SACO INVEST

Fórum da Saco Invest
 
HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  Log in  

Share | 
 

 Why the Fed Will Not Stop Deflation

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
gastaoss



Number of posts : 440
Registration date : 2007-07-01

PostSubject: Why the Fed Will Not Stop Deflation   Thu Aug 30, 2007 11:02 pm

http://www.bullnotbull.com/bull/node/44



Prechter: Why the Fed Will Not Stop Deflation





Posted August 30th, 2007 by manystrom

in

  • Federal Reserve




Editor's note: Robert Prechter's Latest Elliott Wave Theorist was released three weeks early, and is one of his best Theorist's
ever. He does not mince words and cuts straight to the bone on what the
Fed is and is not willing to do. It is fascinating reading. I have
arranged to make this brief excerpt available.
Excerpted from The Latest Elliott Wave Theorist

August 26, 2007 | Robert Prechter

Reprinted with permission

We hear it every day: "What about the Fed?" The vast majority of
investors and commentators seem confident that the Fed's machinations
make a stock market collapse impossible. Every hour or so one can read
or hear another comment along these lines: "the Fed will provide
liquidity," "the Fed is injecting money into the system," "the Fed will
be forced to bail out homeowners, homebuilders, mortgage companies and
banks," "the Fed has no choice but to inflate," "the government cannot
allow deflation," "the Fed will print money to stave off deflation" and
any number of like statements.
None of them is true.
The Fed is not forced to do anything; the Fed has not been injecting
money; the Fed does have choices; the government does not control
deflationary forces; and the Fed will not print money unless and until
it changes its long-standing policies and decides to destroy itself.
A perfect example of one of these fallacies recently exposed is the
widespread report in August that the Fed had "injected" billions of
dollars worth of "money" into the "system" by "buying" "sub-prime
mortgages."
In fact, all it did was offer to stave off the immediate illegality of many banks' operations by lending money against the collateral of guaranteed mortgages, but only temporarily
under contracts that oblige the banks to buy them back within 1 to 30
days. The typical duration is 3 days. Observe three important things:

  1. The Fed did not give out money; it offered a temporary, collateralized loan.
  2. The Fed did not inject liquidity; it offered it.
  3. The Fed did not lend against worthless sub-prime mortgages; it lent against valuable
    mortgages issued by Fannie Mae (the Federal National Mortgage
    Association), Ginnie Mae (the Government National Mortgage Association)
    and Freddie Mac (the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation). The New
    York Fed is also accepting "investment quality" commercial paper, which
    means highly liquid, valuable IOUs, not junk

As a result:

  1. The Fed took almost no risk in the transactions.
  2. The net liquidity it provided -- after the repo agreements close -- is zero.
  3. The financial system is still choking on bad loans.
  4. Banks and other lending institutions must sell other assets to raise cash to buy back their mortgages from the Fed.

These points are crucial to a proper understanding of the situation.
The Fed is doing nothing akin to what most of the media claims; like
McDonald's, it is selling not so much sustenance as time, in this case
time for banks to divest themselves of some assets. But in the Fed's
case, that's all it's selling; you don't get any food in the bargain.
As I have said before, the Fed is a bank. It has private owners. The
owners do not want to see their enterprise destroyed. Although Bernanke
probably received distress calls from mortgage lenders, he probably
also got calls from the Fed's owners saying, "Don't you dare
buy any of that crap and put it in our long-term portfolio." The Fed's
owners are smart. They exploit the banking system without taking on any
of the risks. They let member banks make mortgages and lend to
consumers, but they don't do so themselves.
In the early 1930s, as markets fell and the economy collapsed, the
Fed offered loans only on the most pristine debt. Its standards have
fallen a bit, but not by much. Today it will still lend only on highly
reliable IOUs, not junk. And it doesn't even want to own most of those;
it takes them on only temporarily as part of a short-term repurchase
agreement.
The Fed's power derives from the value of its holdings, which are
primarily Treasury bonds, which provide backing for the value of the
Fed's notes. What would a Federal Reserve Note be worth if it were
backed by sub-prime mortgages? The real value of U.S. Treasury debt is
precarious enough as it is, but at least it has the taxing power of the
government behind it. But if the Fed bought up the entire supply of
sub-prime mortgages, its notes would lose value accordingly. So will
the Fed bail out mortgage companies, as the optimists seem to think?
No, it won't. Those who think the Fed will buy up junk with cash
delivered by helicopter are dreaming.
Ironically, of course, the Federal Reserve System and the federal
government-both directly and via creations such as privileged mortgage
companies and the FDIC-have fostered all the lending and the
junk debt that resulted. But these entities want only to benefit from
the process, not suffer from it. As we will see throughout the bear
market and into the depression, the Fed is self-interested and will not
brook losses in its portfolio. Those who own the bad loans, and perhaps
some foolish government entities that try to "save" them, will take
losses, but the Fed won't. ...
What must the banks do with their "grace period" of a few days that the Fed's repo agreements provide? They have to raise the cash to buy back the IOUs that the Fed agreed to hold for them.
How does a bank raise money? By selling assets. Thus begins the
downward spiral: Contracting credit causes asset sales, which cause
collateral values to fall, which causes lenders to curtail lending,
thus contracting overall credit, which causes assets sales, and so it
goes. Thus, the Fed is not staving off deflation; at best, it may have
helped -- momentarily -- to make it more orderly. But the selling of
assets has begun regardless.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
 
Why the Fed Will Not Stop Deflation
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Stop Loss Orders - CSE
» Action Promise - Sri Lanka new watchdog not pressured to stop probes: SEC
» CEB to stop private power purchases in 2013-2014
» Lotus tower project looks like to stop-mr.Ranathunga
» Auto Stop Loss And Take Profit - VertexFX EA

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
SACO INVEST :: SACO INVEST-
Jump to: