Cliff notes on the financial crisis

At work we are writing occasional articles for the fine people over at Rates Blog at the moment.  I’ve decided to focus on an issue that will get people irritated – an explanation of the GFC where I largely defend economists (although admiting that the mainstream missed the development of the shadow banking sector).

I’ve stuck with the view I’ve articulated in the past (as can be seen here with and with the links), but I’ve attempted to articulate it in a clearer fashion.  I’m aiming to have a related article out at some point trying to discuss why the crisis has persisted – after all in the article I’ve linked to above, if my explanation was true, the actions of the Fed and US Treasury should have led to the crisis being over by now.   My view is that policy failure in Europe put us on this darker and more persistent path.  The three other primary views are:

  1. Fed and US Treasury policies did nothing, and this is still in essence the same crisis.
  2. Financial crises, but default, are long and ardueous.
  3. This is irrelevant and monetary policy has just been too tight due to central bankers being more conservative.

I would note here that these views (including the one I posited) are not mutually exclusive, and each has a significant grain of truth to it.

Our explanation for the crisis matters right now because it determines what sort of policy response we think is right – which is the main reason why many analysts out there are purposefully “over-arguing” how confident they are about their explanation.  In truth, things are never as simple as they seem.

Note:  And before anyone starts saying that by defending economists on some level (even though I do appropriate blame on them as well) and therefore I’m being purely self serving regarding my own failure to publically warn about the crisis, I’d also note that I only started my job in 2007 – I was just starting to get used to data sources and writing about economics on a regular basis (including starting the blog) once the crisis had begun.

It would be in my interest to attack the establishment that was already in place and pretend to be a “fresh voice” – but unlike some economists around the world who seem quick to attack the rest of the discipine, and misrepresent the views of other economists to sell their own image, I’d prefer to take a bit more of a balanced view 😉 [this comment isn’t aimed at New Zealander commentators, just to make that clear].

  • I’d be interested to learn what you think lies at the end of the GFC in Europe, and the US? How can the national debts of Greece, Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, US ever be repaid … or even paid down considering the tax-takes needed for that – and logically given historical tax takes have still required governments to borrow – so we’d have to be looking at something like upwards toward double current taxing rates to stablise state finances, all else being equal, but then considering that all else would not be equal, as such tax increases would finish off what’s left of those economies. Assuming, of course, governments don’t reign in expenditure by the amounts required (because there’s no sign of them doing so, as long as politicians have their eye to the voting chamber).

    And, currently there is a flight of the rich out of France and US, at least: where are they going? (Asis?)

    • For me the big question, and the one that needs to be dealt with before the crisis can end, is who ends up paying for the debt.

      I’ll be trying articulate that sort of issue, and what we really need to see an end in sight, when I get to the next article. They are both aiming to be pretty descriptive, so in a lot of ways there won’t be much “there” other than a clear indication of how I see the crisis.

  • Maybe, by defending the profession, you are a ‘fresh voice’ among the hubris of others? I see a completely self-serving explanation for this entire bloggin endeavour 😉

    • You know me – I’m completely self-serving. The thing is, my preference is over making noise rather than actually trying to achieve anything 😉

      • Utility maximization at its finest!

  • Pingback: More on describing the crisis | The Dismal Science()

  • Pingback: Financial regulation: Efficiency vs stability trade-off | The Dismal Science()