by DETLEV SCHLICHTER
This is a statement that has no basis in fact. Any
rational analysis will quickly expose it to be a fallacy. Economic theory, economic
history, and plain good old horse sense can demonstrate effortlessly that this
statement is an illusion. Yet, it is today a widely held and deeply cherished
illusion in the world of finance (and, incidentally, the world of politics). In
fact, it has become one of the defining myths of the modern fiat money era. It
has for decades provided portfolio managers and bankers with an imaginary
refuge from the turbulent world of capitalist “creative destruction”, a ‘safe
haven’ where their nerves and capital could rest. The ‘free lunch’ might not
have been a feast – only the ‘risk-free rate’ was to be had – but it was better
than nothing and anyway a welcome break from capitalism and entrepreneurship.
And by the way, if you leverage your government bond portfolio sufficiently
with the help of central-bank-provided, zero-cost fiat money, the returns could
still be quite handsome.
The fate of myths is that they sooner or later clash
with reality. Then they are exposed as myths, which requires a painful giving-up
of beloved certainties, a readjustment of paradigms and an abrupt change in
behaviour. This is what we have been witnessing in European sovereign bond
markets and will soon observe outside Europe as well. To believe that this
process would stop with Greece or even Italy, as seemed to be the consensus in
the summer of 2011, was naïve. That it would stop with France or even be
contained within the European Monetary Union is the present hope of government
bond investors and government-bond issuers, i.e. politicians. It is equally
naïve and it received a meaningful dent last week in form of the worst auction
result for German government debt (Bunds) ever.
When the irrational belief that the major governments
– those of the U.S., Germany, U.K., France, Japan – can and will always pay,
regardless of the size of their overall obligations, and that their bonds are
therefore ‘risk-free’, is finally being questioned, we could witness a
momentous change in market behaviour. That this moment will be reached at some point
is beyond doubt. I would argue that this moment could be sooner than many
think.
Before we look at present events more closely and risk
a peek into the future, let us revisit some of the fundamental facts of
government bond investing.
Some basic facts about lending to the state
Government bonds are not backed by productive capital
and will not be repaid out of capitalist production, at least not directly.
Those who lend to the state do so in the expectation that the state, after
consuming what it has borrowed right away, will repay its creditors by either
taxing the productive section of society (i.e. those who have not put their
money into ‘safe’ government bonds but risked it in a competitive enterprise
and managed to generate a return by providing something of value to the buying
public) or by printing the money and thereby taxing the fiat-money users in
society (i.e. everybody) via a declining purchasing power of the monetary unit.
Government bonds channel savings back into consumption, and they shift scarce
resources away from employment that is directed by markets (and thus ultimately
consumers) and into employment that is directed by politics. The rising public
debt levels of the modern fiat money era indicate substantial and growing waste
of resources and misallocation of capital, and are harbingers of great social
and economic upheaval.
That banks and portfolio managers lend so generously
to the state is not surprising as the cost of error (over-lending and
over-borrowing) is apparently easily socialized across the wider public, either
via higher levels of taxation or faster paper money debasement. “The state can
always pay.”
The game is now up. The accumulated debt load has
become too big to be serviced or repaid in any stable manner out of taxation or
fiat money creation. If these mechanisms are nevertheless still employed it
must lead to chaos.
Fact is this: Around the world government spending,
budget deficits and accumulated debt loads are unsustainable in light of real
underlying economic strength and the true available pool of private savings.
But the modern welfare state cannot shrink. Nobody in the political machinery
has any idea how it should be done. The fiat money economy is not built for
deleveraging and the welfare democracy not for downsizing.
If you needed any further evidence of this you got it
in spades last week. In the U.S. the ‘super-committee’ failed to reach
agreement on spending cuts, and in the UK the Prime Minister admitted that the
government was failing in its effort to reduce the debt load and announced
various subsidies for the housing market, tax-funded bribes for companies to
hire unemployed teenagers, and New Deal-style infrastructure projects to ‘kick
start’ the economy.
The confused and pointless “Occupy Wall Street”
movement seems to have brought to the forefront of public discussion again the
notion that all of this could be sorted by taxing the rich. That this is even
debated shows how little the public appreciates the sheer mind-boggling
extravagance of the modern welfare-warfare state: In 2011 the U.S. government
will have spent at least $3,700 billion while taking in about $2,200 billion,
thus running an eye-watering $1.5 trillion deficit. It collects less than $1
trillion in income tax. Thus, even if the government doubled its intake from
income taxation instantly it could not close the budget gap. The situation is
completely out of control, and to those who believe that this is no problem
because the U.S. government can always print the money, I can only say: Be
careful what you wish for.
Beyond repair
But back to Europe, which continues to get most
attention at the moment: As I said, long-held and cherished myths are not
abandoned easily. The investment community has for months demanded ever more
urgently a policy ‘bazooka’ that would restore the old order. Of course, by
this is meant again the established mechanisms for repaying the lenders to the
state: tax somebody else or print money. If the taxes needed to repay Greek and
Italian debt could not be had from Greeks and Italians, then the Germans should
pay as part of ‘fiscal integration’ or communal bond issuance. Or, the bond
investors get repaid out of printed money from the ECB. “Unlimited bond-buying”
via the printing press was the other bazooka.
Such proposals are unoriginal and illustrate that the
gravity of the situation is not fully appreciated. Germany and France simply
lack the resources to bailout the others, or even their own banks. As to the
ECB’s printing press, as I explained here, ‘unlimited’ bond buying cannot be limited
to Italy, which in itself would pose an enormous challenge. The overall size of
the operation would soon be such that concerns about inflation must rise, and
once real interest rates begin to go up deficits will expand even faster,
forcing the ECB to buy ever more bonds. A spiral of ever higher real rates,
more central bank bond buying, and in turn rising inflation expectations and
even higher real interest rates is the classic fiat money endgame.
