Depends on the Definition of Credibility
by matt at 6:00 am on April 24th, 2007 in Bush Man Date, Depends on the Definition of, Economy, Hank Paulson, John SnowDuring John Snow’s tenure as Secretary of the Treasury, he proved a renewable source of material for us. In an administration where all policy is politics, and all decisions are made in the West Wing, Snow’s only job was to sell the President’s agenda to Wall Street and foreign investors.
When President Bush announced Hank Paulson’s nomination to replace Snow, he said
He’s earned a reputation for candor and integrity.
The media fell directly in line:
“I think getting Paulson is a bit of a coup for the Bush administration,” said Jeoff Hall, the chief U.S. economist for Thomson Financial. “You’ve got enough academics at the Fed right now. You need someone with a little Wall Street credibility.”
In choosing Paulson, Bush defied skeptics who predicted that late in his presidency he would be unable to attract a Wall Street heavy hitter for a position that up to now has held little power in his administration. As chief since 1999 of one of Wall Street’s wealthiest investment-banking firms, Paulson brings high-caliber financial credentials that contrast with Bush’s previous Treasury chiefs — Paul H. O’Neill, who ran Alcoa aluminum, and Snow, of the CSX railroad.
The White House was eager to find a candidate with credibility among investors.
We know why the White House wants Hank Paulson. He’s got big Street credibility on Wall Street. He can sell the president’s economic plan.
Former Goldman Sachs CEO Henry Paulson is a major-league hard-ass with serious Wall Street credibility.
[…]
His credibility with investors and sense of imperiousness will ease fears about our budget and trade deficits and the weak dollar, all of which will shore up confidence in our economy and draw billions in investment.
While Paulson has managed to keep his feet out of his mouth, a nice change from his predecessors, he hasn’t really done anything but continue futile Bush administration efforts to jaw-bone China into un-pegging their currency from the dollar. He’s made no progress, and he won’t, but he seems to love running to the business press to talk about all the talking he’s doing. His ineffectual tenure notwithstanding, he somehow has been able to keep his media-bestowed credibility intact.
If there was any justice, the end of this interview with Marketwatch would cause Paulson to be exposed to the effects of the economy he’s so eager to tout:
In a question-and-answer session, Paulson delivered an upbeat assessment of the economy, saying growth was healthy and the housing market was nearing a turnaround.
“All the signs I look at” show “the housing market is at or near the bottom,” Paulson said. The U.S. economy is “very healthy” and “robust,” he said
Where to even start?
U.S. GDP growth is slowing, and economists have been regularly revising their predictions down:
The Blue Chip Economic Indicators panel of forecasters said they expect U.S. gross domestic product to expand at a rate of 2.3 percent in 2007, the slowest growth since 2002.
But let’s be charitable and give Paulson the benefit of the doubt on whether growth slowing to (or more likely below) the rate of inflation is “very healthy” and/or “robust.” Economists get things wrong all the time, and there’s still the possibility, at least in a vacuum, that the economy will be just fine. And apparently it has become customary for the Treasury Secretary and other high-ranking officials to talk up the economy regardless of facts. Sort of a “Heckuva job, Brownie” or “Buttercheeks has our full confidence” for the dismal set.
But there is simply no excuse for Paulson’s General Fluffer moment on housing. I’m not sure what signs Paulson is relying upon, but unless a) his assistant is filtering out all the reality-based reports, b) his definition of “all” is significantly different from mine, or both, he is 100% wrong about the state of the U.S. housing market.
The number of default notices sent to California homeowners last quarter increased to its highest level in almost ten years, the result of flat appreciation, slow sales, and post teaser-rate mortgage resets, a real estate information service reported.
Large inventories have caused prices to level off or fall modestly in much of the country over the past year or so. The recent surge in defaults on subprime mortgages — loans to people with blemished credit records — has prompted lenders to tighten credit standards. That tightening is expected to put downward pressure on home prices by removing many potential buyers from the market.
American Home Mortgage Investment Corp. on Friday slashed its first-quarter and full-year earnings forecasts, blaming conditions in the secondary mortgage and mortgage-backed securities markets.
Investment bank Goldman Sachs is increasingly concerned about the health of California’s real estate market and reckons mortgage giant Countrywide Financial could be harder hit than other lenders because of its big exposure to the state.
[…]
…Goldman is worried that surging prices in the state in recent years weren’t driven by traditional factors such as strong employment and income growth. Instead, the bank reckons an increase in ARM mortgages offered to borrowers who were already stretching to buy high-priced homes fueled the boom.Now that lenders are cutting back some of these types of loans and regulators are beginning to crack down, California home prices could begin falling later this year, especially in high-price cities and towns, Goldman said.
All of this data comes from links I’ve been saving over the past few weeks. Is it possible that Paulson is following his boss’ lead and ignoring the papers? Maybe, but when Congress is already considering an absurd exercise in moral hazard via a multi-billion dollar bailout, his legislative aides should at least have mentioned it to him.
A Bush administration official, even a high-ranking cabinet member, telling lies isn’t even an automatic post here anymore; there simply aren’t enough hours in the day. But when the guy they brought in to be a credible voice starts talking out of his ass in the face of overwhelming evidence, it’s a serious problem. Considering that it was a comment from then-Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan that created a boom in the “non-traditional” mortgage markets, Paulson should be erring on the side of caution.
More on the housing mess, and our leaders’ role in it, in an upcoming post.
**Late add-on: The National Association of Home Builders doesn’t see a housing bottom either, and surprise, surprise, they see recession risks rising:
Growth Domestic Product growth still is in a slowdown phase and recession risks have risen to some degree. The labor market still is performing well but some weakening is likely later in the year. A record volume of vacant (unoccupied) housing units is weighing heavily on both single-family and multifamily housing markets, and historical norms suggest an excess of about 1.3 million vacant units on the market. Deterioration of the supply-demand balance in housing markets has downside implications for house prices and has prompted downward revisions to NAHB’s forecasts of home sales and housing production for the balance of 2007-2008.
**Update 10:30am PDT: Wonder if Hank would like to reconsider his assessments:
Sales of existing homes plunged in March by the largest amount in nearly two decades, reflecting bad weather and increasing problems in the subprime mortgage market, a real estate trade group reported today.
The National Association of Realtors reported that sales of existing homes fell by 8.4 percent in March, compared with February. It was the biggest one-month decline since a 12.6 percent drop in January 1989, another period of recession conditions in housing. The drop left sales in March at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 6.12 million units, the slowest pace since June 2003.
sac wrote:
Good time to buy.
Posted 24 Apr 2007 at 7:30 am ¶
David Wozney wrote:
A “Federal Reserve Note” is not a U.S.A. dollar. In 1973, Public Law 93-110 defined the U.S.A. dollar as consisting of 1/42.2222 fine troy ounces of gold.
Posted 24 Apr 2007 at 5:01 pm ¶
sarabeth wrote:
The market price of gold is alleged to be $683 per troy ounce these days.
If a dollar is defined as “1/42.2222 fine troy ounces of gold”, then the price of gold by law is $42.22 per troy ounce.
You better alert Buttercheeks that the market price of gold is violating the law. I’m sure he can arrange to have it arrested, or deported to a friendly foreign government, or waterboarded in Gitmo (till it rats out Osama or promises to behave, whichever comes first).
Posted 24 Apr 2007 at 7:46 pm ¶
Wesley wrote:
California foreclosures up 68 percent
Posted 26 Apr 2007 at 10:41 am ¶