We all all (here) familiar with the Austrian theories that explain why there was an abundunce of credit available in the west. i.e. Central bank expansionary monetary policy.
However, the explanation for the explosion in the amount of credit offered on the BBC is the “financial super highway of savings from est to west”. In other words, the high levels of saving in the east funded the high levels of borrowing in the west.
The upshot of this is that our borrowing was funded by real saving, not credit out of nowhere. Interest rates did reflect supply and demand for credit. They were not driven by the central bank lower than the natural rate markets would have dictated.
Is this a viable explanation for our current economic crisis? Credit became too cheap for us here in the west. Not because it’s price didn’t reflect the pool of real savings available, but simply because the low price induced us to borrow more than is good for us. Is that the truth of the matter?
I think the credit only flowed because there was an irrational demand in the West, and the East were offered these new debt instruments to buy, that were totally false.
If people have their legs, and someone yells fire in a crowded theatre, many will run for the exit.
Likewise, someone trusted told a bunch of investors, here are some kickass investments, and if you don’t get in, others will scoop up the best ones first.
What cannot be overlooked, monetary policy aside, is the complete and total fraud that was US government regulation of the Housing and Financial sectors, as well as the private market regulatory institutions like ratings industries. There was was deliberate policy of misleading, lying, forging etc on behalf of the government, lenders and it’s watchdogs.
I have no idea how they could all not know this would turn out bad.
Bob Barr did say something very smart recently in an interview. Where is the AG? Where are the fraud investigations? Not the token ones. There should be massive fraud investigations in and outside government, to determine exactly wtf happened. Fraud, in or outside a libertarian paradigm, is still bad.
How does it explain the bust? The bust arises because there are inadequate levels of real savings, not because of low prices of borrowing. The latter is not in and of itself problematic.
Doesn’t this theory also fail to account for the cluster of errors on behalf of the entrepreneurs? Which would only happen with artificially low interest rates, that fail to reflect the time preference of society.
I guess that the implication of the above explanation is that there is a level of interest rates that are, in of themselves, bad for society. Especially one like ours in the west with our willingness to spend (and borrow) more than we can afford.
Perhaps if the west had been isolated, the amounts of real savings much less, the interest rates would have been much higher. Thus detering many of us from borrowing more than we should have.