I finally have my kitchen back, and now can devote more time to writing and consulting. I am still pushing another project, so my output here will probably be limited. I have taken another look at my bank primer project, and realised that I have too much content — I will need to trim back the theoretical wrangling texts that I previously wrote. With today’s article, I think I have covered most of the content I want to be in the book, although I might stick in some cursory analysis of a few different banks’ balance sheets. For example, I might compare some teeny-tiny American bank versus larger European or Canadian banks as a way of indicating the dispersal of what “banks” are. This article has only been lightly edited.
If the economy was in a stable equilibrium dominated by agents forecasting their cash flows out to infinity, defaults would be a random process – defaults would occur, but without a pattern to them. Default risk would be an insurable risk (i.e., could be managed by actuarial calculations like life insurance). However, the existence and popularity of the term “business cycle” indicates that the flows of commerce are cycle – and defaults follow the business cycle. During an expansion, banks do face a persistent relatively low level of defaults and delinquent loans, which does accord with being a random, insurable risk. The problem is recessions – which see a spike in defaults. Although it is possible for there to be a recession without a default spike (as discussed below), the “interesting” recessions are the ones with default spikes. The “really interesting” recessions are the ones where the banking system itself joins in on the default trend.