Category: Current Affairs
Greece fact of the day
By contrast, Greek households own more foreign assets than they owe in liabilities to foreigners. Exiting the euro area would immediately make them wealthier, although, perversely, the stimulus would be most potent the longer the government waits for citizens to pull their savings out of the banks.
That is from Matthew C. Klein at the FT.
Tyrone says the Chinese stock market is not a bubble
James Surowiecki writes:
Of seventeen hundred stocks on the Shenzhen Exchange, only four have fallen this year, and more than a hundred have seen their shares rise more than five hundred per cent. The Shenzhen Index as a whole has doubled since January, and is up more than two hundred per cent in the past year. The action on China’s other major stock exchanges—in Shanghai and Hong Kong—hasn’t been quite as torrid, but they’ve had their share of extraordinary winners. The Shanghai Composite Index has risen a hundred and forty per cent since this time last year. In Hong Kong, Jicheng Umbrella Holdings (which makes, yes, umbrellas) went public in February: its shares are up almost seventeen hundred per cent.
Tyrone, Tyler’s evil twin, says buy, buy buy! Borrow to buy, and then borrow to borrow! Tyrone has read so many people in the last week calling the Chinese stock market a bubble, so the contrarian in him thinks you simply need to take the plunge as soon as possible.
Direct foreign investment has been allowed only as of late 2014:
The Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect program will allow all investors to buy shares on the Shanghai Stock Exchange, while also permitting wealthy investors in mainland China to buy stocks listed in Hong Kong. The move allows investors access to companies with an overall market value of roughly $2 trillion.
“We think it is very significant. We plan to participate,” said Gary Greenberg, head of emerging markets at Hermes Investment Management in London, which managed $46.9 billion in assets as of June 30.
That’s a lot of foreign capital to push up the value of Ma and Pa Tofu, and indeed that flood of capital will validate your early investment. And who amongst us is not tempted to diversify just a wee bit into the world’s second largest economy, indeed the very largest by PPP measures? Surely the coming tidal wave of foreign liquidity will push aside all present minor worries.
On the domestic front, Chinese savings are currently real-estate intensive, and over time those funds be shifting into equities, especially as Chinese graduate students carry the lessons of Mehra and Prescott back home. As prices fluctuate, the market is assessing how significant these effects will be, just as it once did with subprime.
Besides, the market went up 4.6% on Monday alone, and that is at a time when Chinese manufacturing seems to be slowing. The Chinese government itself proclaimed the stock market to be “healthy,” and indeed many different parts of the government, including the media, have seconded this verdict. Why bet against all of them?
Did you not know that the Chinese debt-equity ratio is too high? Well, higher equity prices will help lower that ratio, as the government intends; new stock issues are being used to buy back corporate debt, some of it dollar-denominated.
If nothing else, return back to some patriotic context. Was it not a good idea to buy American stocks when our country had a per capita gdp of 6-7k, and headed up? With a 20-30 year time horizon, was it not a good idea to buy American stocks even in 1929?
To be sure, the forthcoming liquidity-based, foreign investor-driven price movements imply a non-horizontal demand curve for those stocks, and thus violate the stricter forms of EMH. But who said a demand curve should be perfectly flat anyway? Weren’t the Marxists referring to perfectly flat demand curves when they said competitive capitalism is the absolute loss of freedom? And hasn’t China been moving away from Marxism? Q.E.D. So Tyrone says it is time to borrow to buy. Someone out there — maybe even you — won’t regret it.
“One Belt, One Road”, or the New Silk Road for China?
That is the new China initiative to rebuild the Old Silk Road along modern principles. The plan is a bit of a grab bag, but seems to include the following:
a. A deepwater naval base in Pakistan, plus a $42 billion aid/investment package for Pakistan. Here is some background on what already has been done.
b. A Chinese route to the sea through Myanmar and Bangladesh.
c. Northern shipping routes to Europe, through the Arctic, as the ice melts.
d. A rail line from Zhengzhou through Russia to Hamburg (already running, a 17-day trip).
e. Power stations and manufacturing plants for the Central Asian republics, in return for gas supply. This infrastructure transfer is also supposed to limit excess capacity in China by sending infrastructure abroad.
f. A railway and highway to connect China to the Arabian Sea.
