Economy Archives - Page 50 of 136 - the patient investor

July 31, 2016

The real problem: Private Investment

Want to know the real cause of low GDP growth? Look no further than Private Investment.

Private Investment over Nominal GDP

Private Investment ran with peaks around 10 percent of GDP and troughs around 4 percent throughout the 1960s, 70s and most of the 80s. Since then Private Investment has declined to the point that the latest peak is close to 4 percent.

It is highly unlikely that the US will be able to sustain GDP growth if the rate of investment continues to decline. GDP growth is a factor of population growth and productivity growth. Productivity growth is not primarily caused by people working harder but by working more efficiently, with better tools and equipment. Using an earthmover rather than a wheelbarrow and shovel for example. Falling investment means fewer new tools and efficiencies.

Private Investment & Debt over Nominal GDP

The second graph plots the annual increase in private debt against GDP. You would think that this figure would fall — in line with falling rates of investment. Quite the opposite. Private debt growth is rising. While annual debt growth is nowhere near the red flag of 5 percent of GDP, if it crosses above the rate of private investment — as in 2006 to 2009 — I would consider that a harbinger of another crash.

July 29, 2016

Why the Fed should use NGDP targeting

Good point made by R.A. in The Economist as to why the Fed should target nominal GDP rather than inflation:

One of the strongest points in favour of NGDP targeting, in my view, is that it implied a need for far more action from the Fed far earlier in this business cycle. People remember how aggressively the Fed intervened to prop up the financial system in the fall of 2008, but they forget how slow the central bank was to react to what was obviously a precipitous decline in the macroeconomy. The fed funds rate stayed at 2% from April until October of 2008. The Fed didn’t ramp up its initial asset purchase programme above $1 trillion until March of 2009, at which point the economy had already lost some 6m jobs. Why the delay? One data point worth noting: the monthly core inflation rate was positive throughout 2008 and 2009. NGDP growth, by contrast, was already negative in the third quarter of 2008, and was sharply negative in the fourth quarter of that year, when total spending in the economy shrank at an 8.4% annual pace. A central bank with an explicit NGDP level target would have faced (appropriately) intense pressure to do much more much sooner than one with the Fed’s present, vague focus on an inflation target as a means to broader macroeconomic stability.

If we look at the graph below, it is likely the Fed would have cut the funds rate to near zero by May 2008, when Q1 GDP results were available — possibly earlier if they were using surrogates to give more up-to-date measures of GDP — rather than waiting until November 2008.

Fed Funds Rate, Core CPI & Nominal GDP

But that misses the key point. The Fed would have intervened far earlier with tighter monetary policy — in late 2003 when GDP growth jumped to 6.4 percent — and prevented the bubble from forming.

Source: Monetary policy: Understanding NGDP targeting | The Economist

July 26, 2016

Privatisation has damaged the economy, says ACCC chief

In a blistering attack on decades of common government practice, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission chairman Rod Sims said the sale of ports and electricity infrastructure and the opening of vocational education to private companies had caused him and the public to lose faith in privatisation and deregulation.

“I’ve been a very strong advocate of privatisation for probably 30 years; I believe it enhances economic efficiency,” Mr Sims told the Melbourne Economic Forum on Tuesday. “I’m now almost at the point of opposing privatisation because it’s been done to boost proceeds, it’s been done to boost asset sales and I think it’s severely damaging our economy.”

Mr Sims said privatising ports, including Port Botany and Port Kembla in NSW, which were privatised together, and the Port of Melbourne, which came with conditions restricting competition from other ports, were examples where monopolies had been created without suitable regulation to control how much they could then charge users……

Deregulating the electricity market and selling poles and wires in Queensland and NSW, meanwhile, had seen power prices almost double there over five years, he said.

I have also been a strong advocate of privatising state assets, but Rod Sims raises some important concerns that need to be addressed.

There is a strong trend in capitalist economies away from free enterprise and towards privatised “monopolies”. Investors place a great deal of emphasis when evaluating stocks on a company’s “economic moat” or competitive advantage. Both of which imply the ability to restrict competition. While this may maximize revenue for the individual economic unit, it is harmful for the economy as a whole.

Which brings me back to Mr Sims’ point. Higher prices paid for infrastructure services destroy the competitiveness of the economy as a whole, with profound implications for exports and productivity.

Source: Privatisation has damaged the economy, says ACCC chief

July 9, 2016

Michael Pettis: Brexit could speed breakup of the Euro

On secular stagnation: “I don’t see growth picking up until you either redistribute income downwards — which is politically quite difficult and slow — or developed countries which are credible borrowers engage in massive infrastructure spending — which would be a great idea but politically difficult — so I’m afraid secular stagnation is going to last several more years.”

