dimelab dimelab: shrinking the gap between talk and action.

constraint Topic in The Credit Debacle Catalog

budget constraint (4); constraints left (1); debt capacity constraints (1); enforcing hard budget constraints (1); external constraints (2); face real constraints (1); financial constraints (1); firm external constraint (1); historically unusual constraints (1); inflation constraint (1); major constraint (1); orthodox framework cannot convincingly explain systemic constraints (1); real constraints (3); resources constraints (1); Soft Budget Constraints (1).

Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Post Keynesian Perspective Thu 2010-09-30 08:12 EDT

Would Keynes have endorsed Modern Monetary Theory/Neochartalism?

...what would Keynes have thought of neochartalism/modern monetary theory (MMT)? MMT developed from Abba Lerner's theory of functional finance, as well as G. F. Knapp's theory of chartalism, as propounded in his book The State Theory of Money...MMT tells us that the government is the monopoly issuer of its own currency. Hence the government is not revenue-constrained. Taxes and bond issues do not finance government spending. No entity with the power to create and destroy money at will requires anyone to ``fund'' its spending. Having said this, one must immediately say that, even though deficits are not ``financially'' constrained in the normal sense, they do face real constraints in the inflation rate, exchange rate, available resources, capacity utilization, labour available (= unemployment level), and external balance...My discussion is based on the fundamental article by David Colander on this subject...``Lerner approached Keynes and asked: `Mr. Keynes, why don't we forget all this business of fiscal policy, public debt and all those things, and have some printing presses.' Keynes, after looking around the room to see that no newspaper reporters could hear, replied: `It's the art of statesmanship to tell lies but they must be plausible lies.' ''...

21st century; endorsed Modern Monetary Theory/Neochartalism; Keynes; Post Keynesian Perspective; social democracy.

Mon 2010-09-20 10:14 EDT

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis: Fictional Reserve Lending And The Myth Of Excess Reserves

...1) Lending comes first and what little reserves there are (if any) come later. 2) There really are no excess reserves. 3) Not only are there no excess reserves, there are essentially no reserves to speak of at all. Indeed, bank reserves are completely "fictional". 4) Banks are capital constrained not reserve constrained. 5) Banks aren't lending because there are few credit worthy borrowers worth the risk. ...concern that excess reserves will lead to lending and inflation is totally unfounded in theory and practice. Fractional Reserve Lending is really Fictional Reserve Lending. In practice, the major constraints to lending are insufficient capital and willingness of credit worthy borrowers to seek loans.

excess reserves; Fictional Reserve Lending; Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis; myth.

billy blog Thu 2010-08-19 16:25 EDT

There is no credit risk for a sovereign government

...UC Berkeley economist Brad DeLong...likes to think of himself alongside Krugman as part of the ``Keynesian'' army against all the neo-liberals. Both are in fact New Keynesians. In that sense, they are not very dissimilar to Mankiw and his gang. Interestingly, they appear to be continually trying to one-up Mankiw as part of some internecine struggle within the American economics academy. But from a Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) perspective, it is hard to tell their various narratives apart...a sovereign government is never revenue constrained because it is the monopoly issuer of the currency. That is a basic starting point in exploring the differences between spending and taxation decisions of a sovereign government and the spending and income-earning decisions/possibilities of the private sector entities (households and firms). The two domains -- government and non-government -- are very different in this respect and any attempt to conflate them as if both are subject to budget constraints is wrong and starts the slippery slide down into the total mispresentation of how the macroeconomics system operates...When a government runs a surplus it is not ``saving'' anything. The surpluses go nowhere! They are just flows that are accounted for and the aggregate demand which is drained by the surpluses is lost in that period forever...DeLong is actually teaching some bastardised course in Political Science here and only allowing the conservative side of the debate to be aired...HSBC economist Steven Major ...[writes in the Financial Times (FT)]...so contrary to what is being peddled each day in the financial press that a medal for bravery should be awarded...

Billy Blog; credit Risk; sovereign Government.

Wed 2010-07-21 10:31 EDT

Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Post Keynesian Perspective: Galbraith versus Krugman on Deficit Spending

In a recent post, Paul Krugman has criticised James K. Galbraith's view of deficit spending. The latter is obviously influenced by Modern Monetary Theory...Krugman has misunderstood Galbraith...Galbraith understands that there are real constraints on deficit spending, not phantom ``financial'' ones. Moreover, it is perfectly clear that Galbraith is talking about deficit spending during a period of high unemployment and low capacity utilization, and perhaps even in the face of a double dip recession. In his response to Galbraith, Krugman adopts the flawed quantity theory of money and attempts to prove mathematically what is perfectly obvious: that hyperinflation can result from continuous budget deficits that are monetized by the central bank. But, since Modern Monetary Theory already acknowledges that inflation is a real constraint on deficit spending, Krugman's analysis seems rather pointless.

21st century; deficit-spending; Galbraith versus Krugman; Post Keynesian Perspective; social democracy.

