China’s Investment-Driven Growth “Miracle”

Worth Wray quotes Michael Pettis from his 2013 book, Avoiding the Fall: China’s Economic Restructuring, about the future path of China’s debt-laden economy:

Every country that has followed a consumption-repressing, investment-driven growth model like China’s has ended with an unsustainable debt burden caused by wasted debt-financed investment. This has always led to either a debt crisis or a lost decade of very low growth.

We couldn’t agree more. China is no different to Japan or Brazil. Investment-driven growth is only sustainable where investment earns a higher return than the long-term cost of servicing the debt. With diminishing returns on additional investment, returns dwindle and a debt/investment imbalance develops.

Keynesian thinking goes even further, however, suggesting that a fiscal deficit can be used to fund expenditure that does not earn a return, whether public fountains or school libraries. But that is short-term thinking, as Keynes indirectly acknowledged with his response “in the long run we are all dead.” In the long run, as with Japan, the government ends up with a huge pile of public debt and no income from investment assets with which to service the interest, let alone repay the principal.

The effect of a Chinese slow-down is likely to be similar to that of Japan in the early 1990s — just on a larger scale.

Read more at John Mauldin’s Thoughts from the Frontline: Can Central Planners Revive China’s Economic Miracle?

What Is China’s Biggest Weakness? | Bloomberg

By William Pesek:

China’s debt reckoning is coming. Maybe not this quarter or this year, but Chinese President Xi Jinping’s unbridled effort to keep growth from falling below the official 7.5 percent target is cementing China’s fate…..

Why then, with so many clear examples of financial excess leading to ruin, is Xi continuing down this road? Blame it on the ghosts of Tiananmen Square. In the aftermath of the crackdown on student protesters on June 4, 1989, China’s leaders made a bargain with their people: We will make you richer, as long as you no longer dissent. After the crash of Lehman Brothers, the regime had to go to extraordinary lengths to keep up its end of the bargain, pumping up what was already the world’s highest investment rate. In doing so, China itself became a Lehman economy…

Read more at What Is China's Biggest Weakness? – Bloomberg View.

ASX 200 retreats

The ASX 200 closed below short-term support at 5500, warning of another test of support at 5400. Declining 21-day Twiggs Money Flow indicates short-term selling pressure. Breakout above 5550 is unlikely in the short-term, but would signal an advance to 5700*.

ASX 200

* Target calculation: 5550 + ( 5550 – 5400 ) = 5700

ASX 200 VIX below 12 indicates low risk typical of a bull market.

ASX 200

Asia: India bullish but China weak

India’s Sensex found support at 24000. Recovery above 25000 would signal a fresh advance to 26000*. Breach of support is unlikely, but would warn of further correction. The primary trend is up and bearish divergence on 13-week Twiggs Money Flow indicates nothing more than medium-term selling pressure from the present correction.

Sensex

* Target calculation: 21000 + ( 21000 – 16000 ) = 26000

China’s Shanghai Composite Index continues to test primary support at 2000. Follow-through below 1990 would signal a decline to 1850*. Reversal of 13-week Twiggs Money Flow below zero signals medium-term selling pressure. Recovery above 2150 is unlikely, but would complete a triple-bottom reversal.

Shanghai Composite Index

* Target calculation: 2000 – ( 2150 – 2000 ) = 1850

Japan’s Nikkei 225 rebounded off primary support and is testing resistance at 15000. Follow-through above 15200 would signal another test of 16000. Recovery of 13-week Twiggs Money Flow above 20% would confirm long-term buying pressure. Reversal below 14000 is unlikely, but would signal a primary down-trend.

Nikkei 225

Footsie and DAX tentative breakout

The Footsie is again testing resistance at 6850. Follow-through above 6900 would signal an advance to 7200*. Rising 13-week Twiggs Money Flow troughs above zero indicate long-term buying pressure. Reversal below 6800 is unlikely, but would warn of another correction.

