by The stock market hasn’t been moneyed; well, US equities, anyway. What do I mean by “moneyed?” Common perceptions (myth) link the Federal Reserve’s so-called money printing (bank reserves) with share prices. Everyone still thinks there’s a direct monetary injection in this case by the central monetary agency which causes stocks to rise for no good reason. While we don’t have to argue the Fed’s bank reserves here, the truth of the matter is stocks have been severed from any part of the actual and effective monetary system since 1929. First, the collapse in share prices started the severing before government regulation finished the job generations ago. This is why, for example, the Crash of ’87 is remembered exclusively in Wall Street legend rather than the first
Topics:
Jeffrey P. Snider considers the following as important: 5.) Alhambra Investments, bonds, currencies, Deflation, economy, eurodollar system, Featured, Federal Reserve/Monetary Policy, global dollar shortage, Great Depression, Hong Kong, Markets, newsletter
This could be interesting, too:
Nachrichten Ticker - www.finanzen.ch writes Krypto-Ausblick 2025: Stehen Bitcoin, Ethereum & Co. vor einem Boom oder Einbruch?
Connor O'Keeffe writes The Establishment’s “Principles” Are Fake
Per Bylund writes Bitcoiners’ Guide to Austrian Economics
Ron Paul writes What Are We Doing in Syria?
The stock market hasn’t been moneyed; well, US equities, anyway. What do I mean by “moneyed?” Common perceptions (myth) link the Federal Reserve’s so-called money printing (bank reserves) with share prices. Everyone still thinks there’s a direct monetary injection in this case by the central monetary agency which causes stocks to rise for no good reason.
While we don’t have to argue the Fed’s bank reserves here, the truth of the matter is stocks have been severed from any part of the actual and effective monetary system since 1929.
First, the collapse in share prices started the severing before government regulation finished the job generations ago.
This is why, for example, the Crash of ’87 is remembered exclusively in Wall Street legend rather than the first modern restart of depression economics (small “e”). Similarly, the dot-com crash led to nothing more than a piddling recession. Behind both of those had been a ghastly yet growing eurodollar system undeterred by equity prices because there was no direct assembly.
Obviously, very different story starting 2007. Eurodollar falls apart, stocks follow, depression the result because of money not shares.
The Great Depression, on the other hand, had unfortunately and directly brought these two things in close combination. The primary reason why Wall Street’s stumble led to the massive deflationary money of the early thirties was something called call money, or alternatively classified as street loans.
Early 20th century bank innovation had spread interbank networks, building upon the more primitive correspondent system developed in the 19th century. Basically, smaller banks held deposit accounts with larger banks (who had correspondent accounts with even larger firms in the biggest cities, particularly NYC) in order to process ledger payments (checks and wires) across greater distances at far better speeds customers of a truly nationalized economy demanded.
But what to do with that correspondent balance while just sitting there waiting for a depositor payment to request some of it? Throughout the twenties, enterprising central reserve city banks, particularly those in NYC, began to offer “safe” returns on correspondent balances to those banks in the tiers below them (reserve city banks).
|
Essentially a repo, or a basic collateralized lending arrangement, a reserve city bank (not likely a country bank) would “invest” some of its correspondent balance in street loans offering a juicy return. The borrower of this call money (because it was a correspondent balance, the loan needed to be available at a moment’s notice, on call, therefore highly liquid) would use the proceeds to buy, yep, stocks. Those stocks were then posted as collateral for the street loan. From the perspective of the respondent reserve city bank, it was as risk-free as risk-free could ever seem; brokered by the top NYC firms, secured by an asset whose price only ever goes up. Until it didn’t. Thus, when Black Tuesday struck, it wasn’t just a portfolio issue for shareholders planning for retirement. It was immediately a monetary matter for the whole damn system, as losses on shares meant the death spiral in correspondent balances and relationships; everyone tried to get their “money” out at the same time, leading to several years of deflationary chaos since there simply wasn’t enough liquidity (and, as Milton Friedman noted, the Fed stood idly by wondering what all the fuss was). Street loans, however, weren’t strictly a domestic issue. How did the Crash of ’29 become the spark which lit the global Great Depression? This: |
 . |
| The massive rise in call money in NYC secured by that ancient equity bubble was financed by more overseas “reserves” than it ever was domestic correspondents. In fact, the blow-off part of the bubble, 1927 to October 1929, was from foreign correspondent reserves flooding the US and, like reserve city correspondents, offered the “safe” yet fat returns in street loans.Destroyed by Wall Street’s debacle, deflationary money spread worldwide.