Arnold Kling, telephone! Are these sustainable patterns of trade and specialization? Or are they slated to be proverbial white elephants? Does anyone know? Bueller?
A few points are striking here.
1. Much of this seems to be defensive geopolitics. Most of China’s oil supply, and much of China’s trade, runs through the Straits of Malacca. This plan, assuming it can be well-executed, affords China a good deal of protection. Yet that insurance does not add growth on top of the status quo, which currently is an open, well-functioning (mostly), trade channel at the Straits. At best it would hold a future catastrophe at bay for China.
2. The gravity equation in international trade economics suggests that countries trade much more when they are “near each other.” But what does proximity in this context mean exactly (pdf, an interesting trade paper by the way, on the “death of distance” theme and where it fails)? The most successful gravity models cite “distance between national capitals” rather than “distance between closest borders.” For evaluating this plan, that difference matters a great deal! I say distance between capitals is likely the more relevant variable, all the more for an economy dominated by state-owned enterprises.
3. The idea of easing excess capacity by sending infrastructure to other countries seems unlikely to succeed. Other than gas, how much do these countries currently have to offer China? And how much infrastructure can be transferred how quickly?
4. China’s economic growth has been dominated by the coasts, and the Great Canal, for approximately one thousand years; today Xi’an is a backwater for instance, although in the Tang dynasty it was possibly the most advanced city in the world. Can this now-deeply entrenched pattern — water transport beats land transport — be reversed by a lot of government spending?
5. To date China’s main external ally is North Korea, even though China is the world’s second largest economy. How well will relations with all these other nations evolve, and what does that mean for the value of those investments? Sri Lanka already has decided to redo its deals with China, and it doesn’t seem China can bully them out of that, though read this update.
During my China visit, I heard repeatedly that this New Silk Road plan will limit the pending decline of China’s growth rate. Each time I expressed skepticism about that prospect, my words were met with great dismay and, I felt, disbelief. Yet I do not see how these pieces are supposed to fit together as a growth-boosting enterprise. They do seem well-designed to extend China’s political influence in the western direction, and to transfer more contracts to state-owned firms. But to raise living standards for most of the Chinese people? I don’t see it, or even see it coming close.
Urban Average is Over
Nearly half of the biggest US metropolitan areas have yet to recoup all the lost jobs from the Great Recession and almost a third have failed to return to previous levels of output, according to analysis that underscores the fragmenting urban fortunes beneath the surface of America’s recovery.
Research on 100 urban areas from the Brookings think-tank, reveals an economic patchwork in which the legacy of boom and bust hangs heavily over cities in Florida and inland California, while at the other end of the spectrum, technology and bioscience-focused cities such as Austin, Texas, San Francisco, and Raleigh, North Carolina have comfortably surpassed their previous peaks.
“This may be the norm now — extreme variation,” said Mark Muro, policy director for the Metropolitan Policy Program at Washington-based Brookings.
Icelandic-Basque relations on the upswing
A memorial dedicated to the 32 Basque whalers who were killed in the West Fjords in 1615 in what’s known as Iceland’s only mass murder was unveiled in Hólmavík, the West Fjords, on April 22, the last day of winter. At the occasion, West Fjords district commissioner Jónas Guðmundsson revoked the order that Basques could be killed on sight in the region.
“Of course it’s more for fun; there are laws in this country which prohibit the killing of Basques,” Jónas told mbl.is. When asked whether he’s noticed an increase of Basque tourists since the order was revoked, he responded, “at least it’s safe for them to come here now.”
President of Gipuzkoa Martin Garitano spoke at the ceremony, as did Icelandic Minister of Education and Culture Illugi Gunnarsson, strandabyggd.is reports. The speeches were followed by musical performances and a moment of prayer.
The program included Xabier Irujo, descendant of one of the murdered Basque whale hunters, and Magnús Rafnsson, descendant of one of the murderers, taking part in a symbolic reconciliation, as it says on etxepare.eus.
There is more here, via Peter Kobulnicky.
Enough said
Labor leaders, who were among the strongest supporters of the citywide minimum wage increase approved last week by the Los Angeles City Council, are advocating last-minute changes to the law that could create an exemption for companies with unionized workforces.
The push to include an exception to the mandated wage increase for companies that let their employees collectively bargain was the latest unexpected detour as the city nears approval of its landmark legislation to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2020.
