« The fifty billion dollar fraud? | Main | Basel faulty, say economists »

Illiquid or insolvent

Describing the multi-bank liquidity injection, Paul Krugman writes:

...the Fed can come to the rescue. If the rumor is false, the bank has enough assets to cover its debts; all it lacks is liquidity — the ability to raise cash on short notice. And the Fed can solve that problem by giving the bank a temporary loan, tiding it over until things calm down.
Matters are very different, however, if the rumor is true: the bank really did make a big bad loan. Then the problem isn’t how to restore confidence; it’s how to deal with the fact that the bank is really, truly insolvent, that is, busted...What’s going on in the markets isn’t an irrational panic. It’s a wholly rational panic, because there’s a lot of bad debt out there, and you don’t know how much of that bad debt is held by the guy who wants to borrow your money...

Chris Dillow wonders "Are we in a Keynesian liquidity trap?"
And, at Seeking Alpha, Michael Shedlock agrees with Krugman that this is a solvency problem, not a liquidity problem, and does so under the best headline of the day: Banks Worldwide Engage in Global Coordinated Panic.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Risk 15% Limited Subscription Offer