How can Europe stop its debt crisis?

Brother can you spare a Euro (Photo: Cathal McNaughton/REUTERS)

Let’s just be blunt: The Eurozone’s bailout program has failed. It’s not solving the underlying causes of the European debt crisis; it might even be making matters worse.

That’s become all too clear in the wake of Ireland’s decision to seek a rescue from the European Union and International Monetary Fund. The hope was that backing up Ireland would quell the contagion spreading to other weak Eurozone members, especially Portugal and Spain. But the opposite has happened. The fact that Ireland, considered a paragon of reform, was forced into a bailout has only solidified fears in financial markets that the others could be doomed as well. The sovereign bonds of both Portugal and Spain are taking a pounding. The spread between Spanish bonds and benchmark German bonds hit a new record on Tuesday, a sign that investors consider Spain’s debt riskier and riskier to own. The euro, after enjoying a strong rally in recent months, has also started slipping again.

How can Europe stop the bleeding? What we need is an entire rethink of how the Eurozone is approaching the problems of its weakest members.

The strategy so far has been simple: Put up rescue funds, demand reforms in the weak economies and hope those steps rebuild confidence in financial markets that the Eurozone’s struggling nations can pay back their giant debts. The process started with a $150 billion bailout of Greece in May; when that didn’t squash the contagion, the EU announced a fund of almost $1 trillion to rescue troubled Eurozone economies. Europe’s leaders hoped they’d never actually have to come up with this money. It was meant first and foremost as a confidence-building measure, so bondholders could be assured that enough cash was at hand to make them whole, no matter what happened in Ireland, Portugal and Spain.

This entire scheme has blown up in Europe’s face. The plan failed to save Ireland; now it is looking more and more likely that Portugal is next. With its high debt, meager growth and political disarray, Portugal has been in the investor spotlight for most of the year, and matters seem to be deteriorating. Unions are calling a general strike on Wednesday to protest a planned austerity budget, which faces a vote in the bickering parliament on Friday. I’m not sure that passing that budget will appease the markets. The government said on Monday that the budget deficit for the first 10 months of 2010 widened from a year ago. Investors seem to be assuming Portugal will inevitably require an Ireland-style rescue. In a Monday note to investors, Royal Bank of Canada Europe stated flatly that it expects Portugal to seek a bailout:

We think it is very likely that Portugal will need a bailout, too. Rates remain prohibitive and in the absence of a massive spread rally (which we do not expect), Portugal will be unable to fund at sensitive levels. Large cash needs will arise in April at the latest. Given the time lag, we think a program is likely by February at the latest.

Why has Europe’s bailout strategy failed? Because investors don’t believe it is viable. The strategy is predicated on the notion that the governments receiving bailouts can fix their finances sufficiently enough to restore confidence in their ability to pay their debts. That means Greece and Ireland have to implement steep budget cuts and other austerity measures. Those steps, however, will only further depress already depressed economies. Even if politicians in Greece and Ireland can muster the political will and authority to sustain those policies – and that’s a big if — there’s no guarantee they will work to turn these economies around. In fact, the bailout-mandated cuts, by suppressing growth, may make it even harder for Greece and Ireland to repair their financial position and pay their creditors. So investors don’t believe that the bailout programs are ensuring they’ll get their money back. That keeps the fear of eventual debt restructurings, in which bondholders share the losses, or even worse, defaults, very much alive.

The instinct of investors under these circumstances is to sell the bonds of weak sovereigns. That’s why Portuguese and Spanish bonds are getting pummeled. The response from the EU is to stress that the economic situation of each nation is different and investors should behave based on that fact. “Portugal does not need any help, it is in a very different situation to Ireland,” European Council President Herman Van Rompuy said Tuesday. That’s true, but it doesn’t matter. Ireland wasn’t supposed to be Greece, either. Once fear grips the minds of investors, they behave in ways that make those fears a reality. That’s how contagion works.

Stopping this cycle of fear and crisis won’t be easy. Investors have to be convinced that their money is safe in Irish, Portuguese and Spanish bonds. How can that be achieved? Europe has to address the problem with more than budget cuts and bailouts. Yes, Greece, Ireland and Portugal all have to get their fiscal deficits under control and stabilize debt levels. But blind slashing with a hatchet can’t be the sole method. Reform programs have to be designed to achieve financial stability while improving each nation’s opportunities to return to healthy growth. Such programs would bolster investor confidence that (1) they would be sustainable, politically and economically, and (2) that the governments implementing them would be better able to pay their debts over the long term.

