The Commercial Real Estate/Small Bank Boogie! CRE Crisis Could Cause Small Banks To Collapse (Bank Credit Growth Now Negative As 10Y-2Y Yield Curve Remains Inverted)

We are back in the USSR! And the economy taking commands from Washington DC!

Introduction

During the COVID-19 pandemic the occurrence of remote work jumped, out of sheer necessity. The technology was already available, but the pandemic accelerated its adoption and bypassed the hesitation of employers to allow people working from home. In many cases, remote work has been successful and therefore seems to have become a permanent feature, often in hybrid form. For employers, it has become an employee benefit to attract people in a tight labor market and it saves on office space costs. The flipside of the latter is that demand for office space has seen a structural downward shift. It is estimated that the underlying value of office space in New York City has permanently declined by 39%. This suggests that at current prices, there is a bubble in commercial real estate. In this special we are particularly interested in the implications for financial stability and the economic outlook. First we take a look at the development of commercial real estate prices and commercial real estate lending. Then we discuss the Fed’s recent stress test on large banks that included a large decline in commercial real estate prices. In contrast to the Fed’s exercise, we show that distinguishing between large and small banks provides a sharper picture of the vulnerabilities in the US economy. In particular, the connection between commercial real estate and small banks, through commercial real estate lending, could pose a threat to financial stability and make a recession worse.

Commercial real estate heading south

If we plot the BIS commercial real estate price index, it is clear that since the Great Recession, commercial real estate (CRE) prices have more than doubled in nominal terms (the blue line in Figure 1), but have moved sideways since 2021. This suggests that prices have reached a plateau. However, in recent years inflation has obscured the movement of CRE prices in real terms (the orange line), which shows a peak in 2021, but since then there has been a decline, almost to the level during the COVID-19 pandemic. In other words, CRE prices are already failing to keep up with inflation. Is this an indication that the CRE bubble is already deflating? With nominal CRE prices remaining elevated, most of the nominal price correction is likely still to come. If the 39% estimate by Gupta et al. for New York City is representative for the entire United States, we are heading for a major decline in CRE prices.

We can also plot the BIS index against CRE lending to show3 that rising prices for commercial real estate sparked a credit boom in commercial real estate (Figure 2). Given the academic literature linking financial crises to credit booms and busts, this should be cause for concern. Moreover, Minsky (1986) notes that an emphasis by bankers on the collateral value and the expected values of assets (instead of cashflows) is conducive to the emergence of a fragile (as opposed to a robust) financial structure.

If excess demand for office space pushed up commercial real estate prices, and if that increased CRE lending by banks, what does a structural downward shift in demand for office space mean? If CRE prices are deflating, what does that mean for the indebted CRE sector? Is this going to lead to defaults? And what does that mean for the banks that did the CRE lending? Is the deflation of the CRE bubble a threat to financial stability? Also note that due to the steep hiking cycle by the Fed, some companies in the CRE sector may find it difficult to refinance their loans at substantially higher rates.

We can dig deeper by looking at the demand and supply developments in CRE lending. If we look at the Fed’s SLOOS data (figure 3), it is clear that demand for CRE loans strengthened especially between 2012 and 2017. Lending standards loosened between 2012 and 2015. This era coincides with a strong rise in the CRE price index, which may have motivated banks to expand CRE lending. Demand for CRE loans weakened during the pandemic, then bounced back as the economy reopened, but headed south again in 2022. Loan standards tightened during the pandemic, then loosened again when the economy rebounded, but have tightened since 2021. In other words, there seems to be a correlation between CRE prices and demand and supply developments in CRE lending. Currently, both are heading south, if we look at CRE prices in real terms and CRE lending in terms of net demand. It seems that rising CRE prices sparked a credit boom in CRE and now that the CRE price bubble is deflating, the CRE sector has less appetite to borrow and banks are tightening their lending standards.

