Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) Co-Directors Dean Baker and Mark Weisbrot issued the following statement today, calling for action by the U.S. Federal Reserve to contain the eurozone crisis. Weisbrot just returned from Spain, where he observed the impact of the crisis firsthand.
The statement reads:
“The financial crisis in the eurozone, now centered on Spain, is contributing to the slowdown in the U.S. economy and opens the possibility of a worse financial meltdown, of the type that followed the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008. This could tip the U.S. economy into recession.
“The European Central Bank (ECB) could put an end to the acute crisis by intervening in the Spanish bond market, as it has done in the past year, thereby stopping financial markets from driving these bond yields to levels at which Spain’s debt is seen as unsustainable. But it has so far refused to do so.
“The Financial Times reported yesterday that ‘A widespread view within the [ECB’s governing] council’ is that prior interventions ‘simply reduced the incentive for governments to act;’ and that ‘the ECB also has to judge whether to take pre-emptive steps to prevent the situation spinning out of control at the risk of lowering the pressure for political reform or wait to see how events pan out before responding.’
“The ECB’s refusal to act, for political reasons, is reckless and inexcusable. Since the eurozone crisis is affecting unemployment in the United States, and threatens to raise it further, it is within the Fed’s mandate to act in this situation.
“Past interventions by the ECB indicate that the amount of intervention would be relatively little. According to press reports, the Fed is currently considering an additional $700 billion of quantitative easing in the United States; the amount necessary for intervention in the Spanish bond market would be a small fraction of this, and possibly have more impact on the U.S. economy. Past actions indicate that private investors would move quickly to buy Spanish bonds on the heels of a central bank intervention. Furthermore, the intervention would come at no cost to the U.S. taxpayer, and the Fed would accumulate foreign assets in its reserve holdings.
“U.S. Treasury rates fell to all-time record lows last week, as fear seized financial markets worldwide. More than $100 billion left Spain in the first quarter of this year – nearly 10 percent of Spain’s GDP – and it is likely that capital flight accelerated in April and May. This capital flight worsens the situation of the Spanish banks, as does the fall in the price of Spanish bonds, which are held mostly in Spain. All of this makes the banking and financial crisis worse. The eurozone recession is deepening, and the financial crisis there is affecting many parts of the world economy.
“It is possible that action by the Fed would also cause the ECB to intervene. But in any case, it is within the Fed’s mandate and ability to contain this crisis. It should act quickly before there is further damage to the U.S. economy.
“Other central banks with large reserve holdings may also want to consider intervening as well, if the Fed does not act, or in conjunction with the Fed if it does.”



21 Comments

Let it bleed Dean.
Gag me; a false statement: “Since the eurozone crisis is affecting unemployment in the United States,” ; no, it is the cutbacks in public spending and workforce that is affecting employment in the U.S.
Egads; “the Fed would accumulate foreign assets in its reserve holdings.” “; doesn’t the Fed have enough toxic assets on it’s books without taking more on? Because that;’s what it would be doing. Spain’s BANKS with all the bad real estate loans is what “foreign assets” the Fed would be getting. ADDITIONALLY, Spanish law does Not PROVIDE for the discharge of a real estate debt in bankruptcy so how will such action do a damn thing to address the unemployment issue in Spain and the ‘austerity’ already thrust upon the population?
More half-truths: “The ECB’s refusal to act, for political reasons, is reckless and inexcusable.” ; The ECB is not acting because there is NO CLARITY amongst European leaders regards the future of the Eurozone and the Euro.
Lastly, because this is so disgusting a suggestion from Mr. Baker and Mr. Weisbrot, if you look at the already Central Bank Liquidity Swap
there’s no need for further Fed intervention. And lastly, the whole European difficulty is nothing but an avoidance of having the European banks ‘take their lumps’ as should have been done here.
And if you want to see what the Fed did secretly back when in terms of providing $29 TRILLION worth of bailout funding go here:
http://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/?docid=1462
and download the working paper #698(it’s a pdf).
And further: “Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, says banks “were either in bad shape or taking advantage of the Fed giving them a good deal. The former contradicts their public statements. The latter — getting loans at below-market rates during a financial crisis — is quite a gift.”
And now he’s advocating another gift for no other reason than …all I can guess without casting aspersions is fear.
And here’s what Spain itself is proposing: “”Spain is likely to offer some banks the chance to opt out of some of the reforms set to be announced on Friday following heavy lobbying from the industry, according to two people familiar with discussions.”
If the Fed acts on this CEPR letter, I may find myself in a permanent state of vomiting.
Yep Fear. Fear that their fiat money might become worthless and the the people will turn on them if the system collapses.
Not one more damned dollar for the banksters until the banks are nationalized, current CEO’s and boards of directors are jailed, bankruptcy laws are changed so a persons mortgage can be crammed down to present value, credit card debt can be discharged, and for good measure every bonus dollar paid on Wall Street, since 2008, be clawed back.
The reactions here seem overblown, based on anti-bailout the banks arguments. I don’t think that’s what’s going on here.
Seems to me fairly simple logic. Buy Spanish bonds and help lower their borrowing costs, take the pressure off their insane austerity to help ameliorate a depression in Spain and the rest of Europe, and thus help support economies that buy products from the US and thus contribute to US employment. All the hand wringing and anti-bank rhetoric seems to miss the point.
Baker isn’t claiming this is the best thing to do; he’s a strong opponent of austerity here and there. But in the face of potential collapse, he’s suggesting the Fed do something, for which he’s hardly alone. And the non-subtle other message is, “well, if you can’t do that to help Spain (and indirectly the US), then do something like this for the US.” I think that’s part of their strategy.