I think Europe has to tackle its debt problem more proactively, not waiting until the edge of the abyss to step in, but getting ahead of the markets and putting in place reform-based bailouts now, at least for Portugal. I also believe these reform packages have to promise change in the Eurozone overall, not just within its weakest members. As part of the bailouts, the Eurozone has to show it is willing to take steps to help these debt-ridden weaklings out of their crises. That means countries like Germany and France can’t just put up some cash for a bailout and go about their business. They need to show a willingness to reform to support their fellow euro-users. Germany, for example, should show a stronger commitment to reducing its current account surplus by liberalizing its still highly regulated economy to spur more domestic demand and buy more from the rest of Europe.

If matters stay as they are, we’re potentially looking at the end of the monetary union. If Portugal goes, Spain is next to face the firing squad. And Spain is a game changer. Finding the cash to rescue Greece, Ireland and possibly Portugal, all small, peripheral economies, is not that much of a challenge, But if Spain, the world’s 9th-largest economy, gets into trouble, it would probably eat up much of what would be left in Europe’s $1 trillion rescue fund. And then what’s available to bailout the next victim? The more bailouts are needed, the more pressure that puts on the political leaders in the rest of Europe who have to put up the funds. This is politically dangerous stuff – asking voters to accept cuts to services and budget spending at home while directing taxpayer money to bailout the Greeks, Irish, and so on. We can’t expect Europe to keep the bailouts coming indefinitely.

Related Topics: Wall Street & Markets
  • Latest on Business

    Brendan McDermid / Reuters

    Facebook’s Stock Falls Below $30 for First Time

    (NEW YORK) — Facebook’s stock has fallen below $30 for the first time since its much-awaited public debut this month.

    The Jury Is Out on the EuroSlate

    U.S. consumer prices rose faster than expected in May. (Mario Anzuoni / Reuters)

    Consumer Confidence in the Economy Plunged in May

    NEW YORK — American confidence in the economy suffered the biggest drop in eight months as worries about the weak jobs, housing and stock markets rattled them again. The decline comes after a few months of optimism amid some positive economic news.

  • deconstructiva

    Michael, thanks for this update although you forgot to address the most popular “solution” listed in comments (though not from me): that countries become “monetarily sovereign”, whatever the hell that means, and can just print all the money they wish to solve everything. Never mind that post-WW1 Germany tried that, but I digress. You’ll probably see that “solution” proposed here anyway so just get it over with already and shoot it down once and for all to make it go away address it in a fair and balanced manner.
    .
    In a more serious manner / speaking of Germany, Michael, how are you reading their reactions here? Do you think they’ll get tired of carrying their weaker brethren and pull the plug / go back to the Deutsche Mark (to save their own ass) or otherwise to a lesser degree stop the bailouts? And in pure “greed is good” fashion, can Ireland and Spain’s mess make the dollar look better to traders or will the falling tides sink all the yachts? Thanks for your thoughts (and putting up with ours).

  • paganbarbarian

    A person who buys bonds in Swiss francs is an investor. A person who buys Portuguese bonds is a gambler. Gamblers deserves whatever loses they get. The euro nations being attacked by gamblers should default, and let the gamblers of the world eat five cents on the dollar. It would serve them right.

  • Michael Schuman

    You’ll probably be interested in this take on Germany and the euro in the FT the other day
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/85b62490-f66e-11df-846a-00144feab49a.html#axzz16Goo3RkS

  • http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

    deconstructiva, says the perfect debt hawk things. Typically, none of his comments include supporting facts. They are pure intuition. Here are a few classic debt-hawk examples:
    .

    “. . . countries become “monetarily sovereign”, whatever the hell that means, . . .”

    .
    He doesn’t know what Monetary Sovereignty means, but by heaven, he’s against it.
    .

    “. . . just print all the money they wish to solve everything . . .

