Asking for Trouble
“We really can't forecast all that well. We pretend that we can but we can't. And markets do really weird things sometimes because they react to the way people behave, and sometimes people are a little screwy.”
– Alan Greenspan, speaking this week on “The Daily Show”
“Jobs Report Leaves Fed in Doubt,” was a big headline
on Wednesday morning. Later in the day came this: “Dow down 54 on jobs
concern.” What is the Fed in doubt about? To taper, or not to taper, that is
the question. And why should a jobs report make any difference?
Oh, dear reader, where have you been? Don’t you know
everyone now sits on the edge of his seat wondering when and how the Fed will
back off from its massive QE program? And don’t you know the future of
civilization hangs in the balance? On that point, we have a position… a
thought… a reaction. Civilization hangs in the balance, but not in the
way you think.
We have been trying to introduce a new way of
looking at civilization. In short, we’ve tried to make it more civilized. What
is the difference between a civilized community and a barbaric one? We have
introduced a simple test. The civilized community relies mostly on cooperation
and consent. The uncivilized community depends heavily on force and violence.
A French historian first introduced the word
“civilization” less than 300 years ago. Since then there has been much argument
about what it means. We enter the fray gingerly, but sure of ourselves. It only
makes sense on our terms. A civilized community is peaceful; a barbaric one is
not.
“Okay, Bill,” you may be saying to yourself. “I’ll
give you that one… I guess. But what the hell difference does it make? What has
it got to do with the jobs report?” Good questions. Glad you asked.
We know from bitter experience that trying to force
economies to do what you want is a thankless task. Markets are fundamentally
based on free exchange, cooperation, trust and trade. Force them in one
direction or another and you are just asking for trouble.
As Alan Greenspan described this week, in an interview
with John Stewart on “The Daily Show,” people are a little “screwy” from time
to time. Which means they don’t necessarily go along with your central
planning, no matter how good you think it is.
But still economists insist that, if they are allowed
to monkey around with it, they can make an economy better. This is
occasionally true. Said occasion is usually when they have already messed it
up. By withdrawing some of their planning and programs, they may allow it to
recover. Otherwise, there is no example in history where force has been
successfully applied to economics.
Compounding Errors
But that doesn’t stop the PhDs from trying. The jobs
report showed about 60,000 jobs missing – fewer jobs than economists had
projected. Now, the erring economists will most likely compound their error by
continuing to try to force the economy to do their bidding – force up the rate
of consumer price increases and force down the number of Americans out of work.
If they really wanted to increase employment, that
would be easy enough. They would encourage the feds to withdraw some of the
laws that bully employers (health insurance… EEOC threats… overtime, etc.)… or
some of the schemes that make it easy for potential employees to remain
unemployed (disability… unemployment benefits… food stamps). As far as we know,
those things are not on the table.
What is on the table is more QE. With regards to QE,
the poles of possibility are as follows:
1. QE does nothing
important. If this were so, there would be no reason to keep it.
2. QE is essential to
the economy. If this were so, they couldn’t get rid of it… no matter what the
jobs report says.
Most likely, QE lies somewhere in between… perhaps
lost in the horse latitudes. It probably has little effect on the real economy.
That is why the jobs report is so disappointing. But it probably has a great
effect on the financial economy. That’s why the Dow sets new record highs
almost every session.
The Fed is probably stuck with QE. Were it to stop,
the stock market would likely tumble and the “wealth effect” the PhDs have been
aiming for would quickly turn into a poverty effect.
Janet Yellen couldn’t stand it. She believes the Fed
should use all its available weapons to force the economy to do what she wants
it to do. She won’t be able to stand by, dagger in hand, when the market turns
its back on her. Instead, she will stab.
And the Fed, which has lived by the sword of QE, will
probably die by it too.
No comments:
Post a Comment