On BREXIT: “I’m not to optimistic that the Euro will be around in 10 years…BREXIT could speed up the process if England does well.”

On future crises: “It’s always the same thing: a huge switch from New York to Washington (in American terms) where policy begins to dominate the whole process…because the solutions to the problems are political solutions, not really economic or financial solutions…”

July 9, 2016

Steve Keen: Australian mortgage debt levels are “outrageous”

Steve Keen has a number of detractors who knock him for his incorrect forecast of collapse of the Australian housing bubble. But he was wrong for the right reasons…. the Australian financial system, based on highly-levered mortgages, is a house of cards. It was only rescued post-GFC by massive stimulus in China, resulting in a mini-boom in the Australian Resources industry.

Steve is at the cutting edge of economic theory. He and Richard Koo (The Holy Grail of Macroecomomics) were at the forefront of identifying the role that debt plays in the Aggregate Demand equation. We should take heed of his warnings.

“Our models predicted it [the GFC] couldn’t happen. It did happen. We therefore shouldn’t trust our models.”

“…What drives house prices is acceleration in mortgage debt…..Australians avoided collapse of the bubble by continuing to lend but mortgage debt is now 1.1 times GDP which is outrageous.”

July 7, 2016

Major banks’ credit rating outlook cut to ‘negative’

From Clancy Yeates:

Australia’s banks face the threat of higher funding costs, after Standard & Poor’s downgraded the big four’s credit rating outlook to “negative”, a direct result of its action on the government’s top-notch rating.

….the banks’ credit ratings are automatically raised by two notches because S&P assumes they would receive government support in times of financial stress. Action on the government’s rating therefore tends to flow directly into the banks’ ratings.

“The negative outlooks on these banks reflect our view that the ratings benefit from government support and that we would expect to downgrade these entities if we lower the long-term local currency sovereign credit rating on Australia,” Standard & Poor’s said.

While the warning does not reflect changes in the banks’ financial performance, analysts say that if it leads to a downgrade in the actual credit rating of banks, it could push up bank funding costs all the same.

….”While Australian banks enjoy relatively high credit ratings and are deemed to be in the top quartile of global capital requirements, the frequent use of offshore wholesale funding markets is likely to result in higher funding costs.”

The big four raise about 30 per cent of their funding by issuing bonds in wholesale funding markets, so the cost of this debt can have a significant influence on the sector…..

To avoid moral hazard, with banks taking unnecessary risk at the taxpayer’s expense — a case of heads I win, tails you lose — Treasury and the RBA should commit themselves to the Swedish example. Banks that require rescue should forfeit control of their assets by issue of a controlling equity stake to the government. That would significantly curtail management and shareholders’ willingness to take unnecessary risks. And create a strong incentive to increase capital buffers. Not just to comply with APRA rules, but to make their businesses as bullet-proof as possible. Conservatively-run banks would be a major asset to the economy.

What APRA needs to focus on is instilling the right culture in banks. Rather than management focused on incentives to grow the business, there should be more emphasis on protecting the business and ensuring its long-term survival.

Source: Major banks’ credit rating outlook cut to ‘negative’

July 6, 2016

Gold surges as the Pound and Yuan fall

The Yuan is sliding against the Dollar, with USDCNY breaking through resistance at 6.60. Expect further capital flight, both from residents and offshore investors. Borrowers will also seek to repay Dollar-denominated loans and replace them with facilities in the local currency, adding further pressure on the Yuan.

USDCNY

The PBOC has been encouraged by fading prospects of further rate rises from the Fed, with 10-year Treasury Yields falling to a new all-time low of 1.37 percent, compared to 1.40 percent in 2012.

10-Year Treasury Yields

….And the Pound falling to a 30-year low.

GBPUSD

Falling currencies and lower long-term interest rates are both good news for gold bugs, with spot gold surging to $1370/ounce. Expect retracement to test the new support level at $1300/ounce. Respect of the band of support at $1280/$1300 is likely and would signal another advance, with a target of $1400/ounce*.

Spot Gold

* Target calculation: 1300 + ( 1300 – 1200 ) = 1400

July 5, 2016

How Hanson should frame the immigration debate | MacroBusiness

From Leith van Onselen:

Senator-elect One Nation’s Pauline Hanson dominated news headlines yesterday after she warned of “terrorism on our streets” and suburbs “swamped by Asians”, prompting righteous indignation from all manner of MSM commentators.

The below extract from The Canberra Times captures some of the shenanigans: At a fiery press conference in Brisbane on Monday, Ms Hanson claimed the major parties should respect the large number of votes One Nation pulled, and urged a return to an Australia “where we as a nation had a right to have an opinion and have a say”…… “We are a Christian country and that’s what I’m saying … [former Liberal prime minister] John Howard said we have a right to say who comes into our country and I’m saying exactly the same.”

