LADYBOY.REVIEWS
This site contains Adult Content.
Are you at least 18 years old?

Yes No

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

No 1929? Re-read history and save your money.

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • No 1929? Re-read history and save your money.

    I was pleasantly amazed when scouring through several books to understand the magnitudes and circumstances of the current credit crunch - which had weak parallels to the panic of 1907 and seemingly greater coincidences to the great crash of 1929 which led to the extended slump thereafter.

    A debate in congress with Bernanke some time last year highlighted Hoover's interventionist policies in that fateful year - 1929, where it all came crashing down. My interest was piqued and to the history books I went to verify the outrageous claims that "the fed did do something" then.

    All along I was taught quite differently.

    Unfortunately, the historian's records speak for it self - and the events below have led me to slowly realise many things have been somewhat conveniently omitted from history books and scholarly articles.

    "Its not 1929 because, the Fed did nothing then." - I hear this once too often as people wave away concerns on a repeat of history. The skeptic in me had to find out.

    Read this section and you'd be amazed as I was about the parallels to today. Bold sections are added by me.

    Do tell me if you're sure of otherwise.

    http://www.mises.org/rothbard/agd/ch...flating_credit

    Chapter 8

    If the Federal Reserve had an inflationist attitude during the boom, it was just as ready to try to cure the depression by inflating further. It stepped in immediately to expand credit and bolster shaky financial positions. In an act unprecedented in its history, the Federal Reserve moved in during the week of the crash-the final week of October-and in that brief period added almost $300 million to the reserves of the nation's banks. During that week, the Federal Reserve doubled its holdings of government securities, adding over $150 million to reserves, and it discounted about $200 million more for member banks. Instead of going through a healthy and rapid liquidation of unsound positions, the economy was fated to be continually bolstered by governmental measures that could only prolong its diseased state. This enormous expansion was generated to prevent liquidation on the stock market and to permit the New York City banks to take over the brokers' loans that the "other," non-bank, lenders were liquidating. The great bulk of the increased reserves-all "controlled"-were pumped into New York. As a result, the weekly reporting member banks expanded their deposits during the fateful last week of October by $1.8 billion (a monetary expansion of nearly 10 percent in one week), of which $1.6 billion were increased deposits in New York City banks, and only $0.2 billion were in banks outside of New York. The Federal Reserve also promptly and sharply lowered its rediscount rate, from 6 percent at the beginning of the crash to 4 percent by mid-November. Acceptance rates were also reduced considerably.

    By mid-November, the great stock break was over, and the market, falsely stimulated by artificial credit, began to move upward again. Standard and Poor's stock price monthly averages, which had climbed from 56 in mid-1921 to 238 in September 1929-more than quadrupling-fell to 160 in November, a one-third drop in the course of two months. By the end of the year, stock prices had risen by several points. The stock market emergency over, bank reserves declined to their pre-crash levels. In two weeks-from November 13, when stock prices hit bottom, to November 27-member bank reserves declined by about $275 millions, or to almost exactly the level existing just before the crash. The decline did not come in securities, which increased in the Federal Reserve portfolio from $293 million on October 30 to $326 million a month later-a rise of $33 million. Discounts fell by about $80 million, and acceptances by another $80 million, while money in circulation embarked on its seasonal increase, rising by $70 million. Thus, from the end of October to the end of November, controlled reserves were reduced by $111 million (including miscellaneous factors not itemized here); uncontrolled reserves, which were more important, fell by $165 million.

    By the end of 1929, total reserves at $2.36 billion were only a little over $20 million below the level of October 23 or November 27 ($2.38 billion on each date), but the distribution of factors was considerably different. Thus, while total reserves were almost the same on October 23 and December 31, security holdings had increased by $375 million, more than tripling Reserve holdings of U.S. governments. Total discounts were about $165 million less, acceptances slightly larger, money in circulation higher by over $100 million, and the gold stock down by $100 million. Of the $23 million fall in reserves from October 23 to December 31, controlled reserves increased by $359 million (with government securities the overriding factor), while uncontrolled reserves fell by $381 million. It is evident, therefore, that the failure to inflate reserves over the last quarter of 1929 was no credit of the Federal Reserve, which did its best to increase reserves, but was foiled by the decline in uncontrolled factors. The total money supply, as gauged by member bank demand deposits adjusted and time deposits, increased slightly-by about $300 million-during the final quarter of 1929.

    President Hoover was proud of his experiment in cheap money, and in his speech to the business conference on December 5, he hailed the nation's good fortune in possessing the splendid Federal Reserve System, which had succeeded in saving shaky banks, had restored confidence, and had made capital more abundant by reducing interest rates. Hoover had done his part to spur the expansion by personally urging the banks to rediscount more extensively at the Federal Reserve Banks. Secretary Mellon issued one of his by now traditionally optimistic pronouncements that there was "plenty of credit available." And William Green issued a series of optimistic statements, commending the Federal Reserve's success in ending the depression. On November 22, Green said:

    All the factors which make for a quick and speedy industrial and economic recovery are present and evident. The Federal Reserve System is operating, serving as a barrier against financial demoralization. Within a few months industrial conditions will become normal, confidence and stabilization in industry and finance will be restored.

  • #2
    Jaymee - excellent piece of research. The only aspect I would contest is that in 1929 there was only M1, M2 and M3.

    Today it is the credit card aspect that creates a whole load more private credit. That was not available in 1929.

    The other aspect (which may be more prevalent today) is the home ownership percentage and the impact that has had on available credit to consumers.

    These 2 issues mean that the overspend (credit of individuals) is at a greater multiple.

    There are more private individuals exposed to stock prices, either as personal investors, or through pension plans - again something that was not so available in 1929.

    The current high energy speculation was also not so prevalent as it is today.

    In 1929, Certainly in the UK, home ownership was much lower and people did not borrow against that asset to fuel consumerism. Credit was only available to the very rich - a very few. There were no pension plans.

    Just wish the media currently would ask the right questions and investigate how the banks moved from record revenue/profits in 2007 only to go 'bust' 9 months later.

    Comment


    • #3
      (rossco @ Nov. 03 2008,15:41) Just wish the media currently would ask the right questions and investigate how the banks moved from record revenue/profits in 2007 only to go 'bust' 9 months later.
      Download the last few episodes of 60 minutes, they are available as free audio podcasts from Apple's iTune store.
      They've had some interesting segments on the crisis.
      "Snick, You Sperm Too Much" - Anon

      Comment


      • #4
        Instead of focusing on the similarities...

        I'd suggest you focus on what is different this time around~

        The world dynamics at a guess are completely different than in 1929.

        There are numerous large economies and many new places to find capital.

        The losses, some 700USD billion and counting have been 90-95% replaced by fresh injection of capital. (The oil money has come home to roost).

        Sure many bankruptcies have and will continue to occur.... this is part of any business cycle.

        But as soon as any of the big firms topple.... there is seemingly an eager buyer waiting in the wings.

        The amount of purchase power sitting in Asia that was not there 80 years ago is staggering!

        Don't be spooked by the stories....

        There is opportunity always and whenever the crowds are acting irrationally they are sure to make big mistakes and the careful predator waits patiently in this environment ready to pounce.

        The fun thing to watch in these times is all the share brokers and economist sitting back trying to work the thing out ~ their models and theories fall apart and they not sure what to do - like rabbits in the spotlight!!

        What i don't get is all the worriers and pessimists

        If you think things will get worse, just keep shorting the indexes and you'll make money if you are right.

        Personally i am happy to go long or short any time as the window opens - I've been doing so since last November and will continue to do so.


        Azza


        A worthy trip report

        Comment


        • #5
          Whilst I have great faith in the USA and Asia to recover from the crisis in the next couple of years the situation in Europe and the UK gives me great concern that we will turn a recession into a depression.

          Those McCain supports who say that Obama is a closet socialist really dont understand the meaning of socialism. In Europe we face a period of creeping socialism with banks being nationalised and increasing interference in the free market.

          The UK, French and German governments are going overboard in blaming the crisis on the USA whilst failing to accept that their banks are the most leveraged in the world being five times more exposed to emerging markets than US banks. They alone hold $1.6 trillion in hard currency loans to Eastern Euiropean countries where the whole collective time bomb is starting to detonate. The result will be huge downward pressure on the Euro and the GBP.

          Next year, following the European elections the key Commission posts in Brussels for single market, competition and trade are likely to go to anti free marketeers. This backlash against the free market will bring in a deluge of new laws that will have a major impact on the city of London which despite its faults remains the largest wealth generator in Europe. In the real economy any country outside the EU which is deemed to be trading unfairly will face trading restrictions as politicians claim that they are stealing our jobs - remember this happened in the 1930s.

          The USA and BRIC countries will look at what is going on in an increasingly anti competitive Europe and think that it is Christmas as they increase their trade with the rest of the world.

          As a shareholder in Lloyds TSB I am appalled at the UK Government interference in the running of what is a solid bank with little exposure to sub prime loans. The bank is basically being forced into a takeover of HBOS for political reasons. I can only applaud the management at HSBC, Standard Chartered and Barclays who have rejected Government overtures to help it bale out the weaker banks.

          This increasing Government interference will hopefully be rejected by the Lloyds TSB shareholders. Todays news that the UK Government will be pumping another £3 billion into the nationalised Northern Rock bank shows that its current policy is one of throwing good money after bad.

          If the UK Government gets its way then they will increasingly believe that they are better at running the economy than the business class which many of them despise. Once they have bailed out the banks they will start using taxpayers money to rescue firms who face collapse due to the recession.

          The one bit of good news is that Elections are due to be held in the UK and Germany within the next 18 months. I hope that some of our useless politicians at last wake up and give the voter a better option than what we are getting at the moment.

          Comment


          • #6
            From an economist's point of view the main difference between 1929 and now is the following:

            1929: after the first crash, the government's (FED) actions reduced market liquidity even more, and the reduction of liquidity spread to the whole world over months

            2008: after the crash, all governments worldwide inject cash massively into the system.


            This fact alone is a fundamental difference.

            Comment


            • #7
              each one you bring up very Ligitiment points. Good going peeps. Well done. I can extract valuable information from everyones posts here.

              I like what manarak posted.
              My Femboys can Beat up your Ladyboys.  

              Comment


              • #8
                greed , mass corruption, high and expansive financial fraud(given nice sounding trading terms),backed up by extremely bad management ..........these are the underlying and also overwelming factors in this mess. this is the truth,there is no need for complicated analysis of whats happened. the financial structures which we have lived with are no longer capable of being managed and monitored,they are basically now so open so as to allow individuals and small groups to corrupt and bring down whole systems and institutions.if any of you think that less legislation is whats needed,then be prepared for more guys to just fuck up their banks and businesses and walk away with $100 million.......hes at the tip of the iceberg and we all know how much more ice is underwater ,and one more thing im no great fan of gordon brown........but hes gone out there and trying some stuff going to the middle east, hes vastly more clued up than most, wheres the fuck bush.?.........just think we may well soon have some young guy who looks like hes just rolled out of college with some nice diplomas and a nice tan taking charge of the american monster anybody got any ideas where hes gonna draw hes ideas and plans from? from his vast array of experience did i hear you say eh? god help us all.
                robbo

                Comment


                • #9
                  (manarak @ Nov. 04 2008,02:09) From an economist's point of view the main difference between 1929 and now is the following:

                  1929: after the first crash, the government's (FED) actions reduced market liquidity even more, and the reduction of liquidity spread to the whole world over months

                  This fact alone is a fundamental difference.
                  That is the huge myth I wanted to point out. Hence the thread title: Re read history to save your money.

                  Reduction in liquidity occured at the 1931 point 2 years later. But the market malaise continued subsequently after the 1929 crash despite intervention.

                  1929 Oct 24 - huge market crash
                  1929 End October - Unprecedented bailout injections
                  1929 Huge 30-40% rally that lasted for one month
                  1929 Nov 15th - 2 percent rate cut

                  2 years later, the stock market is 90% lower.

                  A staggering 90% drop occured inbetween 1929-1931.

                  Then of course you have the smith tawley act, price controls, wage controls et al along the way. And the subsequent rate increases 2 years later.

                  But the damage was done.

                  To quote Friedman and Schwartz on the 5 mistakes of the Fed (I don't think full explains the problems in totality):

                  1. One was an interest rate increase in 1928-1929 that precipitated the crash of the stock market bubble in October 1929. (quite similar to rate increases in 2006-2007 due to inflation fears)

                  2. The second occured two years later, in the fall of 1931, via a rise in interest rates to defend the dollar's peg to gold. The effect of the first mistake was to cause a recession, but the second effectively reduced the money supply by 1/4 to 1/3 (see table below), and was the proximate cause of the deflation of the 1930's.

                  3. The third Fed mistake was in 1932, by failing to loosen monetary policy in the face of the depression.

                  4. The fourth mistake was failing to loan money to failing, illiquid banks, which further decreased the money available to consumers, who then horded any cash they possessed.

                  5. The fifth mistake was another rise in interest rates in 1937-38.
                  HOWEVER to reiterate, it would be grevious to ignore what transpired inbetween Oct 24 1929 (date of crash) to 1931.

                  In an act unprecedented in its history, the Federal Reserve moved in during the week of the crash-the final week of October-and in that brief period added almost $300 million to the reserves of the nation's banks. During that week, the Federal Reserve doubled its holdings of government securities, adding over $150 million to reserves, and it discounted about $200 million more for member banks.
                  The Federal Reserve also promptly and sharply lowered its rediscount rate, from 6 percent at the beginning of the crash to 4 percent by mid-November.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    (rossco @ Nov. 03 2008,15:41) Jaymee - excellent piece of research. The only aspect I would contest is that in 1929 there was only M1, M2 and M3.

                    Today it is the credit card aspect that creates a whole load more private credit. That was not available in 1929.

                    The other aspect (which may be more prevalent today) is the home ownership percentage and the impact that has had on available credit to consumers.

                    These 2 issues mean that the overspend (credit of individuals) is at a greater multiple.

                    There are more private individuals exposed to stock prices, either as personal investors, or through pension plans - again something that was not so available in 1929.

                    The current high energy speculation was also not so prevalent as it is today.

                    In 1929, Certainly in the UK, home ownership was much lower and people did not borrow against that asset to fuel consumerism. Credit was only available to the very rich - a very few. There were no pension plans.

                    Just wish the media currently would ask the right questions and investigate how the banks moved from record revenue/profits in 2007 only to go 'bust' 9 months later.
                    Yes. Gold was pegged to USD hence the absence of widespread credit.

                    Having a bigger balloon of credit blown up may either mean:

                    1. Big explosion when it bursts
                    2. Gradual deflation but deleveraging will wipe out alot of firms with high short term gearing.

                    My take is that the cry out to tap into the bailout funds is a signed 'death' confession from a multitude of listed firms in US - when the funds run out the market will tank if they cannot raise a second bailout sum.

                    Ex-US nations with natural resources and productive capacity will undergo a cyclical downturn (don't fret Aussies) but even the good stocks ahead will undergo severe corrections.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      My Head Hurts
                      I never did well in Econ 101 but...........
                      If Everyone is in a Panic and is Selling, That is when I start Buying  

                      Flip this in the Bull Market.

                      Warning is:
                      It Takes huge Balls and lots of antiacid tablets to do
                      You Live and You Learn -- Hopefully!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        There are a lot of parallels to 1929 and a lot of differences.
                        Two huge differences are in 1929 the world was engaged in an escalating tariff war and the global trade of the pre-WW1 era had fallen apart; also the weather sucked (seriously the drought in the American mid-west was a major factor in loan defaults).

                        We won't know all the details of this crash until its over (and we probably will never know everything), but hopefully when the current de-leveraging is over and the recession passes we can get back to 'normal' in a year. The fear is that de-leveraging is NOT over, and that recession will be long and consumer spending will remain weak. The HUGE Fear is that we enter a deflationary cycle, which are very hard to break and will prolong any significant recovery (aka 'The Japan Trap').

                        Me, I'm an optimist I think things will be okay by 2010 and then we can get back to worrying about the world ending in 2012
                        "Snick, You Sperm Too Much" - Anon

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Check out Thomas Wood's 'Meltdown' for a more detailed Misesian analysis of the current economic disaster.

                          Who'da thunk these forums would hold discussions on Austrian Economics. Thank God for the interwebs

                          Comment



                          Working...
                          X