There are lots of news reports and internet musings about Quantitative Easing. I’ve read many with the hope of discovering one comprehensible article that would fairly represent QE for the non-fiscal, non-monetary schooled citizen. Not to be. The explanations are either way over my head or focused on attacking or defending the policy. People seem to use many exotic terms to describe an already abstract subject.

So I’m going to take a swag at explaining what and why.

The Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke has been fearful of the country falling into another depression since the bubble burst in 2008. He’s made plain that the bogeyman we have to fear is deflation, not inflation. Simply put, inflation is too much money chasing scarce goods. Inflation causes prices to rise. Deflation on the other hand is an abundance of goods and not enough money, or at least not enough buyers. Deflation causes prices to fall.

A recession brings a lot economic distress: job losses, company failures, personal bankruptcies….its ugly. But a depression, that’s an event that changes lives, economies and even governments, sometimes permanently.

The clear similarity between 1929 and 2008/2009 is that in both cases, a massive amount of capital disappeared. Money invested in almost anything (except long term treasury bonds) just disappeared. When money in investments and the value of owned assets disappears people won’t or can’t go out and buy things. Then more jobs disappear because employers know people aren’t spending as much money so they reduce expenses by laying off workers. Fewer jobs equal fewer paychecks and there is even less available money around. As you can see this becomes a really ugly self-perpetuating down spiral.

The 1929 depression saw the collapse of the stock market erase the supply of capitol.  In 2008/2009 the wealth disappeared from home equity first and then the stock and bond market followed.  Again, as in 1929 and the 1930′s, wealth just melted away.  Homes purchased in 2000 for $300,000 escalated to $500,000 in 2005 then fell to $200,000 by 2010. This happened millions of times. Almost all the homes had mortgages, many owners had refinanced and taken money out for home improvements and vacations. By 2010 the inflated value was gone. Owners owed more than the possible selling price  of the house. A vast amount of capital was taken out of the American economy. Whatever the details, 80 years ago or today, a huge amount of wealth ceased to exist.

Bernanke is using QE to replace the private capital that had been lost  in the recession. To do this the Fed is using new money to buy mortgage backed securities (MBS) from banks so that the banks, in turn, make more loans. In other words replacing money which had disappeared and getting it back into the economy.

You might say that this is nice for the banks that are getting premium prices for otherwise unwanted securities, but has this worked to help the little guy? The answer is no, not directly. However, good things have happened  to reverse some of the losses from the recession,  For example: (1) The stock market is within hailing distance of its 2007 high, thus replacing a fair measure of the capital that was lost in the recession. (2) Unemployment has improved slightly. Not that much, but its better than it was two years ago. (3) New housing is showing some signs of life. Again its not a great recovery, but there is improvement. Along with that will come housing prices which will rise and replace a lot of lost wealth.

The arguments against QE mostly have to do with it reducing interest rates for savers and opening the door to inflation.  The inflation argument is pretty weak right now since its very unusual to see high unemployment and high inflation at the same time. Later, when employment improves we hope the Fed stays ahead of the curve. Low interest rates for savers also means low interest rates for home buyers, so that’s a mixed blessing. Savers must take on more risk since bank interest rates won’t even keep pace with low inflation numbers.

SRBAC

Visit Visible Country for products made in the USA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goldman Sachs, Bernard Madoff, MF Global, etc. There seems to be a lot of opportunity today for people to lose money on bad investments. In spite of investing for years, I still don’t understand what these people are (or were) selling. Did the investors? Why would you invest money in something you don’t understand? No question that banks and hedge funds and mutual funds all need to be clear about how they are using your money. But what about the people who bought what they were selling? Shouldn’t they take some of the responsibility?

If some of these sellers were cheating investors by lying to them, that’s one thing. We don’t need new laws to deal with that. We already have laws against fraud. But fraud is hard to prove (it’s all right there in the fine print). We don’t though, have any laws against being stupid. The sellers say “trust me” and the buyers say “OK, here’s my money”. What! What happened to common sense? PT Barnum said “There’s one born every minute” (he was referring to suckers, not bankers).

Maybe the people who lost money weren’t stupid, maybe they were just lazy. Still not a good excuse. It’s pretty hard to cheat people who are willing to do their homework. Instead people buy because their relatives or friends have recommended the investment (bad idea). Or because the salesman has shown them a color glossy with the investment history of continuous profitable returns (worse idea).

People don’t buy individual stocks or bonds because its hard to accumulate a portfolio to accomplish a certain objective without a lot of work. A good mutual fund company will do a better job, and charge you a reasonable amount for their work. But how many people research the fund before they buy? What are the underlying securities that compose the fund?

There’s really no excuse anymore for not doing your homework. Just about any information you need about companies or mutual funds is available on the web. Corporate history, financial information, profit projections, annual reports, whatever.

 

SRBAC

See Made in the USA products at Visible Country.

 

 

I once used an American Express card almost exclusively. The reason was that Amex had a great attitude toward how long you could take to pay your bill. We use to call this “the float”. If you traveled a lot  (which I did), and you weren’t always on-time with your expense reports (which I wasn’t), Amex was very understanding. If you were tardy with your payments,  American Express didn’t charge any interest. You were expected to pay for your charges every 30 days, but if you didn’t they just carried you, in some cases for up to 90 days. All this for $30 a year annual membership.

The reason for they did this was because Amex knew they made their money from the retailers. Since I was the customer, they chose to manage our relationship very carefully. They were making so much money from their percentage of every charge I made (which the retailer paid), that they were happy to let me go on being a chronic slow pay. So if I used my American Express card to buy a $100 dinner in January, I might not actually pay for that meal until April (if I got the invoice in February and took the entire 90 days to pay).

Sadly, all this ended some time ago when Amex decided the carrying charges for the money it was lending me every month was too high. A very nice, but firm, Amex employee explained to me that it didn’t matter if I was a long time customer, I was just going to have to start paying my bill every 30 days. Today I carry the standard bank cards, but since I’m careful to pay them on time they don’t cost me anything at all.

What I don’t get is this E-wallet business. It’s convenient? For who, you or the bank?  Essentially they are into your bank account micro-seconds after you make a purchase. Where’s the float? Why are we so anxious to pay? It’s un-American!

 

 

SRBAC

See Made in the USA products at Visible Country.

 

© 2013 Visible Country Comments Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha