This is an interesting question. What should the UK do if we really face economic meltdown?
First, what's economic meltdown? It would be a major Euro default giving rise to a major bank failure. Or US default as was threatened this summer with a similar outcome. Nothing as is likely as one of these two.
Of course such things by themselves need not represent economic meltdown, but they would if they gave rise to just one major bank failure — as is likely. The moment that happened the domino effect would begin to roll as banks are not independent entities, they constitute an interdependent system (something few still seem to have got their heads round). Then we would face major economic meltdown.
That meltdown would happen because of banking failure. Let's be clear why: banks that under the prevailing accounting rules are insolvent have to cease trading. If there's risk that they cannot meet their liabilities then the game is over: they have to go bust. And a major government default could trigger that.
Of course we've been here before. Northern Rock (a tiny bank) failed in 2007 and Lehman with somewhat bigger impact in 2008. Then it was mortgage debt that brought banks down. Now it could be government debt. The recognition that the debt won't be repaid, at least in part, coupled with the near likelihood of a crash in the value of that debt as a result, which is exacerbated in accounting terms by what are called ‘mark to market' rules that means assets are often valued at market worth and not at their realisable value (which can be more) means that a bank collapse is likely in the case of default, and with that the whole system is then likely to fall over in turn as firstly inter bank credit ceases due to the risk involved and the write down in inter-bank debt results in yet more accounting write offs.
This scenario is now entirely foreseeable. The risk is not even remote, it's high.
In that case, what's the plan? What's going to happen when we face cash point machines closed, payments systems failed and normal commerce collapsed because bank payment is not possible? We know what happened last time. The banks were propped up (and rightly so) but were then left to carry on much as before. What will happen this time?
And I stress, this is not an idle question: Greece is tottering and where Greece goes right now others seem to follow.
Vickers will report today on what he sees as the politically feasible policies for banking that the Condems might deliver if only the economy were stable from now for a decade or so, and the wrangling will immediately begin about a) whether we'll get ring fencing b) when we'll get ring fencing and c) why it will put up the cost of credit immediately (as I guarantee you it will — there's nothing like a government report threatening their future to provide bankers with the opportunity for a little immediate racketeering). And yet if the banks fall over in the meantime all that's irrelevant. It's as if Vickers is living in a time warp where the assumption is that Osborne was right and austerity had saved us all from Armageddon. But that's not the case. Coordinated worldwide austerity, promoted by bankers and their friends has changed the assumptions Vickers should have been using: the luxury of having time on our hands is no longer available.
That means we need to have a plan available for action that will be needed if the banks fail again now.
It's an issue to which I'll be giving some attention over the course of this week. I'm not sure we'll need it by next weekend, although you can't quite be sure. What I do know is that's a lot more realistic a wrking assumption than those Vickers is using.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
It’s worth restating why the banks brought the economy to its knees and condemned millions to hardship.
Directors embraced incomprehensible financial instruments,systematically overvalued assets and undevalued liabilities, ratings agencies gave Triple A ratings to rubbish, Internal Audit failed lamentably, Audit Committees were clueless and external auditors signed off the resulting accounts without comment.
Nothing has changed. The same people are now to be asked which side of a fence these incomprehensible transactions should be placed and the external auditors will now attract more fees for the production of meaningless bi-cameral accounts
We can’t rely on the numbers in the financial sector. Why do financial journalists pretend that we can?
The only response is to develop local currencies independent of the bank monopoly. We need money to trade and if the banks refuse to supply it we’ll have to supply it ourselves. We’ll only be able to trade locally at first but eventually these local currencies will join up and replace the existing national ones. The sooner we begin this, the better.
BB
We need funny money schemes like we need a hole in the head. At best of scant value at worst a distraction.
There is need for social banks, The Northern Rock could become a social back, perhaps a mutual trust bank, the People Post Office Bank as a start. People could bank their money to be used to invest in people, small enterprises, cooperatives , public health, and so
The Parties of Institutional Power will not do this, they are in hoc to fat cat land. You (we) have to do it yourself. Regional ( not too small) Social Investment Societies as IPSs are a possibility. But they need more than marginal support to critic mass and become useful. Totnes Toy Town stuff will not do the job. The Unions could divert some funds to help this happen. In the US the Steel Workers union has begun a dialogue with the Mondragon Cooperative federation to the explore the possibility of creating worker owner jobs.
Oaks and acorns, Anthony. Do some research into Worgl. It’s in the Wiki.
BB
The real issue is surely that the banks create money out of thin air via credit. Credit/money creation should be under state control with the banks paying seignorage – a useful addition to state coffers. It may be difficult to assess the amount of credit to be released onto the market, but it would be far better than leaving the whole matter to those who are individually looking after their own interests only.
And you’ll note there’s absolutely no mainstream discussion about this crucial point, meaning all we witness is panto for the masses. Neither Osborne nor Balls nor Cable show any interest in confronting the genuine issues before us, thus all the main parties shunt themselves off to the sidelines of any practical discussion. They make it plain we can ignore them – now, what can we do ourselves? Suddenly developing local currency doesn’t look so pointless, does it?
BB
Barry Eichengreen ‘Europe on the Verge of a Political Breakdown’ 2011-09-09 and Paul Krugman ‘An Impeccable Disaster’ September 11 2011 are making the same point.
Few northern Europeans take the trouble to understand the incompatible cultural divide between, for example, Germany and Spain (or Italy, Greece and Portugal)
Put simply; the southern Europeans are (to a considerable extent) only interested in avoiding work and embracing fraud – whilst their northern European EU partners are (to a diminishing extent) propelled by a strong work ethic and honest endeavor.
Never the two shall meet – and “Society Med” will continue for ever more.
Except it won’t, because Germany will eventually say ENOUGH!
[…] of which is why I argued yesterday that the state has to be ready now for another failure by bankers, as it is inevitable. […]