iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Job Creation Idea No. 9: Encourage Banks To Lend -- Or Else

Bank

First Posted: 10/12/10 01:38 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:00 PM ET

(No. 9 in Huffington Post's America Needs Jobs series.)

This jobless "recovery" we are in right now is no accident.

That's because corporate fat cats are sitting on mounds of money rather than spending it or investing it in ways that would create jobs.

As the Washington Post recently reported, executives at U.S. companies hoarding a record $1.8 trillion in cash are finally dipping into those reserves -- but, amazingly enough, only to buy back their own stock, a move intended to prop up their share prices and pad their bonuses.

Even that, however, is not as bad as what the banks are doing. (Remember the banks? The ones that got us into this mess in the first place?)

The Federal Reserve, ever since December 2008, has been lending banks loads of money at zero or near-zero interest in an attempt to stimulate lending. But far from lending all that cheap money to businesses that could create jobs, the banks have used it to hugely inflate their cash reserves -- from about $20 billion in 2007 to about $1 trillion today. And when the banks do lend, which is rarely, it's at a huge mark-up.

The reason for all this is that the financial incentives are all wrong. Just as companies are afraid to expand for fear the recovery will stall out, the banks aren't motivated to lend because the possible downsides seem greater than the upsides.

So what if the government provided those banks with some big-time motivation -- by taxing those grotesquely swollen excess cash reserves? Wouldn't that shake things up?

That's what Robert Pollin is advocating.

Pollin, an economist at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, believes we've exhausted monetary policy. "In a severe slump, monetary policy is 'pushing on a string' because you can't go below a zero percent interest rate," he said. But even with monetary policy literally as loose as possible, "the real thing that's meaningful is whether there's credit going out to businesses," Pollin told the Huffington Post. "And there isn't."

In fact, a goodly portion of the jobs crisis can be traced directly an approximately $1.5 trillion shortfall in private borrowing, Pollin said.

Fiscal policy is another possibility, of course. But fiscal action major enough to make a real difference is a political non-starter. "To inject $1.5 trillion back into the economy, you'd have to have something that's twice as big as the [original] stimulus."

Good luck with that. And even then, Pollin said, "there's only so much you can get out of government spending if the private market is not accommodating, which it isn't."

Today, more than ever, Willie Sutton's dictum is right on. The banks are where the money is.

Pollin suggests defining all bank reserves over, say, $200 billion as "excess reserves" -- and taxing them.

"I think a reserve tax is a good tool, and it would be popular, too," he said.

Then comes part two. Banks don't just need to start lending money; they need to lend it at reasonable rates.

Right now, banks are so nervous about the risks involved in lending money that an average, solid business has to pay about 6.5 percent interest for a long-term loan, Pollin has found. Pretty much all of that is profit for the bank, of course, which as you will recall can borrow the money from the Fed for close to nothing.

Pollin proposes lowering the risk for banks by dramatically ramping up the government's existing loan guarantee programs.

"The stick is the tax; the carrot is the huge expansion in loan guarantees," Pollin said. "We're giving them opportunity but we're also holding them accountable."

Even with double the rate of defaults experienced in 2007, the program's increased costs would be minimal compared to the gains, Pollin said. Meanwhile, "it would tell the financial system that if you all are saying risk is too high, we're going to lower risk.

"It's not a way to punish banks," he said. "It's a way to get them to do their job. Their job is not just to sit on idle reserves.


COMING NEXT IN THE AMERICA NEEDS JOBS SERIES: Devalue The Dollar

Have you missed any of the previous installments of HuffPost's America Needs Jobs series? Read the introduction, Idea No. 1: A Payroll Tax Holiday, No. 2: Rescue The States, No. 3: The Joys Of Retrofitting, No. 4: Put Young People To Work, No. 5: Gearing Up For Climate Change, No. 6: Sharing The Pain Of Layoffs, No. 7: Drawing A Line With China, and No. 8: Time For A New WPA.

Got an idea you think we may be overlooking? Email froomkin@huffingtonpost.com.


*************************

Dan Froomkin is senior Washington correspondent for the Huffington Post. You can send him an e-mail, bookmark his page; subscribe to RSS feed, follow him on Twitter, friend him on Facebook, and/or become a fan and get e-mail alerts when he writes.


FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
(No. 9 in Huffington Post's America Needs Jobs series.) This jobless "recovery" we are in right now is no accident. That's because corporate fat cats are sitting on mounds of money rather than spend...
(No. 9 in Huffington Post's America Needs Jobs series.) This jobless "recovery" we are in right now is no accident. That's because corporate fat cats are sitting on mounds of money rather than spend...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,456
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (28 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jzyehoshua
02:22 PM on 10/15/2010
"Forcing them to lend" isn't the same thing as taxing all bank reserves over $200 billion. The article is deceptive in what it's pushing. Furthermore, isn't it risky subprime loans that the government forced banks to make in the first place that played a role in the housing bubble?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo125.html

While I'd agree with making the rich spend to create jobs, at least those who paid themselves with salaries gotten from excessive executive compensation at publicly traded companies even as they fired workers and accepted government bailouts, this appears some of the same wrong-headed thinking that caused the mess in the first place.
photo
AyeChart
Retired Army, half-retired physician
12:08 PM on 10/14/2010
Job creation idea number 10: Leave the banks and the corporations alone! Maximize freedom, and the jobs will take care of themselves. We're America, after all!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Eva fate
01:36 PM on 10/28/2010
open a history book to the end of the 19th century.
the triangle shirtwaist fire, the pinkertons, upton sinclair's "the jungle"... go read about them and other horrible abuses of wealth and power that regulations and unions were first started to avoid. no one anywhere in the world should have to live like that. and it's been historically proven not to be very good for society...
photo
constitutional 1
Reductio ad absurdum
09:22 AM on 10/14/2010
May 5 2009 NYT

About 10 of the 19 largest U.S. banks being stress tested will be instructed by regulators to raise more capital, Reuters reported, citing a source familiar with official talks.


The banks have been negotiating with their regulators about the depth of their capital needs, should the recession prove to be deeper and longer than anticipated. Markets have been anxiously anticipating the results, which will differentiate the strongest banks from those still expected to sustain considerable credit losses.

http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/05/about-10-us-stress-test-banks-to-need-more-capital/
09:08 AM on 10/14/2010
Before commenting, I'd like a better understanding of:

1. parameters used to determine what will deemed "excess reserves" and what measure above those reserves (as they constantly move and there must be some margin of safety) will be set to be taxed.

2. What are banks doing with current excess reserves (investments, etc.); what return (if any) do the derive form this activity; what is the advantage to them for taking such action?
03:21 PM on 10/15/2010
So no one can provide real insight on the points above? Until they are answered, the question about taxing excess bank capital in mute.

...and looking at the news on banks today, perhaps there might be less excess than we thought.
01:47 AM on 10/14/2010
I have a small business. I can't get affordable funds to grow.

I am in consumer electronics, so the traditional VCs don't want to invest in it since they want to invest in Asian companies for this.

Most banks don't want to loan me money because in the current economy, I can't demonstrate profitability, and the few that do agree to lend want to charge huge interests and large payments. This is particularly irritating given that my taxes bailed them out and now they are getting 0% loans from the Feds.

I know that my product lacks a few features, and if I could get the funds to hire a few more engineers, I could become competitive.

So here is an idea - instead of giving the 0% loans to the Feds, give me the 0% loans and I promise to create jobs far more efficiently for the money. Moreover, this will allow me to make my business successful - contributing to the economic recovery.

The alternative is for me to further reduce my local staff and outsource those jobs to India so that I don't have to fold my company.
09:05 AM on 10/14/2010
Is it really the banks fault or the Government fault that you can't grow? It's policies they've enacted that prevents you from growing and making your option to outsource the only viable solution.

Haphazard loan practices is what helps push us off the edge, are we to demand that they reduce their loan requirement AGAIN because this time, instead of saying every American has a right to a home, we're saying every American has a right to a job? So because we need jobs, banks need to loan out no matter what, regardless of what the risks involved could be?

Or maybe you'd like them to be haphazard again with their loans, which they could, then they'd have to get BAILED OUT again when business crumble and can't pay back their business loans. So which is it America?

Force banks to loan, risk the money again and when those industry fails, we bail the banks out again?

I understand your irritations, I would like you to grow! American business should and must grow, but Government Intervention won't do the trick. It might put a band aid on the problem that won't fix a broken bone.