The Fed’s incomplete stress test

CRE prices are falling in real terms and credit for the CRE loans is tightening. Does this pose a problem to the economy? Not if we believe the Fed’s June 28 press release that accompanied the annual bank stress test. The stress test looked at “a severe global recession with a 40 percent decline in commercial real estate prices, a substantial increase in office vacancies, and a 38 percent decline in house prices. The unemployment rate rises by 6.4 percentage points to a peak of 10 percent and economic output declines commensurately.” However, according to the Fed “all 23 banks tested remained above their minimum capital requirements during the hypothetical recession.” Therefore, the central bank concluded that “large banks are well positioned to weather a severe recession and continue to lend to households and businesses even during a severe recession.” However, one line in the press release reveals the main problem with the Fed’s stress test: “The banks in this year’s test hold roughly 20 percent of the office and downtown commercial real estate loans held by banks.” So where is the remaining 80%? If the stress test considers a huge decline in commercial real estate prices, it might be relevant to know how this affects the banks that hold 80% of the CRE loans made by banks. Therefore we take a closer look at CRE lending by large and small banks in the next section.

Bank lending: large vs small banks

We already saw in figure 2 that the rise in CRE prices until 2022 was accompanied by an increase in CRE lending. However, there is more to this story of we take a closer look at who has been doing the lending. So far we looked at aggregate bank lending to the CRE sector, without distinguishing between different types of banks. However, a closer look at the banking sector reveals a disturbing vulnerability that could be a threat to financial stability.

The Fed data on commercial banks distinguish between large and small banks. Large domestically chartered commercial banks are defined as the top 25 domestically chartered commercial banks ranked by size. Small domestically chartered commercial banks are defined as all domestically chartered banks outside of the top 25. Note that according to this definition a bank of say $80 billion would still be considered ‘small.’ In figure 4 we show how CRE lending has evolved, distinguishing between large and small banks.

It turns out that CRE lending by large banks has hardly increased in the last 15 years, while at the same time CRE lending by small banks has more than doubled. In other words, the growth in loans to commercial real estate has come from small banks. In fact, small banks have taken over the role of main provider of commercial real estate loans. Therefore, the Fed’s stress test omits the most relevant part of the banking sector for commercial real estate. While commercial real estate lending by large banks has remained stable since 2006, commercial real estate lending by small banks has increased rapidly. We could even talk of a credit boom in commercial real estate loans provided by small banks.

Whether the increased share of CRE lending by small banks is a problem also depends on the relative importance of CRE loans for small banks (Figure 5). FDIC data (Quarterly Banking Profile) distinguish at least three classes of asset size: more than $250 billion, $10-250 billion, and $1-10 billion. The first class contains only large banks as defined by the Fed stress test, the second class is a mix of large and small banks, the third class only contains small banks. While for the largest banks, CRE loans were only 5.7% of total assets in the first quarter of 2023, for the smallest banks this is 32.9%! For the intermediate-size banks the CRE loans are 18.4% of assets. So not only is 80% of the CRE bank loans made by small banks, these loans also make up a much larger fraction of the balance sheet of small banks.

Finally, it is important to note that small banks are regional banks. In fact, the US has so many small banks because for much of its history it was difficult for banks to open a branch in another state. This legislation has been abolished, and the amount of banks in the US has fallen, but there are still many small banks with predominantly regional clients. This means that CRE risk in small banks is also regionally concentrated. Instead of a diversified nationwide CRE loan portfolio, a small bank tends to make loans to local borrowers. Consequently, if commercial real estate in a region turns sour, the small banks in the area will be highly exposed. Bubble or not, any adverse development in the CRE sector is going to hit small banks harder than large banks.

The commercial real estate-small bank nexus brings together two vulnerable sectors that could rapidly deteriorate in a self-reinforcing loop. Small banks have already shown vulnerable to higher interest rates and deposit outflows in March and commercial real estate is high on the list of financial stability concerns of US regulators. We have shown that the two sectors are critically connected and in the next section we speculate on the feedback mechanisms that could arise and make things worse.

Roads to ruin: feedback mechanisms

The commercial real estate-small bank nexus allows for several scenarios in which both sectors could be destabilized. In the first two scenarios, a crisis occurs in one sector, causing problems in the other sector. Tighter credit and reduced activity in the CRE sector could push the economy into a mild recession. In the third scenario, a mild recession causes problems in both sectors, which could then reinforce each other and make the recession worse.

