Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:26 am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:45 am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:00 am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:36 am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:37 pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:41 am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:32 am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:29 pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:09 pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:47 am EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

Will the US Make Money on its Bailout?
Jim Surowiecki is quite sure that Treasury's bailout plan, or at least the $250 billion part of being spent on recapitalization, is an investment rather than an expenditure:
I realize that, given the way the U.S. budget is accounted for, it's accurate to say the $250 billion package is increasing the deficit. But it'd be good to see some acknowledgement that in this case, "spending" that money is going to make the government richer, not poorer.
Richer? I doubt it. The US has past history here: the S&L bailout, which was smaller than this one, ended up with a cost to the government 3.2% of GDP.
Bank bailouts in other developed countries have had similar fiscal results: Norway's bank crisis of 1987 cost the government 8% of GDP, the Finnish bank crisis of 1991 cost 11% of GDP, and Japan's bank crisis from 1992 onwards cost a whopping 20% of GDP. If you consider South Korea a developed country, its bank crisis of 1997 cost more than 26% of GDP. And bank bailouts in developing countries can be much more expensive still.
All these figures come from a 2000 World Bank report entitled "Controlling the Fiscal Costs of Banking Crises"; its authors, Patrick Honohan and Daniela Klingebiel, write that
Fiscal costs are systematically associated with a set of crisis management strategies. Our empirical findings reveal that unlimited deposit guarantees, open-ended liquidity support, repeated recapitalizations, debtor bail-outs and regulatory forbearance add significantly and sizably to costs.
Sound familiar?
Adrian Ash was on this back in March, citing I think a different version of the same paper:
On average, the World Bank economists found, "governments spent an average of nearly 13 percent of GDP cleaning up their financial systems" as a result of the bailout programs they tried to implement.
"Indeed, each of the accommodating measures examined," they continued, ..."appears to significantly increase the costs of banking crises."
None of this is to say that Paulson's recapitalization plan is a bad idea. But the probability that it's going to end up making a profit is pretty low, if past experience is any guide.
Update: Surowiecki stands his ground.
Comments
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.





