Why are the markets so calm about the US shutdown and debt ceiling debates?

The "Fear Index" is languishing at 17.

The government of the world’s largest economy is shut down and the current debt limit of $16.699 trn was expended in May. Since then the US Treasury has only managed to keep the show on the road by using what it calls "extraordinary measures" but even they will all have been exhausted by 17th October, (-ish).

It now looks increasingly likely that the two questions of passing the Continuing Resolution Bill to allow the government to keep spending money, and raising the debt ceiling, so that the US can repay principal and interest as they become due on current debt, and subsequently issue yet more IOU’s, will become co-mingled.

The trouble is that there is now a three party system in the States; Democrats, Republicans and the Tea Party, and the latter seem to have become almost impossible for House Speaker Boehner to rule, as evidenced by their insistence that the Continuing Resolution Bill was sent to the Senate only following the addition of amendments that would de-fund President Obama’s cherished Affordable Healthcare Act. Amendments that stood zero chance of ever getting through the Democratic controlled Senate.

The moderate wing of the Republican Party is now livid with the Tea Party-one gathers Republican Senators recently fired a volley of angry questions at prominent Tea Party member Ted Cruz, (he of the recent 21-hour filibuster on this matter), their main point being to ask what is his overall strategy, how did he ever think in a million years that he or the Republicans as a whole would come out of this in better shape for next year’s mid-term Congressional elections?

In the chilling words of Vanderbilt University public policy professor Bruce Oppenheimer, "The thing that's different about these Republicans, (the Tea Party), is their unwillingness to bargain," and  "I'm not sure if it's because they lack government experience or they've made such strong promises to their constituencies, but they've put their feet in cement and can't or won't move."

This will very probably end with Boehner leading enough Republicans into a deal to vote with Democrats to get the requisite legislation through, even if this contravenes a party policy known as the “Hastert rule” which prevents a bill getting to the floor that doesn’t command majority Republican support.

A further disturbing factor was the Treasury’s perhaps naïve assurance that in fact Oct 17th isn’t a firm deadline, as they can russle up another $30bn to keep things going to the end of the month.

What I find most chilling, however, is the markets insouciance towards the whole debate, especially the debt ceiling. The Vix Index of equity market volatility, the so-called "Fear Index", is languishing at 17, whereas it reached 48 during the last debt ceiling impasse in August 2011, as the S and P 500 Index fell 15 per cent in a matter of days. Admittedly simultaneously the Eurozone crisis had markets on the edge then, but one gets the distinct feeling that everyone now believes there will be eventual agreement, and sees any dip in prices as a chance to buy stocks, or is sitting comfortably overweight.

Markets always cause the most pain they possibly can; in a world where everyone thinks a solution will be found, but actually has no idea how, there is a distinct chance that before this is over the markets suddenly wake up to the gravity of the risks involved and suffer a very significant pull-back, if not a crash.

Photograph: Getty Images

Chairman of  Saxo Capital Markets Board

An Honours Graduate from Oxford University, Nick Beecroft has over 30 years of international trading experience within the financial industry, including senior Global Markets roles at Standard Chartered Bank, Deutsche Bank and Citibank. Nick was a member of the Bank of England's Foreign Exchange Joint Standing Committee.

More of his work can be found here.

Getty
Show Hide image

Vince Cable will need something snappier than a graduate tax to escape tuition fees

Perhaps he's placing his hopes in the “Anti Brexit People’s Liberation Front.” 

“We took power, and we got crushed,” Tim Farron said in what would turn out to be his final Autumn conference as Liberal Democrat leader, before hastening on to talk about Brexit and the need for a strong opposition.

A year and a snap election later, Vince Cable, the Lib Dem warhorse-turned-leader and the former Coalition business secretary, had plenty of cracks about Brexit.

He called for a second referendum – or what he dubbed a “first referendum on the facts” – and joked that he was “half prepared for a spell in a cell with Supreme Court judges, Gina Miller, Ken Clarke, and the governors of the BBC” for suggesting it".

Lib Dems, he suggested, were the “political adults” in the room, while Labour sat on the fence. Unlike Farron, however, he did not rule out the idea of working with Jeremy Corbyn, and urged "grown ups" in other parties to put aside their differences. “Jeremy – join us in the Anti Brexit People’s Liberation Front,” he said. The Lib Dems had been right on Iraq, and would be proved right on Brexit, he added. 

But unlike Farron, Cable revisited his party’s time in power.

“In government, we did a lot of good and we stopped a lot of bad,” he told conference. “Don’t let the Tories tell you that they lifted millions of low-earners out of income tax. We did… But we have paid a very high political price.”

Cable paid the price himself, when he lost his Twickenham seat in 2015, and saw his former Coalition colleague Nick Clegg turfed out of student-heavy Sheffield Hallam. However much the Lib Dems might wish it away, the tuition fees debate is here to stay, aided by some canny Labour manoeuvring, and no amount of opposition to Brexit will hide it.

“There is an elephant in the room,” the newly re-established MP for Twickenham said in his speech. “Debt – specifically student debt.” He defended the policy (he chose to vote for it in 2010, rather than abstain) for making sure universities were properly funded, but added: “Just because the system operates like a tax, we cannot escape the fact it isn’t seen as one.” He is reviewing options for the future, including a graduate tax. But students are unlikely to be cheering for a graduate tax when Labour is pledging to scrap tuition fees altogether.

There lies Cable’s challenge. Farron may have stepped down a week after the election declaring himself “torn” between religion and party, but if he had stayed, he would have had to face the fact that voters were happier to nibble Labour’s Brexit fudge (with lashings of free tuition fees), than choose a party on pure Remain principles alone.

“We are not a single-issue party…we’re not Ukip in reverse,” Cable said. “I see our future as a party of government.” In which case, the onus is on him to come up with something more inspiring than a graduate tax.

Julia Rampen is the digital news editor of the New Statesman (previously editor of The Staggers, The New Statesman's online rolling politics blog). She has also been deputy editor at Mirror Money Online and has worked as a financial journalist for several trade magazines.