The Global Economy Burns, While its Leaders Fiddle

China is by no means a panacea of economic equality or perfect policy. It has a fast growing portion of billionaires and accounts for nearly a third of the world’s luxury goods consumption, while its per capita GDP ranks 125^th globally, and 2.8% of Chinese live below the poverty line (according to ‘official’ stats).

In contrast, the US has an official poverty rate of 14%, though think tanks like the Economic Policy Institute, consider this estimate low. Still, in its latest 5-year economic plan, the Chinese government at least gave lip service to how to deal with its growing inequality - by increasing certain wages by 40%, decreasing taxes on the poor and increasing them on the rich.

The US government has no such strategy, except in campaign speeches, as reflected by our anemic economy. Instead, we witness inane partisan prattling over the deficit and what mini-budget modifications are needed to bring it into line, most of which would disproportionately detract from the people that had the least to do with inflating it. (i.e. anyone not running a bank or hedge fund.)

Yet, like our own, inequality figures will worsen for China, which will ultimately destabilize its economy. The result of attracting that menacing, mercurial entity called ‘global capital’ is inflated growth figures predicated on bulging service sectors and population wealth gaps. The more capital sloshing around a country, the more destabilized it becomes, and the more its leaders pretend that’s not the case. 

Global speculative capital (the kind flowing through any major financial entity) is cunning, aggressive, greedy, shortsighted, and yes, cowardly (it doesn’t stick around when things get shaky.) If it were a person, it would smack down minions of grandmothers and infants to get to the door of a fiery building first, and then deny burn victims healthcare. It hates rules, which is why it likes promoting the notion of markets free of them.

Individual investors in silver are the latest casualties of speculative capital’s fickleness. People that invested their own money in silver were snuffed by the entities that borrowed or invested other people’s money to do the same. The COMEX found the anti-speculation religion it never sought during run-ups of commodities prices for items like food and fuel, and raised silver trading margins.  Though those hikes were the prevalent reason for silver’s price plummet, all they really did was give fast capital a chance to book profits and alter course.

Any investment is subject to fundamental forces, like supply and demand or how much US economic policy is devaluing its currency. But, it’s more subject to speculative whims, like who's in and out, by how much and how fast, whether its a fund or an entire nation.

The time-honored scheme in which controlling capital cons ordinary people (or governments) to join it before crashing or heading for the hills has devastated many individuals and economies. That ploy ran rampant during the crash of 1929. Banks put up their ‘own’ capital, which was really borrowed capital, to spur individuals to do the same with their savings. When banks pulled out, people were hosed thrice – through the loss of their savings, the decimation of their bank accounts that the powerhouses used for speculative purposes  -  under the guise of – serving their clients, and by a raging Depression that killed jobs and hopes.

Not much has changed. Matt Taibbi’s recent excoriation of Goldman Sachs reveals how gray the line is between screwing and screwing, one’s clients. Only now, when banks lose money, governments and central banks reward them with trillions of dollars of subsidies, using the excuse of aiding the population and avoiding larger catastrophe. They say things like - it takes time to increase employment, but we can waste no time in propping up our financial system. Or - pensions and teachers caused budget failures, but we’ll keep holding excess reserves, borne of debt, for banks in case they need it, and pay interest on it.

We are in an ongoing global economic depression. The signs are everywhere, even as they are lost on economic leaders that put private banks and short-term speculative capital before citizens and long-term working capital. Central banks use other people’s future money in the form of debt to do this. No central bank holds, and thus enables, more national debt than the Federal Reserve.

I hate to keep repeating this, but until someone of some ability to do anything gets it, I’m going to keep going. Last week, Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke, co-enabler with Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner (among others) of our ballooning debt and mis-prioritized economic policy, urged Congress for another debt cap increase, or else.  The guy holds about  $2.5 trillion of debt on his books, being used for – nothing helpful to the general economy. A simple transfer would solve the debt cap problem in a nanosecond. Going a step further, a simple exchange of any of the $1.5 trillion of excess bank reserves receiving interest from the Fed, would do the same.  Instead of defaulting on, how about retiring, some debt? Thinking outside the box.

