Why is the threat of Greek default driving the American economy?

I just read a financial blog post that claims “… [American] investor sentiment has been vastly contingent upon the perceived fate of Greece and the rest of the euro zone.”

Now, I get that everyone trades with everyone and we’re all interconnected, but why does our entire economy seem so dependent on whether or not Greece defaults on its debt? I don’t really understand the gravity of that interconnected-ness sufficiently to see how one small-ish (but fairly developed) foreign country can have such a profound impact on the U.S. economy. Obviously I’m not an economics expert, so please use small words in explaining it to me. :stuck_out_tongue:

Because much of Western economy in the last 50 years or so, is based on speculation, commonly known as gambling.

What you read is trying to guess the behavior of stock market gamblers.

Just like a prostitute trying to guess what her “John” will do in a poker game in 18’th century US.

This is the nature of much of the “developed” countries economic activity lately.

Most days, the market doesn’t do much. Sometimes there is almost no price movement, but lots and lots of volume. Those days have long term economic consequences, but no one outside of the businesses involved actually pay any attention. Here lately, there have been much larger price moves, on very small volumes, which makes it easy to report boom and bust scenarios.

There are three or four television networks with all day coverage of the markets in the US. Their business is not providing reasoned, much less accurate analysis of the way money is moving, or the likely consequences of that movement. Their business is selling advertising. The next time you see a report on a company, or market segment, try to learn one fact about how the business is actually functioning, how its products or services are being created, and delivered. It is almost impossible, even in the detailed analysis provided to brokerage houses by the actual businesses themselves.

Modern markets are 99.9% public perception. If everyone thinks stocks are going to go down, they go down. If everyone thinks the banks are going to go broke, they go broke. And when everyone decides that all those cheap companies are going to come back up, hey, what a surprise, they come back up.

If the Greek people decide to stiff the folks who bought their bonds, those folks will start selling those bonds like they were on fire. All the analysts will declare Greek Debt to be worthless, and the rates the Greek government has to pay to borrow money will go up. When it gets high enough to be worth the increased risk, all institutions and funds with cash sitting on the sidelines will take the risk. The pool of money needs to be put somewhere to earn money. The market rides up in bubbles and no one asks “Where did all this money come from?” But when it comes down like the breakers at Maui, everyone wonders “where did all that money go?”

In the fifteenth century, some very clever people came up with the concept of corporations created by pooling idle wealth. That idle wealth drove opportunities, and endeavors that created goods and services, and provide huge amounts of benefit, drew enormous profits, creating the Renaissance. It kept going for hundreds of years. The phenomenon really did create wealth. Starting in the middle of last century, investment management became an industry for its own sake. There was no encouragement of risk capitalization, just opportunities to take percentages from every type of economic activity. What we have now is deliberate bubble and bust cycles that benefit only the financial industry itself.

Buy low. Don’t sell. If you chose to buy a company because it makes, or does something useful, and it does that particularly well, why would you sell it unless it stopped doing it well?

Tris

Well, you have to sell at some point, or that money’s useless to you.

True, for some investment goals. For other goals, it might be a better plan not to sell, but rather draw income from dividends. In other cases, the stock itself can be collateral for loans for short term needs. But, the actual brilliant idea of corporate ownership of assets was to make idle wealth useful to both you, and corporation. Investing wealth which cannot be idle is a different strategy, and involves more risk, and more inherent expense.

Tris

The answer to the OP’s question is basically as follows:

A lot of banks, in the US & Europe, are exposed to risk if Greece defaults, whether due to owning the debt or to having insured it (mostly the latter, in the case of US banks).

Banks are required to keep their capital at certain levels, relative to their loan portfolios. To the extent that they need to write down the value of their capital, they need to shrink their loan portfolios.

As a result, if Greece defaults, then banks will be much more reluctant to lend money to people and businesses, which will harm the economy.

In addition to the above, if Greece defaults, that will increase the likelihood that other countries do the same - this magnifies the impact of a Greek default.

This is the key. Greece’s economy is tiny, but if Spain and/or Italy go, that would be a big ker-plump!