Archive - Oct 27, 2012

This is no longer your "father's economy." The importance of this shift in the U.S. from away from being the epicenter of global production and manufacturing to a service and finance based economy should not be overlooked.  This transition is responsible for the issues that are impeding economic growth in the U.S. today from structural unemployment, declining wage growth and lower economic prosperity. What does this have to do with GDP and exports?  Well, just about everything. With exports declining which is impacting corporate profit margins, employment conditions deteriorating, and business spending contracting - these are all the necessary ingredients to spin out a negative economic growth rate at some point in the not so distant future.

Since the 2008 financial crisis the foundations of the global economy have been in repair, translating into a prolonged period of economic frailty. Against this backdrop, social and political tensions have increased between citizens and government, international institutions and governments, and individual nation states. The European debt crisis remains the largest challenge facing the global economy. A negative resolution emanating from the world’s largest economic bloc would cause harmful ripple effects worldwide in global trade flows. More importantly, it could also mark a paradigm shift in international relations, dealing a critical blow to what has been a relentless trend towards liberalism since the end of World War II, while providing fecund ground for a resurgence in realist ideology. Interestingly though, constructivism may be at the forefront in explaining the current dilemma between the European core and its periphery. It would also be wise to ponder the idea of whether a supranational government could exist. Proceeding down a path with a likely dead end would consume precious resources and lead to widespread suffering among every day citizens.

Two of the saving features that allowed Japan to internalize 30-some years of failed fiscal and monetary policy (and yes, not one, not two, but now 8 failed iterations of quantitative easing) and to offset one relentless deflationary vortex was i) its demographics coupled with an investing culture that favors deposits and bonds over equities, which incentivized its aging population to invest its savings into government bonds, and ii) its trade surplus which led to foreign capital flows to enter the country. Well, as far as i) is concerned, Japan may have reached its demographic limit, since as reported several months ago, Japan's pension funds are now not only selling JGBs to meet redemption and cash needs, but forced to do truly stupid things like investing in the riskiest of assets to generate a return at any cost. In other words, demographics will no longer be a natural source of demand for deficit funds. As for ii), well... here is what has happened with Japan's trade surplus status in recent weeks following the collapse in the country's foreign relationship with China.

"We do not have the slightest doubt that our holdings in New York and Paris are also made up of the purest fine gold. We have at our disposal fully documented lists of the bars, and our partner central banks send us every year confirmation not only of the bars’ existence but also of their quality.... We had nothing but the best of experiences with our partners in New York, London and Paris. There was never any doubt about the security of Germany’s gold. In future, we wish to continue to keep gold at international gold trading centres so that, when push comes to shove, we can have it available as a reserve asset as soon as possible. Gold stored in your home safe is not immediately available as collateral in case you need foreign currency....for years, our gold has been stored by the highly esteemed central banks of the United States, Great Britain and France without provoking any complaints whatsoever – not by just any fly-by-night operators. Part of the debate in Germany has veered somewhat towards the absurd."

A PhD super being from outer space...

First, it was Greece who failed to stick with the "do not rock the boat until the US election" script so meticulously crafted by Tim Geithner, and now it is Italy's turn as Europe threatens to come unhinged precisely in the week when complete peace and quiet is needed to avoid deflecting attention from the peak season of the US presidential theater. As Reuters reports, "Tens of thousands of people marched through Rome in a "No Monti Day" on Saturday, some throwing eggs and spraying graffiti to protest against austerity measures introduced by Prime Minister Mario Monti's government. Appointed in November when Italy risked being sucked into the euro zone debt crisis, Monti has pushed through painful austerity measures to cut the country's massive debt, including tax hikes, spending cuts and a pension overhaul. "We are here against Monti and his politics, the same politics as all over Europe, that brought Greece to its knees and that are destroying half of Europe, public schools, health care," said demonstrator Giorgio Cremaschi... In another demonstration in northern Italy, a small group of protesters scuffled with police near where Monti was addressing a rally on the theme of family values." So who gets to capitalize on the latest bout of surging discontent with the Goldman appointed technocrat? Why the same man who yesterday was sentenced to several years in jail (a sentence that will be never carried out of course), Silvio Berlusconi, and whom the ECB singlehandedly took down nearly a year ago, when it sent Italian bond yields to record highs: "The center-right bloc will decide "in the next few days" whether to withdraw confidence for Prime Minister Mario Monti in parliament or support him until elections in April, former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said on Saturday. Monti's government of non-elected technocrats is backed by the center-left, the center and the center-right. It would have to resign if it lost the support of the entire center-right."