(At this point I often get the following comment: But
what about Japan? Have they not been conducting QE for many years without a
rise in inflation? — No! The Bank of Japan’s balance sheet is roughly the same
size today as it was ten years ago. By contrast, since 2008, the balance sheets
of the Fed, the Bank of England and the ECB have roughly tripled in size. For
numerous reasons, Japan is a gigantic accident waiting to happen but in terms
of monetary sanity the Japanese are presently the least mad.)
The political class, the fiat money bureaucracy and
their eager creditors in the financial community have collectively checkmated
themselves. Dreams of the policy ‘bazooka’ and the helpless babbling about
‘lack of political leadership’ cannot mask that sinking feeling that a lot of
the ‘risk-free assets’ that have been carelessly accumulated over recent
decades now turn out to be toxic waste that could burn a sizable hole into
investment portfolios. Hiking taxes or printing the money is not a sensible
solution but that does not mean it won’t be tried – it most certainly will be,
and with predictably disastrous results. But here is the funny bit: if these
are the potential outcomes of the European debt crisis: defaults, fiscal
integration, unlimited helicopter money
– why would anybody buy German Bunds? Did anybody really think that the
ECB could print the entire European sovereign bond market to a sustainable 2
percent communal interest rate, or that in a fiscal union everybody converges
on Germany’s 2 percent rate? Yet, for months and months now (until last week),
the investment community has happily piled into German debt as the alleged
‘safe haven’. Why?
Mass psychosis
To explain this we have to resort to psychology. As I
explained here, amateur psychology has no place in economic theory but it is
often useful when trying to make sense of short-term market phenomena. Traders,
bankers and investors simply didn’t want to give up the myth of the safe asset.
Although the problems are essentially the same almost everywhere, the investment
community did not want to believe that government bonds as such were a dodgy
investment but only that certain government bonds were dodgy investments.
Bizarrely, the realization of acute fiscal predicament in one state thus led to
massive inflows into the bonds of other, only slightly less fiscally challenged
states, which were then prematurely declared ‘safe havens’ precisely until
their predicament was exposed as well. It almost appeared as one only had to
wait for the tidal wave of fiscal concern to take one state after another out
of the safe-haven basket into the basket of basket cases.
So why not get a step ahead of this train wreck in
slow motion and go short Bunds, U.S. Treasuries and UK gilts now? The math on
these seems straightforward. If the ECB, the Fed and the Bank of England do not
engage in large-scale money-printing (and once again, they certainly should not
but the Fed and BoE are already itching to do more) then the underlying
disinflationary forces and the fiscal death trap that these nations are already
caught up in should make their bonds excellent shorts: the endgame is default.
At least this would be an honorable and not entirely unethical outcome. But
more likely is the somewhat cowardly ‘solution’ of debt monetization. The many
bank economists who are now clamoring for this approach do so against better
judgment – one can only assume they do it out of desperation, which gives us
some indication of the situation their banks are in.
The problem is way too big for some elegant
inflating-away of the debt. As QE in the U.S. and the UK demonstrates,
providing a fiat-money-funded backstop to the government does not mean
debt-reduction but additional debt-accumulation. Once started, large-scale bond
buying will have no endpoint but simply have to continue ad infinitum. This
must at some point raise inflation concerns and thus lead to ever more of the
remaining private-held government bonds getting dumped onto the central bank.
To keep the government in business the central bank will then have to print
more money faster and do so at times of rising inflation expectations. This is
a recipe for disaster. The endgame is currency collapse and default.
While the math seems to be clear, the desire to
believe in the infallibility and omnipotence of the state, which in our secular
age has become the new deity, is powerful and may keep those government bonds
bid for a while longer. Who knows? But when the ice breaks, this is surely one
of the major trading opportunities in this unspeakable financial mess, maybe
the short of the century. In this context, the events of last week were
meaningful. Reality has finally caught up with German Bunds. The poor price
action in Bund futures is indication that German government debt is losing its
safe haven status. Fiscal concerns are now engulfing ‘the core’ of Europe.
Again, investors desperately hold on to their belief that ‘safe havens’ exist
somewhere out there, so they are stupidly piling into Gilts and Treasuries.
Soon these will make an excellent short as well.
At this point, I should probably add a disclaimer: The
purpose of this site is not to give investment advice but to provide a
different and – I like to believe – superior explanation of the present crisis.
I am expressing opinions here, and it remains the responsibility of the reader
to see if he/she follows my rationale and what conclusions he or she draws for
his/her own actions. We are in the endgame of our present – mankind’s latest –
experiment with unlimited state paper money. This crisis will continue to
unfold and many people will lose money. If we understand this crisis correctly,
we may protect our wealth better. For this, I believe, holding substantial
positions in physical gold (and probably a few other assets) is crucial. But
there could occasionally be other opportunities to make money. This crisis has
already exposed the fallacy that our fiat money system in combination with
deposit insurance and hyper-regulation has made our banks safe. The next
fallacy to get exposed is the belief in safe government bonds. The consequences
for financial markets are enormous – and this can offer opportunities. But be
careful. Markets are very volatile. Also, at some stage in the future, I expect
government interference and a ban on naked shorts. But until that happens, we
could be looking at the short of the century.
In the meantime the debasement of paper money
continues.
No comments:
Post a Comment