My simple advice to Ms Hanson is that if she wants to be taken seriously in the immigration debate, then she must dump the racial overture and instead focus on the level of immigration and why it is too high.

The fact that many of us in major cities are stuck in traffic, cannot get a seat on the train, are experiencing crowded hospitals and schools, and cannot afford a home has little to do with race, but rather a high immigration intake that has overwhelmed our cities’ ability to cope with the influx.

….Ms Hanson should also highlight that the system surrounding so-called skilled and student visas has been corrupted, with widespread rorting and fraud revealed by the recent joint ABC-Fairfax investigation (see Australia’s hidden people smuggling scandal). Again, rather than focusing on race, Ms Hanson should argue to restore integrity to Australia’s visa system so that it is not overtaken by “crooks and criminals”.

…More broadly, Ms Hanson should highlight that for a major commodity exporter like Australia, which pays its way in the world by selling-off its fixed endowment of resources, ongoing high immigration can be self-defeating from an economic standpoint. That is, continually adding more people to the population year after year means less resources per capita. It also means that Australia must sell-off its fixed assets quicker just to maintain a constant standard of living (other things equal).

Again, none of this has anything to do with race – i.e. where the migrants come from – but rather that the overall immigration intake is too high and has overwhelmed the capacity of the economy and infrastructure to absorb them, eroding individuals’ living standards in the process.

There has also been no proper debate within the community about the appropriate level of immigration and no political mandate for pursuing a “Big Australia”.

…..We should not forget that an Essential Research opinion poll published in May revealed that the overwhelming majority of Australians (59%) believed “the level of immigration into Australia over the last ten years has been too high”, more than double the 28% of Australians that disagreed with that statement.

….under current policy, Australia is on track to double its population by 2050 to more than 40 million people – something most Australians oppose. Again, this comes amid virtually no discussion nor mandate for this dramatic change, nor any plan on how to cope with this growth.

As long as Ms Hanson plays the “race card”, she will be rightly ridiculed and has already lost the debate. Population policy is far too important an issue to be segregated into pro- and anti-immigration corners based upon views about race and cultural supremacy. Instead, the issue needs to be debated rationally and based upon whether or not immigration is benefiting the living standards of the existing population.

I agree. This has nothing to do with race or religion. Pauline Hanson is barking up the wrong tree. This is about numbers. I suspect the same is true of the Brexit vote. I am all in favor of skilled migration (being a migrant myself) but any newcomer should ask themselves how they can contribute to existing Australian values and culture….rather than preserve their own.

Source: How Hanson should frame the immigration debate – MacroBusiness

July 4, 2016

Don’t blame demographics, blame the government

Niels Jensen’s Absolute Return monthly newsletter raises one of the major structural impediments to growth in Europe:

As [economist Woody Brock] pointed out when in London, ageing has only had a modest impact on GDP growth and inflation so far. Governments have ruined economic growth in Europe; demographics haven’t. If employment laws are such that employment is virtually for life, companies stop hiring. If you can’t fire, you don’t hire, as Woody pointed out….

Similar impediments are evident in Australia. If developed economies want to compete in global markets, they need to get their house in order. Raising barriers to free trade is not a sustainable alternative but will instead destroy any remaining semblance of competitiveness. Trade barriers result in a limited choice of products, forcing customers to pay higher prices and accept inferior quality. Lack of competition leads to the death of innovation. Quality deteriorates and we soon face another zombie industry dependent on government support. A prime example would be the motor industry — in Europe, North America, even Australia — over the last half-century.

June 28, 2016

Gold rises as the Yuan and interest rates fall

China seems to have given up on its policy of supporting the Yuan against the Dollar, with USDCNY breaking through resistance at 6.60. Depleting foreign reserves to support the Dollar-peg was always going to be a tough call for the PBOC. But the alternative of increased capital flight and rising counter-measures from trading partners may exact an even higher price.

USDCNY

Perhaps the PBOC was encouraged by fading prospects of further rate rises from the Fed this year, after BREXIT. 10-Year Treasury Yields are headed for a test of support at the all-time low of 1.40 percent in 2012.

10-Year Treasury Yields

Gold broke resistance at $1300/ounce and is now retracing to test the new support level. BREXIT, a weakening Yuan, and lower interest rates are all likely to fuel demand for gold. Respect of the band of support at $1280/$1300 is likely and would signal another advance, with a target of $1400/ounce*.

Spot Gold

* Target calculation: 1300 + ( 1300 – 1200 ) = 1400