« Fatten The Beast | Main | Why The Media Likes Huckabee »

Is The Political World Ignoring The Economy?

15 Aug 2007 12:48 pm

A well-connected Democrat with a background in economics worries that the Democratic presidntial candidates are paying too little attention to the prospect of a recession. They're nibbling at the edges -- Hillary Clinton has a plan to solve what she sees as a national housing crisis -- but none of the candidates seem remotely prepared for a credit crunch, a market crash, a sudden GDP decline and a marked decline in consumer spending.

One theory is that Democrats don't want to be accused of talking down the economy in the way that the Republicans accuse them of talking down the surge.

This Democrat e-mails:

The Fed and European Central Bank last week intervened in a big way (the ECB pumped substantially more money into the financial system in a single day last week than they did the day after 9/11) to inject liquidity and get the markets on their feet. Probably a good thing, unless you worry about moral hazard problems, but they don't intervene unless things are getting dicey. And things are getting dicey – and things are likely to get much, much worse before they get better. I don’t think the political world understands just how harrowing the last two weeks have been in the financial markets. How and why did we get here?

Mortgage problems are spreading beyond subprime, which had already been an obvious and growing problem – Countrywide, a large mortgage originator reported in July that the delinquency rate on prime (not subprime) home equity loans was 3.7%, up from 1.5% a year before. Jumbo loans (above $417,000) are being priced 1.5% higher than non-jumbos, if they can be found at all. As recently as 2 weeks ago, the rate for a jumbo was almost equal to a non-jumbo, things have shifted that quickly. To give you a sense of why this matters, in the San Francisco Bay Area, 61.9% of mortgages are of the jumbo variety. If the housing market was already bad, it's just going to get worse as mortgage lenders stop the flow of easy money and housing gets decidedly more expensive, especially in large urban areas. (This perhaps will be a blue-state phenomenon more than a red state phenomenon).

The mortgage market mess has had a contagion effect in the broader credit markets. Appetite for the junk offerings being thrown off by multi-billion dollar private equity deals has disappeared as risk is getting re-priced. Here again there has been contagion beyond high-yield. Case in point, the LIBOR (London interbank offered rate, which banks charge to each other) jumped by 1.5% in a single day last week. That just doesn't happen. Today, there are signs that a bunch of banks in Canada are cutting back on lending to commercial paper issuers, ostensibly borrowers that are relatively safe bets. And a company that manages money funds for hedge funds today asked for permission to suspend redemptions. Counterparties that for years have lent to each other on very generous terms are suddenly extremely suspicious of each other.

A lot of the big investment banks are going to have ugly Augusts and Septembers as these private equity deals come home to roost and more losses emerge among the hedge funds they manage. This will lead to further turmoil in the banking sector, creating a downward spiral.

Where does it end? I’m not sure. I would say that the odds of a significant recession in the next 18 months are materially greater than 60%. If I were to venture a guess, I would bet that “it’s the economy stupid” is going to be right up there with “bring them home” when it comes to sloganeering on the campaign trial next year.

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Is The Political World Ignoring The Economy?:

» Does it matter if the political world ignores the economy? from eyeon08.com
Marc Ambinder was sent a letter by a Democratic economist and asks whether the political world is ignoring the economy. I wonder if it matters? Doesn’t the economy re-assert itself? re: "When I come back I want to come back as the bond mar... [Read More]

Comments (5)

If the American dollar surplus is based on American investors, then what is the value of the federali surplus from international investors worldwide? This article seems to neglect worldwide investers, in calculating the strength of the American dollar!

I just think most Dems realize that the economy is not high on the public's list of Thing To Worry About right now. Its probably there, after Terrorism, Iraq, Paying Healthcare Bills, Job Security, etc...more narrow economic-related interests, or foreign policy interest (would be interested to see data on this, however).

John Kerry lost foreign policy credibility, I thought, not because he didn't perform well on it, but because, after hammering Bush on it in debates, he decided instead to "move on" to "safer" territory: domestic issues, which are the Dem perceived areas of strength. That signaled to voters that he viewed foreign policy as just one item on a checklist of items to be discussed, and not The One True Issue with which he was concerned. And Iraq + War on Terror combined in exit polls to kill any other issue in terms of importance with voters.

The sooner a Dem tries to "move past" foreign policy, the more (s)he looks like a poseur trying to skate by on the issue in order to go towards areas of safety, like health care or the economy.

The GOP is weakest right now on Foreign Policy and corruption. The Dems would be (electorally) wise to hammer away at those issues over and over and over and over.

How well that will transfer over to preparedness to govern is another matter altogether.

I'm strongly in agreement with the major point made by the anonymous Democrat. But I wonder how the housing crunch is worse in Red than in Blue states. Seems to me that it's a bigger problem anywhere housing has been hotter, smaller where real-estate moved slower. To me that means sun-belt. The worst housing situations I've read about in the MSM are SouthFlorida (Lee & Collier Co's) and SoCalifornia. I think of these as pretty 'Blue'.

...but none of the candidates seem remotely prepared for a credit crunch, a market crash, a sudden GDP decline and a marked decline in consumer spending

Huh? In political terms, what does it even mean for the Democrats to be "prepared"? If you're a Democrat, all you've got to do to be "prepared" for economic problems is to make some attack ads, and let the White House be delivered to you on a silver platter. The conventional wisdom surely is correct that the Democrats are strong favorites to win in 2008. But if the US economy is in recession between now and then, well, then, heck, the Republicans might as well quit now.

sqkgbldi npqclhjgy rstbofqp agoxnjdv uvtcwb sebxrny dqxifnhs