FTSE 100

* Target calculation: 6800 + ( 6800 – 6400 ) = 7200

The DAX broke resistance at 9800. Expect retracement to test the new support level. Respect is likely and follow-through above 10000 would signal an advance to 10500*. Recovery of 13-week Twiggs Money Flow above the declining trendline suggests that selling pressure is easing. Reversal below 9750/9800 is unlikely, but would warn of another correction.

DAX

* Target calculation: 9750 + ( 9750 – 9000 ) = 10500

TSX bullish consolidation

Canada’s TSX 60 is consolidating in a narrow range on the weekly chart. Upward breakout is likely and would signal contuation of the advance to the 2008 high of 900. Bearish divergence on 13-week Twiggs Money Flow appears secondary, in line with the medium-term consolidation, but a further decline would warn of a correction. Reversal below support at 830 and the rising trendline is unlikely, but would indicate that the primary trend is slowing.

TSX 60

S&P 500 bullish, Nasdaq tests resistance

After early skittishness over some dud Institute for Supply Management (ISM) data, the S&P 500 recovered lost ground by the close. Expect an advance to 1950*. Rising 21-day Twiggs Money Flow troughs above zero indicate strong medium-term buying pressure. Reversal below 1900 is unlikely, but would warn of a correction.

S&P 500

* Target calculation: 1850 + ( 1850 – 1750 ) = 1950

CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) below 12 indicates low risk typical of a bull market.

VIX Index

The Nasdaq 100 is testing resistance at 3740/3750. Breakout would signal an advance to 4000*. Rising 21-day Twiggs Money Flow troughs above zero again indicate strong medium-term buying pressure. Reversal below 3700, however, would warn of another correction.

Nasdaq 100

* Target calculation: 3700 + ( 3700 – 3400 ) = 4000

Gold tumbles as Treasury yields fall

Overview:

  • Treasury yields fall
  • The Dollar strengthens slightly
  • Stocks are rising
  • Gold breaks support

Interest Rates and the Dollar

The yield on ten-year Treasury Notes broke primary support at 2.50 percent, warning of a decline to 2.00 percent*. Reversal of 13-week Twiggs Momentum below zero confirms weakness. Recovery above 2.80 is most unlikely at present, but would indicate another advance.

10-Year Treasury Yields

* Target calculation: 2.50 – ( 3.00 – 2.50 ) = 2.00

The Dollar Index is testing resistance at 80.50. Recovery of 13-week Twiggs Momentum above zero would increase the chances of a double-bottom reversal (to a primary up-trend), but respect of resistance remains as likely and would test primary support at 79.00. Another 13-week Twiggs Momentum peak below the zero line would signal continuation of the primary down-trend.

Dollar Index

* Target calculation: 79.0 – ( 81.5 – 79.0 ) = 76.5

Stocks and Housing

Falling long-term interest rates are likely to boost the housing sector and the broader stock market. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is heading for a test of the recent high at 16750. Rising 21-day Twiggs Money Flow signals medium-term buying pressure. Retracement that respects support at 16500 would confirm an advance to 17000*.

Dow Jones Industrial Average

* Target calculation: 16.5 – ( 16.5 – 16 ) = 17

Gold and Silver

Gold faces conflicting forces: low inflation reduces demand for precious metals, but low interest rates and a weaker Dollar increase demand. At present low inflation seems to have the upper hand, driving gold through support at $1300/$1280 per ounce. Expect a test of primary support at $1200. Reversal of 13-week Twiggs Momentum below zero reinforces the bear signal. Recovery above $1300 is most unlikely, but would warn of a bear trap and rally to $1400.

Spot Gold

War on entitlements doesn’t extend to military | | MacroBusiness

By Leith van Onselen, with kind permission from Macrobusiness:

I have noted previously how the Coalition has ear-marked tens-of-billions of taxpayer dollars to local defence manufacturing, including a $10 billion to $15 billion-program for 1,000 locally produced armoured vehicles, and locally designed and built submarines for around $40 billion. It has also flagged a multibillion-dollar warship project that will be built locally.Today, The AFR has revealed that an $8 billion contract for local shipbuilder, ASC, to supply three air warfare destroyers for the Australian Navy is running two-and-a-half years late and more than $300 million over budget because the company has no experience in shipbuilding:

  • An audit released in March… warned there could be further cost blowouts and delays to come…
  • The 320-page audit found defective drawings supplied by Navantia and an inexperienced Australian shipyard workforce were a devastating combination leading to hull blocks not joining up, pipes, air conditioning systems and cabling requiring modification, doors not lining up and equipment being left off and expensive and costly rework.

Surely the above schmozzle casts serious doubts over the Government’s plan to build military hardware locally.

While I acknowledge that there is an argument to retain your own military hardware building capacity, at what cost? The Coalition’s hard line on industry assistance appears to be in stark contrast to its defence procurement policy. Australia could easily purchase proven, fit-for-purpose, military hardware from abroad at a fraction of the cost of developing similar technology locally, saving taxpayers billions in the process.

Once again, it is these sorts of inconsistencies that undermine the Government’s goal of “ending the age of entitlement”. While it slashes benefits to vulnerable sections of the community, it is allowing egregious lurks and subsidies to remain in others, which is undermines the Government’s calls for “shared sacrifice”, whilst also ensuring that the burden of adjustment is not broad-based, reducing its efficacy. As I’ve said before, a much clearer framework for these decisions is needed.

Past experience of Australian military hardware (e.g. Collin’s class submarines) is that locally built generally means over-priced and second-rate (….be kind). While that does not necessarily extend to armoured vehicles, naval vessels such as frigates, destroyers and submarines appear beyond present capabilities. Commissioning local development is no doubt intended to create jobs, but is at the expense of selling short our soldiers and sailors — equipping them with second-rate equipment in situations where it can mean the difference between life and death. Which is why military procurement, like the selection of infrastructure projects, should be above the political process.

Read more at War on entitlements doesn’t extend to military | | MacroBusiness.

Has democracy failed us or have we failed it?

I came across this opinion piece I wrote for Memorial Day three years ago. How little has changed:

Who kept the faith and fought the fight;
The glory theirs, the duty ours.

I would like to make this quote from Wallace Bruce the theme of today’s newsletter on Memorial Day, May 30th.
We often take for granted the institutions that our ancestors sacrificed so much to secure. Have we fulfilled our duty to preserve the freedoms that they sacrificed so much for? And have we held the members of our institutions to account for the neglect of their duties?

Some legislators only wish vengeance against a particular enemy. Others only look out for themselves. They devote very little time to consideration of any public issue. They think that no harm will come from their neglect. They act as if it is always the business of somebody else to look after this or that. When this selfish notion is entertained by all, the commonwealth slowly begins to decay.

Little seems to have changed since Thucydides made this observation in about 400 BC, a century after the foundation of democracy in ancient Athens. The fundamental weakness of democracy seems to be that those who are elected to office tend to place their own interests ahead of the interests of their electorate — and ahead of the interests of the nation. Not surprising when, as Thucydides pointed out, they believe that little harm will come from their neglect. But if enough legislators place their own interests ahead of those of the country, they will cause irreversible damage.

The First Rule of Politics is to Get Re-Elected

By placing their own interests first, I do not necessarily mean that office holders seek to enrich themselves at the expense of the taxpayer — although that does occasionally happen. Rather that they define their primary duty to their country as re-election. The pressure to get re-elected is bound to influence their thoughts and actions on almost every issue.

The Presidential Cycle

The temptation to manipulate the system to maximize your chance of re-election is too great for most politicians to resist. In fact it has become so ingrained that the whole economy, and the stock market particularly, is subject to the political cycle. Jeremy Grantham explains the presidential cycle in his last quarterly newsletter:

In the first seven months of the third year (of the presidential cycle) since 1960, Year 3 has returned 2.5% per month for a total of 20% real (after inflation adjustment)…. Now, 20% is perilously close to the total for the whole 48-month cycle of 21%. This means, of course, that the remaining 41 months collectively return a princely 1%.

