As the Congress was debating how much power and how many hundreds of billions to the US Treasury, I was pondering who would be in charge of all that come January 20th.
What happened to oil markets on Monday?
Here’s how it was reported, for example, in the Wall Street Journal:
Reaction to the Wall Street bailout and frenzied last-minute trading in the oil market sent crude prices soaring by more than $16 a barrel, the biggest one-day jump ever.
The late-day spike, which shoved oil up 16% to $120.92 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, offered an illustration of Wall Street’s hard-to-predict moves amid broad market turmoil.
And here’s what really happened.
Housing Prices: How Far to Go until Bottom?
I’ll just take the market’s view here; using the futures prices from the CME (via ino.com), prices will fall about another 16% from June (or 17% in log terms):
“The government’s bailout efforts” on MPR
This morning, I had the pleasure of discussing this issue with GMU’s Russell Robert on Minnesota Public Radio’s Midmorning show. The link is here.
Brad DeLong on Bernanke and Paulson
Brad DeLong had some insightful and amusing observations on the priorities of Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. I can’t resist reproducing Brad’s comments with some annotations of my own.
Paulson bailout
Let me begin with the point on which I am in complete agreement with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke– it is hard to overstate just how scary this week’s developments in financial markets could be.
The housing meltdown: Why did it happen in the US?
From a timely BIS working paper by Lucy Ellis released on Thursday:
Mortgage lending standards eased in many countries in recent years, but the limited available cross-country evidence does suggest that the process went further in the United States. Standards are difficult to measure because different aspects need not all move together (Gorton 2008), but the observed increase in early payment defaults in the United States (but not elsewhere) provides direct evidence that it occurred (Kiff and Mills 2007); Gerardi, Lehnert, Sherlund and Willen (2008) provide additional detail on the easing in lending standards.
Two developments seem to have spurred the easing in US standards. First, a range of legislative and policy changes had been made to encourage the development of a non-conforming (Alt-A and subprime) lending sector, lying outside the model defined by the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). Part of the motivation for this was a desire to ensure that home ownership was accessible to households who had historically been underserved by mortgage lenders (Gramlich 2007). In addition, the administration had wanted to reduce the GSEs’ domination of the mortgage market. Following problems with accounting and governance at both institutions, the GSEs’ capacity to expand lending was capped by new regulatory limits on their activities (Kiff and Mills 2007, Blundell-Wignall and Atkinson 2008). [emphasis added — mdc]
Some Observations on the Ongoing Crisis: Causes and Opportunity Cost Again
There’s a lot of commentary — more comprehensive and up to date than I can provide — on the crisis and the attempts to resolve the logjam in the financial markets.[0], [1] But I stilll have a couple of thoughts about the causes, and the implications, of the process that has resulted in so much turmoil this week.
Implications of Repricing of Dollar Denominated Assets
In the wake of global financial events, a couple of articles have caught my attention in terms of implications for the dollar. First was this Reuters account of a People’s Daily editorial, suggesting “diversification”. But it’s hard to discern the underlying message given the low signal to noise ratio in official publications. Today’s article in the IHT is a little more informative, not just about what’s going on in China but in Asia (where a lot of that “saving glut” was alleged to come from):
Scott Irwin takes down Michael Masters
Econbrowser is pleased to host another contribution from Scott Irwin, who holds the Laurence J. Norton Chair of Agricultural Marketing at the University of Illinois. Today Scott offers a critique of a recent report by Michael Masters on the role of commodity speculation.