StockBuz Empowering Stock Market Traders and Investors StockBuz Empowering Stock Market Traders and Investors

What We're Reading

Admin

Remembering The Impetus Of Irrational Exuberance

In December of 1996, Greenspan was clearly beginning to worry about the economic fallout of a bursting asset bubble. Back then he had a front row seat and, in fact, a strong hand in creating the dotcom bubble, whether he admits it or not. He was so worried about the consequences of “irrational exuberance” that he declared these concerns “must be an integral part of the development of monetary policy.” And this was before he had even witnessed any of the actual economic consequences we have now lived with for two decades. Clearly, his worries were well founded but he wasn’t quite worried enough.

The financial well-being of entire generations has been permanently damaged. Think of the Baby Boomers whose retirement dreams turned to nightmares through two stock market crashes in less than a decade. Think of the Generation Xers whose dreams were shattered by the housing bubble and the mortgage crisis. As a group these latter folks, even though they are now entering their peak earnings years, are flat broke almost a decade after it all began. And the major media outlets wonder openly why the average American has next to nothing in savings. He was explicitly encouraged by the single most powerful institution on the planet to put his savings into great peril, time and again.

screen-shot-2016-10-20-at-1-22-18-pmNow I should be clear that over the decade following this famous speech, while he remained Fed Chairman, he did nothing to incorporate these prescient concerns into Fed policy. Just the opposite. After the dotcom bubble burst he engineered the housing bubble to try to ameliorate the damage done by the first. It’s one thing to worry about the risks of financial bubbles you have a hand in creating; it’s something else to actually do something about them. So while we can admire his foresight we should not honor it by overlooking his cowardice in failing to do anything about it.

Since then, and with the benefit of witnessing the actual fallout of these epic busts, many at the Fed (and even more outside of it) have openly discussed this dilemma of directly addressing asset bubbles. Eric Rosengren, head of the Fed Bank of Boston, became the latest to openly echo Greenspan’s concerns regarding “irrational exuberance” in the financial markets. Robert Shiller won a Nobel Prize for work in this very area. Still, nothing has been done to actually address these massive economic risks. After 20 years and two bursting bubbles whose effects are still plaguing the economy it’s still nothing more than sporadic public hand wringing by the people with the power to do something about it.

In recent years the Fed has only doubled down on these policies by directly pursuing a “wealth effect.” Rather than give a boost to the broad economy, however, these central bankers have only accomplished an even greater and more pervasive financial asset perversion. Stocks, bonds and real estate have all become as overvalued as we have ever seen any one of them individually in this country. The end result of all of this money printing and interest rate manipulation is the worst economic expansion since the Great Depression and the greatest wealth inequality since that period, as well.

Someday, possibly soon, the public will finally decide it’s had enough of the escalating boom bust cycles the Fed has exacerbated, if not directly engineered, over the past couple of decades. Falling confidence in these technocrats and the resulting rising populism will serve as a clarion call for a new brand of Fed Chairman with the courage to finally address the glaring danger asset bubbles pose to financial stability and the long-term economic health of our nation. She will be the 21st century’s version of Paul Volcker. Rather than breaking the back of inflation in the traditional sense, she will break the cycle of unwarranted asset inflation at the direction of the Fed and all of its deleterious consequences. At least I hope it’s not irrational to believe so.

Courtesy of TheFelderReport

Email me when people comment –

You need to be a member of StockBuz to add comments!

Join StockBuz

We welcome you to post a blog entry, oped or share your daily reading with us as long as it is relevant to the topic of investing and not an attempt to sell a product, proprietary strategy, platform or other service. Please provide links to any research data and if re-posting other articles, give credit where credit is due providing a back link to the original site.

300 words minimum per post. You may also sort by category or search by topic. Don't forget to comment and please "share" via Facebook, Twitter and Google+. If you have any questions, please contact us.


Only search StockBuz

Un-check to search the web

FOLLOW STOCKBUZ

__________________

This is a member-supported site. Please donate when you can to help pay the rent. Thank you!

Stay Informed. Sign up for the FREE StockBuz eNewsletter

________________

Investing involves substantial risk. All content is subject to StockBuz disclaimer.

Create Income With Option Spreads

All content on StockBuz.net is subject to disclaimer and Terms of Service
web counter
web counter
Share