What follows is not to claim the current world’s monetary system is as it was in its most fragile state in late October 1929. As I started out, stocks have been neatly parted from money in the US$ sense. At least, domestic stocks. How about the other side of the eurodollar world, though? In places like, say, Hong Kong where global trade meets global finance in bulk with the eurodollar system involved in every possible angle in between them, might there still be a connection between correspondent relationships (especially those involving China on one side, both merchandise transactions as well as financial flows) and the perceived safe haven of the city’s various financial outlets? It seems as if there just might be. The Hang Seng stock index, for example, correlates a little too closely (though not exactly) with the repeated episodes of eurodollar shortages. Starting with the current one: |
 . |
| This particular relationship between UST curve and the Hong Kong index is murkier the wider the historical lookback, if only because the yield curve has itself flattened so much and at different intensities over the last decade and a half since Euro$ #1 – the original “somehow” Global Financial Crisis.Dates still match overall, though, which we can better observe using instead one of our favorite dollar shortage indications: 30-year swap spreads. The swap spread, and difficulties revealed by it, is a toxic mixture of balance sheet constraint and collateral shortage all piled neatly into a single market spread (set against nominal UST yields, too).
Never exact, yet there’s more than a passing relationship here. |
 . |
| And given how it repeats every time, up to now five times, there’s no chance this is some random fluctuation.
When you examine each instance individually, the relationship becomes even more compelling: |
 . |
 . |
|
 . |
|
| But what is “it” that connects eurodollar squeezes, these all-too-regular dollar shortage instances, with specifically Hong Kong equity markets?
It could be nothing more than sentiment; HK therefore China when highly susceptible to the same thing driving eurodollar (and collateral) scarcity. Repetition, though. In my view, and you are, as always, free to make your own determination, there’s correspondent behavior behind all this (why the detailed opening). And if that is the case, it would mean something like contagion. Again, I’m not saying 1929-style global contagion, or even 2007, rather what seems to be a financial/money mechanism whereby one problem gets passed into another systemic piece which only makes the problem worse for everyone participating in either. |
 . |
| Since eurodollar, and eurodollar as global reserve, it’s a problem for everyone just starting to and from China. |
 . |
 . |
|
| So, with Hong Kong share prices, at least the Hang Seng, careening down toward values last seen in 2016, might this be telling us something about the true and more seriously negative potential of Euro$ #5?
With eurodollar futures inversion nearing the whites, there’s obviously something very much amiss right now; certainly several things. Hong Kong connections wouldn’t explain everything, they might, however, represent deeper (kind of ancient) fault lines due from lingering systemic fragility. With an unhealthy dose of imperial Xi Jinping arrogance. Further (not necessarily extreme) deflationary money potential. As if we didn’t already know it; yet another sizable and sustained scramble for collateral just this morning. From near the end of the Asian trading session. |
 . |
You Might Also Like
Looking Back At Chaotic March Through TIC
2022-05-20
March ended up being a pretty wild ride. Lost amidst the furor over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the month began with a couple clear “collateral days. T-bill rates along with repo fails echoed that same shortfall before the yield curve then joined the eurodollar futures curve being inverted.
Eurobonds Behind Euro$ #5’s Collateral Case
2022-05-12
The bond market is allegedly populated by the “smart” set, whereas those trading equities derided as the “dumb” money (not without some truth). I often wonder if it’s either/or. The fixed income system just went through this scarcely three years ago, yet all signs and evidence point to another repeat.
China, Japan, And The Relative Pre-March Euro$ Calm In February
2022-04-22
The month of February 2022, the calm before the latest storm. Russians went into Ukraine toward the month’s end, collateral shortage became scarcity, maybe a run right at February’s final day, and then serious escalations all throughout March – right down to pure US Treasury yield curve inversion.Given that setup, it was unsurprising to find Treasury’s February TIC data mostly unremarkable.
It Wouldn’t Be TIC Without So Much Other
2022-03-23
With the Fed (sadly) taking center stage last week, and market rejections of its rate hikes at the forefront, lost in the drama was January 2022 TIC. Understandable, given all its misunderstood numbers are two months behind at their release. There were some interesting developments regardless, and a couple of longer run parts that deserve some attention.
The Fed Inadvertently Adds To Our Ironclad Collateral Case Which Does Seem To Have Already Included A ‘Collateral Day’ (or days)
2022-03-21
The Federal Reserve didn’t just raise the range for its federal funds target by 25 bps, upper and lower bounds, it also added the same to its twin policy tools which the “central bank” says are crucial to maintaining order in money markets thereby keeping federal funds inside the band where it is supposed to be. The FOMC voted to increase IOER from 15 bps to 40 bps, and the RRP from 5 bps to 30 bps.
China’s Petroyuan, Uncle Sam’s Checkbook, The Fed’s Bank Reserves: Who Really Sits On King Dollar’s Throne? (trick question)
2022-01-14
A full part of the inflation hysteria, the first one, was the dollar’s looming crash. The currency was, too many claimed, on the verge of collapse by late 2017, heading downward and besieged on multiple fronts by economics and politics alike.
As The Fed Tapers: What If More Rapid (published) Wage Increases Are Actually Evidence of *Deflationary* Conditions?
2022-01-05
Since the Federal Reserve is not in the money business, their recent hawkish shift toward an increasingly anti-inflationary stance is a twisted and convoluted case of subjective interpretation.
Tags: Bonds,currencies,Deflation,economy,eurodollar system,Featured,Federal Reserve/Monetary Policy,global dollar shortage,Great Depression,Hong Kong,Markets,newsletter