Economists Who Dominated the GFC Predictions
Monday, September 14th, 2009
On the first anniversary of the collapse of Lehman Brothers, this piece sums up the cause to the GFC, as predicted by 5 economists who subscribe to the line of economic thinking we promote: land rent theory.
Dirk Bezener, the academic who collated the 12 economists who predicted the GFC, wrote in the Financial Times Why Some Economists Could See the Financial Crisis :
Glenn Stevens, governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, said: “I do not know anyone who predicted this course of events. But it has occurred, it has implications, and so we must reflect on it.” We must indeed.
…
I undertook a study of the models used by those who did see it coming.* They include Kurt Richebächer, an investment newsletter writer, who wrote in 2001 that “the new housing bubble – together with the bond and stock bubbles – will [inevitably] implode in the foreseeable future, plunging the US economy into a protracted, deep recession”; and in 2006, when the housing market turned, that “all remaining questions pertain solely to [the] speed, depth and duration of the economy’s downturn”. Wynne Godley of the Levy Economics Institute wrote in 2006 that “the small slowdown in the rate at which US household debt levels are rising resulting from the house price decline, will immediately lead to a sustained growth recession before 2010”.Michael Hudson of the University of Missouri wrote in 2006 that “debt deflation will shrink the ‘real’ economy, drive down real wages, and push our debt-ridden economy into Japan-style stagnation or worse”. Importantly, these and other analysts not only foresaw and timed the end of the credit boom, but also perceived this would inevitably produce recession in the US. How did they do it?
Central to the contrarians’ thinking is an accounting of financial flows (of credit, interest, profit and wages) and stocks (debt and wealth) in the economy, as well as a sharp distinction between the real economy and the financial sector (including property). In these “flow-of-funds” models, liquidity generated in the financial sector flows to companies, households and the government as they borrow. This may facilitate fixed-capital investment, production and consumption, but also asset-price inflation and debt growth. Liquidity returns to the financial sector as investment or in debt service and fees.
Neo-classical economists only focus on two factors of production – capital and labour. Bezener misses the big one in his flow-of-funds analogy. The imperative question is – what was the money was borrowed for?
Land – predominantly. Land values in Australia are twice as big as the ASX.
Fred Harrison wrote in his 1997 analysis – The Chaos Makers
By 2007 Britain and most of the other industrially advanced economies will be in the throes of frenzied activity in the land market equal to what happened in 1988/9. Land prices will be near their 18-year peak, driven by an exponential growth rate, on the verge of collapse that will presage the global depression of 2010. The two events will not be coincidental: the peak in land prices not merely signalling the looming recession but being the primary cause of it.
Fred should be given his due respect, especially as his Power in the Land (1984) also predicted the 1987/8 downturn using the 18 year land cycle. See one of his best videos on the GFC.
Who else used the role of land in their interpretation of business cycles to do what the most high profile economists in the world failed to do?
(more…)