In scenario 1, a small banking crisis leads to problems in CRE. Given that the majority of CRE loans have been made by small banks, continued problems for small banks, caused by or leading to deposit flight, could force them to tighten lending to the CRE sector. This would reduce the supply of credit to CRE, causing additional problems for the CRE sector, on top of office vacancies and stagnating prices.
In scenario 2, a CRE crisis causes small banks to collapse. Even if small banks stabilize in the near future from the recent deposit flight problems, they could subsequently be dragged down by a crisis in the CRE sector. Defaults in CRE will asymmetrically hurt small banks rather than large banks, because of the concentration of CRE risks at small banks. This could lead to a new round of deposit flight from small banks to large banks and money market funds. The losses on loans and loss of funding could be lethal to small banks.
In scenario 3, a mild recession could cause a small banking crisis and a CRE crisis. In turn, this could lead to a more severe recession. A mild recession, for example caused by the Fed’s hiking cycle, will hurt the banking sector and the CRE sector at the same time. In particular, a recession would further reduce demand for office space. This will add to the problems in the CRE sector. Increased CRE defaults will hurt banks, especially the smaller ones with relatively more exposure to CRE. Losses on CRE loans will force banks to tighten credit, including for the CRE sector. The self-reinforcing problems in the two sectors could further drag down the overall economy, making the initially mild recession more severe. Specifically, tighter credit and reduced activity in the CRE sector will drag down GDP growth further.

We summarize the specific feedback mechanisms in the commercial real estate-small bank nexus in figure 6.

More broadly, we already saw in March how problems at small banks had an immediate adverse impact on financial markets. In combination with a faltering CRE sector this could severely undermine confidence among investors, consumers and businesses. This would have a broad-based negative impact on GDP growth.

Conclusion

COVID-19 appears to have a lasting negative impact on demand for commercial real estate. The federal regulators are aware of the risks in commercial real estate, but the Fed’s stress test provides a false sense of security. The finding that large banks are able to absorb losses on CRE loans in case of a CRE crisis is encouraging, but the bulk of CRE bank loans has been provided by small banks. In fact, while CRE lending by large banks has been stable, there has been a credit boom in CRE loans provided by small banks, more than doubling the amount since 2006. What’s more, small banks are more vulnerable to the CRE sector in terms of exposure and have already been hit by deposit outflows earlier this year. The commercial real estate-small bank nexus exposes the US economy to a vulnerability that could threaten financial stability and either cause a recession or make a recession more severe.

And another day, another inverted 10Y-2Y yield curve!

This chart goes along with negative bank credit growth.

Lastly, we have the Conference Board’s leading index plunging to -10!

Thanks in part to Cap’n Crunch, Fed Chair Jerome Powell!

Bidenomics (Or Yellenomics)! Real Weekly Earnings For Men LOWER Under Biden Than Jimmy Carter! (Men’s Real Weekly Earnings DOWN -9% Since Q2 2021 While M2 Money UP 31%)

President Jimmy Carter is usually the bar for terrible Presidents. Under Carter, the US experienced economic stagnation and soaring inflation. At least it led to the election of Ronald Regan!

So, Biden’s much mentioned Bidenomics have produced REAL MEDIAN WEEKLY EARNINGS FOR MEN that is currently below 1979 levels under Jimmy Carter.

Even worse for Bidenomics, REAL MEDIAN WEEKLY EARNINGS GROWTH FOR MEN was -4.45% In April 2023, while the last reading prior to Covid under Trump was 6.674% YoY in February 2020. So, Bidenomics isn’t even back to Trump levels for men.

I like this chart which I call “Yellenomics” because it illustrates The Fed’s Folly of money printing and its impact on real earnings. After the Trump wage growth boom, real median weekly earnings for men has been steadily declining.

Women, on the other hand, did show a gain since Carter, but still lower than the last month before Covid struck. Women’s real median weekly earnings growth YoY since Q2 2021 are down -5%. So, Bidenomics has been less sucky for women than men.