Who's giving the Fed 0% loans? It's the Fed giving out the loans. The Fed shouldn't even exist, for those of you that hate private banks, they're the worst! Banks should loan out to businesses, but they shouldn't be forced to do so haphazardly for the sake of job creation.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Capn Scott
the 'moderated' me
01:02 PM on 11/04/2010
Spoken like a true tea-bagger. He's got his, so everyone else can just go fsck themselves. Cripes ...its posts like this that make me long for the days of tar-and-feathering.
photo
mmm611
themiracleinsidemymind.com
10:52 PM on 10/13/2010
Hello, didn't you just get through blaming the banks for the financial crisis? You blame the banks for being greedy and making all those risky loans, then, when they don't make the loans, you blame them for being greedy and not making loans. People need to understand that we are a capitalist society, and if you don't like it, move to Cuba. In Cuba, blaming the banks for not lending would make perfect sense. Some people here truly don't understand the great history and culture of our country. Maybe that is why we are going down......
09:09 AM on 10/14/2010
As much as I agree with your point on blaming banks on both sides of the story. It's true, now the banks are being hesitant to loan because they know what happened last time. Subprime mortgages came about because the Government told banks to loan to risky home buyers because "everyone has the right to a home". Look what happened!

BUT I disagree with you in saying people should leave the country. I hate when American's tell other American's this. I get told this ALL the time. Leave! Go to China!

The American Revolution was not overwhelmingly popular in the colonies as we would like to believe. I guarantee many of the colonist told our founding fathers, "If you don't like it, leave the colonies!" Imagine this country had our founding fathers decide to leave instead of fight back and create this nation. It'd be a different world all together.
photo
mmm611
themiracleinsidemymind.com
06:32 PM on 10/14/2010
Sorry about the "leaving the country" part. But I think it's more of a rhetorical statement not to be taken literally.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MissingAmerica
09:59 PM on 10/13/2010
Here's one good reason: It's our money they were given in the first place!
09:11 AM on 10/14/2010
The problem is, it was GIVEN to them. Don't be an Indian giver. Our Federal Government thought it was a good move to give them this money, so point blame where blame is due.

Why don't you say "Hey Big Government, you will no longer give Welfare to ANYONE, business OR individuals!"

I'm again both individual and corporate welfare.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:18 PM on 10/13/2010
yea... lets get the government to pressure the banks into making more bad loans to people who are not qualified to receive them because it worked out so well the last time around, remember 2008? Banks are in the business of loaning money, thats how they make the majority of their profits, however, they have been forced to tighten lending practices in the wake of the 2008 debacle (which is probably a good thing). Its not that the banks arnt lending because they are greedy bastards (having vast cash reserves really dosent benefit them, other than being capable of surviving a collapse better), they are not lending because their is a lack of demand from credit worthy borrowers. Its a tricky situation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gerald4
licensed mechanical and electrical engineer
06:11 PM on 10/13/2010
I am going to start a wind driven electrical generator factory in the USA? I will import wind driven electrical generators from China and then hire a couple of US citizens (or maybe illegal aliens) to remove the Chinese nameplates and then attach a new nameplate with my factory name, address, serial number, with "Made in the USA" on the nameplate, and then that product will be "Made in the USA"?

I plan to make sufficient political contributions to US congressmen and/or hire lobbyists to have a law passed to require that only "US Made Products" be installed on all of the federally funded "Green Energy" projects, then I will be able to sell these wind driven electrical generators at any price that I desire, and the US unemployment statistics for the USA will not be changed.

If the US government objects, then I will have the wind driven electrical generators delivered to my factory without nameplates and then they will be parts for final assembly in the USA by Americans when US citizens add only the nameplate to each of the Chinese wind driven electrical generators.

I will pay the Chinese with US dollars for these wind driven electrical generators, and the Chinese will then use my US dollars to buy title to more privately owned businesses, factories, casinos, hotels, farms, land, ports, breweries, refineries, forests, ports, breweries and other privately owned wealth and other assets located in the USA that were created by previous US generations.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gerald4
licensed mechanical and electrical engineer
06:02 PM on 10/13/2010
If you want US businesses to hire US citizens, there must be some financial incentive for US businesses to hire US citizens instead of relocating the jobs to lower paying countries?

During the last 40 years you and I both (or your parents) elected the Democrat and the Republican members of the US Congress and US Senate that created the "FREE TRADE" laws that removed the import taxes on imported consumer products to the USA and this allowed, encouraged and economically required that US businesses to use less expensive foreign labor and less expensive foreign country environmental laws, in order to give the US consumer the absolutely lowest possible price for each product, without the business going bankrupt.

I believe that most of the foreign manufacturers (and US importer/distribuitor/retailer's) hired paid lobbyists to spen hundreds of thousands of dollars on wine, food, women, song, vacations, cash, sexual services, corporate jobs for the (unemployable) children/wives/girlfriends of the congressmen and their aids who actually control the members of congress, and campaign contributions to entice (bribe) each of our US congressmen for the past 40 years to create all of these various "FREE TRADE LEGISLATION" and treaties that allowed, caused, and economically required our businesses to take advantage of the lower labor and environmental costs available in various foreign countries?
05:39 PM on 10/13/2010
Enough with business, banks and financial institutions - lets put America to work!
Time to help the shrinking middle class & forget about the banks and other greedy institutions.

Main Street Americans can resolve the housing and employment crisis FAST.
How about giving all Americans making less than $250,000yr the option to withdraw retirement savings TAX FREE if they pay CASH for a primary or second home or rent to a foreclosure victim? They must keep the home for at least 3 years or pay the taxes.
This would greatly reduce the foreclosure blight, stop home prices from declining, put cash in the economy, increase consumer confidence and spending, and provide much needed employment as well as state and local taxes.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
searles7
06:04 PM on 10/13/2010
Yes, it would do all of those things and for a very short time. What, pray tell, would you do for an encore? The excess reserves tax is a much needed, perpetual part of the mechanism of national economics not a stop gap with temporary ramifications.
06:10 PM on 10/13/2010
This would restore confidence in the economy.
Confidence would increase demand for goods and services.
Increase demand leads to increase jobs.
Without increasing DEMAND for homes, home prices and foreclosures continue their downward spiral, which further decreases demand and consumer demand.
If we offer the middle class (Not Banks, Wall Street, Mortgage Companies) incentives to buy home for all cash (no middle men or debt), we increase jobs (think how many products/services are purchased by new homeowners), decrease foreclosures and jump start the economy.
100% AMERICAN HOMES AND AMERICAN JOBS.

Besides, you know of anything else that might work?
oilfield
large employer per obamacare
11:26 PM on 10/13/2010
that would be too close to being self sufficient....we have to be dependant on someone right?
03:43 PM on 10/13/2010
Or what?

No cookies with the romper room crowd?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:27 PM on 10/13/2010
If the interest-free handouts the Feds been giving the banks are loans, can't the Fed just take the money back. Call the loans.
05:44 PM on 10/13/2010
Foreclose on the banks; I love it!
10:01 PM on 10/13/2010
Tarp money are returned by almost all banks, except the Barney's pet Fannie Mae
01:57 PM on 10/13/2010
What a mind-bogglingly foolish idea! Have we all forgotten the disaster that ensued the LAST time we tried mandating loans? And what is to keep banks from simply 'loaning' each other equal amounts and making the whole effort moot?

You cannot artificially create demand by outlawing savings. More ominously, if we allow the government to tax bank's reserves, what's to keep them from taxing US for doing the same? Imagine if the corporatists got the last laugh by outlawing people from putting aside any money!
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
03:50 PM on 10/13/2010
You obviously don't understand our banking system. There's HUGE demand and the banks aren't lending. Did you READ the article? Nobody suggested outlawing savings.
09:25 AM on 10/14/2010
When you create a punitive tax law you are outlawing savings. If you say you can tax the reserves of banks, cash they just have on hand, you are essentially saying you are allowing the IRS to tax cash that someone is saving, ie, not willing or wanting to spend.
09:15 AM on 10/13/2010
Thomas Jefferson warned this country about the problems with the banking system in 1816. Did ANYBODY listen? "The system of banking we have both equally and ever reprobated. I contemplate it as a blot left in all our constitutions, which, if not covered, will end in their destruction, which is already hit by the gamblers in corruption, and is sweeping away in its progress the fortunes and morals of our citizens"
02:23 PM on 10/13/2010
Nobody listened because Thomas Jefferson was a rabble-rouser and a closet anarchist.