John Steele Gordon on the Financial Mess: Greed, Stupidity, Delusion — and Some More Greed

John Steele Gordon, an author who specializes in financial and business history, has a helpful pedigree: both his grandfathers held seats on the New York Stock Exchange. His 2004 book An Empire of Wealth: The Epic History of American Economic Power is a remarkably vivid chronicle of every boom and bust that our economic history has absorbed.

Last week, we asked two University of Chicago finance professors, Doug Diamond and Anil Kashyap, to explain the Lehman and A.I.G. meltdowns (and more) in lay terms. Now we’ve asked Gordon to put the current mess in historical perspective and give some further insights into its origins.

Greed, Stupidity, Delusion — and Some More Greed

By John Steele Gordon

A Guest Post

Looking just at the Friday closes, it was one of those ho-hum weeks in the stock market. The Dow had ended the previous week at 11,421.99, and last Friday it closed at 11,388.44 — down 33.55 points — a measly 0.29 percent.

To be sure, in between the two closes things got a tad volatile: down 504 points on Monday, up 141 on Tuesday, down 449 on Wednesday, up 410 on Thursday, and up 368 on Friday — all on huge volume (with a record on Thursday of 10.2 billion shares). And in this remarkable week, the landscape of American capitalism changed profoundly. Great names like Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers will disappear, and government responsibility for backing up the financial system will increase considerably as the administration asks Congress for $700 billion in borrowing authority to handle the situation.

What happened? Simple: panic. Vast amounts of assets in the financial system became unsellable as no one knew what they were worth, and thus they were useless as collateral for loans. As a result, highly sophisticated bankers refused to lend to other highly sophisticated bankers overnight; Ma and Pa Mainstreet rushed to take their money out of uninsured money-market funds and put it in Treasury bills paying practically nothing, and in gold, which pays nothing at all (and indeed costs money for storage or insurance).

The world’s financial system came perilously close to seizing up — like an engine without oil. Had that happened, the consequences would have been very nasty indeed. Let us hope that the market’s bets on Thursday and Friday are a sign that the government is getting a handle on things.

But the first thing to do in a panic is … don’t panic! “If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs,” you’ll be fine.

There have been headlines that this is the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. No. It is a financial crisis.

The underlying American economy is not in bad shape. Unemployment is at 6 percent; that’s a little high by the standards of the last decade or so, but not by longer-term standards (unemployment reached 10.8 percent as recently as 1982). In 1933, it was over 25 percent (and actually far higher, with many working part time). In 1933, G.D.P. was little more than half of what it had been in 1929.

G.D.P. has grown smartly in the last five years, even in 2008. Farm mortgages were being foreclosed at the rate of 20,000 a month in 1933. The nation’s farmers have never been so prosperous as they are today. When F.D.R. was inaugurated on March 4, 1933, banks were entirely closed in 38 states and restricted in the other 10. Over 5,000 banks had already failed by then, and had taken the savings of millions with them. Today, millions of families have substantial savings, retirement funds, and equity in real estate. In 1933, exports were one-fifth of what they had been in 1929. American exports are booming today.

In 1933, we were a country of haves and have-nots; today, we are largely a country of haves and have-mores. The poverty of the sort seen in the immortal photographs of Walker Evans simply does not exist today.

How we will get out of this mess is becoming clearer, and Congress will have to act very quickly. But the members of Congress stared into the abyss along with the rest of us last week, so my guess is that even they will act responsibly for once.

But there is no doubt at all about how we got into this mess.

To be sure, there is plenty of blame to go around. Greed, as it periodically does when traders and bankers forget the lessons of the past, clouded judgments. Some very smart people talked themselves into believing in the repeal of one of the fundamental laws of economics: risk will always equal potential reward. The idea that risk can be eliminated and high yields guaranteed is as idiotic as the idea that gravity can be suspended. Remember Long-Term Capital Management? Ten years ago it figured out how to eliminate risk using highly sophisticated computer programs and rolled up annual returns averaging 40 percent — until it collapsed in a heap.

Credit ratings agencies such as Moody’s and Standard and Poor’s gave good credit ratings to securities they didn’t understand.

But at the heart of the problem is Congress and its deeply corrupt relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congress was equally at the heart of the savings and loan disaster 20 years ago and, obviously, learned nothing from it. (For a history of what led to the savings and loan collapse, see here.)

Fannie and Freddie, two of the largest publicly traded financial institutions on earth, are headquartered in Washington, D.C., where the next-largest non-governmental financial institution is probably a local credit union. Big financial companies are headquartered in New York and other cities where capitalism is practiced. That should tell you a lot about Freddie and Fannie: they were political to their fingertips.

Being “government sponsored entities,” they were able to borrow at lower interest rates than other profit-seeking companies, had less regulation, had lower capital requirements, and had an “implied” guarantee on their huge debts. This was supposed to translate into more money available for mortgages, but was used instead to roll up big profits and, not so incidentally, big bonuses for their top management — which came not from the financial world but from the political one.

Franklin Raines, Fannie C.E.O. from 1999 to 2004, had been budget director in the Clinton White House. He cooked the books at Fannie to increase his compensation (more than $50 million). Jamie Gorelick, vice C.E.O., was number two at the Clinton Justice Department before going to Fannie Mae. She made $26 million. Jim Johnson, a perennial Washington big-foot, was chairman from 1991 to 1998. He too, according to an official government report, cooked the books to increase his compensation and failed to publicly reveal how much he received.

The Wall Street Journal editorial page has been giving chapter and verse for years on why this was a disaster waiting to happen (Pulitzer Prize judges, please note). The Bush administration tried way back in 2003 to change the system. It got nowhere. Alan Greenspan, then the chairman of the Federal Reserve, frequently noted the danger of Fannie and Freddie’s weak capitalization. He was ignored. Congressman Mike Oxley, then chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, introduced a bill in 2005 to correct the situation. Lobbyists from Fannie and Freddie succeeded in gutting it to the point that Rep. Oxley pulled the bill.

Why were Fannie and Freddie so successful at maintaining the status quo? Check it out.

Senator Chris Dodd — formerly ranking member and now chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, with oversight over Freddie and Fannie — recently said on Bloomberg Television: “I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years.”

Excuse me? Just where the hell were you, Senator? Oh, right. You were standing in line at the bank in order to deposit the political contributions Fannie and Freddie were lavishing upon you. At least they got their money’s worth — until the party ended and the American people got the bill.

Members of Congress — aided and abetted by their many waterbearers in the media — wonder why their collective approval rating is about on par with colon cancer’s. The reason is simple enough: Congress is the sick man of Washington; a textbook example of the truism that institutions tend to evolve in ways that benefit their elites, at the expense of the people they were created to serve.

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

 

COMMENTS: 211

  1. Ho Chi Daddy says:

    I agree with Donna but would add that I find it rather interesting that the author points straight at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as the main culprits in this meltdown. There was lax oversight of the entire financial system, not just these two entities. There was also a deeply corrupt relationship between the federal government as a whole and the financial industry. The states wanted to put limits on the subprime mortgages banks were making and the Bush administration blocked their efforts. It’s also interesting that Mr. Gordon takes aim at precisely the same talking points the Republicans are using against Obama and the Democrats, praising the GOP actors in this disaster and attacking the DNC’s when the GOP was in complete power when the seeds of this mess were planted and cultivated. I was hoping to read an enlightening piece of scholarship and what I got was a heavily partisan op-ed. You disappoint me, Mr. Gordon.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Rodrigo says:

    Could you please explain to us how you believe the whole mess is due entirely to mismanagement at Fanny Mae and Fredie Mac? I am sure you realize that your entire column reads as a rather crass partisan smokescreen that does not do justice to what is otherwise an intelligent column. And of course it does not help your implied argument – that the democrat’s corruption is the true culprit of the problem – that today we lean Mr. McCain’s very own campaign manager turns out to have been paid handsomely (at least by the standards most of us live by) to lobby against regulation of the very institutions whose lack of regulation you blame for the disaster.

    Perhaps this is a good time to breathe deeply and remember that rageful ideological blindness is a dubious guide in apportioning blame.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. JGunn says:

    Little bit partisan, are we? Let’s get back to real fundamentals – as you said, the real economy (which can still become a victim of financial-sector-cancer). The US savings rate over the past 20 years or so has plummeted. Growth has been dependent on borrowing – by households, corporations, and the US government (e.g., war of choice in Iraq and tax breaks for rich cronies of the Bushes, if we’re indulging in partisanship). Yes, we have to stop the financial-sector cancer (here we can be even-handed – both Rubin and Paulson came from Goldman Sachs, which is now part of a brand-new government-protected commerical/investment banking giant-duopoly). But we won’t have a return to sustainable growth until the US pays down its debts and starts living within its means.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Greg says:

    “Haves” and “Have nots” are relative terms. The only reason that these terms “may” have elevated to “haves and have mores” is because of technological advances, not any form of equity between the financial classes. It’s a nice catchy idea, but misleading.

    The market has been uncertain because we’ve stopped dealing in real products and have become dependant on virtual products with inflated value, which only maintain value so long as you can convince everyone else they are worth something.

    We’re playing financial hot-potato with bad debt. Wall Street has been given an opportunity to pass it on to the American taxpayer, but even with this so called “savings” America is claimed here to have, taxpayers have on average a higher debt burden.

    The resilient America described here doesn’t exist anymore. Both the Republicans and Democrats have gutted the country. Sure unemployment is “only” 6 percent or so, but the country is making less money than they did before and has higher debt. Assuming the average American changes his/her spending habits, it will still take years for demand to rebound, so the life-preserver that Washington threw to Wall Street will keep them afloat, but it has a slow leak.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Bob Brokaw says:

    The proper comparison is not 1933, but 1929 (or perhaps earlier), when the financial panic that preceded the Depression began, although this has the feel of earlier panics, such as the 1890s. Some of these led to depressions, when credit remained unavailable throughout much of the country for several years. Unemployment, bankruptcies, and other negative indicators began to rise as early as 1926, but were still relatively low when credit collapsed in 1929. If nothing is done to restore credit–both the willingness to lend and the desire to borrow–this could still turn into an economic depression as well as a financial panic.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. AK says:

    I am tired of these partisan attacks on Democrats. Let’s get back to blaming Bush for everything.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Hunter says:

    #1 (donna) – The author’s point is that the inequality in the system today is largely a result of the rich getting amazingly, fantastically richer and the poor getting 2GB iPods.

    And I will agree with you that there are still cases of real poverty (not-enough-to-eat, nowhere-to-sleep poverty), but those cases are all the more poignant for their rarity, not their prevalence.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. Don H. Doyle says:

    Greed must be considered a constant, and even necessary, element in any capitalist society. The purpose of government is to safeguard the public interest against unregulated greed. The regulatory function of government did not just fail through stupidity; it was deliberately weakened by the persistent assault of Republican presidents beginning with Reagan. Will we forget Reagan and the Republicans’ cries to “Get Government off the backs of the people” as financeers rush to the public trough for public relief from their private failures?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0