Tue 2010-06-01 18:24 EDT

billy blog >> Blog Archive >> In the spirit of debate ... my reply Part 2

Today, I offer Part 2 of my responses to the comments raised in the debate so far...Modern monetary theory does not use the term ``money'' in the same way as the mainstream because it creates instant confusion. As Scott said ``Money is always someone's liability, so better to be precise about whose liabilities we are talking about than saying money.'' That is why we emphasis fully understanding the asset-liability matches that occur in monetary systems. And that leads you to realise that transactions between government and non-government create or destroy net financial assets denominated in the currency of issue whereas transactions within the non-government sector cannot create net financial positions...So modern monetary theorists prefer to concentrate on what is going on with balance sheets after certain flows have occured rather than narrowly defining some financial assets as money and others not...There is no doubt that the non-government institutions can increase credit. Some slack analysts call this an increase in money. But the accurate statement is that, as a matter of accounting it increases the (in Scott's words) ``the quantity of financial assets and financial liabilities 1 for 1 in the non-govt sector. So, with private credit, there is BY DEFINITION no NET increase in private sector financial assets created.'' Once we understand that and note that typically the non-government sector seeks to net save in the currency of issue then modern monetary theory tells you that the public sector must run a deficit to underwrite this desired net saving or else see an output gap widen...Who is in control is an interesting question. Clearly, the government cannot directly control the money supply which renders much of the analysis in mainstream macroeconomics textbooks as being irrelevant. The Monetarists via Milton Friedman persuaded central banks to adopt monetary targetting in the 1980s and it failed a few years later -- miserably...Then you might like to consider it from the other angle -- a government which accepts responsibility for full employment can ``finance'' the saving desires of the non-government sector by increasing its deficit up to the level warranted by the spending gap (left by the full employment non-government savings)...Orthodox macroeconomic theory struggles with the idea of involuntary unemployment and typically tries to fudge the explanation by appealing to market rigidities (typically nominal wage inflexibility). However, in general, the orthodox framework cannot convincingly explain systemic constraints that comprehensively negate individual volition. The modern monetary framework clearly explicates how involuntary unemployment arises. The private sector, in aggregate, may desire to spend less of the monetary unit of account than it earns. In this case, if this gap in spending is not met by government, then unemployment will occur. Nominal (or real) wage cuts per se do not clear the labour market, unless they somehow eliminate the private sector desire to net save and increase spending...to maintain high levels of employment and given that the public generally desire to hold some reserves of fiat money, the government balance will normally have to be in deficit...modern monetary theory demonstrates that if you want the non-government sector to net save...

Billy Blog; blogs Archive; Debate; reply Part 2; Spirit.

Tue 2010-05-18 14:16 EDT

billy blog >> Blog Archive >> The enemies from within

...Unemployment is the major source of poverty whether it be in a advanced or developing country. It is alienating, soul destroying, extends its costs well beyond the individual and the income losses alone dwarf the costs arising from so-called microeconomic inefficiencies. The daily loss of GDP involved in not having all available workers doing something productive is mammoth. It is a no-brainer that it is the large economic problem that should be solved in any country...If the private sector cannot produce enough then there is only one sector left ladies and gentleman who can do the trick!...Given the private sector doesn't want to spend at present -- and you cannot blame them for that given the appalling state of their balance sheets and the very unsteady housing market -- there is a danger that demand will drop further unless the government adds to its stimulus packages...the US is an economy that desperately needs more aggregate demand. The only constraint on employment is the lack of spending and there is no financial constraint that exists in a fiat monetary system that prevents the government from eliminating that demand deficiency...

Billy Blog; blogs Archive; enemies.

The Money Game Fri 2010-03-19 12:38 EDT

Kenneth Rogoff's Sovereign Debt Warnings Are So Wrong, It's Like He's Living In A Different Time Period

We've persistently taken the view that there is no economic doctrine, no magic number, which would imply a firm external constraint as far as public spending goes, when dealing with a sovereign government issuing debt its own floating rate, non-convertible currency. At some point, we may indeed have a resource constraint, or an inflation constraint, but not a national solvency issue. Yet the hysteria surrounding fiscal policy has moved from the realm of rational debate and metamorphosed into a matter of national theology...A sovereign government is never hostage to the dictates of financial capital because it no longer faces the external constraint that was always present under a gold standard regime. A nation that adopts its own floating rate currency can always afford to put unemployed domestic resources to work. Its government may issue liabilities denominated in its own currency (for interest rate maintenance reasons or to offer its savers an interest-bearing alternative to cash), and will service any debt it issues in its own currency...

different time periods; Kenneth Rogoff's Sovereign Debt Warnings; lively; Money game; wrong.

Mon 2010-03-08 09:41 EST

Truthdig - Calling All Rebels

There are no constraints left to halt America's slide into a totalitarian capitalism. Electoral politics are a sham. The media have been debased and defanged by corporate owners. The working class has been impoverished and is now being plunged into profound despair. The legal system has been corrupted to serve corporate interests. Popular institutions, from labor unions to political parties, have been destroyed or emasculated by corporate power. And any form of protest, no matter how tepid, is blocked by an internal security apparatus that is starting to rival that of the East German secret police. The mounting anger and hatred, coursing through the bloodstream of the body politic, make violence and counter-violence inevitable. Brace yourself. The American empire is over. And the descent is going to be horrifying...

called; rebel; Truthdig.

