Magical Thinking
September 1, 2016·4 comments·monetary policy
Central banks have spent years repeating the same incantations, tweaking their formulas, insisting that the right words spoken at the right time will control inflation and growth. The formulas promise control over invisible economic forces. Yet the banana plants keep dying anyway, and nobody asks whether the spells ever worked at all, only whether they were cast loudly enough.
• The priest-kings admit the game is theater. A Fed official explains that interest rate decisions are just negotiated trade-offs: "hike today and delay later" or vice versa. There's no underlying logic, just consensus-building through political compromise disguised as monetary science.
• The spells worked until they didn't. The Gaussian Copula promised mathematical certainty that mortgage securities were safe. Interest rate formulas promised control of inflation. Both delivered stability for years, then collapsed because they never addressed the actual underlying forces.
• When the spell breaks, the response is always the same. The priest-kings don't abandon spell-casting. They cast harder, rewrite the incantations, change the secret words from "inflation" to "nominal GDP growth" and try again. They will never acknowledge that spells don't work.
• The alternative is worse, so we all stay quiet. Societies accept magical thinking because the alternative is admitting we can't control anything. The moment people lose faith in incumbent spells, populist alt-priests arrive with different magic. And history shows some of that magic is genuinely evil.
• The fatal flaw is that we've lost the ability to imagine solving problems without state magic. When monetary spells fail, we don't ask whether we need fewer spells. We ask for fiscal spells instead. We've surrendered the possibility that the real solution might be doing less state-directed action, not more.
DISCLOSURES
This commentary is being provided to you as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. The opinions expressed in these materials represent the personal views of the author(s). It is not investment research or a research recommendation, as it does not constitute substantive research or analysis. Any action that you take as a result of information contained in this document is ultimately your responsibility. Epsilon Theory will not accept liability for any loss or damage, including without limitation to any loss of profit, which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information. Consult your investment advisor before making any investment decisions. It must be noted, that no one can accurately predict the future of the market with certainty or guarantee future investment performance. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.
Statements in this communication are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements and other views expressed herein are as of the date of this publication. Actual future results or occurrences may differ significantly from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, and there is no guarantee that any predictions will come to pass. The views expressed herein are subject to change at any time, due to numerous market and other factors. Epsilon Theory disclaims any obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or views expressed herein. This information is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of any offer to buy any securities. This commentary has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive it. Epsilon Theory recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial advisor. The appropriateness of a particular investment or strategy will depend on an investor's individual circumstances and objectives.
Comments
At least part of the problem here is that most of society finds the comfort created by artificially deferring the inevitable is preferable to confronting reality. Most of society prefers to work less (or better still, not at all) than to use tech and innovation to boost productivity, and nobody is structurally motivated to set us on a different course. Our reliance on magic spells provides the alt-priests with a source of power, which they like, and a basis for paternalistic overlord-like behavior, which they also like. As long as this setup also suits those holding political power, it’s hard to see any catalyst for change until some fairly disastrous consequences fall upon our economies and society. Then, after some period of extreme social and economic pain, everybody will forget and it can all start over.
Amazingly enough, the U.S. can still grow its way out of the massive debt we’ve taken on. I know … hard to believe. But it’s true. The power of compounding is truly inexorable, and it’s amazing what a steady 3.5% growth rate on a huge economic base can do to make manageable even trillions of dollars in debt.
Ben just wondering if you think this is still true ….it’s hard to believe it’s been over 5 years since I first read this note
On the same line, isn’t the US national debt actually a US national asset? Paying off the national debt would actually be the destruction of money. A 3.5% growth rate would just mean the national debt could grow larger. The US isn’t going to grow its way out of massive debt, it will grows its way into more debt. If stuck at 1% or 2%, then no more debt growth? I’m not sure, I think I have Lacy Hunt’s diminishing rate of return on debt in my head.
Ben,
lpusateri brought this to our attention on the Financial Nihilism thread… I’m taking the liberty to move it up.
The original three commentators offer hope. We can grow out of this. Lacy Hunt’s commentary over the last ten years, imo, MAY, somehow be tweaked to use debt for increasing returns.
We’re using debt for all the wrong reasons.
Jim
Continue the discussion at the Epsilon Theory Forum...