The Economics Of Trust In The United States

By Chandrashekar (Chandra) Tamirisa, (On Twitter) @c_tamirisa

Flattr this

Clintonomics is useful as a last resort. Akin to war.

At issue are two concepts since the Standard and Poors (S&P) downgrade of US debt on Friday, August 05, 2011: risk free rate of return and relative rate of return. In theory and in practice all government bonds, no matter to which country they belong, are always risk free. Investors always get their money back because governments print money. Investors need not worry because the Fed committed itself to running the printing presses through mid-2013.

Rates of return on US bonds could rise because their risk relative to bonds of other countries and other investments has risen after the S&P downgrade. US bonds are safe but could secularly, on a downward slope, become less safe over time, ceteris paribus.

There are two other concepts to consider: risk premium or yield and opportunity cost. The buyers of US Treasuries, domestic and foreign, are incurring an opportunity cost by deciding to invest cash in US Treasuries (moving from the money market to the bond market) instead of elsewhere. Risk premium or yield plus the purchase price of a fixed income asset must equal the opportunity cost of the investor.

Real rate of return is another important concept. Inflation expectations are buried in yields when adjusted for inflation. Inflation expectations, ideally being zero, make inflation a necessary component of the risk premium.

Nominally, therefore, all bonds are risk free. In real terms, however, there is no risk free instrument. The issue is not investor psychology, though in philosophical terms when reflecting on the system construction of economic science it is all perception.

Clintonomists can, this time around, run down the United States to change the country just as they did Eurasia and Latin America in the ‘90s, and again the eurozone now.

Wall Street Christmas will be as usual, Jesus, the work of God, expensive wines and all, but for the administration of domestic “shock doctrine” on Constitution Avenue, the Main Street of the United States, by the bulls raging on Wall Street for bears to prowl elsewhere in the country, because neither American investors nor foreigners have any appetite for America’s financial antics, neither domestic nor foreign.

The shock and awe of the coming swarm of the locusts, as the Germans have called Wall Street, will be played alongside the fireworks of East River as the crystal ball drops on Time Square on New Year’s eve if the government does not pay attention to the failing grade it received on economic management only to get its act together after further carnage of the US debt and the dollar.

US Treasuries can no longer be talked up. They must be walked up by freezing all further borrowing for the next decade. Dodd-Frank must be reformed and the United States needs the Federal Reserve to also serve as an investment bank.

S&P AA+ for the United States of America is not okay.

(My comments in the American Economic Association, AEA, Linkedin discussion of Snehal Manjrekar with Vichet Sum as a contributor in response to a New York Times article constitute this piece).


About Chandrashekar (Chandra) Tamirisa
This entry was posted in Economics, Finance, Financial Regulation, Foreign Policy, Monetary Policy, National Security and Defense, North America and Caribbean, Politics, Transformations LLC and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to The Economics Of Trust In The United States

  1. Ml Hayes says:

    For most Americans, economics is a secretive if not magical science. You seem to know better. So, we only have till the holidays to save ourselves. This seems to be the bottom line of your message. In any case, the Obama Administration can do something and the opponents to his administration can just sit back and ride it out.

    I have been following your insights for a few months and I am impressed by you insight, but underwelmed by you ability to communicate the role of ordinary people in this matter. As the people of Tunisia, Libya and Syria (among others) struggle for thier lives with tyrants, the idea that the American people should calmly stand on the sidelines and be civil about their economic slaughter and the demise of the global system comes accros as a disjointed and unrelated idea in your writings.

    The People need to know what they can do, not what will happen if the do nothing. They need several alternatives not a single pronouncement. They need consequential considerations in terms of bad, worse and untolerable. Without such insights the alternativesa are Baharain or worse yet Saudia Arabia where our Plutocrates behave like their monarchs. That isn’t order and it does not lead to a better world for as many as are willing to produce goods, services or innovations that releive toil, hunger, or disease.

    The AA rating has been proclaimed, but it is a sentence that can be bourn by the many if it leads to a deminished perception of Wall Street as a place where capital is raised. That doesn’t happen there anymore. Its just a giant casino where stocks are the donomination of the chips on the table. We are effectively living in an age where capital can’t be raised by ordinary persons with extrodinary ideas no matter what their desires or capabilities. The restoration of the AAA credit rating is an objective, but only one side of the story is being told. You have the ability to state the otherside of the issue. Please, do that.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s