Reminds me of The Yardbird’s classic “I’m A Man.” Worse off under Biden than under Jimmy Carter. Although The Yardbird’s “Over Under Sideways DOWN” is more emblematic of Bidenomics.

Bidenomics should be renamed Corruptionomics given Biden’s habit of selling government influence to anyone willing to waive a few million.

Why US Inflation Will Start Rising Again (WTI Crude Futures UP Above $80 Again As Gasoline Futures UP 91.5% Under Bidenomics)

Joe Biden said that Republicans will impeach him in the House of Representatives since inflation is coming down. Huh? No Joe, it is because your are the most corrupt President in history, a compulsive liar and your economic policies are pure World Economic Forum mandates (open borders, Central Bank Digital currency, green energy, etc). Biden started off his Presidency by declaring war on fossil fuels that helped drive prices through the roof. And the middle class are paying the price.

But as inflation cools (blue line) thanks in part to Biden draining the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (orange line), Biden can gloat. But remember, gasoline prices remain 56% higher under Biden’s Reign of Error. Even worse, gasoline FUTURES are up 91.5% under Biden. Yikes!

But look at how gasoline prices and gasoline futures have risen in July (pink circle). The last inflation report showed that inflation has declined to 3% (still higher than The Fed’s 2% target), gasoline prices are up almost 5% since July 19, 2023.

Gasoline, meanwhile, started the year at less than $2.50 per gallon. This week, gasoline topped $2.90 per gallon and may yet reach $3.

WTI Crude Oil futures have broken through the $80 barrier … again. Heating oil futures are up 1.43% today with WTI Crude futures up 0.61%.

So as energy prices keep rising (and Biden’s EPA keeps issuing green energy edicts and fails to recognize that our power grid can’t support all the electric cars and trucks envisioned by the Obama/Biden green dreamers). As such, energy prices will keep rising and with it … inflation.

Case-Shiller National Home Price Index Slows To -0.46% YoY As Fed Withdraws Covid Stimulus SLOWLY (Mortgage Rates UP 151% Under Bidenomics, Taylor Rule Suggests Fed Rate Of 10.42%)

The Case-Shiller home price numbers are out for May. The national home price index is down -0.46% YoY as The Fed slows M2 Money growth into negative growth territory. No doubt Biden (and Karine Jean-Pierre) will take credit for slowing home price growth, although The Federal Reserve slowing monetary stimulus is mostly responsible.

The Fed is still slow walking shrinking its enormous balance sheet. Although The Fed is cranking up their target rate.

The Taylor Rule suggests a 10.42 target rate to cool inflation. They are only half way there!!!

CRE Storm? “Nobody Understands Where Bottom Is” For Commercial Real Estate (Fed STILL Slow To Remove Monetary Stimulus)

Where is the bottom for commercial real estate (CRE)?

Starwood Capital Group’s Barry Sternlicht recently told Bloomberg’s David Rubenstein about the ongoing crisis in the commercial real estate sector, equating it to a severe “Category 5 hurricane“. He cautioned, “It’s sort of a blackout hovering over the entire industry until we get some relief or some understanding of what the Fed’s going to do over the longer term.”

Currently, the biggest problem in the CRE space is sliding office and retail demand in downtown areas. Couple that with high-interest rates, and there’s a disaster lurking for building owners. According to Morgan Stanley, the elephant in the room is a massive debt maturity wall of CRE loans that totals $500 billion in 2024 and $2.5 trillion over the next five years.

Senior markets editor for Bloomberg, Michael Regan, chatted with John Fish, who is head of the construction firm Suffolk, chair of the Real Estate Roundtable think tank and former chairman of the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, in the What Goes Up podcast to discuss the biggest problems in the CRE market.

Fish warned that “capital markets nationally have frozen” and “nobody understands value.” He said, “We can’t evaluate price discovery because very few assets have traded during this period of time. Nobody understands where the bottom is.”

For a sense of recent price discovery trends, we were the first to point out to readers of a wicked firesale of office towers in the downtown area of Baltimore City:

As for the overall CRE industry, Goldman Sachs chief credit strategist Lotfi Karoui recently told clients, “The most accurate portrayal of current market conditions with Green Street indicating a 25% year-over-year drop in office property values.”

