Posts Tagged ‘Great Depression’

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke Likely to Keep His Job

Wednesday, September 2nd, 2009

Federal Reserve chairman and Great Depression scholar Ben Bernanke will stay in his job for another four years if President Barack Obama gets his way.  There likely will be some contentious moments during the reconfirmation hearings as Senators grill him about bailing out Wall Street institutions deemed too big to fail.  He is expected to stay on.bernanke__150184gm-a

Former Fed governor Randall Kroszner, who resigned his post to return to the University of Chicago, believes that the president has made the right choice and that Bernanke’s “amazing and steady” leadership rescued the nation from a second Great Depression.  Mark Calabria, a policy scholar at the libertarian Cato Institute, disagrees and opines that Bernanke’s renomination “sends the worst possible message”.  Still, most experts think that retaining Bernanke is a smart move, especially now that the economy and financial markets are stabilizing.  “Love him or hate him, there’s strength in continuity,” says money manager Douglas Nardi of Legg Mason Investment Counsel.  “Things are going pretty well, and you don’t want to rock the boat.”

Bernanke faces some rough months ahead.  He will have to start pulling money out of the system that he flooded with cash last fall.  This is a judgment call full of political peril, because it could mean slowing economic growth to control inflation – even if unemployment is still hovering around the 10 percent mark.  In Kroszner’s opinion, Bernanke is significantly farther along in this process than the general public realizes.  The Fed provided approximately $1.5 trillion in short-term loans as of the end of last year, which helped keep swaps, commercial paper and other institutional markets from shutting down completely.

Hooray for Hollywood

Friday, June 19th, 2009

Hollywood’s Blockbuster Year

“Hooray for Hollywood”, said the 1937 lyric by Johnny Mercer, sung during the depths of the Great Depression.  It appears the one industry that’s recession proof has done it again.  While the world’s economy has gone into free fall, Hollywood is in a state of euphoria right now, buoyed by a box-office surge that has stumped even the experts.  Suddenly, everyone is going to the movies, with ticket sales spiking 17.5 percent, to $1.7 billion, according to Media by Numbers, a box-office tracking company.hollywood-sign-address1

“Star Trek,” director JJ Abrams’ take on sci-fi’s most enduring franchise, is the biggest hit this year with a total gross of $223 million (it remained in the Top 5 with $8.4 million last week).  Medium-budget films also performed well this year with “Taken”, starring Liam Neeson, bringing in more than $80 million, and “Gran Torino”, starring the 79-year-old Clint Eastwood, topping $130 million.  The appropriately titled “Up” may give Hollywood even more wind in its sails this summer.  The latest film from Pixar (a division of Apple, and easily Hollywood’s most consistent studio) brought in $44.2 million in its second week, with a 10-day take of $137.3 million.  An interesting counterpoint to this is that movie merchandising sales are down.  Thinkway Toys, whose range of products related to Pixar’s 2006 film “Cars” helped the film to a merchandise sales record of $5 billion, is not creating a single toy based on the new movie.  Disney stores will offer only limited merchandise to promote “Up.”

The conventional wisdom would say that all this is obvious since people seek out escapism during a recession, particularly the type that’s priced right.  However, Hollywood’s splendid performance is actually an anomaly and all the more remarkable when we consider history.  Contrary to popular mythology, the film industry was not “Depression-Proof” in the 1930s but suffered a steep decline: attendance soared after the 1927 introduction of “talkies” (Al Jolson’s “The Jazz Singer” was the first sound film).  But weekly viewership peaked at 90 million tickets in 1930, then declined by more than a third by 1933.  Part of the problem was sound: to equip their theaters and sound stages, the studios tripled their debts during the mid- and late-’20s to $410 million.  By 1933, attendance and revenues had fallen by forty percent.  To hold on, the studios cut salaries and costs, and closed a full third of the nation’s theaters.

Dr. Geithner’s Harsh Medicine

Tuesday, April 21st, 2009

The Obama administration has proposed the most comprehensive overhaul of the nation’s financial industry since the Great Depression.  The measures, as outlined by Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, geithnerwill require regulation of hedge funds for the first time and give government wide-ranging powers to seize and take apart companies that are perceived as threats to the overall economy.  The proposals are strong medicine indeed.

The measures, which require Congressional approval, are structured to entice private buyers by offering the similar supercharged leverage that prevailed during the financial boom-but one where oversight is de rigueur.   While the private sector is cutting back on its debt, the government believes that providing inexpensive financing is the best way to free up the market for illiquid debt.

The proposals give the Federal Reserve the authority to oversee the nation’s economy for signs of “systemic risk”.  The legislation will include significantly stronger requirements regarding the cash reserves and assets that institutions must have on hand to endure economic downturns.  Hedge funds, private-equity firms, derivatives and other private investment funds will be required to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission and will be subject to strict regulation.  Additionally, the government will establish a central clearinghouse to closely monitor trades in these markets.  Lastly, the administration will develop stricter requirements for money market funds so withdrawals don’t threaten the broader financial system.

Harsh medicine indeed, but the old system failed us all.  Secretary Geithner sees his proposals as a price worth paying to clean out banks’ balance sheets.  If the plan fails, it will be because banks were not willing to risk of taking a write-down and depleting precious capital.