FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Banking on Thin Ice

The banking system has two historic functions. The first is to make the circulation of money easier, safer and faster, by allowing depositors to pay by cheque, bank card, etc. The second is to create account money, by granting credit. The two functions are distinct, but both concern the payment of value and cannot avoid interacting.

Accounts are kept of all deposits. Small and large sums are credited and debited, moving among different accounts in the same bank or between banks. Once a day, all these movements are added up by a clearing-house, and each bank is given the state of its balance. (As the larger banks are doing business 24/24, 7/7, all around the world, the daily clearing process has lost its precision. On the other hand, computer technology makes it possible for banks to appraise their balances constantly.) For some banks, the sums credited are larger than the sums debited. For the others, the situation is reversed. Some banks have a surplus of money on their accounts. The others are in the red and must settle that debt before they can begin a new day’s business. Usually, the banks with the surplus lend it to the banks in the red.

The other function of banks is to grant credit to depositors. To do this they increase the value of deposits with virtual money. This is possible because only a small fraction of the total deposits actually moves around at the end of the day. As most of the value deposited never leaves the bank, it can be increased at will. However, as a security, banks are obliged to own collateral, such as gold, currency, bonds, stocks, real estate, etc. The value of which must be superior to a certain minimum fraction of the credit granted (currently 8%).

The interest paid on the credit granted by banks is their principal source of income. Wishing to maximise their incomes, banks face a double dilemma. Increasing the amount of credit granted means increasing the value of their collateral. But collateral is ever a fluctuating value. Stocks and real estate are particularly volatile. Their values frequently swell rapidly and deflate suddenly. And the more stable forms (gold and currency) pay neither rent nor dividends. The fluctuation of value on the market means that collateral can gain or loose value as of itself. So the problem banks face is the choice of collateral and the temptation to follow the rising market value of their collateral, by a corresponding rise in the amount of credit they grant.

The market values of the different forms of collateral rise and fall independently, each following its own particular cycle. But, every now and then, they move together in the same direction. At present, three forms of bank collateral, stocks, bonds and real estate, are valued at historic highs. The corresponding amounts of credit granted depend on these high values being maintained. It seems, however, that the three values mentioned above have peaked simultaneously. And that the desperate efforts at keeping them all up there together are doomed.

The weakest link is the rate of interest. It varies inversely to the market value of bonds. When interest rates rise, the value of bonds must drop accordingly (1). And, with inflation looming in the wake of mounting commodity prices, this two way movement seems inevitable in a very near future. And rising rates of interest will have a less immediate effect on the housing market and the value of real estate. They will also hit the stock market and credit in general, when the falling value of collateral reduces the amount of credit that can be granted (some have already called for a lowering of the necessary minimum fraction). A reduced supply that will put up the “price” of credit, cumulating with the increases due to inflation.

Rising prices and the interruption of cheap borrowing are the ordinary consequences of every credit bubble. But the cyclical coincidence of three forms of collateral, in their rise, peak and forthcoming slump, is a rare occurrence. It has facilitated an unprecedented swelling. But it also means that there are no secure forms of collateral to fall back on. As, apart from the three, currency is an obvious target for inflation. And gold is almost exclusively held by central banks and, anyway, there is nowhere nearly enough of it around.

The most likely scenario is stagnation accompanying inflation. Probably (inevitably?) for several years, as the gigantic paper structure of sub-prime junk that has filled so many balloons with hot air will not be absorbed painlessly overnight. This time the collapse will not be limited to Argentina, or the Asian “Dragons”. This time it concerns the whole Developed World. A financial turmoil of such magnitude that holding it off till after the November elections seems an impossible task. And yet, the presidential candidates have not voiced an inkling of what is brewing. No one seems to realise how thin the ice is. So how will they react when it all begins to crack?

KENNETH COUESBOUC can be reached at kencouesbouc@yahoo.fr

1. A bond labelled $100 pays $5 a year interest, that is 5%. If the rate of interest rises to 10%, then the $5 paid by the bond is 10% of only $50. The market value of the bond has been halved.

 

 

 

 

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
William Blum
Anti-Empire Report: Unseen Persons
Lawrence Davidson
Missiles Over Damascus
Patrick Cockburn
The Plight of the Yazidi of Afrin
Pete Dolack
Fooled again? Trump Trade Policy Elevates Corporate Power
Stan Cox
For Climate Mobilization, Look to 1960s Vietnam Before Turning to 1940s America
William Hawes
Global Weirding
Dan Glazebrook
World War is Still in the Cards
Nick Pemberton
In Defense of Cardi B: Beyond Bourgeois PC Culture
Ishmael Reed
Hollywood’s Last Days?
Peter Certo
There Was Nothing Humanitarian About Our Strikes on Syria
Dean Baker
China’s “Currency Devaluation Game”
Ann Garrison
Why Don’t We All Vote to Commit International Crimes?
LEJ Rachell
The Baddest Black Power Artist You Never Heard Of
Lawrence Ware
All Hell Broke Out in Oklahoma
Franklin Lamb
Tehran’s Syria: Lebanon Colonization Project is Collapsing
Donny Swanson
Janus v. AFSCME: What’s It All About?
Will Podmore
Brexit and the Windrush Britons
Brian Saady
Boehner’s Marijuana Lobbying is Symptomatic of Special-Interest Problem
Julian Vigo
Google’s Delisting and Censorship of Information
Patrick Walker
Political Dynamite: Poor People’s Campaign and the Movement for a People’s Party
Fred Gardner
Medical Board to MDs: Emphasize Dangers of Marijuana
Rob Seimetz
We Must Stand In Solidarity With Eric Reid
Missy Comley Beattie
Remembering Barbara Bush
Wim Laven
Teaching Peace in a Time of Hate
Thomas Knapp
Freedom is Winning in the Encryption Arms Race
Mir Alikhan
There Won’t be Peace in Afghanistan Until There’s Peace in Kashmir
Robert Koehler
Playing War in Syria
Tamara Pearson
US Shootings: Gun Industry Killing More People Overseas
John Feffer
Trump’s Trade War is About Trump Not China
Morris Pearl
Why the Census Shouldn’t Ask About Citizenship
Ralph Nader
Bill Curry on the Move against Public Corruption
Josh Hoxie
Five Tax Myths Debunked
Leslie Mullin
Democratic Space in Adverse Times: Milestone at Haiti’s University of the Aristide Foundation
Louis Proyect
Syria and Neo-McCarthyism
Dean Baker
Finance 202 Meets Economics 101
Abel Cohen
Forget Gun Control, Try Bullet Control
Robert Fantina
“Damascus Time:” An Iranian Movie
David Yearsley
Bach and Taxes
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail