Daily Adams

Banking & Finance

Illogic in Support of the Ex-Im Bank

From  a letter to Forbes:

So I’ve a question: why does Ex-Im need government reauthorization?  If it receives no money from taxpayers – indeed, if it turns such a profit that it “gives them money” – surely private investors will eagerly seize the opportunity to serve the profitable markets that Ex-Im has abandoned.

Mr. Brinkley answers that markets served by Ex-Im are too risky for private banks.  But this answer makes no sense if Mr. Brinkley is correct in asserting that Ex-Im receives no money from taxpayers.  Loan portfolios that are so risky that they require taxpayer backing are by their nature loan portfolios that over time are not profitable; they are loan portfolios that do not repay lenders adequate returns on their loans.  The very need for taxpayer backing of such loans implies that taxpayers are destined to cover losses on, rather than to reap profits from, these loans.

In short, Mr. Brinkley’s case for reauthorizing Ex-Im is a hopelessly illogical muddle, for it asserts that Ex-Im is simultaneously profitable and unprofitable.  A government agency that must be defended by such twisted thinking is surely one that ought to be shuttered permanently.

Via It’s Always In the Black (Except When It’s In the Red) @ Cafe Hayek.

If the GOP Congressional Majority Can’t Kill the Ex-Im Bank, It Can’t Do Anything Worth Doing

With control of both houses of Congress, the GOP has no excuse whatever on the question of killing the corporatist Export-Import Bank. The House failed to kill the bank in 2014, keeping a big-corporation slush fund (‘long-term loan guarantees’) alive in ’15. So here we are, with the GOP possessing majorities in both federal legislative…

Reality Creeps up on Chinese State-Capitalism

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard writes about the Chinese government’s (publicly) dismissive reply to an International Monetary Fund warning about Chinese debt-fueled over-investment. A single sentence serves as an executive summary: All those extrapolation charts of a Chinese-led planet that enthralled us all in the BRICS hysteria of 2008 will look very silly indeed, unless China heeds the…

GDP Data in State-Capitalist China: Often Bogus, Often a Distraction from Underlying, Systemic Weakness

William Pesek has it right about state-capitalist, investment over-intensive China. First, Chinese GDP and other metrics are simply dodgy: Even in the best of times, China’s data can be about as accurate as tossing a dart at a chart on the wall. It’s a structurally imbalanced economy distorted by top-down policies and considerable “gray activities”…

How Government Discourages Savings

One often hears that Americans don’t save enough, but why is that? For a few, it’s probably the consequence of spending too much, conspicuously, to keep up appearances. For most people, though, that’s not true: the percentage of lavish, status-conscious spenders is a small part of most communities. One of the reasons Americans don’t save…