fiat dollars are not. Food costs are not slowing the way they should if an economy is truly productive, wages are declining, productivity(…well is there such thing as productivity in Never Never land?) is declining and the government is scaring the entrepreneur back into his/her shell with taxes.

Jefferson is rolling over in grave as we speak.

Wendall Wilkie Federal Reserve, Free trade, General, Real Estate , , , ,

Smart people, Wrong Lesson?

March 20th, 2009

Have you ever stopped to think about how much efficiently you could have learned something? Or what about when you realize everything you thought you knew was wrong? I am sure some very smart people were convinced the world was flat and were quite perturbed when learned the world was actually round. Well I would say I just realized everything that I had been taught/thought about the history of the U.S. was dead wrong.

At Syracuse University, as a history major, I was taught that it was Roosevelt’s quarterbacking in the 30’s that helped the U.S. recovery from the depression. I was essentially taught, like the rest of us, that fiat monetary system created by the Federal Reserve was necessary to provide the economy the “flexibility” to soften the blows that were supposedly considered a natural occurrence of the market (this is painful to think about). If you are reading the blog, you probably have had the experience that I had when I discovered the plethora of readings that come from what is known as the “Austrian” school of economic thought. My first reading was Economic Policy: Thoughts for today and Tomorrow. From there it all just snowballed for me. Hayek, Hazlitt, Rothbard. But honestly it really only took me about the first 25 pages of that first Von Mises book and I was hooked. Like I had discovered a new religion and that I was saved….and then I immediately felt as if I had been robbed.

I thought to myself, “How could I not have heard of this school thought…I was a double major.” One would think that if you majored in both political science and history that I would have come across this “Austrian” school of thought. This just did not make sense.

What I do realize is that history is written by the victors. America came out of the WWII the strongest nation which had seemingly won WWII (no one really won, everyone lost in my opinion). We had amassed an enormous amount of wealth throughout the 19th and early 20th century. Subsequently although Roosevelt was in charge during the majority of America’s most prolonged down turn he and his “brain trust” are viewed as saviors.

What’s my point? I honestly believe that Mr. Obama and Mr. Bernanke are two of America’s best and brightest, however their current “humanactions” are a mold/consequence  of their life experiences. Obama happened to attend a college that teaches its students to believe that they know better than the collective. They believe can smooth out market upheaval with their policies rather than recognizing its their policy  their school of thought that caused the problems.   What if Mr. Bernanke was scientist that could have cured cancer but he was instead taught that cancer can’t be cured but merely slowed down and then at very end of his life he realizes he could have cured cancer all along but he was taught it can only be slowed down.

This is my glass have full post. I will try not to succomb to the idea (at least not tonight) that this mess came about because politicians and other self interested individuals were/are trying retain their power through inflation and wealth redistribution.

Wendall Wilkie Entrepreneurship, Federal Reserve, Free trade, General, History, Real Estate , , , , ,

Obama Budget, What it Doesn’t Do Wrong (Totally)

February 27th, 2009

Farm subsidies are one of the grossest misallocations of resources perpetrated by the US government.  For all of the things the Obama budget gets totally wrong, this one he got right (sort of).  Obama’s recently submitted budget will eliminate farm subsidies to those farmers making over $500,000 per year (hence the sort of, not a total victory for free trade).  This is a huge step and one that no president dare take until now.  Already this action has stepped on the toes of Congress, as representatives have already come out to reassure their lobbyists constituents that the farm subsidies in place for this year will remain.

Most estimates place the value of subsidies at 22 percent of all US farm production.  That’s a staggering figure.  Over one-fifth of all value created by US farms is pure government subsidy.  Many believe that this money is going to poor and struggling yeoman farmers.  Not so.  First, farmers as a class are not poor.  The government itself puts the average farm income nearly 30 percent higher than the average American household.  Moreover, the average farmer has a net income nearly 8 times the average American (nearly $1 million).

According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, farm subsidies end up being a food tax on the average American household of $146 per year.  That’s a hefty tax whose buden falls heaviest on the working poor.  The worst offender is probably sugar.  Sugar subsidies, at times, have caused Americans to pay double the world market price.  Currently the average world spot price is around $.14/pound.  US subsidies guarantee American sugar producers a minimum of $.23/pound.

Will there be a hang over for the farmers coming off subsidies?  You bet.  When any good is subsidized that heavily, it incentivizes the overproduction of said good.  When these subsidies end, the will no longer be any floor holding the price up and will demonstrate just how poorly those resources were allocated.  Farmers need to immediate see the change coming and reallocate resources toward profitable ventures.  This may mean a variety of innovative changes or simply diversifying land use and cutting costs.

At the end of the day, though, this is a huge victory for liberty.  I understand that a good chunk of subsidies will still exist, but in this one small arena, we’ve achieved a victory for liberty in this country.

Teacherman Free trade, Government Spending, Interventionism , , , , , ,