THE
ASCENT OF MONEY: A FINANCIAL HISTORY OF THE WORLD
BY
NIALL FERGUSON
INTRODUCTION
Bread,
cash, dosh, dough, loot, lucre, moolah, readies, the where-withal: call it what
you like, money matters. To Christians, the love of it is the root of all evil.
To generals, it is the sinews of war; to revolutionaries, the shackles of
labour. But what exactly is money? Is it a mountain of silver, as the Spanish
conquistadors thought? Or will mere clay tablets and printed paper suffice? How
did we come to live in a world where most money is invisible, little more than
numbers on a computer screen? Where did money come from? And where did it all
go?
Last year
(2007) the income of the average American (just under $34,000) went up by at
most 5 per cent.1 But the cost of living rose by 4.1 per
cent. So in real terms Mr Average actually became just 0.9 per cent better off.
Allowing for inflation, the income of the median household in the United States
has in fact scarcely changed since 1990, increasing by just 7 per cent in
eighteen years.2 Now compare Mr Average’s situation with
that of Lloyd Blankfein, chief executive officer at Goldman Sachs, the
investment bank. In 2007 he received $68.5 million in salary, bonus and stock
awards, an increase of 25 per cent on the previous year, and roughly two
thousand times more than Joe Public earned. That same year, Goldman Sachs’s net
revenues of $46 billion exceeded the entire gross domestic product (GDP) of
more than a hundred countries, including Croatia, Serbia and Slovenia; Bolivia,
Ecuador and Guatemala; Angola, Syria and Tunisia. The bank’s total assets for
the first time passed the $1 trillion mark.3 Yet Lloyd
Blankfein is far from being the financial world’s highest earner. The veteran
hedge fund manager George Soros made $2.9 billion. Ken Griffin of Citadel, like
the founders of two other leading hedge funds, took home more than $2 billion.
Meanwhile nearly a billion people around the world struggle to get by on just
$1 a day.4
Angry
that the world is so unfair? Infuriated by fat-cat capitalists and
billion-bonus bankers? Baffled by the yawning chasm between the Haves, the
Have-nots - and the Have-yachts? You are not alone. Throughout the history of
Western civilization, there has been a recurrent hostility to finance and
financiers, rooted in the idea that those who make their living from lending
money are somehow parasitical on the ‘real’ economic activities of agriculture
and manufacturing. This hostility has three causes. It is partly because
debtors have tended to outnumber creditors and the former have seldom felt very
well disposed towards the latter. It is partly because financial crises and
scandals occur frequently enough to make finance appear to be a cause of
poverty rather than prosperity, volatility rather than stability. And it is
partly because, for centuries, financial services in countries all over the
world were disproportionately provided by members of ethnic or religious
minorities, who had been excluded from land ownership or public office but
enjoyed success in finance because of their own tight-knit networks of kinship
and trust.
Despite
our deeply rooted prejudices against ‘filthy lucre’, however, money is the root
of most progress. To adapt a phrase from Jacob Bronowski (whose marvellous
television history of scientific progress I watched avidly as a schoolboy), the
ascent of money has been essential to the ascent of man. Far from being the
work of mere leeches intent on sucking the life’s blood out of indebted
families or gambling with the savings of widows and orphans, financial
innovation has been an indispensable factor in man’s advance from wretched
subsistence to the giddy heights of material prosperity that so many people
know today. The evolution of credit and debt was as important as any
technological innovation in the rise of civilization, from ancient Babylon to
present-day Hong Kong. Banks and the bond market provided the material basis
for the splendours of the Italian Renaissance. Corporate finance was the
indispensable foundation of both the Dutch and British empires, just as the
triumph of the United States in the twentieth century was inseparable from
advances in insurance, mortgage finance and consumer credit. Perhaps, too, it
will be a financial crisis that signals the twilight of American global
primacy.