The story is here. And here is a mood-affiliated Jared Bernstein piece on the L.A. minimum wage hike; it would have been stronger if all he had written were the simple eleven words: “I’m sorry, but I don’t think this is a good idea.” In a way, the labor unions have just said the same.
Hat tip goes to Modeled Behavior.
Sentences to tremble by
It is far from clear whether Europe can act as an engine of world recovery.
You will find more pessimism here, by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard.
Facts about China (America)
Roughly 50% of Chinese savings – amounting to as much as half of GDP – lie in real estate alone, with 20% in deposits, 11% in stocks, and 12% in bonds. To compare, in the United States, real estate, insurance, and pensions each account for about 20% of total savings, with 7.4% in deposits, 21% in stocks, and 33% in bonds.
Rising stock-market capitalization also helps to reduce the real economy’s exposure to bank financing. The US is much more “financialized” than China, with stocks and bonds amounting to 133% and 205% of GDP, respectively, at the end of 2013. Those ratios were only 35% and 43%, respectively, in China. Meanwhile, China’s bank assets amounted to 215% of GDP – more than double America’s 95%.
That is from Sheng and Geng.
The Great Stagnation spreads
Chris Giles and Sam Fleming at the FT report:
Output per worker grew last year at its slowest rate since the millennium, with a slowdown evident in almost all regions, underscoring how the problem of lower productivity growth is now taking on global proportions.
The Conference Board, a think-tank, said that based on official data on output and employment from most countries, only India and sub-Saharan Africa enjoyed faster labour productivity growth last year.
Globally, the rate of growth decelerated to 2.1 per cent in 2014, compared with an annual average of 2.6 per cent between 1999 and 2006, it said.
…Bart van Ark, the Conference Board’s chief economist, said total factor productivity, which takes account of skill levels and investment as well as the number of workers, fell 0.2 per cent in 2014. “This is a global phenomenon and so we have to take it very seriously,” he said.
Economists are increasingly identifying the problem of low global productivity as one of the greatest threats to improved living standards, in rich and poor countries alike.
As you may know, I am on record as predicting that the great stagnation will end, but so far it doesn’t seem like it is happening.
Paul Krugman on productivity stagnation
That is the topic of his column today, I had not seen this very good point before:
One possibility is that the numbers are missing the reality, especially the benefits of new products and services. I get a lot of pleasure from technology that lets me watch streamed performances by my favorite musicians, but that doesn’t get counted in G.D.P. Still, new technology is supposed to serve businesses as well as consumers, and should be boosting the production of traditional as well as new goods. The big productivity gains of the period from 1995 to 2005 came largely in things like inventory control, and showed up as much or more in nontechnology businesses like retail as in high-technology industries themselves. Nothing like that is happening now.
Overall Krugman is agnostic on the stagnation argument.
John Nash, RIP
John Nash and his wife died yesterday in a car accident.
CNN: Nash, who won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1994, was known for his work in game theory, and his personal struggle with paranoid schizophrenia. His life story inspired the 2001 Oscar-winning film “A Beautiful Mind” starring Russell Crowe and Jennifer Connelly as the Nashes.
Nash’s 27 page dissertation would eventually win him a Nobel prize in economics. Nash’s dissertation extended von Neumann and Morgenstern’s theory of games from cooperative, bargaining-type solutions to non-cooperative solutions in which each player is assumed to act in their self-interest and in so doing made the theory tremendously more relevant to economics, business, political science, and even theories of animal behavior and evolution.
Here is further background on Nash’s work in game theory. Here is the PBS documentary A Beautiful Madness with lots of links to interviews and further explanations of his work and influence.
The economy in Pakistan is indeed improving
The recent terror attack in Karachi won’t help any, but still the news is looking up, from The FT:
The IMF has acknowledged that Pakistan averted a balance of payments crisis in 2013 and managed to stabilise its foreign reserves. This week Standard & Poor’s, the credit rating agency, raised the outlook for its B minus rating from stable to positive, while Moody’s last month raised its outlook to stable from negative — albeit for a Caa1 rating, which puts it one notch above Greece.
With liquid foreign reserves having grown almost fourfold in the past year to $12.5bn, a figure equivalent to about three months of imports, Mr Wathra has less cause for concern about the stability of the rupee than some of his predecessors.