Sooooo, Powell and The Fed will likely raise rates this week. And maybe a few more times over the next few months. And The Fed remains defiant about taking away the Covid monetary stimulus.

Financial Climate Change! Billionaire Sternlicht Warns CRE Storm Now “Category 5 Hurricane” (Starwood Defaults On $212.4 Million Commercial Mortgage Loan In Atlanta)

No, this isn’t a John Kerry/Greta Thunberg hysterical warning about climate change. But a storm created by 1) Biden/Congress spending splurge and 2) excessive monetary stimulypto by The Federal (Feral) Reserve. Now that The Fed is withdrawing the excess stimulus, we are seeing a world of pain for commercial real estate. A financial climate change!

Days after Barry Sternlicht’s Starwood Capital Group defaulted on a $212.4 million mortgage backed by an Atlanta office tower, Bloomberg released an eye-opening interview with the billionaire investor about mounting distress in US commercial real estate.

“We’re in a Category 5 hurricane,” Sternlicht said in an interview on June 28 taped for a July 25 release in an upcoming episode of Bloomberg Wealth with David Rubenstein.

Sternlicht warned, “It’s sort of a blackout hovering over the entire industry until we get some relief or some understanding of what the Fed’s going to do over the longer term.”

He explained the CRE downturn was sparked by the Federal Reserve’s sixteen months of aggressive interest rate hikes to tame inflation — and unlike past downturns — not due to reckless speculation.

In early March, during the regional bank meltdown, we penned a note that accurately pointed out stress would materialize in the CRE space, mainly in offices and malls. The note was titled Why Small Banks Are In Big Trouble: As Hedge Funds Pile Into The New “Big Short,” The Next’ Credit Event’ Emerges. And since, we have penned countless CRE notes (some of which are here & here & here) about the unfolding crisis.

Tighter credit conditions following the regional bank crisis in March have made refinancing existing buildings exceptionally hard for landlords and come as vacancies rise.

Sternlicht recalled that his firm tried to obtain a bank loan for a small property not too long ago. He said his staff reached out to 33 banks, and only two came back with offers.

According to Morgan Stanley, the elephant in the room is a massive debt maturity wall of CRE loans that totals $500 billion in 2024 and $2.5 trillion over the next five years.

As we’ve seen in San Francisco, the inability to refinance as some properties sustain rising vacancies will pressure landlords to sell properties or walk away from them.

Sternlicht said there’s a very real possibility of a “second RTC” event playing out, referring to Resolution Trust Corp., the government entity that led the effort to liquidate assets of the savings and loan associations that failed three decades ago.

“You could see 400 or 500 banks that could fail,” he said. “And they will have to sell. It also will be a great opportunity.”

Sternlicht launched his real estate firm during the era of RTC, purchasing multi-family units and flipping them to billionaire Sam Zell 18 months later for triple the price.

Sternlicht said the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp would likely begin offloading CRE loans on Signature Bank’s books, which failed in March. He said, “The government’s going to prop up the value of that portfolio by providing very cheap financing to it.”

* * *

Transcript of the interview:

David Rubenstein:

Sometimes people are saying that the best investment opportunity now is distressed real estate debt — that you can buy the debt from banks at a discount. But do you think it’s too early for that?

Barry Sternlicht:

You know, we were gonna give back an office building. And they said, “Well, not so fast. If you want to, we’ll restructure the loan. And we’ll cut the loan in half. And you put the money in here. And we’ll take this as a junior note.” Because the banks don’t want the assets back. They’re not set up to carry these assets. It’s not their business.

So you’re beginning to see stuff. We’re going to see this big trade of the [Signature] Bank portfolio. That’s going to be a benchmark for market.

David Rubenstein:

A lot of fortunes were made in the real estate world in’ 07-’08 when people bought distressed real estate. The late ’80s too, when the RTC was here. Do you see funds being formed to buy these assets? But you think they won’t be available for a year or two?

