3rd October 2008

Confirmation bias

posted in Alaska, Economy, Politics, Weather |

We haz it.

I watched the debate (of course) (sigh) (when did I decide to become a politics junkie?).  I thought that Biden came across better, but that’s because I’m on his side.  Palin’s constant reiteration of “maverick”, as though it were a magic charm, made me roll my eyes; her misunderstanding of what an “Achilles heel” is makes me worry about my dotter’s education here in Alaska; her co-opting of a series of Reagan’s catchphrases, including “There you go again, Joe!” was noticeable; and the last I heard, it was the mess on Wall Street that is impacting Main Street.  But, in the end, she redeemed herself by not repeating her gaffes from various carefully prepped interviews.  She sounded, in general, nice.

But I’m not looking for “nice” in my presidential or vice-presidential candidates.

So I came away thinking Biden “won”–whatever that means.

Then we went to dinner at the local Indian restaurant.  Mixed grill–yum!  Tandoori chicken, shish kebab, lamb, curried chicken.  Mmmm.

There was another group at the restaurant, talking vivaciously about the debate, and about the current economic situation.  I first noticed them when they were talking about the debate; one guy shouted out, “She really nailed it when she said, ‘I’m not one of those Washington insiders who says I’m for this then says I’m not for it’!  BINGO!  I want someone who’ll say what they mean and mean what they say!”

So, there ya have it:  Confirmation bias.  I thought Biden came out better; these folks thought Palin came out better.

And then the older woman in the group–who seemed to be a real estate person–started talking about the economic situation and the bailout bill.

She said that a friend had offered on a house, had the mortgage all set up, everything was going swimmingly…and then, the day of closing, the loan offer was withdrawn.  She said that these people had great credit.  I’ve heard similar things online; this was the first I had heard it “first-hand”.  She said that credit was frozen, and she talked about a few businesses she knew that were running on credit and weren’t going to be able to meet their payrolls if it kept up.  She wanted the bailout, even though she thought it wasn’t very good, because it was the only thing going right now.  She mentioned 401k’s that had taken huge hits during the stock drop on Monday and how people who were close to retirement were getting hammered.

All of which is true (except I wasn’t for the bailout).

Then they talked about not living on credit.

Which seemed a bit of cognitive dissonance to me; the entire notion behind the bailout is, in essence, that we should go back to borrowing money like crazy and spending it like crazy and the economy will just go on chugging along, growing and blossoming, tra la, tra la.

So this afternoon the House of Representatives voted for the bailout–the expanded bailout, with $100 billion of pork tacked on to make it appetizing to a wider variety of senators and representatives.

And the stock market, which had been up some 200 points prior to the vote, dropped.  And kept dropping.  And ended the day below where it ended on Monday…the day the bailout vote failed.

Say what?!  Isn’t the bailout supposed to…oh…”save 401k’s and retirement accounts”?  Aren’t we all happy campers now?  Isn’t Great Depression II averted?  Wasn’t the stock market going to heave a great sigh of relief?  The bailout certainly hasn’t saved Wachovia Bank, which is currently being fought over by Citibank and Wells Fargo, like a pair of vultures over fresh road kill.

I’ve been saying it for a while, and I’ll say it again:  This mess is too entrenched, too intertwined, too highly leveraged, for this bailout to stop the unraveling.  Oh, it may end up slowing it down a bit.  But firms that are leveraged 30:1 or more aren’t going to become solvent with a wave of the magic Federal Reserve/Treasury/bailout wand.  And those firms are global in scope; just read a bit about what’s happening in Iceland.  Or see how the Greeks today passed a blanket deposit guarantee bill after runs on the banks, emulating Ireland, which did the same thing yesterday.  Or read about the Dutch government taking over Fortis NV, a portion of Fortis, which is one of the largest financial companies in Europe, today.

I’m gettin’ a heapin’ helpin’ of confirmation bias about the economy these days…

Oh, yeah, and it’s snowing here:  Great big fat flakes.  Holy moly.  Our first snow of the winter season.

There are currently 6 responses to “Confirmation bias”

  1. 1 On October 4th, 2008, preTzel said:

    All of this has me nervous Kate. I have an IPERS (state) retirement and all the money from myself and my work goes in to that and I’m concerned about losing all of that. Mr.’s retirement is up in the air because his work forgot about red tape and they are now being investigated by Big Brother to make sure they did pay the retirement they were supposed to so his entire retirement account has been “frozen” for two years now and earning NOTHING because of it. Ugh.

    Snow? Yikes! I am not ready for it or the cold.

  2. 2 On October 4th, 2008, Halcyon Mama (aka Mrs Figby) said:

    I agree with you COMPLETELY. Finally! Someone who is saying exactly what I’ve been thinking about the bailout. I’m totally disappointed that the House caved.

    And here’s another first-person credit story for you: We got a letter from Chase the other day revoking our line of credit due to a late payment (less than 30 days) last spring to Home Depot when we were disputing the bill for our blinds. Luckily we didn’t need the LOC and hadn’t been using it anyway. But the scary part is that we have really outstanding credit, so I’m sure people with less great credit scores will be suffering. And economist after economist is now saying that they don’t think the bailout is going to have an effect on the credit markets anytime soon.

  3. 3 On October 4th, 2008, Theresa said:

    My dh is in finance-his company deals only with student loans and graduate student loans. I have watched him for the past couple years go on business trip to Europe to get the money for these students. The cascade effect now seen in Iceland does not surprise me at all.

    What frustates the hell out of me is that the root of this mess are all those subprime loans which then artificially inflated home values and now the bubble is bursting. There is plenty of blame to go around to everyone-congress-the banks-investors on Wall Street- but I want to know if they are now going to make sure people have adequate credit to purchase a home-or is this going to continue? Makes me want to storm those Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac hearings with a pitchfork!

    Dh says philosophically he is against the bailout but pragmatically he favors it. But we were the type of people that were told when we purchased our modest home 6 years ago-”You know you can have alot more money” and we said “Thanks, but no thanks!” because we knew about 6 months later we would be adopting and I would be quitting my job for a few years.

  4. 4 On October 4th, 2008, D2 said:

    On the politics… oh my. Reality and facts are so yesterday. Folksy-ness and bold baseless statements apparently are what matter. Never mind if half of what a person says is just meaningless or out of context…

    But that wasn’t why I wanted to comment. It’s that last part… the part about the snow. That’s just too hard to wrap my mind around… we had 80+ degrees and 90+% humidity at 8 this morning here in Ixtapa… and by now it’s well into the 90s and no change in humidity… can I have some of your cold air? I’ll trade for some hot and humid…

  5. 5 On October 4th, 2008, Sister Carrie said:

    Did you see this on The Onion? http://www.theonion.com/content/news/report_60_million_people_youd

    So true.

    I’m also philosophically against the bailout and pragmatically for it. All our retirement is in 401Ks. The outlook is very sad. I’m afraid to see what comes next. What was up with the stock market? It rose on the possibility of a bailout, then declined when the bailout was actually passed. Everyone’s so skittish.

  6. 6 On October 4th, 2008, Stephen Cataldo said:

    I don’t think following the stock market to assess the bailout is a good measure. There are two opposing pressures:
    1 — There is a huge breakdown of capital/credit markets (and capitalism), something we haven’t seen since the Great Depression in the US. The bailout is supposed to get the credit markets liquid, *which would push stocks up* the better the bailout design.
    2 — The original Paulson bailout would move hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to Wall Street. The stock market was really hoping for this, and the final bill was modified quite a bit towards equity instead of subsidy. This means more money for taxpayers, less for Wall Street, and is pushing stocks down (but the country up).

    When theory crashes into facts, it’s generally time to go with the facts. Corporate power unrestrained by good regulations led to depressions and monopolies throughout the 1800’s through the Great Depression — it sucked if you really believe in Free Markets. The recent support for “free markets” hasn’t been for the kinds of markets Adam Smith was talking about, it’s just painted greed.

Leave a Reply