All around the world, the bodies and countries with the most power keep screwing people (some like IMF head, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, literally) and entire nations, while supporting their banking systems.  Last week, S&P announced it would downgrade Portugal if it didn’t play ball with the IMF and EU over its 4-year 78E billion-bailout program in return for hacking public programs.

Echoing our own Congressional goons spewing spending cuts in the face of inadequate revenues and for-bank-manufactured mega-debt, the S&P noted, “Two-thirds of the projected savings in [Portugal’s] 2012 budget will likely come from spending cuts.”

On a roll, the IMF also declared Italy needs ‘structural reform’, meaning labor market reform, less public ownership and more private investment to “unlock its growth potential.” (aka invite more speculative capital at its earliest convenience.)

Meanwhile, thousands of people are again striking in Greece, as the IMF and EU discuss more austerity measures, following the bank bailout that provoked public outrage a year ago, and a rating downgrade by S&P. The EU remains more concerned with investors regaining confidence in Greece than economic stability of its citizens. Then, there’s Ireland, for whom its last bailout didn’t dent its 14.5% unemployment rate, or fill in the gaping holes its banks dug.

In short, the global ‘remedy’ for depressed economies and debt-bloated banking sectors remains to do  – more of the same - and pretend  this will beget a different outcome. Yet, there is no way this strategy will result in more stable economies.  What we can expect instead is further widespread deterioration.

Did Tim Geithner really say something that dumb?

It's been at least a week or two (or maybe I've just been paying attention to other things that he doesn't appear to be noticing), since Tim Geithner reminded us how little he understands (or cares) about - everything. But, his Bloomberg Breakfast statement this morning, just nailed it. 

"The global economy is in a much stronger position to handle rising oil prices than it was in 2008 when crude shot up to a record US$147.27 a barrel in New York... Central banks have a lot of experience in managing these things.”

I mean, really ?!? What part of the global economy basking in the stability of its strength would that be, Tim?

The part uprising in the streets, in nations where a third of the population lives in utter poverty? The part getting kicked out of homes, while lenders stash their subsidization money with the Fed, and get interest on it? The part that has all but stopped searching for employment, as the pool of applicants drowns the drop of available jobs? The part that can't afford to eat? The part being asked to give up their right to collective bargaining, so that the part that collectively bargains constantly (under the corporate collective bargaining label 'lobbyists') can defund state and federal revenues while chewing on unnecessary tax breaks?

What part?

A significant chunk of the Middle East and Northern Africa is in revolt against corrupt governments and soul-destroying economic conditions - chief amongst those, a hopeless level of unemployment, particularly for the growing youth populations in those regions (and by the way, Tim - also in our own country), as well as a paralyzing financial chokehold unleashed by record high food and agricultural prices and rising oil ones. No, Tim, the global economy doesn't need more pain.

But wait. Tim, maybe you've got a point about crisis management. Central banks, especially ours, are really good at managing crises on behalf of - banks. They are brilliant at manifesting any required amount of money to subsidize the crisis creators, and patting themselves on the back when that money pumps up stock market prices, corporate cash reserves, and commodity costs. And, when this wall of 'so-called recovery' that you talk about, shows fractures you strive to conceal, due to the reality of an anemic, depressed economy, our central bank is excellent at springing to action. Bernanke just lobs a QE maneuver to inflate the value of our debt and deflate the value of our currency, much the same way the ECB moans a bit, each time a Greece, or an Ireland, or a Portugal begs for a reprieve from the international capital regime that colluded with their local banking systems to trash their citizen economies.

And you, Tim, so heroically helped our central bank manage the crisis, as the Treasury department issued $4 trillion of debt (in two years!) while now, nervously talking about budget spending cuts and deficit reduction and hoping no-one will remember your part in the financial imbalance that is our national economy. This, in co-hoots with a reckless Federal Reserve determined to pretend that the cheap money it continues to pump into the speculative class has nothing to do with the inflation in commodity prices it refuses to acknowledge, and that the trillions of dollars manufactured to enable our negligent, accountability-immune (h/t to the magnificent Matt Taibbi) banking system to remain functional was no hardship to our country, whereas say, advocating the raising of taxes and revenue seeking measures on those recipients would be.

Yeah. Nothing like management experience.