The recent plunge in the price of crude has seen the cost of oil imports fall to $9.7bn in the nine months to March, down from just over $11.2bn a year earlier, according to central bank figures.
Falling oil prices have also helped lower the fiscal deficit to an expected 5 per cent of gross domestic product in the year to June, down from above 8 per cent just over two years ago. And the country’s GDP is forecast to grow by about 4 per cent this year, following a similar rise last year.
You may recall my earlier post on Pakistan being an undervalued economy, more here too. It still is.
Why you cannot see how well China is doing, and why the country is undercrowded
Since I’ve been in China, a number of you have written me and asked me how “conditions on the ground” are looking for a Chinese hard or soft landing. But in fact visual inspection of the country does not answer this question in any simple way.
I recall being in Madrid in 2011 with Yana and seeing everything slow and all the people looking depressed; it was obvious that the country was in a deep recession. But a comparable inference cannot be made from looking around China.
There is a visual feature of China which is incontestable, namely the country has a lot more buildings and structures than it is currently using. If you take the train through the countryside, or out West, this is especially noticeable. But does it have to be bad or fatal news? Well, no.
At the very least it is possible that migration from the countryside will fill and validate those structures and other apparent over-extensions of capital investment. Under both the optimistic and pessimistic views, China today evidences some extreme in-the-moment overcapacity. That is what you would expect from a rapidly growing economy — “build for the glorious future!”, but it is also what you would expect from a rapidly malinvesting economy.
(By the way, those who have never visited often think that China is “crowded.” But relative to facilities, the country is quite undercrowded; for instance it is easy enough to dispense with dinner reservations most of the time.)
How long will this excess capacity last? How much time will the Chinese future need to “catch up” to this infrastructure? Will that validation come too late? We all may have opinions (or not), but the visuals themselves do not tell any specific tale.
So to a China pessimist and a China optimist, the world looks more or less the same. For now.
What would it take for me to change my mind on TPP?
I’m familiar with studies showing estimated economic gains from TPP in the neighborhood of $1.9 trillion (pdf). Given the past performance of trade models, I am willing to believe that might be an overestimate. So let’s cut those gains roughly in half to say a trillion. (That said, if I understand the Peterson document correctly, they are not even trying to incorporate gains from reallocation on the production side, as might result from comparative advantage or dynamic specialization; in this sense $1 trillion may be a considerable underestimate of the upside.)
That is still a sizable sum of economic gain.
What would convince me to oppose TPP if is somebody did a study showing the following: when you use a better trade model, use better data, and/or add in the neglected costs of TPP (which are real), those gains go away and indeed become negative.
Then I would change my mind, or at least weigh those economic costs against possibly favorable geopolitical benefits from the deal.
What does not convince me is when people simply list various costs and outrages associated with TPP. Furthermore if one of those problems with TPP is addressed, or partially addressed, often these commentators circle around to another possible problem. In fact that response pattern is a sign the critics don’t themselves have a very good comprehensive estimate of global costs and benefits. By the way, it also fails to convince me when the critics attack those who support TPP for being craven, superficial, lackeys, and so on.
I say let’s just have a two-way button and ask everyone to press it: do you believe that TPP would lead to a net gain in economic welfare or not?
If those costs and outrages associated with TPP are so bad, it ought to be possible to do a study which makes the trillion in benefits go away. Has anyone done such a study? Would such a study survive the commentary from the NBER annual macro conference?
I am not suggesting that economic welfare should be the only criterion for evaluating a policy. But making everyone press this two-way button — and in the process citing their favorite comprehensive policy study of TPP – would do wonders to bring clarity to the debate. Commentators still would have the liberty of accepting the reality of the economic gains while disfavoring the policy, as indeed I do with forced kidney extraction and transplant.
In the meantime, the more desultory lists I see of possible negative consequences of TPP, the more likely I am to think it is a good idea after all.
We’ve had a version of ISDS with Vietnam since 2001
Has it been so bad? For us? For them? How many of us had even noticed?
Here are some information (pdf), and here (pdf), I thank Matthew Vogel for reminding me of this.
Here is my previous post on ISDS and TPP. Here is a good CRS brief on previous trade agreements with Vietnam.