It’s the economy, stupid

The third rule of politics is don’t run for re-election during a recession. Ask George H. W. Bush who, despite successful prosecution of the first Iraq war, was beaten by Bill Clinton in 1992 with the slogan “It’s the economy, stupid.” (The second rule, by the way, is: never forget Rule #1)

Successive presidents/governments have failed to find a way to re-schedule elections to a time that bests suits them (despite many examples in the rest of the world). They soon, however, came up with an ingenious alternative: re-schedule the recession.

How to Re-Schedule a Recession

As soon as politicians realized they could spend future taxes as well as current taxes, the demise of the current system became inevitable. Prior to the Great Depression of the 1930s, governments were assessed on their ability to balance the books. Previous disasters with fiat currencies (continental and confederate dollars) were still fresh in the national consciousness. Only during times of war could they justify running a deficit. So much so that Herbert Hoover refused to run a deficit despite the deflationary spiral following the 1929 Wall Street crash.

When FDR lifted that constraint in the 1930s, with the acquiescence of a desperate public who were willing to try almost anything, an immense new power was born. Unfortunately with immense power comes immense responsibility — and successive governments have proved themselves unequal to the task.

Spend Future Taxes and Leave your Successor a Pile of Debt

It has become too easy for whoever is in power to spend future taxes to stimulate the economy and postpone a recession. The result is that their successor inherits a pile of debt, which if they attempt to repay, is likely to lead to a recession. So the game becomes one of pass the parcel, with each elected government adding to the debt and passing it on to the next.

If the ancient Greeks had the same power, the decline of Athens may have been a lot sooner. Their modern counterparts have demonstrated that the game cannot continue indefinitely. At some point the market will begin to question government’s ability to repay, raising interest rates to compensate for the risk of sovereign default. Their fears become a self-fulfilling prophecy, with higher servicing costs increasing the burden on the already-precarious fiscal budget.

Fed Compliance

The second actor in this modern form of Greek tragedy is the Federal Reserve. Without a compliant Fed, government efforts to kick the can down the road would be largely negated. An independent Fed could put the brakes on government efforts to stimulate the economy with borrowed money, merely by acting as a counter-balance to their actions. Unfortunately the Board of Governors are political appointments, nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) may be more evenly balanced with the addition of the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and four of the remaining eleven Reserve Bank presidents, who serve one-year terms on a rotating basis, but is still dominated by the seven Board members. You can be sure that very few mavericks are appointed as governors and that most dissenting votes come from the regions.

Washington, Inc.

Elections are an expensive business and no candidate is likely to achieve re-election without financial backers, making them especially vulnerable to outside influence. The finance industry alone made $63 million in campaign contributions to Federal Candidates during the 2010 electoral cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That will buy you a lot of influence on the Hill, but is merely the tip of the iceberg. Interest groups spent $3.5 billion in that year on lobbying Congress and federal agencies ($473 million from the finance sector). While that money does not flow directly to candidates it acts as an enticing career path/retirement plan for both Representatives and senior staffers.

The revolving door between Capitol Hill and the big lobbying firms parachutes former elected officials and staffers into jobs as lobbyists, consultants and strategists — while infiltrating their best and brightest into positions within government; a constant exchange of power, influence and money. More than 75 percent of the 363 former senators or representatives end up employed by lobbying firms, either as lobbyists or advisors.

Can the Present System Evolve?

Are we likely to experience slow decay that Thucydides predicted? The present system is entrenched and likely to resist any attempts at reform. Evolution, however, does not occur in small increments. The norm is quite the opposite, with species enjoying long periods of stability followed by violent change when threatened with extinction. The current GFC presents just such an opportunity for change. The Tea Party movement, for example, is attempting to re-define the way that the system works, while I am sure that there are many Democrats who mistrust the motives of Washington.

If they fail to succeed, there is bound to be a next time. And probably sooner than we think.

The state that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its laws made by cowards,
and its fighting done by fools.

~ Thucydides (c. 460 BC – c. 400 BC).