    The usual debt-hawk straw man. Those who understand Monetary Sovereignty know that excessive money printing could cause inflation. However, neither we nor the EU nations are anywhere near that point. (See Item 12)
    .
    <blockquote “. . . post-WW1 Germany . . .
    .
    Ah, the old German hyperinflation routine. I’m surprised he didn’t mention Zimbabwe, as that has become a debt-hawk favorite, lately. German inflation was caused by the onerous, post-WWI conditions placed on Germany by the allies. The German government responded to the inflation by printing money, rather than by raising interest rates, as Monetary Sovereignty suggests. Money printing in response to inflation causes hyperinflation. In essence, the inflation causes the money printing, and not the other way around.
    .
    Note that the only debt-hawk “solution” is to “pull the plug,” i.e. to allow several nations to experience the horror of sinking into depression. Presumably, this is punishment for not doing the impossible, namely for a non-sovereign government to be self-supporting without a positive balance of trade. (See: Impossible task
    .
    Five years ago I predicted the EU would experience just what it now is experiencing (See: The Solution ), and gave the solutions then.
    .
    There are but two long-term solutions for the EU nations:
    1. Become monetarily sovereign, like the U.S., Canada, Japan, Australia and the U.K. (a member of the EU that cannot go bankrupt)
    or
    2. Have the EU, which itself is monetarily sovereign, support its member states.

    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

  • deconstructiva

    Thanks for linking your own blog as sole proof for your own arguments.

  • deconstructiva

    Thanks for the link, although it’s firewalled / limited # articles access. Looks like the euro’s toast if Germany’s internal struggles over it implode (such as in court / constitutional issues?).

  • http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

    deconstructiva, still not reading?
    .
    The blog references I provided contain the data. Just because you don’t like the source, doesn’t mean you should ignore the data.
    .
    Or, if you don’t like my data, go to http://moslereconomics.com/ or to http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/

    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

  • http://will110256.wordpress.com will110256

    On brighter news, I used to think that voters in the US were somewhat stupider than those in Europe. Now, however, it also seems that a substantial block of European voters like to receive government benefits and services without paying for them. God, I’m glad we don’t have people in this country like that. Sarcasm intended.

  • economicsfordemocrats

    This crisis was mainly caused by the private monetary system of the commercial banks and wall street. It caused tax revenues of governments to go down and safety net expenditures to go up. Therefore, it is impossible for non monetary sovereign states to be solvent! (Including most of our States)

    Then the EU, IMF and others, then force these state’s to balance their fiscal budgets causing more economic damage.

    This is NOT a fiscal problem it is a monetary one and can be solved on the monetary side.

    Rodger is correct. There are plenty of research, history and facts besides his website. Please review http://www.monetary.org and join the monetary reform movement.

    Mark S. Pash, CFP
    Center for Progressive Economics

  • http://www.thedailyalmanac.com thelastrefuge

    Greece Austerity Program “On Track”
    Greece’s lenders have cleared the way for the nation to receive the next installment of its $150 billion bailout package. Officials from the EU and IMF say while its austerity program remains largely on track, Greece still needs to make an “extra effort. http://www.newslook.com/videos/268741-greece-austerity-program-on-track?autoplay=true

  • http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

    Thanks Mark,
    In addition, all of our counties, cities, towns, companies and people are monetarily non-sovereign. Over the long haul, no monetarily non-sovereign entity can survive without money coming in from outside.

    If a state spends all its money on in-state projects, and receives all its money from resident taxpayers, then a fixed amount of money merely circulates within the state. In that case, even the most modest inflation will reduce the total value of money in the state, and ultimately the state will be unable to pay its bills.

    For that reason, each state either must be a net exporter, or receive more money from the federal government than its residents pay to the federal government in taxes.

    Clearly, it’s not possible for every state to be a net exporter, so mathematically it is necessary for the federal government to support the states (and the states to support the counties and cities).

    We can complain about how dishonest state politicians are, but even if all state officials were scrupulously honest, most states would be suffering financially. It’s basic math.

    The same is true of the monetarily non-sovereign EU nations. Mathematically it is impossible for all of them to survive without assistance (not loans) from the EU itself, which is monetarily sovereign.

    Ireland’s only reasonable salvation is to quit the EU and declare itself monetarily sovereign.

    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

  • http://simonls25.wordpress.com simonls25

    @RMM. regarding Ireland. I am sure they would love to bail from the Eurozone but look at us, its neighbour, Britain. We are not in the Euro but we are in deep doodoo (technical term :P ) with our government slashing public spending at the cost (anticipated) of the loss of ONE MILLION JOBS (both private and public sector). The people and opposition in the UK want a more steady debt reduction plan but despite heaped pressure from various quarters the Conservative led government is intent on ignoring all good advice and today said that “Protest will not change policy” now, in light of the fact they are committing Britain to economic suicide can ANYONE on here please use whatever leverage you are able to make them listen to reason or you will also see the collapse of the UK economy within the next couple of years. HELP!

