With interest rates and bank credit officially manipulated, what market-fundamentalism does statism's nobelist Stiglitz refer to?

We have many central banks purchasing public debt in outrageous amounts, and thereby manipulating and distorting all interest rates yield curves in favor of their governments.

And the regulators, with their risk-weighted capital requirements, allow banks to leverage much differently their equity, depending on the ex ante perceived or decreed risk; something which distorts entirely the allocation of bank credit to the real economy.

And since the risk weight of the Sovereign has been decreed 0%, while that of We the People has been set at 100%, most of that regulatory manipulation is in favor of the government.

And then time after time we hear experts, like Nobel Prize winner Professor Joseph Stiglitz, attributing most of our current problems to neo-liberalism and market fundamentalism; and often suggesting that the solution lies in increased government spending. What free markets are they referring to? In Stiglitz case, could it be he is only a statist nobelist creatively adapting the facts to his storyline?

PS. I have not read Stiglitz’ “The Euro” yet but, from what I hear he does not link Euro’s troubles in any way to loony bank regulations.  The Euro did indeed present challenges but, when in Venezuela I wrote my “Burning the bridges in Europe”, I had no idea it would also have to face such statist and distorting regulations.

PS. When utilities were being privatized in South America, I often heard accusations in terms of savage neo-liberalism. Since these utilities were not adjudicated to whoever offered to serve us citizens the best and the cheapest, but to whoever offered to pay the government the most, a tax advance that left us with a huge bill to pay at private investment rates of return, to me those privatizations were more an expression sadist statism.

Is not the interest that is not earned on public debt because of public policies a tax?

In terms of taxation, who is affected by a higher real tax rate?

Someone earning 5 percent in interest on public debt and, supposing a tax rate of 20 percent, then has to pay 1 percent in taxes, resulting in net earnings of 4 percent, or, 

Someone only earning only 3 percent on public debt, because of QEs, lower capital requirements for banks when lending to sovereign, and other fancy stuff causes lower interest rates on public debt.

You tell me, or better yet, tell them! on public

Why stimulate before making sure the economy as a whole will enjoy it?

I just received a letter from one of those big banks that has recently received billions of dollars in official assistance, informing me that if I finance my purchases with my credit card my annual interest rate will be 17% and, if I enter into any default, 26%.
This in a country where there are no inflation expectations, the government is paying less than 1% on its short term borrowings, contemplates a close to a trillion dollar stimulus package and wants the consumers to spend more to keep the economy from falling.
For a consumer to finance the anticipation of any purchases at 17% would be an act of extreme irresponsibility.
For someone in default having to pay 26% will only guarantee to dig him deeper in the hole he is in. The only way to justify these extraordinary high rates is that they need to compensate for all those who should not have been given a credit line to begin with.
What is going on? Have we not learned anything? And why should anyone stimulate the economy before making sure that all the new green sprouts are not going to be devoured by some players in the financial sector?

The Clause

“As of this date, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela agrees not increase its current level of public debt, nor to contract public debt with payment due in less than ten years. In the case of failure to comply with the above, all current public loans will be considered due and payable immediately. In order to guarantee that any future government does not employ subterfuge to evade the spirit of this Law, the Nation agrees to abide by international arbitrage.” …Just this simple clause, typical of the those applied in the private sector to control corporate debt levels, would enable, as if by magic:

An immediate and dramatic drop in the interest rates applied to the country, when international markets realize that the country, with its relatively modest debt, is determined to put an end to the distortion of short-term debt, the refinancing of which has been the eternal reason for charging high rates, while at the same time guaranteeing that the resulting relief in servicing the debt is not used as a pretext for increasing it. 

The end of the country risk financial rating, when after only a few days credit raters will have to classify Venezuelan public debt as worthy of investment.

Opening the economy to all kinds of private initiatives on the part of individuals, families, companies and cooperatives, since all would have access to new loans under reasonable conditions – something which to date has been blocked by our political leaders’ hunger for tax income and the consequent increase in debt.

Friends, I am sure the clause I propose would help put our country on the road to sustainable economic development but - I swear! - how difficult it is to convince our leaders of the past and present who blithely condemn old debt while at the same time extolling the virtues of new debt.

It sounds easy but... could it be done? Indeed it could! The hard part will be to free ourselves of loans traffickers and to ensure that our eternal paradigm changes actually change – even if only one little paradigm. 

Some may rightly say that the country would lose part of its independence. However, it would be well worth it if this would allow us to decree an abolition of public debt slavery, the same way we abolished slave labor long ago. 

Translated from El Universal, Caracas, July 3, 2003

Of mangoes and bananas

For several reasons, the debate about the global economy has recently reminded me of fruit. The wise Henri Pitier wrote his Manual about Common Plants in Venezuela in 1926. In it he wrote the following about the mango:

"It is harvested in abundance, and there are many who, during the season in which they are ripe, dedicate all of their time to the search for this fruit which for some time then becomes their only source of nourishment, very often to the detriment of their health. One can vacillate, then, on deciding whether the introduction of this tree [from Asia] has been a blessing or a curse. The writer of these words is inclined to believe the latter since the mango leads to idleness, to the invasion of another’s property and to vagrancy; additionally, no matter how good or healthy it may be, when ingested in moderation, it sometimes provokes digestive disorders and is far from being wholesome food. It alters, then, both morality as well as public health." 

This interesting quotation shows us that, in addition to oil, the mango should be classified high on the list of culprits that have been the cause of our poor economic development. Most assuredly, in addition to the mango and oil, we must also add to this list the sun, the beaches and all those variables that undoubtedly make it easier to survive an economic recession in a tropical Caracas than in a wintry Moscow.

Since it seems evident that the simplicity of living in the tropics leads to laziness while the hardship of winter promotes the discipline and work ethics that have ultimately inspired today’s global economic development, it behooves us to view global warming with renewed preoccupation and from a totally new angle.

I belong to a group that is identified in Venezuela as Contemporary Adults (sounds better than middle-aged). This implies being up-to-date with current issues such as the environment. I have, with certain frequency made own individual observations about the evolution of global warming. Every Carnival weekend, for example, I stroll out to the beach in Margarita, the tropical Venezuelan island in the Caribbean Sea, in my most casual, monarchic pace, and with all seriousness and responsibility, take note of the width of the shore from the water line to the roadway. Even when I had terrible difficulty in finding a spot in which to anchor my garishly multicolored beach umbrella, I never really worried about it. I simply attributed this difficulty to the increased popularity of the island and not to an invasion by the oceans.

Today, however, I harbor serious doubts as to the validity of my method of measurement. Wherever I look I find evidence of the advanced state of warming in the world.

How else, other than by assuming a certain displacement toward the north of the geographical boundary of the Banana Republics, can we explain the opposite positions sustained by superpowers like Europe and the United States on the issue of bananas, as if they were some modern versions of Lilliput and Blefuscu.[i]

How else, other that by assuming the creation of climatic conditions conducive to the cultivation of mangos, can we understand why Japan has not been able to combat idleness and stimulate the reactivation of its economy? We have all read that Japan has reduced interest rates to an annual rate of one per one thousand. Can you imagine how impressed a botanist like Henri Pitier would be upon observing this unique specimen of a mango?

[i]PS. The current enormous fiscal and commercial deficits of the North might also lend further credibility to the thesis of the displacement of the parallel of the Banana Republics. 

From The Daily Journal, Caracas, March 12, 1999

The shameful lack of housing

A young Venezuelan recently spoke with satisfaction and pride about how he had managed, after only eight months in the United States, to purchase his own home. He could finally enjoy his privacy and consolidate his married life. Unfortunately, he had to work in New York City cleaning bathrooms, but what else could he do? For the previous five years in Venezuela, after graduating as an engineer together with his wife, he had not even managed to scrape together the minimal down payment required to purchase an apartment.

It is difficult to fathom the accumulation of errors required to create a scenario in which young educated people from an oil rich nation with all the advantages of a tropical climate must immigrate to a country with a hostile winter in order to solve their housing problems. A country’s reserves are not those sitting in the Central Bank, but rather its people, especially after they have invested in a decent education. Today, our Central Bank is raising interest rates in order to keep its dollar reserves. Today, our young human reserves are leaving in droves.

A home is a long-term investment. It is not a vehicle, a trip to some Caribbean isle or a new double-breasted suit. A home for the normal citizen, who lives from his work and savings, is an investment that he hopes to amortize in 20 or 30 years if all goes well. In order to allow a young couple to acquire a home it is necessary to provide them with a real and sustainable source of long-term financing. The key words here are “real” and “sustainable”.

In Venezuela, the conditions for local currency loans are non-existent. To begin with, there is absolutely no possibility to establish fixed interest rates for a long-term Bolívar loan. Either interest rates are so high in real terms that it becomes virtually impossible to service the loan. Or they are too low, which effectively results in undeserved subsidies, which in turn threaten the very existence of the financial system as a whole.

In the case of loans with variable interest rates, the erosion of value due to inflation is usually covered with an increase in the interest rates. This makes the term of a 20- or 30-year loan, whether documented as such or not, a tasteless joke.

Let us take a closer look at this. If inflation rises to 40%, interest rates more than likely will be pegged at around 50%. Should a young couple manage to qualify for a Bs. 10 million loan for a 20-year term, they would need to raise Bs. 5 million to cover interest payments and Bs. 500,000 to cover amortization of principal on an annual basis. After one-year elapses (if they survive) they still owe Bs. 9.5 million. This amount, adjusted for 40% inflation is only worth Bs. 6.8 million in real terms (Bs. 9.5 million divided by 1 plus the inflation rate). Our young couple in essence has amortized the sum of Bs. 500,000 plus the amount corresponding to this adjustment, that is, Bs. 2.7 million. This has absolutely no relation with a 20-year term.

Other countries plagued by inflation have looked for solutions to this problem by denominating loans in indexed units. In this case, the debtor would owe Bs. 13.3 million instead of Bs. 9.5 million after the first year (Bs. 9.5 million plus inflation of 40%). However, instead of having to pay Bs. 5.5 million to service the loan as in our first example, service would have been limited to Bs. 1.5 million corresponding to a 10% real interest rate and the payment of a real amortization of Bs. 500,000.

Evidently, another alternative to indexed units is the denomination of loans in a stable currency, US dollars for example. Even when devaluation could possibly wreak havoc with debt service in the short term, a working person could most likely weather this and adequately service his dollar loan if and when it is contracted under prudent terms. When contracting a dollar denominated loan, a company or bank must immediately reflect exchange losses on their balance sheets. In the case of our young couple, the impact is limited to higher monthly payments which he could eventually expect to offset with inflation adjusted increases in his salary.

It is a shame that a full 15 years after the initial devaluation in 1983, we have not managed to reestablish sources of long-term financing for acquisition of housing. The fact that the Agenda Venezuela does not include a real and concerted effort directed at solving the problem of housing only serves to reinforce my belief that my daughters’ respective agendas have much more meaning.

I hope to stay in Venezuela. Somehow, I feel I would definitely prefer to remain here accompanied by many young, eager and educated people dedicated to the country’s future and without one single dollar in the Central Bank, rather than the other way around.