Barry Sternlicht:

Right now you have an unusual situation in the real estate markets because everyone’s sort of looking at the yield curve. And it says rates will be lower later. Everyone says, “You know, survive till ’25. Hold onto your assets.” So transaction volumes have plummeted.

Unless you have to sell something today, nobody wants to sell anything today. They think tomorrow will be rosier. So for the most part, everybody’s pushing any sales back. But what you’re seeing is when a loan is maturing and a borrower can’t cover the current debt service. Something’s gotta give. Unfortunately, we’re also a lender.

David Rubenstein:

Are we going to change the way office buildings are really valued in the future because tenants aren’t going to need as much space? Or do you think eventually the tenants will come back and the employees will come back?

Barry Sternlicht:

The work-from-home phenomenon is a US phenomenon. If you go to England or Germany, rents are up, and vacancy rates in the top German property markets — Berlin, Frankfort, Munich, Hamburg — are less than 5%. People are back in the office. You and I go to the Middle East, they’re full. We have offices in Asia, they’re full. So this is a US situation.

In the US you have two markets. The nice buildings will stay rented and my guess is at pretty good rates. And the B and C stuff is going to be — maybe fields of grain or something. It’ll be very pretty. We’ll have all these little mid-block parks in New York City because there won’t be anything else to do with those buildings.

The other thing about office is AI. AI is going to hit a couple of these industries that have been big users of office space. So that’s sort of a big question mark in the investment equation.

David Rubenstein:

Let’s suppose I’m an average person. Where should I put my money as an investor in real estate?

Barry Sternlicht:

High interest rates are depressing the number of single-family home units that have been built so now you’re having an ever-increasing scarcity of residential. Given the cost of construction, the whole residential complex — including single-families for rent, multi-family, the housing market, even residential land — I think they make interesting investment opportunities today.

David Rubenstein:

Is it a good thing for people to now invest in a real REIT?

Barry Sternlicht:

I think real estate has a nice place in the balance sheet of any individual. In the pandemic, we raised a special-situations fund and bought 15 names in the REIT business, and we were up, like 70% at one point. We’re going to do that again. And if you take a long-term view, some of these are good companies with the wrong interest-rate environment. I wouldn’t even say they have the wrong balance sheet, but they are so out of favor. There are some really good buys out there. So if you’re clever, you could buy some public REITs.

David Rubenstein:

What kind of return should an average REIT investor expect?

Barry Sternlicht:

In the mortgage REIT, Starwood Property Trust, we’re paying a 10% dividend. So you get that and any appreciation in the stock, and the stock’s currently trading below book value. It usually trades above book value. It used to trade at 1.23 times and now it’s trading at .9. So if it reverts, you’ll get a 15% return. We’ve averaged 11.3% over 10 years.

David Rubenstein:

Why should somebody want a career in real estate? Why is that a good business to be in?

Barry Sternlicht:

You’ve got to find niches, and there are a lot of niches in real estate. And it’s very micro, block by block. If I didn’t have my firm today, could I buy — even in a city like New York — and redo apartments and housing. I could make money doing that. I have a friend of a friend who’s bought 300 homes. He turned living rooms into bedrooms, put them all on Airbnb. He’s earning a fortune and using Airbnb as his distribution set. It’s a giant industry. There’s always something to do.

David Rubenstein:

You were based in the northeast part of the US for much of your career. You grew up in Connecticut, you were born in Long Island. But you picked up and moved to Miami. Why did you do that a few years ago? And any regrets about moving to Miami?

Barry Sternlicht:

Well, my mom’s down there. And I got divorced. That was one reason. Change your life, start over. There was obviously a tax benefit to doing so. And I had sold an interest in my firm at the time. I was based in Connecticut. I was based in Greenwich, our headquarters was there. I looked at my travel calendar in a normal year and I was only home for about a third of it. So I didn’t think it’d be that hard to move and make that my base of operations. It turned I caught the wave perfectly.

I was an early settler into Miami. And, you know, the home prices probably tripled there. I should have bought everything with my house. I would have had the best-performing real estate fund in the world.

