"The pursuit of perfection, then, is the pursuit of Sweetness and Light. He who works for Sweetness and Light united, works to make reason and the will of God prevail." - Matthew Arnold

« ‘Gazans’ Blow Up Barrier, Pour Into Egypt | Home | NYT: Good Times Economy Was Only Mirage »

Shocker: Soros ‘Talks Down’ The Economy

From the UK’s Financial Times:

Chairman of the Soros Fund Management, USA, George Soros, pauses ...

The worst market crisis in 60 years

By George Soros

January 22 2008

The current financial crisis was precipitated by a bubble in the US housing market. In some ways it resembles other crises that have occurred since the end of the second world war at intervals ranging from four to 10 years.

However, there is a profound difference: the current crisis marks the end of an era of credit expansion based on the dollar as the international reserve currency. The periodic crises were part of a larger boom-bust process. The current crisis is the culmination of a super-boom that has lasted for more than 60 years.

Boom-bust processes usually revolve around credit and always involve a bias or misconception. This is usually a failure to recognise a reflexive, circular connection between the willingness to lend and the value of the collateral. Ease of credit generates demand that pushes up the value of property, which in turn increases the amount of credit available. A bubble starts when people buy houses in the expectation that they can refinance their mortgages at a profit. The recent US housing boom is a case in point. The 60-year super-boom is a more complicated case.

Every time the credit expansion ran into trouble the financial authorities intervened, injecting liquidity and finding other ways to stimulate the economy. That created a system of asymmetric incentives also known as moral hazard, which encouraged ever greater credit expansion. The system was so successful that people came to believe in what former US president Ronald Reagan called the magic of the marketplace and I call market fundamentalism. Fundamentalists believe that markets tend towards equilibrium and the common interest is best served by allowing participants to pursue their self-interest. It is an obvious misconception, because it was the intervention of the authorities that prevented financial markets from breaking down, not the markets themselves. Nevertheless, market fundamentalism emerged as the dominant ideology in the 1980s, when financial markets started to become globalised and the US started to run a current account deficit.

Globalisation allowed the US to suck up the savings of the rest of the world and consume more than it produced. The US current account deficit reached 6.2 per cent of gross national product in 2006. The financial markets encouraged consumers to borrow by introducing ever more sophisticated instruments and more generous terms. The authorities aided and abetted the process by intervening whenever the global financial system was at risk. Since 1980, regulations have been progressively relaxed until they have practically disappeared.

The super-boom got out of hand when the new products became so complicated that the authorities could no longer calculate the risks and started relying on the risk management methods of the banks themselves. Similarly, the rating agencies relied on the information provided by the originators of synthetic products. It was a shocking abdication of responsibility.

Everything that could go wrong did. What started with subprime mortgages spread to all collateralised debt obligations, endangered municipal and mortgage insurance and reinsurance companies and threatened to unravel the multi-trillion-dollar credit default swap market. Investment banks’ commitments to leveraged buyouts became liabilities. Market-neutral hedge funds turned out not to be market-neutral and had to be unwound. The asset-backed commercial paper market came to a standstill and the special investment vehicles set up by banks to get mortgages off their balance sheets could no longer get outside financing. The final blow came when interbank lending, which is at the heart of the financial system, was disrupted because banks had to husband their resources and could not trust their counterparties. The central banks had to inject an unprecedented amount of money and extend credit on an unprecedented range of securities to a broader range of institutions than ever before. That made the crisis more severe than any since the second world war.

Credit expansion must now be followed by a period of contraction, because some of the new credit instruments and practices are unsound and unsustainable. The ability of the financial authorities to stimulate the economy is constrained by the unwillingness of the rest of the world to accumulate additional dollar reserves. Until recently, investors were hoping that the US Federal Reserve would do whatever it takes to avoid a recession, because that is what it did on previous occasions. Now they will have to realise that the Fed may no longer be in a position to do so. With oil, food and other commodities firm, and the renminbi appreciating somewhat faster, the Fed also has to worry about inflation. If federal funds were lowered beyond a certain point, the dollar would come under renewed pressure and long-term bonds would actually go up in yield. Where that point is, is impossible to determine. When it is reached, the ability of the Fed to stimulate the economy comes to an end.

Although a recession in the developed world is now more or less inevitable, China, India and some of the oil-producing countries are in a very strong countertrend. So, the current financial crisis is less likely to cause a global recession than a radical realignment of the global economy, with a relative decline of the US and the rise of China and other countries in the developing world.

The danger is that the resulting political tensions, including US protectionism, may disrupt the global economy and plunge the world into recession or worse.

To be fair, Mr. Soros has done more than talk to try to destroy our economy and our country in general.

Why only today the ever accommodating Associated Press ran a hit piece written by two “journalism centers” funded by the famous philanthropist. (A minor detail the AP somehow neglected to mention.)

There is no denying that the man has his dream:

So, the current financial crisis is less likely to cause a global recession than a radical realignment of the global economy, with a relative decline of the US and the rise of China and other countries in the developing world.

Still, there should be a word for someone who does everything in their power to destroy the very country that gave him a home and a fortune. (It should probably be a variation on Soros — or maybe Schwartz, which is his real name.)