Behind
each great historical phenomenon there lies a financial secret, and this book
sets out to illuminate the most important of these. For example, the
Renaissance created such a boom in the market for art and architecture because
Italian bankers like the Medici made fortunes by applying Oriental mathematics
to money. The Dutch Republic prevailed over the Habsburg Empire because having
the world’s first modern stock market was financially preferable to having the
world’s biggest silver mine. The problems of the French monarchy could not be
resolved without a revolution because a convicted Scots murderer had wrecked
the French financial system by unleashing the first stock market bubble and
bust. It was Nathan Rothschild as much as the Duke of Wellington who defeated
Napoleon at Waterloo. It was financial folly, a self-destructive cycle of
defaults and devaluations, that turned Argentina from the world’s sixth-richest
country in the 1880s into the inflation-ridden basket case of the 1980s.
Read this
book and you will understand why, paradoxically, the people who live in the
world’s safest country are also the world’s most insured. You will discover
when and why the English-speaking peoples developed their peculiar obsession
with buying and selling houses. Perhaps most importantly, you will see how the
globalization of finance has, among many other things, blurred the old
distinction between developed and emerging markets, turning China into
America’s banker - the Communist creditor to the capitalist debtor, a change of
epochal significance.
At times,
the ascent of money has seemed inexorable. In 2006 the measured economic output
of the entire world was around $47 trillion. The total market capitalization of
the world’s stock markets was $51 trillion, 10 per cent larger. The total value
of domestic and international bonds was $68 trillion, 50 per cent larger. The
amount of derivatives outstanding was $473 trillion, more than ten times
larger. Planet Finance is beginning to dwarf Planet Earth. And Planet Finance
seems to spin faster too. Every day two trillion dollars change hands on
foreign exchange markets. Every month seven trillion dollars change hands on
global stock markets. Every minute of every hour of every day of every week,
someone, somewhere, is trading. And all the time new financial life forms are evolving.
In 2006, for example, the volume of leveraged buyouts (takeovers of firms
financed by borrowing) surged to $753 billion. An explosion of
‘securitization’, whereby individual debts like mortgages are ‘tranched’ then
bundled together and repackaged for sale, pushed the total annual issuance of
mortgage backed securities, asset-backed securities and collateralized debt
obligations above $3 trillion. The volume of derivatives - contracts derived
from securities, such as interest rate swaps or credit default swaps (CDS) -
has grown even faster, so that by the end of 2007 the notional value of all
‘over-the-counter’ derivatives (excluding those traded on public exchanges) was
just under $600 trillion. Before the 1980s, such things were virtually unknown.
New institutions, too, have proliferated. The first hedge fund was set up in
the 1940s and, as recently as 1990, there were just 610 of them, with $38
billion under management. There are now over seven thousand, with $1.9 trillion
under management. Private equity partnerships have also multiplied, as well as
a veritable shadow banking system of ‘conduits’ and ‘structured investment
vehicles’ (SIVs), designed to keep risky assets off bank balance sheets. If the
last four millennia witnessed the ascent of man the thinker, we now seem to be
living through the ascent of man the banker.
In 1947
the total value added by the financial sector to US gross domestic product was
2.3 per cent; by 2005 its contribution had risen to 7.7 per cent of GDP. In
other words, approximately $1 of every $13 paid to employees in the United
States now goes to people working in finance.5 Finance
is even more important in Britain, where it accounted for 9.4 per cent of GDP
in 2006. The financial sector has also become the most powerful magnet in the
world for academic talent. Back in 1970 only around 5 per cent of the men
graduating from Harvard, where I teach, went into finance. By 1990 that figure
had risen to 15 per cent.a Last year the proportion was
even higher. According to the Harvard Crimson, more than 20 per
cent of the men in the Class of 2007, and 10 per cent of the women, expected
their first jobs to be at banks. And who could blame them? In recent years, the
pay packages in finance have been nearly three times the salaries earned by Ivy
League graduates in other sectors of the economy.
At the
time the Class of 2007 graduated, it certainly seemed as if nothing could halt
the rise and rise of global finance. Not terrorist attacks on New York and
London. Not raging war in the Middle East. Certainly not global climate change.
Despite the destruction of the World Trade Center, the invasions of Afghanistan
and Iraq, and a spike in extreme meteorological events, the period from late
2001 until mid 2007 was characterized by sustained financial expansion. True,
in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the Dow Jones Industrial Average declined
by as much as 14 per cent. Within just over two months, however, it had
regained its pre-9/11 level. Moreover, although 2002 was a disappointing year for
US equity investors, the market surged ahead thereafter, exceeding its previous
peak (at the height of the ‘dot com’ mania) in the autumn of 2006. By early
October 2007 the Dow stood at nearly double the level it had reached in the
trough of five years before. Nor was the US stock market’s performance
exceptional. In the five years to 31 July 2007, all but two of the world’s
equity markets delivered double-digit returns on an annualized basis. Emerging
market bonds also rose strongly and real estate markets, especially in the
English-speaking world, saw remarkable capital appreciation. Whether they put
their money into commodities, works of art, vintage wine or exotic asset-backed
securities, investors made money.
How were
these wonders to be explained? According to one school of thought, the latest
financial innovations had brought about a fundamental improvement in the
efficiency of the global capital market, allowing risk to be allocated to those
best able to bear it. Enthusiasts spoke of the death of volatility.
Self-satisfied bankers held conferences with titles like ‘The Evolution of
Excellence’. In November 2006 I found myself at one such conference in the
characteristically luxurious venue of Lyford Cay in the Bahamas. The theme of
my speech was that it would not take much to cause a drastic decline in the
liquidity that was then cascading through the global financial system and that
we should be cautious about expecting the good times to last indefinitely. My
audience was distinctly unimpressed. I was dismissed as an alarmist. One of the
most experienced investors there went so far as to suggest to the organizers
that they ‘dispense altogether with an outside speaker next year, and instead
offer a screening of Mary Poppins’.6 Yet the mention of
Mary Poppins stirred a childhood memory in me. Julie Andrews fans may recall
that the plot of the evergreen musical revolves around a financial event which,
when the film was made in the 1960s, already seemed quaint: a bank run - that
is, a rush by depositors to withdraw their money - something not seen in London
since 1866.
The
family that employs Mary Poppins is, not accidentally, named Banks. Mr Banks is
indeed a banker, a senior employee of the Dawes, Tomes Mousley, Grubbs,
Fidelity Fiduciary Bank. At his insistence, the Banks children are one day
taken by their new nanny to visit his bank, where Mr Dawes Sr. recommends that
Mr Banks’s son Michael deposit his pocket-money (tuppence). Unfortunately,
young Michael prefers to spend the money on feeding the pigeons outside the
bank, and demands that Mr Dawes ‘Give it back! Gimme back my money!’ Even more
unfortunately, some of the bank’s other clients overhear Michael’s request. The
result is that they begin to withdraw their money. Soon a horde of account
holders are doing the same, forcing the bank to suspend payments. Mr Banks is
duly sacked, prompting the tragic lament that he has been ‘brought to wrack and
ruin in his prime’. These words might legitimately have been echoed by Adam
Applegarth, the former chief executive of the English bank Northern Rock, who
suffered a similar fate in September 2007 as customers queued outside his
bank’s branches to withdraw their cash. This followed the announcement that
Northern Rock had requested a ‘liquidity support facility’ from the Bank of
England.
The
financial crisis that struck the Western world in the summer of 2007 provided a
timely reminder of one of the perennial truths of financial history. Sooner or
later every bubble bursts. Sooner or later the bearish sellers outnumber the
bullish buyers. Sooner or later greed turns to fear. As I completed my research
for this book in the early months of 2008, it was already a distinct
possibility that the US economy might suffer a recession. Was this because
American companies had got worse at designing new products? Had the pace of
technological innovation suddenly slackened? No. The proximate cause of the
economic uncertainty of 2008 was financial: to be precise, a spasm in the
credit markets caused by mounting defaults on a species of debt known
euphemistically as subprime mortgages. So intricate has our global financial
system become, that relatively poor families in states from Alabama to
Wisconsin had been able to buy or remortgage their homes with often complex
loans that (unbeknown to them) were then bundled together with other, similar
loans, repackaged as collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and sold by banks
in New York and London to (among others) German regional banks and Norwegian
municipal authorities, who thereby became the effective mortgage lenders. These
CDOs had been so sliced and diced that it was possible to claim that a tier of
the interest payments from the original borrowers was as dependable a stream of
income as the interest on a ten-year US Treasury bond, and therefore worthy of
a coveted triple-A rating. This took financial alchemy to a new level of
sophistication, apparently turning lead into gold.
However,
when the original mortgages reset at higher interest rates after their one- or
two-year ‘teaser’ periods expired, the borrowers began to default on their
payments. This in turn signalled that the bubble in US real estate was
bursting, triggering the sharpest fall in house prices since the 1930s. What
followed resembled a slow but ultimately devastating chain reaction. All kinds
of asset-backed securities, including many instruments not in fact backed with
subprime mortgages, slumped in value. Institutions like conduits and structured
investment vehicles, which had been set up by banks to hold these securities
off the banks’ balance sheets, found themselves in severe difficulties. As the
banks took over the securities, the ratios between their capital and their
assets lurched down towards their regulatory minima. Central banks in the
United States and Europe sought to alleviate the pressure on the banks with
interest rate cuts and offers of funds through special ‘term auction
facilities’. Yet, at the time of writing (May 2008), the rates at which banks
could borrow money, whether by issuing commercial paper, selling bonds or
borrowing from each other, remained substantially above the official Federal
funds target rate, the minimum lending rate in the US economy. Loans that were
originally intended to finance purchases of corporations by private equity partnerships
were also only saleable at significant discounts. Having suffered enormous
losses, many of the best-known American and European banks had to turn not only
to Western central banks for short-term assistance to rebuild their reserves
but also to Asian and Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds for equity
injections in order to rebuild their capital bases.
All of
this may seem arcane to some readers. Yet the ratio of a bank’s capital to its
assets, technical though it may sound, is of more than merely academic
interest. After all, a ‘great contraction’ in the US banking system has
convincingly been blamed for the outbreak and course of the Great Depression
between 1929 and 1933, the worst economic disaster of modern history.7 If
US banks have lost significantly more than the $255 billion to which they have
so far admitted as a result of the subprime mortgage crisis and credit crunch,
there is a real danger that a much larger - perhaps tenfold larger -
contraction in credit may be necessary to shrink the banks’ balance sheets in
proportion to the decline in their capital. If the shadow banking system of
securitized debt and off-balance-sheet institutions is to be swept away
completely by this crisis, the contraction could be still more severe.
This has
implications not just for the United States but for the world as a whole, since
American output presently accounts for more than a quarter of total world
production, while many European and Asian economies in particular are still heavily
reliant on the United States as a market for their exports. Europe already
seems destined to experience a slowdown comparable with that of the United
States, particularly in those countries (such as Britain and Spain) that have
gone through similar housing bubbles. The extent to which Asia can ride out an
American recession, in the way that America rode out the Asian crisis of
1997-8, remains uncertain. What is certain is that the efforts of the Federal
Reserve to mitigate the credit crunch by cutting interest rates and targeting
liquidity at the US banking system have put severe downward pressure on the
external value of the dollar. The coincidence of a dollar slide and continuing
Asian industrial growth has caused a spike in commodity prices comparable not
merely with the 1970s but with the 1940s. It is not too much to say that in
mid-2008 we witnessed the inflationary symptoms of a world war without the war
itself.
Anyone
who can read a paragraph like the preceding one without feeling anxious does not
know enough financial history. One purpose of this book, then, is to educate.
It is a well-established fact, after all, that a substantial proportion of the
general public in the English-speaking world is ignorant of finance. According
to one 2007 survey, four in ten American credit card holders do not pay the
full amount due every month on the card they use most often, despite the
punitively high interest rates charged by credit card companies. Nearly a third
(29 per cent) said they had no idea what the interest rate on their card was.
Another 30 per cent claimed that it was below 10 per cent, when in reality the
overwhelming majority of card companies charge substantially in excess of 10
per cent. More than half of the respondents said they had learned ‘not too
much’ or ‘nothing at all’ about financial issues at school.8 A
2008 survey revealed that two thirds of Americans did not understand how
compound interest worked.9 In one survey conducted by
researchers at the University of Buffalo’s School of Management, a typical
group of high school seniors scored just 52 per cent in response to a set of
questions about personal finance and economics.10 Only
14 per cent understood that stocks would tend to generate a higher return over
eighteen years than a US government bond. Less than 23 per cent knew that
income tax is charged on the interest earned from a savings account if the
account holder’s income is high enough. Fully 59 per cent did not know the
difference between a company pension, Social Security and a 401(k) plan.b Nor
is this a uniquely American phenomenon. In 2006, the British Financial Services
Authority carried out a survey of public financial literacy which revealed that
one person in five had no idea what the effect would be on the purchasing power
of their savings of an inflation rate of 5 per cent and an interest rate of 3
per cent. One in ten did not know which was the better discount for a
television originally priced at £250: £30 or 10 per cent. As that example makes
clear, the questions posed in these surveys were of the most basic nature. It
seems reasonable to assume that only a handful of those polled would have been
able to explain the difference between a ‘put’ and a ‘call’ option, for
example, much less the difference between a CDO and a CDS.
Politicians,
central bankers and businessmen regularly lament the extent of public ignorance
about money, and with good reason. A society that expects most individuals to
take responsibility for the management of their own expenditure and income after
tax, that expects most adults to own their own homes and that leaves it to the
individual to determine how much to save for retirement and whether or not to
take out health insurance, is surely storing up trouble for the future by
leaving its citizens so ill-equipped to make wise financial decisions.
The first
step towards understanding the complexities of modern financial institutions
and terminology is to find out where they came from. Only understand the
origins of an institution or instrument and you will find its present-day role
much easier to grasp. Accordingly, the key components of the modern financial
system are introduced sequentially. The first chapter of this book traces the
rise of money and credit; the second the bond market; the third the stock
market. Chapter 4 tells the story of insurance; Chapter 5 the real estate
market; and Chapter 6 the rise, fall and rise of international finance. Each
chapter addresses a key historical question. When did money stop being metal
and mutate into paper, before vanishing altogether? Is it true that, by setting
long-term interest rates, the bond market rules the world? What is the role
played by central banks in stock market bubbles and busts? Why is insurance not
necessarily the best way to protect yourself from risk? Do people exaggerate
the benefits of investing in real estate? And is the economic inter-dependence
of China and America the key to global financial stability, or a mere chimera?
In trying
to cover the history of finance from ancient Mesopotamia to modern
microfinance, I have set myself an impossible task, no doubt. Much must be
omitted in the interests of brevity and simplicity. Yet the attempt seems worth
making if it can bring the modern financial system into sharper focus in the
mind’s eye of the general reader.
I myself
have learned a great deal in writing this book, but three insights in
particular stand out. The first is that poverty is not the result of rapacious
financiers exploiting the poor. It has much more to do with the lack of
financial institutions, with the absence of banks, not their presence. Only
when borrowers have access to efficient credit networks can they escape from
the clutches of loan sharks, and only when savers can deposit their money in
reliable banks can it be channelled from the idle rich to the industrious poor.
This point applies not just to the poor countries of the world. It can also be
said of the poorest neighbourhoods in supposedly developed countries - the
‘Africas within’ - like the housing estates of my birthplace, Glasgow, where
some people are scraping by on just £6 a day, for everything from toothpaste to
transport, but where the interest rates charged by local loan sharks can be
over eleven million per cent a year.
My second
great realization has to do with equality and its absence. If the financial
system has a defect, it is that it reflects and magnifies what we human beings
are like. As we are learning from a growing volume of research in the field of
behavioural finance, money amplifies our tendency to overreact, to swing from
exuberance when things are going well to deep depression when they go wrong.
Booms and busts are products, at root, of our emotional volatility. But finance
also exaggerates the differences between us, enriching the lucky and the smart,
impoverishing the unlucky and not-so-smart. Financial globalization means that,
after more than three hundred years of divergence, the world can no longer be
divided neatly into rich developed countries and poor less-developed countries.
The more integrated the world’s financial markets become, the greater the
opportunities for financially knowledgeable people wherever they live - and the
bigger the risk of downward mobility for the financially illiterate. It
emphatically is not a flat world in terms of overall income distribution,
simply because the returns on capital have soared relative to the returns on
unskilled and semi-skilled labour. The rewards for ‘getting it’ have never been
so immense. And the penalties for financial ignorance have never been so stiff.
Finally,
I have come to understand that few things are harder to predict accurately than
the timing and magnitude of financial crises, because the financial system is
so genuinely complex and so many of the relationships within it are non-linear,
even chaotic. The ascent of money has never been smooth, and each new challenge
elicits a new response from the bankers and their ilk. Like an Andean horizon,
the history of finance is not a smooth upward curve but a series of jagged and
irregular peaks and valleys. Or, to vary the metaphor, financial history looks
like a classic case of evolution in action, albeit in a much tighter timeframe
than evolution in the natural world. ‘Just as some species become extinct in
nature,’ remarked US Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Anthony W. Ryan before
Congress in September 2007, ‘some new financing techniques may prove to be less
successful than others.’ Such Darwinian language seems remarkably apposite as I
write.
Are we on
the brink of a ‘great dying’ in the financial world - one of those mass
extinctions of species that have occurred periodically, like the end-Cambrian
extinction that killed off 90 per cent of Earth’s species, or the
Cretaceous-Tertiary catastrophe that wiped out the dinosaurs? It is a scenario
that many biologists have reason to fear, as man-made climate change wreaks
havoc with natural habitats around the globe. But a great dying of financial
institutions is also a scenario that we should worry about, as another man-made
disaster works its way slowly and painfully through the global financial
system.
For all
these reasons, then - whether you are struggling to make ends meet or striving
to be a master of the universe - it has never been more necessary to understand
the ascent of money than it is today. If this book helps to break down that
dangerous barrier which has arisen between financial knowledge and other kinds
of knowledge, then I shall not have toiled in vain.
NOTES
1 To be precise,
this was the increase in per capita disposable personal income between the
third quarter of 2006 and the third quarter of 2007. It has since been static,
rising barely at all between March 2007 and March 2008. Data from Economic
Report of the President 2008, table B-31: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/eop/.
2 Carmen
DeNavas-Walt, Bernadette D. Proctor and Jessica Smith, Income, Poverty
and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2006 (Washington,
DC, August 2007), p. 4.
3 We See
Opportunity: Goldman Sachs 2007 Annual Report (New York, 2008).
4 Paul Collier, The
Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries Are Failing and What Can Be Done
About It (Oxford, 2007).
5 David Wessel, ‘A
Source of our Bubble Trouble’, Wall Street Journal, 17 January
2008.
6 Stephen Roach,
‘Special Compendium: Lyford Cay 2006’, Morgan Stanley Research(21
November 2006), p. 4.
7 Milton Friedman
and Anna J. Schwartz, A Monetary History of the United States,
1867-1960 (Princeton, 1963).
8 Princeton Survey
Research Associates International, prepared for the National Foundation for Credit
Counseling, ‘Financial Literacy Survey’, 19 April 2007: http://www.nfcc.org/NFCC_SummaryReport_ToplineFinal.pdf.
9 Alexander R.
Konrad, ‘Finance Basics Elude Citizens’, Harvard Crimson, 2
February 2008.
10 Associated Press,
‘Teens Still Lack Financial Literacy, Survey Finds’, 5 April, 2006: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12168872/.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario