Subscribe to RSS Feed RSS Feed
 

BACK TO BASICS FOR THE ECONOMY?

Topic: The Forum
16. September 2008
| Print This Post Print This Post | Email This Post Email This Post |

People want something solid to cling to when the ground begins to shift beneath their feet.  With Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch and AIG crumbling, the supposed "flagships" of Wall Street may be replaced, as Carrick Mollenkamp and Mark Whitehouse write in the Wall Street Journal, by the "old-school banks" that managed to avoid subprime and that are anchored by old-fashioned businesses like "chasing customer deposits and building branch networks."  Could Lehman Bros.’s failure — in the long run — be a blessing in disguise for the U.S. economy?
When banks want to avoid risk, they begin pushing capital towards more stable forms of economic growth than your typical MBS or hedge fund.  This means that manufacturing ventures with lower but more reliable returns, infrastructure projects, and innovative technologies may be favored by more commercial banks such as Bank of America, which has now snapped up Merrill Lynch. And other top-ranking U.S.banks that have avoided the subprime trap (some of which have built up their advertising spend in recent weeks — awfully good timing) stand to benefit as the government reins in Wall Street.

What if the next presidential administration commits to developing new energy technologies and making green building construction the norm?  Again, traditional banking — from community savings banks to the stodgier (read: smarter) commercial banks — will come to the fore.  But investors are still going to look for high returns — perhaps this time in the manufacturing sector. The combination of risk-avoidance and reasonable profits could be enough to build good jobs and keep serious investment money at home.  In contrast to John McCain, Barack Obama looked happy on the stump yesterday for the first time in weeks.  Was it because he saw the long-term potential in these Wall Street collapses not just for himself, but for the country?

Ned Hodgman

4 Responses to “BACK TO BASICS FOR THE ECONOMY?”

  1. Ender:

    Newsflash: Unless I was dreaming, the U.S. Government just took a huge ownership share in AIG.


    comment at 16. September 2008
  2. Edward Hodgman:

    Yes, but that was HOURS after I posted this comment. And my larger point is that when the state is confronted with these kinds of major problems, one possible outcome is a major review of priorities for the economy and for the state’s investment strategy. That’s why Obama had an FDR moment yesterday. The scenario I described is an optimistic view, but that doesn’t mean it’s impossible.


    comment at 17. September 2008
  3. Ender:

    No… no… I understand. It was just the utter shock I experienced at witnessing the U.S. Government taking a vast OWNERSHIP interest in an enterprise that employs multi-millionaires. Assuring the continuation of Business-class air travel for high paid executives should not be a government handout. And Yes, I understand the insurance issues, but it would be even easier for the Fed to assume to assume insolvent liabilities. I am not prone to hyperbole, but this is Madness. If the Government is unwilling to provide health care for those do not possess coverage, why will it take emergency action to ensure that financial services workers will have their six and seven figure salaries covered?


    comment at 17. September 2008
  4. Ender:

    What’s next, the bailout of white-shoe law firms because the partners may experience difficulty paying the mortgage on the country house during the economic downturn?


    comment at 17. September 2008

Leave a Comment


XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>