When the UK Previously Looked to a Canadian to Run the Bank of England

Just a quick historical note on the somewhat stunning news that Mark Carney, the current head of the Bank of Canada (and a Canadian citizen), has been asked and has accepted the job of running the Bank of England.

Graham Towers and Montagu Norman 

I say 'somewhat' because students of history may know that as Montagu Norman's 24 year reign at the Old Lady of Threadneedle Street was winding down the then head of the Bank of Canada, Graham Towers (also a Canadian citizen), was considered as a leading candidate to replace Norman.

Norman and Towers worked closely together during World War II to support the price of sterling during the Battle for Britain, and much of the UK's gold (as well as France's) was sent to Canada to protect it in the event of a Nazi amphibious invasion of Britain. However, for reasons possibly lost to posterity Towers was either never offered or accepted the job.

Analogies about how England's national football coach is often  foreigner and how the Carney choice really isn't all that different are of course flooding the media airwaves right now. Perhaps the economic, patriotic, and security considerations that come with heading the national football club and central bank aren't really as far apart as one might think?

An issue which isn't under much doubt is that Mark Carney, like Graham Towers in his day, is simply a very good candidate for the job.

Looking ahead, the one thing that is certain is that Mr. Carney will have very big shoes to fill. Even with the financial crisis and the challenges faced by the City of London over the past several years, there can be little doubt that Sir Mervyn King has proven to be one of the finest central bankers of his age. Sir Mervyn recently gave an excellent lecture at the LSE on inflation targeting, which can be viewed here.

Another point is that the Carney choice further confirms London's status as the most welcoming of the major financial centers to foreigners and capital alike. Take that New York!

Why Italy Isn't In Such Bad Shape, But the U.S. and UK Are

Bill Gross runs PIMCO's huge flagship bond fund which, having engaged in an untimely shorting of U.S. Treasuries, has hit a bit of a rough patch in recent times. Some have suggested that the 69-year old might be a few years past the recommended portfolio manager retirement age and that it's no longer as useful as it once was to read his monthly investment newsletters.

Think again.

While Gross's timing on shorting U.S. treasuries has been poor, and his revealing in this month's column of memory issues is a little unnerving, his analysis of the fundamentals and medium to long-term sovereign fiscal picture remains sound.

Take his updated 'Ring of Fire II' chart, the first version of which he first published a few years back. The chart (below) plots countries by both their annual public sector deficit (y-axis), which is the difference between government spending and taxes, and what is termed a 'fiscal gap' (x-axis). The fiscal gap takes into account future expenditures, which in the U.S.'s case include entitlements such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

As you can see from the chart Italy appears to be in better fiscal shape than several 'Ring of Fire' members like the U.S., Japan and the UK.  How is this possible? Italy has been experiencing what economists refer to as a 'speculative attack' from the sovereign bond market, while the three Ring of Fire countries are currently enjoying record low yields on their government debt. 

Continue reading the full article here.

Adventures in Alternative Currencies - Bristol Launches Its Own

The Bristol ten pound banknote

Here is another reason to love the quirky, iconoclastic south western British city.

From the BBC:

It is a direct assault on global trade. The city of Bristol has launched its own currency, which cannot be used in Bath, never mind Berlin or Bombay. 

More than 350 firms in the city have signed up, making it the UK's largest alternative to sterling. 

Unlike previous schemes which have relied on paper, the Bristol Pound can be used online, even by mobile phone.

h/t Tyler 

Happy Free Positive PR for UK Banks Day!

One somewhat peculiar difference between the U.S. and UK is how in the UK (and Ireland) official public holidays are referred to as 'bank holidays'. From Wikipedia:

A bank holiday is a public holiday in the United Kingdom or a colloquialism for public holiday in Ireland. The first official bank holidays were the four days named in the Bank Holidays Act 1871, but today the term is colloquially...used for public holidays which are not officially bank holidays, for example Good Friday and Christmas Day.

I have no idea whether Brits on whole form any positive associations towards banks because of this, but if nothing else it strikes me as some nice free, positive advertising for our friendly, neighborhood Too Big to Fail banks.

Here's an idea: perhaps renaming 'bank holiday' to 'public holiday', or something similar, would allow a pol to campaign on a symbolic, anti-banker message that also poses low-to-no risk to the establishment.

Video: Phase Three of the Global Crisis

This is from a year ago but still worthwhile if you haven't seen it.

Speaker: Paul Mason

This event was recorded on 31 January 2011 in Sheikh Zayed Theatre, New Academic Building

As countries adopt competitive exit strategies from the global crisis Paul Mason surveys the political economy of a flat recovery. He argues that mainstream economics have still refused to draw the lessons of asset price bubbles and situates the divergent recovery, east and west, within a long-wave explanation of the crisis. Paul Mason is the award-winning economics editor of BBC Newsnight, covering an agenda he describes as 'profit, people and planet' and author of the Idle Scrawl blog , which was shortlisted for the Orwell Prize 2009. His first book, Live Working or Die Fighting: How the Working Class Went Global, was longlisted for the Guardian First Book Award. This event marks the publication of his latest book Meltdown: The End of the Age of Greed.

Podcast: Philip Coggan's Paper Promises - Money, Debt and the New World Order

Below is the podcast of Coggan's book talk, and here is a good review of Paper Promises.

Speaker(s): Philip Coggan

Chair: Professor Christopher Polk

Recorded on 19 January 2012 in Sheikh Zayed Theatre, New Academic Building.

The world is drowning in debt. Greece is on the verge of default. In Britain, the coalition government is pushing through an austerity programme in the face of economic weakness. The US government almost shut down in August because of a dispute over the size of government debt.

Our latest crisis may seem to have started in 2007, with the collapse of the American housing market. But as Philip Coggan shows in this new book, Paper Promises: Money, Debt and the new World Order which he will talk about in this lecture, the crisis is part of an age-old battle between creditors and borrowers. And that battle has been fought over the nature of money. Creditors always want sound money to ensure that they are paid back in full; borrowers want easy money to reduce the burden of repaying their debts. Money was once linked to gold, a commodity in limited supply; now central banks can create it with the click of a computer mouse.

Time and again, this cycle has resulted in financial and economic crises. In the 1930s, countries abandoned the gold standard in the face of the Great Depression. In the 1970s, they abandoned the system of fixed exchange rates and ushered in a period of paper money. The results have been a long series of asset bubbles, from dotcom stocks to housing, and the elevation of the financial sector to economic dominance.

The current crisis not only pits creditors against debtors, but taxpayers against public sector workers, young against old and the western world against Asia. As in the 1930s and 1970s, a new monetary system will emerge; the rules for which will likely be set by the world's rising economic power, China.

Philip Coggan was a Financial Times journalist for over twenty years, including spells as a Lex columnist, personal finance editor and investment editor, and is now the Buttonwood columnist of The Economist. In 2009, he was awarded the title of Senior Financial Journalist in the Harold Wincott awards and was voted Best Communicator at the Business Journalist of the Year Awards. Philip Coggan is the author of the business classic, The Money Machine.

Video: Niall Ferguson on Charlie Rose

Video of Niall discussing his new book, Civilization, as well as his current views on the European debt crisis, Turkey's resurgence, and Iran's future here.

Greece Has Its Own Banknote Printing Facility; Ireland Mulls Boosting Its

From the WSJ:

Most euro-zone central banks maintain at least limited capacities to print bank notes. While the European Central Bank is responsible for determining the euro zone's supply of bank notes, it doesn't actually print them. The ECB outsources the work to central banks of euro-zone countries. Each year, groups of countries are assigned the task of printing millions of bank notes in specific denominations. 

The countries have different arrangements for printing their shares of the notes. Some, like Greece and Ireland, own their printing presses. Others outsource to private companies. 

The assignments vary from year to year. Last year, Ireland printed 127.5 million €10 notes, and nothing else, according to its annual report. This year, it was among 11 countries assigned to print a total of 1.71 billion €5 notes.

Full story here.

Steve Keen on How He Saw "It" Coming and Why We're in a Depression

A must watch interview with Economist Steven Keen, the first part of which is embedded below (remaining parts can be found here).

Recommended links & Photo of the Week

Coming soon to a Eurozone bank near you?

1. Beware of falling masonry (Economist) Good tactical overview of the eurozone crisis and some of the options being considered. See also 'Banks Build Contingency for Breakup of the Euro' (NYT)

2. Latvian bank Krajbanka set to be wound up (AFP) Above bank run image is of Krajbanka.

3. The Rise and Fall of Bitcoin (Wired) Contrary to the title I don't think this is the last we've heard of Bitcoin, or other virtual currencies, but an interesting and informative read nonetheless.

4. Prepare for riots in euro collapse, UK Foreign Office warns (Telegraph)

5. Why Not Break-Up Citigroup? (Simon Johnson) Citibank has blown-up and required a bailout three times in the last three decades, or once on average every ten years.

6. How could Reebok sell trainers for $1? (BBC) Contrary to popular believe it's not all glum news here at TPC. I was able to see the remarkable Nobel Peace Prize winner Professor Muhammad Yunus speak this week (video below). His bank, Grameen, is doing amazing things and gets a BHAG nod.

7. MF’s Missing Money Makes You Wonder About Goldman (Jonathan Weil)

World's Most Dangerous Banks and Their Host Countries

Below is the Financial Stability Board's list (by host country) of systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs), alternatively known as the 29 banks which are simply Too Big to Fail.

Twelve different countries are home to these 29 banks. Half of those countries host just one Too Big to Fail institution, and the other half host anywhere from two (Germany and Switzerland) to the U.S.'s eight.

Continue reading the full article at SeekingAlpha here.

Default Myth Busting: Sorry Simon and James, the U.S. is not a Default Virgin

Professor Simon Johnson and James Kwak of The Baseline Scenario have an article at Vanity Fair about the geopolitical importance of credit in late-18th century France, Great Britain, and (especially) the United States. Their article, however, fails to mention an important detail which also happens to contradict their claim that "the (U.S.) federal government would always honor its debt".

The consolidation/conversion of U.S. revolutionary state debt into federal debt, which took place in the early 1790s, and which the authors refer to in the paragraph prior to the above quote, represented a U.S. sovereign default. (For more on this event see Reinhart and Rogoff (click on the U.S. tab) or Sylla, et al, which describes the 'haircut' bondholders received (6% to 4%).)

The notion that the U.S. has never defaulted has unfortunately been repeated often enough that, like the incorrect claim that TARP was "profitable", otherwise well-informed people have come to believe it.

In terms of other U.S. defaults, Reinhart and Rogoff also count Franklin Roosevelt's 1933 prohibition on owning gold and the subsequent devaluation of the U.S. dollar vs. gold as a default.

It's not very surprising to see Vice President Biden promoting the myth that the U.S. has never defaulted (in his case following a visit to the U.S.'s largest creditor, China). Professor Johnson, however, should know better.

Video: Keynes on Britain's Departure from the Gold Standard

Video: Meltdown - Documentary (all 4 parts) on the Financial Crisis

h/t Barry R.

Graphic: Who Holds Sovereign Debt? 70% of U.S. Debt Held by Government Entities

Courtesy of Global Macro Monitor:

Here’s a great chart just released by the International Monetary Fund. Note that almost half — 47 percent – of the US$14.7 trillion U.S. federal government debt is held by the Federal Reserve and the government itself, such as the Social Security trust fund. Add to that the 22 percent foreign official holdings (mainly central banks) and almost 70 percent of the debt of the U.S. government is held by non-market/non-profit oriented public sector entities. Stunning! 

It’s also interesting to hear Europeans quote the $14.7 trillion (apx. 100% of GDP) figure while U.S. officials like to refer to marketable or debt held by the public, which totals US$10.1 trillion (apx. 75% of GDP).

(click to enlarge)

Why the Vickers Report on Banking Reform Failed the UK and the World

Kotlikoff rips the Vickers commission's final recommendation:

The Independent Banking Commission’s final report is a grave disappointment. The ICB (chaired by Sir John Vickers) seeks to reinstate Glass-Steagall by ring-fencing good banks and letting bad banks do their thing and, if they get into trouble, suffer the consequences. This proposition was tested by the collapse of Lehman Brothers, whose failure nearly destroyed the global financial system. 

The commission retains the current system apart from some extra requirements primarily imposed on the good banks (the retail banks). The main impact of this is likely to be to foster more financial intermediation to run through the bad banks, i.e. if you impose more regulation on financial companies that call themselves X and less on companies that call themselves Y, companies that call themselves X will start to call themselves Y. In short, the commission has in effect taxed good banking while sanctifying shadow banking. The commission has also chosen to regulate based on what a bank calls itself, rather than on what it does.

A year back, Mervyn King, Bank of England governor, described the current banking system as the “worst possible.” In a speech, delivered at the Buttonwood Conference in New York, he called for the analysis of Limited Purpose Banking — a reform plan that I developed, which replaces traditional banking with mutual fund banking and makes no distinction between financial intermediaries.

At the end of last year, I travelled to London and met the commission staff to discuss Limited Purpose Banking. I had thought the commission would take the proposal and my discussion with them seriously. That was not to be. In fact, the commission spent very little space discussing the proposal, despite Mr King’s urging that it be carefully studied, and notwithstanding its remarkably strong endorsement by economics Nobel Laureates George Akerlof, Robert Lucas, Edmund Phelps, Edward Prescott, and Robert Fogel as well as by former US secretary of state and former US secretary of the treasury, George Shultz, by Jeff Sachs, Simon Johnson, Niall Ferguson, Ken Rogoff, Michael Boskin, Steve Ross, Jagdish Bhagwati, and many other prominent economists and policymakers.