While those in the power and money echelons of the "developed" world scramble day after day to hold the pieces of the collapsing tower of cards in place (and manipulating public perception that all is well), knowing full well what the final outcome eventually will be, those who still have the capacity to look, and invest, in the future, are looking neither toward the US, nor Asia, and certainly not Europe, for one simple reason: there is no more incremental debt capacity at any level: sovereign, household, financial or corporate. Because without the ability to create debt out of thin air, be it on a secured or unsecured basis, the ability to "create" growth, at least in the current Keynesian paradigm, goes away with it. Yet there is one place where there is untapped credit creation potential, if not on an unsecured (i.e., future cash flow discounting), then certainly on a secured (hard asset collateral) basis. The place is Africa, and according to some estimates the continent, Africa can create between $5 and $10 trillion in secured debt, using its extensive untapped resources as first-lien collateral.

The rats on the street followed the receding water back into their holes

While the topic of the Japanese purchase of the contested [Senkaku|Diaoyu] Islands may have receded from the front pages of global media for lack of any major recent developments, the issue is still quite ripe in the minds of over 1 billion Chinese (and several hundred million Japanese, not to mention the executives of Japanese car and electronics makers who have seen a cliff-like collapse in purchases of their products by Chinese consumers in the past month). However, just because it is out of sight, does not mean it is out of mind, the front page of the official Chinese Daily is out with a big piece titled "China says no concession on territorial sovereignty" in which it makes it abundantly clear that Japan will have no choice but to back down in what China continues to consider an "aggressive" invasion of its territorial sovereignty. And to avoid any confision. Xinhua clarifies that if "anyone wants to challenge China's bottom line on the issue of sovereignty, China will have no alternative but to respond forcefully so as to remove disturbance and obstacles and move steadily on the path of peaceful development."

Still unsure if to laugh off Sandy, memories of the overblown New York City panic over Irene still fresh, or if to sandbag the basement and first two floors of your house? Here is the latest on the storm courtesy of Jeff Masters' Wunderground blog, which at last check had the following characteristics: Wind: 75 MPH — Location: 29.0N -76.0W — Movement: NNE. In other words, slowly but surely approaching New York, with landfall still expected sometime Tuesday morning. One thing is certain: there will be at least some "boost" to Q4 GDP as a result of the quite a few broken windows, even as all domestic companies line up to blame Sandy for continuing to miss the top line and increasingly, their EPS numbers, some time in January.

While the much anticipated ramp into the elections has so far failed to materialize (confirming yet another "technical pattern" of the New Normal, namely that whatever most expect to happen, never happens), it is time to consider what impact a given administration - either Republican or Democrat - would have on the stock market. Fiscal cliff aside, whose overcoming will be very problematic in either case and will likely necessitate a market plunge a la August 2011 to be fully implemented, although more likely if Romney wins the presidency or there is a Democratic sweep, both outcomes which according to popular conventional wisdom and various online polling services have a less than 50% chance of occurring, it turns out that at the macro level there is absolutely no difference for the market whether the president is a republican or a democrat for stock returns one year after the election. As Goldman observes: "Since 1976, the S&P 500 has offered approximately 10% total returns in the twelve months following a presidential election, regardless of which party wins that election. Performance is also very similar over shorter three and six month windows. However, median returns are slightly better early in Republican administrations, while during an entire four year term the equity market has somewhat higher returns under Democrats." In other words, those who are unsure if to invest in the broad market based on who wins, should not have the party affiliation of the winner as a consideration, at least not as a key issue. Where there are, however, nuances is at the sector level, which is where those seeing to generate "presidential beta" should consider trading on.

Uhhhh. It just couldn’t last. Risk had been pushed higher and higher in anticipation, but a combination of reality-check, rather unsettling Q3 earnings and renewed Spanish jitters just made players come down hard from their previous week’s high flying exercise.
Nothing new.

Spailout OMT still not in play. Greece, haggling not over. Earnings rather bad. PMIs dismal. Central Banks on hold, as everything is on the table, at least for the moment.