Search

The existing literature on finance, debt, and inequality depicts economic elites as a creditor class. According to a popular thesis, over the past four decades, the rich and ultra-rich households have experienced a saving glut (excess income), which they have invested in the debts of the poor and their governments. While it is undeniable that the rich have expanded their income share at the expenses of the poor, to refer to them as 'creditors' or 'lenders' is a misrepresentation of how they actually expand their wealth and income shares by financial means. For it conceals the fact that a great deal of their investments is leveraged, that is, carried out with borrowed money. This article shows that the debts generated for the sake of affluent households easily surpass those of all other households. However, these debts are not accounted for in statistics on household debt. This is because affluent households, particularly multi-millionaires and billionaires inside the top 1%, do not simply borrow from banks, like normal households do, but they are instead absentee debtors who borrow through corporate structures of which they are dominant shareholders and ultimate beneficiaries. To gain an insight into their invisible leverage, the article looks at how much hedge funds borrow and why their leverage matters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Apocalyptic thinking has a long religious and political tradition, but what place does it occupy within the temporal universe of contemporary capitalism? In this essay, we use the figure of the eschaton to draw out the loaded and ambiguous character of the future as it emerges through the condition of indebtedness. This entails a departure from political economy accounts of capitalist futurity, which stress the structural logic of financial speculation, in favour of an existential account that begins instead with the cosmology of money and debt. We argue that finance capital's fixation on the future has produced a very specific form of apocalyptic imagination, characteristic of financial society and built on a libidinal economy of leverage. Rather than offering an ecstatic end to the global process of financialization, financial eschatologies bind the contemporary subject to debt and indebtedness to the very end: an endless apocalypse, premised on the ends of finance itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are two main theories of banking which seem to be incompatible by nature. According to the first, banks intermediate money through their credit infrastructure but are not themselves able to create new money. By contrast, the second argues that banks do create money out of nothing in the process of lending their credit. Significantly, despite their contrasts, both theories conceptualize banking in functionalist terms as the financing of other people's indebtedness. In so doing, they relegate to the side-lines the fact that banks are in the business first and foremost to 'make money' for themselves as they leverage their unique market position as dealers of other people's debts. The article thus investigates the phenomenon of modern banking as the art of leverage. After showing the specificity of bank leverage relative to other forms of leverage across society, it delineates the fundamentals of a political economy of banking, money-making and debt finance. Finally, the article turns to an analysis of how contemporary banks make money and at once weave the infrastructure of financial markets through leverage-enhancing techniques rooted in repurchase agreements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]