And the related message to ECB is, Do Something. This is hardly a new argument coming from US economists.
It’s pain now or pain later. I say we let the banks fail, take the pain now and avert future moral hazard.
IMO, on balance the pain now approach will approximate the pain later approach in terms of total pain. But pain later has the added dimension of moral hazard.
I oppose any possible benefit for Wall Street without seeing accountability and justice. And yes, I know that’s at least 4.5 years away….
Economics is not morality play. I don’t think anyone here is ecstatic about a possible Fed intervention, but a collapse of the euro under the present dysfunctional system they have over here (I’m writing from Paris) would be a catastrophe all round. It is a monumental screw-up anyway you look at it.
It was bad enough when we bailed out the (mostly) American banksters with taxpayer money and no accountability, but bailing out the Europeans? No fucking way.
Sorry, Dean, this time you’re off target. The collapse of the entire austerity movement in Europe would be the best thing that could happen to us, and might (although I’m skeptical) keep us from going too far down the same rat hole.
The problem I have with the presentation is that it doesn’t state the facts of the case when it suggests that Europe’s problems are causing ours – it is more the reverse as we have been pointing out on this forum, with the multinationals based in this country starting the entire process and folk like Goldman Sachs offering sweet deals and betting against collapsing economies. That may have folk invested here and there anxious, and certainly Europe’s collapse is going to affect us, but the truth of the matter lies perhaps with our obligations financially speaking, since we in fact set the ball rolling on this.
I’m not an economist. I have no idea how we should bring the chickens home to roost, but when they do they should not affect the security of lesser mortals who have no skin in the game.
Arg…can’t rely to both above posts. But I agree with Beach and also juliania.
If GS and JPM-Chase take a major hit, no skin off of my nose.
Besides the Euro was a majorly bad idea in the first place.
First time I find myself disagreeing with you Scarecrow. Baker’s point about the ECB is the crux; it is the ECB who ‘should be buying Spanish bonds. And the failure of the European elites to get their act together -we’re talking the Bilderberg people here- is NOT a problem for the U.S.
“But in the face of potential collapse, he’s suggesting the Fed do something, for which he’s hardly alone.”; no , he has people like Geithner as an association but please tell us who else? As towards economists, well, the ‘standard’ econmmists -the one’s listened to by the UI.S. government- were the same who said ‘what, me worry?’ prior to the financial collapse.
And Juliana’s point is correct; the phrasing of “Europe’s problems are causing ours” is completely disingenous.
It would seem I was a bit hasty in the Banking Union thing. As were a number of others. My bad.
Nein! Nein! Nein! Again
This is the part that gets me when I read something like Baker has written: “Let me add that a “European Banking Authority” already exists. It was created in November 2010.
It has “binding powers” and can override national vetoes in extremis.
It tasks include: “preventing regulatory arbitrage, strengthening international supervisory co-ordination, and promoting supervisory convergence”. It carries out stress tests. It sets capital adequacy rules.
And though Evans-Pritchard’s link to the legal text is a ‘page not found’, his point about the European Banking Authority is completely valid.
The answer to his confusion -”Quite why the Madrid and Milan bourses have been rallying is beyond me.- goes right back to writings such as Baker’s.
Just because the US financial industry manufactured the toxic waste that is destroying the global economy is no reason for the US to continue meddling in foreign countries. The last time our government intervened in Spain it was to quash (former)Judge Baltazar Garcon’s investigation into the USA’s war crimes committed during the Bush/Cheney administration. The pressure by the Obama admin. successfully thwarted that investigation and destroyed Garcon’s career. A portion of the FED’s $16 trillion cash infusion to prop up our corrupt Banksters also went to corrupt European Banksters. The FED helps no one but themselves.
Where do I sign up?
We are all so screwed.
You’re right. We already fed that kitty and we don’t really know how much.
It was actually $27 Trillion worth of swap lines; see my comment at #2 and dload the levy institute paper for all the details.
When do we start writing off the debt and nationalizing the banks? Otherwise, this endless Fed and ECB bailout of the crooks is going to just inflict more pain to the 99% that didn’t make this mess.
I thought the reality of a $16 Trillion bailout was a ridiculous and disgusting wealth transference from the already debt enslaved 99% to the oligarchs. Now that you’ve apprised me that it was actually $11 Trillion more, it’s beyond appalling. This system is beyond repair and it’s past time for me to be planning my escape to someplace that has shunned the domination of USA,Inc. and the West. I’m looking southward.
I think this is a bad proposal. It’s not about morality plays; it’s about getting control of our political system again; and it is about moral hazard. We shouldn’t be bailing out Spanish Banks who were losers in the international gambling casino; because to do that is to bail out a casino we should be destroying. Let the European Banking System fall; if that’s what the European elites want; if they don’t all they have do is to implement this very simple program.
If they fail to do that, or something else equally constructive, then let them fall. That will create another crisis in our big banks because of their very investment in the casino. When they become insolvent, Obama will have the choice of bailing them out or not. He’ll have another chance to take them into resolution and take them out of politics, while they’re being resolved. he’ll also be able to investigate the mortgage frauds freely and put a lot of people in jail who we need badly to go there, to eliminate the existing moral hazard that comes from their still walking free and enjoying the fruits of their frauds.
If he doesn’t do that with total support from the Democrats, they’ll all be toast in the Fall elections. On the other hand, if they do take the banks down, they’ll probably win handily, if they also run on ending unemployment with State revenue Sharing, FICA Tax holiday, and a Job Guarantee program.