David Rubenstein:

If your mother came to you and said, “I have $100,000. I need to invest it somewhere. Where should I invest it?” You would say where, real estate?

Barry Sternlicht:

Today if you look at my portfolio, I have a significant amount of cash that I never had before because I’m getting 5% for the cash. Pretty soon I’m going to just start deploying that capital when I can see the sun coming through the clouds of the Fed’s movement. When the Fed basically tells you they’re done, I think real estate will catch a very firm bid.

Greta Kerry? John Thunberg?? They are the same repeater, and non thinker.

Here the real (financial) climate terrorists!! Yellen and Powell.

Bidenomics, Born Under A Bad Sign! US Treasury Yield Curve (10Y-2Y) Inverts To Under -100 BPS Again (Nickel UP 1.78%, Dogecoin UP 5.58%)

I have never seen anything like this. The US Treasury 10Y-2Y yield curve is deep in inversion and has had a negative slope for 265 straight days. Bidenomics is born under a bad sign!

On the commodities front, heating oil is up almost 2% this morning and nickel (an important element in Biden’s green energy mandates) is up 1.78%.

On the crypto front, Bitcoin is up 0.47% and Dogecoin is up 5.58%.

You can always buy Kamala’s Own Word Salad Dressing!

Shot Through The Heart (Of The Economy)? US Debt UP By Same Amount In Last 4 Years Than It Did In First 221 Years (Minsky Moment When $192 TRILLION In Unfunded Liabilities Hits The Fan

Shot through the heart (of the economy), and they’re to blame. The Fed and Congress give government a bad name.

When I see the faces of Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, Janet Yellen and Jerome Powell, all I think of is …. the Minsky Moment brigade!

From Zero debt in 1776 to $21 trillion in 1997 and just in the last 4 years, debt has gone up by that same $21 trillion. This graph shows the debt explosion, a 63x increase.

And then we have Congress promising >$192 trillion in entitlements (wealth transfers) that will likley be added to the already >$32 trillion in Federal debt.

Bidenomics Strikes! US Housing Starts 1-unit Plunges -7.4% YoY In June For 14th Straight Month Of Declines (Multifamily Starts Down -11.56% From May To June, Permits Down -13.52%)

Bidenomics strikes! Or as Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum sing “I’m going to make (the US) mine!”

Despite the open borders where millions of low wage workers and parasites pour across into the US, we still see 1-unit housing starts plunged -7.4% YoY in June as The Fed continues tightening.

Multifamily starts actually fell worse than 1 unit starts. 5+ unit starts were down -11.56% MoM. Multfamily permits were down -13.52%.

And it just isn’t little girls that Biden is creepy about (like the family member we all keep our kids away from), Biden is creepy towards adult women too! These guys, like most normal people, aren’t digging Old Joe’s creepiness.

The Fed’s Minsky Moment! Even Top 1% Of Net Worth Is Lower With Fed Tightening (US Industrial Production YoY Goes Negative)

The Federal Reserve, an organization that even George Orwell would find outrageous, is a Minsky Moment Machine!

A Minsky Moment refers to the onset of a market collapse brought on by the reckless speculative activity that defines an unsustainable bullish period. Minsky Moment crises generally occur because investors, engaging in excessively aggressive speculation, take on additional credit risk during bull markets.

And since Covid and the Great Monetary Expansion to fight it helped creates massive inflation and helps the 1% get wealthier and wealthier. BUT as M2 Money growth slows, the 1% are losing their position as top dogs in the economy. Not by much (see pink circle), but a little.

And The Federal Reserve helps create the monetary expansion through low rate policies, fueling credit and asset bubble expansion. Greenspan, Bernanke and Yellen were the masters at creating a Minsky Moment (named after Hymen Minsky, the late Washington University of St Louis economist).

Then we have the latest bit of bad news. US Industrial Production year-over-year of -0.43% as M2 Money growth evaporates.

After The Fed’s insertion of massive monetary in 2008, continued stimulus until the second massive stimulus burst in 2020, unfunded liabilities of pension funds have worsened. Another possible Minsky Moment created by the Kafkaesque Fed. Kafedesque??