Tuesday, November 24th, 2009

Saving Banks Accomplishes Nothing

Mar 11th, 2009 | By Andrew Gordon | Category: Financial News

How many times have you heard, “the economy won’t turn around until banks start lending?” It’s so damn obvious…_

Banks got us into this mess, so it’s banks that will have to get us out.

From the President on down, nobody is disputing such a self-evident premise.

And that includes Wall Street. Here’s a typical statement – from RDQ Economics LLC in NY, “They [the Obama administration] should be focused on stabilization” of financial firms “and stimulus — and that should not only be ‘Job 1,’ that should be the only job right now.”

Of course, the financial crisis has killed Wall Street. So the statement might seem a little self-serving, except for the fact – once again – that everybody agrees with it. I don’t buy it.

Maybe banks were the problem a lifetime ago – when Bear Stearns was taken over and Lehman went under.  When nobody knew which were the good banks and which were the bad banks and interest rates shot up as a result.

But it just takes one stupid question to realize we’re so past that now…

Who will the banks lend to?

To you and me? Wait a minute. We’re saving more. From a negative savings rate, we’re now saving about five percent of what we earn.

It’s about time. We couldn’t go on forever spending more than we make. It was bankrupting us.

Do you really want to buy a new car? Richard Wagoner, CEO of GM, wants you to. So does Ben Bernanke. And, let me go out on a limb and submit that President Obama also wants you to.

But what’s good for the economy isn’t necessarily good for you and me.

But surely companies need more loans from banks? If companies weren’t running so low on cash, why are so many of them cutting their dividends (37 so far this year)?

Aren’t the auto companies strapped for cash? Aren’t many banks scraping the bottom of the cash barrel? Couldn’t they use loans from other banks?

Yes, yes, and yes, BUT…

Fewer sales mean a smaller cash flow. When you’re earning less cash, the last thing you want to do is get a loan and go deeper into debt. Ask any responsible CEO: Higher interest payments and lower earnings aren’t a good combination.

Then there are the irresponsible CEOs, who have made a ton of bad decisions and are now forced to take out loans. Just ask Vikram Pandit of Citigroup (NYSE:C) and Bob Nardelli of Chrysler how it feels to put their companies into deeper debt?

No self-respecting bank would give these companies a loan. They’re getting them from the government.

Responsible companies – especially those in cyclical industries – are paring down debt right now, not increasing it.

In other words, we’re way past the point where banks are holding back the economy. In fact, there are very good reasons why the government shouldn’t spend hundreds of billions of dollars to a trillion dollars more to save banks…

  • Throwing good money after bad. The so-called stress test isn’t nearly tough enough. Many of the banks getting government money won’t survive.
  • The adrenaline shot is diluted. When banks were leveraged 30 and 40 to one, these banks might have been able to kick start a lagging economy. Not anymore.
  • Inflated pay scale. A reality check is long overdue. Without the lucrative derivative market and with lower leverage, banks can’t afford to pay their 20-something employees millions of dollars anymore.
  • Where’s the accountability? On a scale of 1 to 10, remorse gets 0 and a sense of entitlement gets 11. Dozens of banks were engaged in reckless behavior. They bullied Freddie and Fannie. They gave out billions of dumb loans. They infected other banks all over the world. Has any banker said, “I’m sorry?” Not that I know of.

We shouldn’t be asking our banks to go back to the bad ol’ days of dumb lending and dumber borrowing. It’s not fair to lenders or borrowers.

But even if banks wanted to return to their loosy-goosy lending ways (which they don’t), they wouldn’t find enough pent-up demand for credit to lift the economy out of its current doldrums.

Banks are a problem. But they aren’t the answer. Their festering issues are hurting the market because Wall Street thinks that banks are more important than they are.

It’s the ultimate lose-lose situation…

Save the banks and the economy still drops like a rock.

Don’t save the banks and the markets drop like a rock.

I’m bearish. And you should be too. There’s no easy way out of this dilemma.

Source: Saving Banks Accomplishes Nothing


AdvertisementWall Street Lies EXPOSED!

They've led you to believe that investors who want outsized gains must take on ridiculous risks.

Click here to learn how a Small One-Time Investment Could Grow Until It's Larger Than All of Your Other Investments Combined.



Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

By Andrew Gordon

Related Articles



About the Author

Andrew GordonAndrew is currently the Editor-in-Chief of two monthly investment research services INCOME and The Wealth Advantage. He has also become a leading expert in utilizing Exchange Traded Funds to profit from rising and falling market sectors.

See All Posts by This Author



Investor's Daily Edge is a free investment e-letter delivered every day before the market opens. In each issue you'll receive clear recommendations and practical strategies for protecting your portfolio and multiplying your money, whether the market is rising or falling.

See All Posts from This Publication

Leave Comment