Do the opinions of the governor of the Bank of England and all these prominent authorities on finance and economics deserve to be dismissed in seven sentences? For seven sentences is all the commission was able to spare when it came to discussing Limited Purpose Banking, notwithstanding the 358 page length of its report.

Full article here.

Quote of the Day: Paging Mr. Oliver Cromwell

Oliver Cromwell

Putting aside his controversies for a moment, the below words Oliver Cromwell used during his address to the Long Parliament in 1653 feel appropriate for today:

"It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonoured by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice. Ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money. Is there a single virtue now remaining among you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God. Which of you have not bartered your conscience for bribes? Is there a man among you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth? 

Ye sordid prostitutes, have you not defiled this sacred place and turned the Lords temple into a den of thieves by your immoral principles and wicked practices. Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation. You who were deputed by the people to get grievances redressed, are yourselves become the greatest grievance. Your country therefore calls upon me to cleanse this Augean stable, by putting a final period to your iniquitous proceedings in this House; and which by God`s help, and the strength he has given me, I am now come to do. 

I command ye therefore, upon the peril of your lives, to depart immediately out of this place; go, get you out! Make haste! Ye venal slaves, be gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!"

Are there any politicians out there today who can deliver similar words with conviction and credibility?

Video: The Commanding Heights - the battle between government and the marketplace

No less relevant today than it was roughly ten years ago when it first premiered, below is Part 1 of the must watch video series The Commanding Heights. Globalization, Keynes vs. Hayek, the future capitalism -- it's all here. Especially recommended for those interested in intellectual history. You'll find the remainder of the episodes at PBS here.

Investment Implications of Prolonged Financial Repression

Interesting read from Joe Roseman, former head of Moore Capital PM and Head of Macro Research, on the investment implications of 'prolonged financial repression'. Some highlights:

One of the issues that appears to have really confused economists is why corporates have steadfastly refused to participate in a new capital investment cycle? Why has new hiring been virtually non-existent? 

Standard econometric equations get this wrong because equations can’t think. Econometrics will look for the last time that interest rates were this low, looking at what worked before. 

I would argue that such equations do not have the requisite history built into them to recognise a period when three out of four cylinders in the engine of growth have been impaired. Econometric equations can’t think, but Sir Martin Sorrell of WPP certainly can. 

To quote Sorrell; “Most importantly, post-Lehman and the several corporate crises, we have seen a concern, or even fear, amongst Chairmen and CEOs and in the boardroom about making mistakes and a consequent emphasis on cost containment and unwillingness to add to fixed expenses and capacity.” 

Sorrell goes on to say that “Western-based multi-nationals are said to have over $2tr in cash on their balance sheets, but unemployment remains at stubbornly high levels, with only increases in temporary employment and limited expansion in fixed capacity in Western markets. Hence, a willingness to invest in the brand and maintaining or increasing market share, rather than increasing capacity and fixed expenses.” 

Governments don’t have the cash so print it. Households don’t have the cash so borrow it when they can. Banks don’t have the cash so skim it from savers. Corporates have the cash and just hoard it.

And the possible investment implications?

Not everywhere in the world has the same macro-impairment as the major Western economies, thereby allowing many corporates to develop growth strategies based outside of the G7. Having a cheap(er) currency certainly helps those companies. 

The market seemingly does not value cash sitting on the balance sheet highly. I wonder if that is a mistake. Cash, it is argued, offers optionality to the holder to take advantage of falling (asset) prices should they occur. On the same basis it may also be being undervalued on balance sheets.

I wonder if standard tests of “value” are missing the true value of the cash sitting on balance sheets? In a world where black swans are as common as starlings, having high net cash balances is a major plus. I also wonder whether that same optionality to use cash to buy cheap assets should also be valued higher.

In closing, he wondering whether the M&A department of foreign corporates would view weak currencies, like the pound or U.S. dollar, as an opportunity to acquire cash-rich businesses in the UK or U.S., respectively.

Full writeup here.

The Greatest Trick Lenders Ever Pulled?

A pretty good candidate in my mind was substituting the term 'credit' for 'debt'.

Not all too long ago, 'debt' was clearly understood as something that, simply put, was bad.

But 'credit'? Oh boy, give me some of that!

There is a lot more to the credit/debt bubble than rebranding. But it's interesting to observe the different terms used for the same or like things, and the effect such differences can have on adoption and/or support. Some other examples:

• 'Orderly resolutions' vs. 'bailouts'
• 'Quantitative easing' vs. 'printing money'
• 'Macroprudential regulation' vs. 'financial repression'
• 'Department of Defense' vs. 'Department of War'

The observation on swapping 'debt' for 'credit' and other interesting thoughts from this talk and Q&A with novelist (and non-economist) John Lanchester.