Moreover, one has to wonder why this criminal has not been extradited back to France, where he would do time for one of his numerous crimes. 

Now is as good a time as any.

Related Articles:

  Print Email

8 Responses to “Shocker: Soros ‘Talks Down’ The Economy”

  1. Reality Bytes

    Who listens to this twurp anymore?! He’s like the crazy uncle who sits in the corner yelling at everything. The only reason why he’s there is because the family is hoping to get something when he dies.

  2. Landshark

    he stands to gain a fortune if the economy tanks. Can you imagine the media running this if it were a right-winger who had made bets in the derivatives market against the U.S. economy in the fourth clinton term?

  3. Lurkin_no_mo

    I was going to say something like “and this effects him, how?” Now we know, he gets to make even more money to give to socialist/liberal causes.
    By the way, that picture looks like some dead guy. Infact I have seen much better looking corpses.

  4. notsoyoungjim

    This from Wikipedia:

    “Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and father of Monetarism, argued that many of the fears of trade deficits are unfair criticisms in an attempt to push macroeconomic policies favorable to exporting industries. [now to include service industries like insurance--hello Warren Buffet!] He stated that these deficits are not harmful to the country as the currency always comes back to the country of origin in some form or another (country A sells to country B, country B sells to country C who buys from country A, but the trade deficit only includes A and B). In fact, in his view, the “worst case scenario” of the currency never returning to the country of origin was actually the best possible outcome: the country actually purchased its goods by exchanging them for pieces of cheaply-made paper. As Friedman put it, this would be the same result as if the exporting country burned the dollars it earned, never returning it to market circulation. [furthermore they buy lots of 10yearnotes and bonds, which has the effect of lowering the price of our credit and keeping our financial markets phat to the rest of the world]

    Critics claim that Friedman’s argument is equivalent to saying that it doesn’t matter if you get indebted, because eventually you will have to pay the money back. [that is of course unless they roll over the debt, which has been the case ever since the eurodollar started trading back in the 70's.] The obvious counterargument is that once a significant debt has been accumulated, paying it back may be painful. Friedman’s supporters retort that when the money returns, the demand for foreign currency will make the exchange rate better for trade deficit country.”

    Despite his rhetoric–Soros would be a fool to be short the dollar right now, with the Euro and Yen coming off of historic highs. My guess is that he’s short the debt instruments he claims will be devalued by a credit contraction (note the 3/4 point rate cut is the opposite of a contraction) and is in the process of talking down the bonds and the 10 year notes.

    Another thing to remember Short the dollar and long the bond (or vice versa) is the most common hedge in currency trading. IOW our relatively cheap currency has the effect of making our debt instruments more attractive. Soros is likely short both (which is not a good idea when the fed decides to cut rates over a bank holiday weekend.)

    I think he’s simply talking down the bond and the US financial notes. If you take a look at a proper bond chart you can see that he’s likely taking a big hit now in his bets. both the dollar and the financials are rallying, and commodities (especially oil) are now in a slide.

    Long story short, while i’m sure he’ll always be a rich dude–his investment choices are not the best way to increase value to his positions.

  5. TheChicagoWay

    So, “it is an obvious misconception that the common interest is best served by allowing participants to pursue their self-interest”…. Without even doing any research, it is apparent that countries that use this “misconception” have, on the average, a far greater standard of living than those countries that are not so “enlightened”. Geez, even China, the 800 pound gorilla of central planning, has tacitly admitted it works. (BTW China, good luck keeping your rapidly expanding middle class happy without an ever greater expansion of individual liberties)…. Forget stealth technology… Open trade is our greatest secret weapon.

    According to Mr. Soros, US protectionism is “dangerous to the world economy”… Does this mean that Mr. Soros promotes even more open trade? Won’t this lead to even greater American “ hegemony ”? ….(I LOVE that word…. Remember to use it when bird-dogging co-eds on campus.)

    Given that this collaborator is so sophisticated and worldly, has he EVER spoken to any REAL people who have operated REAL businesses in both the US and in other countries? (You know, entities that actually create jobs and enrich society?) To a person, they will tell you that the US is at least 25 years ahead of ANY other nation when it comes to a favorable environment for research, business development and worker productivity. Our economic engine is still by far and away the most dominant in the world in spite of the best efforts of Mr. Soros and his ilk. I don’t know, maybe this dominance has something to do with “allowing participants to pursue their self-interest”?

    How many jobs has this self-hating miserable excuse for a human being ever created? (Other than the network of snitches back in Vichy France.)

    ”.

  6. 1republicanscientist

    Hey, you can’t pass up on the chance to gouge this Gomer Pyle looking
    meddler. What a dung heap, better yet, what a dung beetle. What exactly is that
    odd little man doing/having done to him in that pic?

  7. MilkBone

    Imagine that.

    Soros talks down the market so he can make a few [ten/hundred million] bucks.

    He’s a disgrace to humanity, but thankfully a friend o’ Hillary.

  8. Enthalpy

    Soros–One of the true patriots of our time, No?


Leave a Reply

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.


« Front Page | To Top
« ‘Gazans’ Blow Up Barrier, Pour Into Egypt | NYT: Good Times Economy Was Only Mirage »