China Financial Markets Thu 2010-03-04 08:47 EST

Stuck in neutral -- what Japan's rebalancing can teach us

...A few days ago I read a good article (``Stuck on Neutral'') about Japan [from] the Economist...about Japan's post-1989 rebalancing, ...discusses why, in spite of every attempt, Japan has not been able supposedly to rebalance the economy and achieve any real growth during the two lost decades after 1990. Private consumption never took off to drive economic growth...After many years of excess investment driving growth, Japan's rebalancing process, which occurred after corporate, bank and government debt levels prevented the investment party from continuing, locked the country into many years of slow growth because it had to grind through years of debt-fueled overinvestment...it doesn't matter what individual policies we take to boost consumption if these polices don't in the aggregate represent a real transfer of income to the household sector, as they did not in Japan...Japan's experience suggests one of the risks China faces...Chinese household consumption will undoubtedly rise as a share of Chinese GDP over the next decade or two, but the process nonetheless can be disappointing for growth. It depends on lots of other moving parts, most importantly perhaps the change in investment and the speed with which income is transferred to households. And the change in investment might depend on debt capacity constraints and the extent of earlier overinvestment.

China Financial Markets; Japan's rebalancing; neutral; stuck; teach.

Jesse's Café Américain Tue 2010-01-05 19:05 EST

Is the US Goverment Preparing the Lifeboats for the Next Financial Disaster?

The fraud and mispricing of risk in the US financial system has become pervasive and epidemic, such that a good stiff headwind could have taken it all down, and because of a lack of serious reform, still can. Rather than fixing potential causes of the next disaster, the Obama Administration seems content to block the escape routes and issue priority passes to the big Wall Street banks and a favored few...The only constraint on the Fed's printing money is the acceptability (marginal value) of the Bond and the dollar, which is the bond of zero duration. And the people making the decisions about printing and distributing those dollars are more unworthy of holding such power than you might imagine, even in your lowest expectations.

financial disaster; Goverment Preparing; Jesse's Café Américain; lifeboat.

Willem Buiter's Maverecon Thu 2009-10-15 16:51 EDT

Kornai on Soft Budget Constraints, Bail-Outs and the Financial Crisis

...Spreading of the SBC syndrome is at once a cause and an effect of the crisis. I will not say it is the only cause: the situation that led to the crisis was brought about by a complex of factors. But I will say firmly that softening of the budget constraint is one of the main causes of the crisis. The general softening tendency has been reinforced in the United States and several other countries by successive bailouts over the last ten or twenty years. Some economists, such as Professor Chenggang Xu, have been pointing for years at a close link between the crisis in East Asia and earlier bailouts. [moral hazard generalized]

bail-outs; Financial Crisis; Kornai; Soft Budget Constraints; Willem Buiter's Maverecon.

zero hedge Sat 2009-10-10 11:57 EDT

The Federal Reserve's Balance Sheet: An Update

...the Federal Reserve has faced two historically unusual constraints on policy. First, the financial crisis, by increasing credit risk spreads and inhibiting normal flows of financing and credit extension, has likely reduced the degree of monetary accommodation associated with any given level of the federal funds rate target, perhaps significantly. Second, since December, the targeted funds rate has been effectively at its zero lower bound (more precisely, in a range between 0 and 25 basis points), eliminating the possibility of further stimulating the economy through cuts in the target rate. To provide additional support to the economy despite these limits on traditional monetary policy, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) and the Board of Governors have taken a number of actions and initiated a series of new programs that have increased the size and changed the composition of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet. I thought it would be useful this evening to review for you the most important elements of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet, as well as some aspects of their evolution over time. As you'll see, doing so provides a convenient means of explaining the steps the Federal Reserve has taken, beyond conventional interest rate reductions, to mitigate the financial crisis and the recession, as well as how those actions will be reversed as the economy recovers...

Federal Reserve's balance sheet; Update; Zero Hedge.

Thu 2009-10-08 17:04 EDT

After subverting bank insolvency, our leaders are now about to make a mess of liquidity

Unless there is a major change of direction among global economic and financial officialdom, we are at risk of ending up with a world in which liquidity provision is privatised and insolvency risk for banks is socialised. This would be the exact opposite of what makes sense: solvency is (or should be) a private good and liquidity is (or should be) a public good...The authorities should not waste their limited organisational capital to force banks to provide inefficiently the public good of liquidity when confidence and trust are low. They should instead focus on ways of enforcing hard budget constraints on banks - to confront them with the realities of insolvency in a way that separates shareholders, unsecured creditors, boards and managers from their investments while leaving the bank as a functioning organisation capable of continued intermediation.

leaders; liquidity; makes; Mess; subverting bank insolvency.