site banner
Antonomon  1yr ago (novum.substack.com)   2307 thread views

"What if your entire worldview was just because of near-zero interest rates?"

novum.substack.com

Since the Great Recession, the Fed has transformed itself into an entity more and more responsible for asset prices. This was the stated goal since 2009 as the Fed adopted a new philosophy called the "Wealth Effect." The thinking behind it was simple: growth in asset prices would translate to an increase in consumer spending and hence demand itself. It was a 'trickle down' economic philosophy an increasingly financialized economy.

This backdrop has defined our post-2009 era which stirred certain pathologies that were reflected in the greater culture and politics. It was the time when 'finance became a culture' and actual-productivity plummeted across most developed economies, especially the United States. But somehow in spite of the accumulating dysfunction across most key areas, everything kept trudging along, partly thanks to investors being satiated with record returns.

While the near-zero interest rate regime may now be ending, it is worth considering how much of the water we were all swimming in excused poor state capacity, distorted economic fundamentals, and how it even kept a lid on the dysfunction potentially blowing up in our faces. Now that we have to reckon with these realities, it may be wise to ask how many worldviews were simply products of the the cheap money regime - which is now, in a shock to many, coming to a close. Whether or not it will easily be let go, however, is another matter.

11
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What asset bubbles are in Europe? I don’t even think asset bubbles exists for the most part. There just some guy saying they think the price of something is wrong and claiming there some intellectual bubble spot. And once every 10-16 years a guy whose made a 100 bubble calls gets one right and then he gets to go cnbc for the next decade as the guy who got it right but was just a perma bear who saw bubbles every where.

Real estate?

Why?

The prices in every major city in the EU have gone insane.

Why does that mean bubble?

People have not gotten more money, only access to more credit specifically for housing.

This creates a housing specific asset "bubble", where the properties haven't gotten better or more desirable and yet have greatly inflated in price relative to the rest of the economy and disconnected from material reality (construction cost and availability of land).

One could argue that it isn't a bubble in the sense that it can't really pop though. The people are stuck and there are no alternatives so even increasing interest rates can at most have an limited impact on prices (unless the central banks plan to break the economy).

Perhaps more accurate to say is that housing prices have rapidly increased, far outstripping any real growth in wages or productivity. This has a number of undesirable effects.

So buying power increased because a factor in the price of land - interest rates changed for real reasons. Not a bubble.

Granted almost every place doesn’t provide enough land for development which makes it the bottleneck asset and hence ability to pay (rates) tends to drive land prices.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats