[-AI-3.5]An American economist talks about the cause of the Lehman shock

Abstract

リーマン・ショックとは、2008年にアメリカで起こった金融危機を指します。これはリーマン・ブラザーズの破綻によって引き起こされ、世界中の金融市場に大きな影響を与えました。住宅市場の崩壊、金融業界の問題、経済政策の制約などが重なって危機が発生しました。リーマン・ショックの後、政策や規制の大幅な変化がもたらされ、金融業界や世界経済に大きな影響をもたらしました。

不動産市場バブルは、リーマン・ショックにつながるプロセスで最大の原因の1つでした。実際の市場価格が制限注文価格を大幅に下回ったことで、多くの資産や金融商品が急に価値を失い、多くの住宅所有者が住宅ローンの支払いを滞納し、銀行が赤字に転落していきました。このバブルの原因は多数ありますが、主に不動産市場の変化と住宅ローン市場での過剰が挙げられます。主要な金融機関が低利回りの住宅ローン担保証券（MBS）を積極的に発行し、住宅ローンへの投資需要を高め、不動産市場がバブル状態になっていったため、リーマン・ブラザーズの破綻につながりました。バブル崩壊により、数百万人のアメリカ人が家を放棄し、多くの企業が倒産し、アメリカ全土で深刻な経済危機が発生し、世界中に広がっていきました。

金融業界の問題は、借り手の返済能力に基づいて債務の格付けを決定するクレジットレーティング機関が存在します。しかし、この分類は、サブプライムローンが大量に流通していたときに確立されました。これらのローン取引は、元々滞納者（不履行債務者）と見なされている借り手に対して行われました。低金利政策は、利率を下げて消費や投資を促進する経済政策です。しかし、この政策が実行されると、銀行が新規ローンを発行し、貸し手が容易に信用を現金化できるため、住宅バブルや広範囲な金融崩壊を引き起こしました。証券化などを通じたレバレッジド・トランザクションは、それ以上のシステムリスクを生むことになりますが、多くの市場参加者にはこの情報が伏せられ、リスク管理が不十分になっていました。多くの合理的な投資家が金融システムが簡単に崩壊するということに注意を払っていましたが、市場のバブル状態に合わせざるを得なかったのです。

経済政策は、経済回復に向けたほとんどの政策が金融緩和に依存しています。しかし、長期間にわたる景気後退や不況が続く場合、財政政策による政府支出の増大が必要になることがあります。リーマン・ショック後、先進国は同時に金融緩和政策を実施しましたが、結果的にはその効果は大きくありませんでした。それは、民間企業が財政支出の増加を投資や販促に使わず、代わりに資金を貸し出しを行う産業銀行に預けてしまったためです。企業による投資や消費は経済回復に不可欠ですが、この時の政策の影響は限定的でした。総額を見ても、財政投資や資金調達は限られた影響しかもたらしません。さらに、財政赤字が拡大すればするほど、貸し手が政府債券を購入しやすくなり、金利が上昇する可能性があります。ここに財政政策の限界があります。

リーマン・ショック後の金融緩和は、中央銀行が政府や民間部門に貸出を行い、資金の流動性を高めることで、企業や個人が低金利で資金を調達することができるため、経済回復に寄与すると期待されました。しかし、企業が資金を投資せずに貯蓄したため、実際の経済効果は小さくなってしまいました。経済政策は、経済回復に貢献するだけでなく、インフレーションやデフレーションなどのリスクも伴います。そのため、通貨政策と財政政策の両方を包括した総合的な政策が必要です。ただし、政治家たちが議会で意見が対立する場合、政府の政策はしばしば打ち消されることがあります。

Table of contents

• Introduction
• Real estate bubble
• Problems in the financial industry
• Limits of economic policies
• Conclusion

-- CAUTION

[Text]This blog is purely generated by Cohesive.ai

Introduction

The Lehman Shock refers to the 2008 financial crisis in the United States. It had a significant impact on financial markets around the world, triggered by the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers. The crisis was caused by a combination of factors, including the collapse of the housing market, issues in the financial industry, and constraints in economic policy. The aftermath of the Lehman Shock brought about significant changes in policies and regulations, greatly impacting the financial industry and the global economy.

Real estate market bubble

One of the biggest causes in the process leading up to the Lehman shock was the excessive real estate market bubble. In the United States, starting in 2008, the actual market prices fell significantly below the limit order prices, causing many assets and financial products to suddenly lose their value. In this situation, many homeowners were chased by mortgage payments and banks began to fall into deficit.

The causes of this kind of bubble are numerous, but mainly include changes in the real estate market and excess in the housing loan market. Major financial institutions actively issued low-yield mortgage-backed securities (MBS), which increased the investment demand for housing loans, causing the real estate market to become a bubble.

This situation led to the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in 2008. The bubble burst even further and as a result, millions of Americans gave up their homes and many companies went bankrupt. This caused a serious economic crisis throughout the United States, which spread throughout the world.

In fact, there were numerous factors leading to the bubble, many of which were created by unscrupulous financial providers selling complex and unclear financial products. The Lehman shock reminds us how vulnerable our financial system is.

The problem of the financial industry

Credit rating agencies for loans determine the credit rating of debt based on the borrower’s repayment ability, as the name implies. However, this classification was established when a massive amount of subprime loans were circulating during the bubble collapse. These loan transactions were made to borrowers who were deemed delinquent (non-performing debtors) from the beginning.

Low-interest-rate policies are economic policies that aim to promote consumption and investment by reducing interest rates and encouraging banks to make new loans. However, when this policy is implemented, banks issue more loans, and lenders can easily convert credit into cash flow, which caused the housing bubble and a broader financial collapse.

Leveraged transactions, through securitization and other means, created even more system risks. However, this information was hidden from many market participants, and risk management became inadequate. Many sensible investors have been paying attention to how easily the financial system can break down, but they had no choice but to conform to the market’s bubble state.

The limit of economic policies

Most economic policies aimed at economic recovery rely on monetary easing. However, during a prolonged economic downturn or recession, an increase in government spending through fiscal policy may become necessary. Following the Lehman shock, advanced countries implemented monetary easing policies simultaneously, but did they lead to economic recovery? In reality, the effects were not that significant.

The reason for this is that private companies did not use the increased fiscal spending for investment or sales promotion, but rather deposited the funds with industrial banks that provided loans. While investment and consumption by companies are essential for economic recovery, the policy effects were limited this time.

Even when looking at the total amount, fiscal investment and financing have a limited impact. Additionally, the more the fiscal deficit expands, the easier it becomes for lenders to buy government bonds, leading to a rise in interest rates. This is where the problem with limited fiscal policies lies.

Monetary easing following the Lehman shock involved central banks lending to the government and private sector, increasing the circulation of funds. This was expected to contribute to economic recovery by allowing companies and individuals to secure funds at low interest rates. However, as companies did not invest the funds and instead saved them, the actual economic effects were small.

Economic policies not only contribute to economic recovery but also come with risks such as inflation and deflation. Therefore, a comprehensive policy that includes both monetary and fiscal policies is necessary. However, government policies are often cancelled out when politicians have conflicting opinions in parliament.

Conclusion

The lesson learned from the Lehman shock is the importance of financial regulation to mitigate risks and policies that encourage economic recovery. The future risks include abrupt financial market fluctuations and economic downturns, but there is potential with appropriate policies. It is essential to find the balance between risk mitigation and growth promotion. With proper adjustments, it is possible to prevent serious economic crises like the Lehman shock.