By Steve Saville
In late 2002, when deflation fears were running rampant
through the financial markets, a little known Fed governor by the name of
Ben Bernanke thrust himself into the glare of publicity by giving a speech
in which he explained what the Fed could do to ensure that deflation didn't
happen in the US. Like most people, when Bernanke talks about deflation he
is referring to falling prices; that is, he is talking about one of the
effects of deflation as opposed to actual deflation (money supply
contraction). His speech, therefore, discussed the actions that could --
and probably would -- be taken by the Fed and the US government to prevent
a sustained fall in the general price level. During this speech he referred
to the Fed's unlimited ability to create new dollars* and to Milton
Friedman's famous quip about the government dropping money from
helicopters. As a result of this speech he came to be known as
"Helicopter Ben" and to be viewed by government policy-makers as
a likely candidate to succeed Alan Greenspan as Chairman of the Fed.
When the problems in the world of sub-prime mortgage debt
threatened to evolve into a broad-based financial crisis in August of 2007,
the Fed, now with Bernanke at the helm, quickly began slashing the price
paid by banks for short-term credit. The way the Bernanke-led Fed initially
reacted to the crisis lent support to the existing perception that when
'push came to shove' "Helicopter Ben" would live up to his
moniker, even if it meant trashing the US dollar. The markets therefore
began to anticipate monetary profligacy on a grand scale, accordingly
pushing the foreign exchange value of the US$ downward and the prices of
most commodities upward. However, what we now know is that this
anticipation was off the mark, or at least premature.
Perhaps sensitive to his nickname, Bernanke did not flood
the economy with new money. Instead, he attempted to shore up the banking
system's collective balance sheet in ways that did not involve net
additions to the money supply. As evidenced by the Fed's weekly H.4.1
Report, there has been a net increase of only $37B in reserve bank credit
during the most recent 12-month period (the 12 months ending 5th September
2008). This amounts to a gain of about 4.3%, which is similar to the
year-over-year percentage increase in True Money Supply.
However, the modest $37B year-over-year increase in reserve
bank credit masks dramatic activity beneath the surface. The Fed has, for
instance, provided the banking industry with an additional $150B of money
via a scheme called the "Term Auction Facility" (TAF). Also,
under another scheme called the "Term Securities Lending
Facility" (TSLF) it has helped banks and other financial corporations
by offering pristine Treasury securities in exchange for the private
corporations' toxic waste (illiquid securities of indeterminable value).
All told the Fed has, in effect, provided $337B of assistance to the
financial establishment over the past year via the TAF, the TSLF, and a few
other methods, but has "sterilised" this assistance by disposing
of about $300B of its own Treasury securities, leaving a net change in
reserve bank credit of only $37B and avoiding a sharp increase in the money
supply. To paraphrase Edmund Blackadder, it was a plan so cunning you could
put a tail on it and call it a weasel.
Understand, though, that the Fed's ability to continue
along its current path will be restricted by the fact that its holdings of
US Treasuries have already dwindled from $780B to $480B. The Fed will
almost certainly want to retain at least a few hundred billion dollars of
Treasuries on its balance sheet, so if the financial sector requires
additional large-scale assistance in the future then it is reasonable to
assume that the Fed will be forced to resort to methods that involve
creating a lot of new money 'out of thin air'. Bernanke and Co. appear to
be making a high-risk bet that the situation is now under control and that
such assistance will NOT be required.
It's very unlikely, in our opinion, that the efforts made
to date by the Fed to shore up the financial system will be the end of it.
In any case, aside from any additional aid it may or may not provide to
banks the Fed will be intimately involved in rescue operations cobbled
together by the US Treasury, beginning with the takeovers of Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac. A realistic appraisal of the balance sheets of Fannie and
Freddie would probably reveal that the combined liabilities of these
companies are hundreds of billions of dollars greater than their combined
assets, and since the government doesn't have any spare money of its own
(the government is already heavily in debt and running a huge deficit) it
will have to borrow the money needed to fill this liability-asset gap. In
all likelihood, borrowing the money will entail issuing bonds to the Fed in
exchange for newly created dollars.
*Here is the actual quote: "U.S. dollars have
value only to the extent that they are strictly limited in supply. But the
U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its
electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as
it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of U.S. dollars
in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the U.S.
government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and
services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those
goods and services. We conclude that, under a paper-money system, a
determined government can always generate higher spending and hence
positive inflation."
Steve Saville
****
Regular financial market forecasts and analyses are provided
at our web site:http://www.specul
ative-investor.com/new/index.html We aren’t offering a free trial
subscription at this time, but free samples of our work (excerpts from our
regular commentaries) can be viewed at: http://www.
speculative-investor.com/new/freesamples.html