  • http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

    Yes, we have the same suicidal group. They are the “debt-hawks,” who they think they are being “prudent,” when in fact they are destroying America.

    I am reminded of the doctors who applied leaches to sick people, to remove the “bad blood.” They wound up killing the people they wanted to cure.

    Your idiots are no smarter than our idiots, and absolutely, positively will not listen to facts. They just know in their guts that deficits and debt are harmful, and they have no desire to learn about Monetary Sovereignty.

    One day, I hope before they do irrevocable damage, they will understand, at which time they will tell the world, “Hey, I knew it all the time.”

    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

  • Michael Schuman

    Let me finally weigh in here. Rodger is correct that, in theory, countries with control over their own currencies can create as much money as they wish. But in practice, they don’t. Every country, the U.S. included, control the growth of money supply, raise government funds through taxes, attract foreign investment and other funds from overseas, etc. That’s because there is a downside to printing money as well. The reason is based on the very basic concept of supply and demand. The more supply there is of something, whether apples, automobiles or currency, the less it is valued, especially if that supply outstrips demand. If everyone knew that the U.S. government just printed money indefinitely to pay its bills or whatever, the value of that money would deteriorate. Perhaps Rodger is correct, and countries could safely take on more debt and deficits than they currently do. That’s why the debate over the current wave of austerity measures in the developed world has been so confrontational. But at some point, a country that prints money endlessly will come to destroy the value of its currency.
    Nor does possessing your own currency make you immune from financial or debt crises. There are endless examples of countries with their own currencies that defaulted on their debt or experienced a financial meltdown.
    The problems in Europe are related to the euro, but not in the way Rodger believes. Joining the monetary union allowed some countries to enjoy lower interest rates than they would have as fully independent economies. Those lower interest rates fed credit booms, which have now gone bust. That’s what happened in Spain. Having more euros around would have only fed the bubble further. In the case of Greece, joining the eurozone allowed the government to borrow money to fill in deficits at a lower cost than it should have been able to get if it had an independent currency. If Greece was able to print its own money to fill in its deficits, it probably would have destroyed its value, or it wouldn’t have been able to run the deficits it did for so long.

  • http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

    Michael is correct to mention supply and demand. He properly says, “The more supply there is of something . . . the less it is valued, especially if that supply outstrips demand.”
    .
    Unfortunately, he then ignores demand. Demand is based on risk and reward. The risk of owning money is inflation; the reward for owning money is interest. The demand for money is increased by raising interest rates.
    .
    This is why the Fed successfully fights inflation by raising interest rates, and is why there has been no relationship between federal deficits and inflation since we went off the gold standard in 1971. (See: Cause of Inflation )
    .
    Michael parrots the old debt-hawk line, “But at some point, a country that prints money endlessly will come to destroy the value of its currency.” Yes, yes, at some point. I, as accurately could say, “At some point taxing endlessly will bankrupt a nation’s citizens,” an equally meaningless statement.
    .
    So that misleading “at-some-point” comment works equally well against increasing the deficit or decreasing the deficit.
    .
    If Michael is right, we should see a relationship between federal deficit spending and inflation. If I am right, we should not see that relationship. Fair enough?
    .
    So what do the facts show? Read: Causes of Inflation and decide for yourself.
    .
    Ireland, Greece and Spain, monetarily non-sovereign nations, have run large deficits, and now are unable to service their debts. Read what Ireland for instance, is forced to undergo: Ireland. The U.S. and Japan, both monetarily sovereign, also have run huge deficits, but have no difficulty whatsoever servicing their debts. Why?
    ..
    Anyone who has not studied the implications of Monetary Sovereignty, simply does not understand modern (post-1971) economics.
    .
    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

  • http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

    Michael, what’s happening in Europe is exactly as I predicted 5 years ago, in a speech at the University of Missouri, Kansas City: SPEECH, when I said, “The Euro is the worst economic idea since the recession-era, Smoot-Hawley Tariff. The economies of European nations are doomed by the Euro.”
    .
    When you read and understand the implications of Monetary Sovereignty, you will realize the crisis in Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Greece could not have happened had these nations not surrendered their monetary sovereignty.
    .
    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

blog comments powered by Disqus