Will Japan’s Earthquake-Tsunami Be Market Bearish Or Bullish?

The glazier's gain of business, in short, is merely the tailor's loss of business. No new "employment" has been added. The people in the crowd were thinking only of two parties to the transaction, the baker and the glazier. They had forgotten the potential third party involved, the tailor. They forgot him precisely because he will not now enter the scene. They will see the new window in the next day or two. They will never see the extra suit, precisely because it will never be made. They see only what is immediately visible to the eye.-Henry Hazlitt, The Broken Window, Economics in One Lesson

Next week’s front running issue will likely be the double whammy of the earthquake-tsunami that struck Japan.

There might be a third factor—risks of a nuclear meltdown[1] as consequence to the above.

Capital Accumulation As Life Preserver

The largest of the massive earthquakes had been one for the record books.

Figure 3: Economist: World Largest Earthquake

According to the Economist[2],

ON Friday March 11th a huge earthquake of magnitude 8.9 struck off the north-east coast of Japan's main island, triggering a tsunami seven metres tall. The earthquake is thought to be the largest ever to hit Japan, and the fifth-largest since decent records began in 1900. According to the US Geological Survey, 15 of the 16 largest earthquakes occurred in and around the Pacific "Ring of Fire". Fortunately, many of the biggest, known as "megathrust" earthquakes, as one tectonic plate is forced under another, have occurred in sparsely populated areas.

While it may be true that megathrusters have occurred in sparse areas, the terrifying aspect is when the body counts begin to pile up. And the issue isn’t about the magnitudes of earthquakes but about how wealth from capital accumulation[3] has prepared society for such contingencies.

The 2010 earthquake in Haiti which only had a 7.0 magnitude took an estimated 92,000 to 220,000 lives[4]. However, the Philippines lost about 1,621 lives when a 7.8 tremblor struck in Northern Luzon on July 16^th 1990[5]. Strict building codes can’t be enforced if there is no wealth to fund it. That’s basic.

Earthquakes compounded by tsunamis increases the casualty rate. The 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami took some estimated 227,000 lives across 15 countries and is considered as one of the ten worst earthquakes in recorded history[6]. Indonesians bore the brunt of the death toll (130,736) or about 70% of fatalities.

Outside the escalation of a nuclear radiation disaster, I am hopeful that Japan’s fatality will be fraction of Haiti and or the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami incident.

Framing The Impact of the Earthquake-Tsunami

Some say that the Japan tragedy is market bearish. Others see this as market bullish.

My position is that while the initial reaction could be negative, this woeful episode would be a neutral or a nonevent over the medium to the long term.

Basically it’s all about the issue of risk and uncertainty.

While it is true that such large scale devastation would likely impact the insurance industry the most, as insurance companies would have to indemnify insured claims, looking solely at the damage-indemnity framework wouldn’t be sufficient or won’t reveal market dynamics in action.

My presupposition is that these companies have factored in the Japan’s geographic risk profile, and naturally, the calamity risk that Japan is faced with, as Japan is situated in the Pacific ring of fire[7] where 10% of the most active volcanoes are.

In other words, most of them would have assumed on the risk-reward balance of actualizing insurance contracts. Otherwise failure to do so means the risk of bankruptcy.

And if there are any clues towards Japan’s earthquake risks, many geologists have spent so much time and money to predict the “big one” coming but apparently failed to do so[8]. The point is the Japanese or the insurers are most likely well aware of such risks.

Nor do I agree with the suggestion that such disaster would trigger a fiscal crisis in Japan. All Japan would need is to open its doors to rehabilation and reconstruction to domestic and international private investors, as well as, to liberalize labor.

The assumption that reconstruction should be undertaken solely by Japan’s government represents as analytical myopia.

What we should also look at instead is if Japan or Japan’s financial companies would repatriate funds from abroad, and how this might put pressure on the US dollar, as well as, US Treasuries.

To add, I think Japan will, from this event, be forced to import labor or liberalize migration given its declining population due to rapidly falling fertility rates[9].

Figure 4: Bespoke Invest[10]: Framing The Kobe Earthquake

Many charts will frame peoples thoughts as Figure 4. By looking at the Kobe incident also known as the Great Hanshin earthquake[11] without ascertaining the backround would possibly mislead people into thinking that the past performance equals the future.

The Nikkei has already been in a downtrend following the 1990 bubble bust. Thus, the Kobe Earthquake only became an aggravating circumstance rather than the key driver.

Figure 5: Jakarta Composite Index and Thailand’s SET Post 2004 Tsunami

To balance the perspective, the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake hardly put a dent on the Indonesia’s (upper window) or even Thailand’s (lower window) stock markets, see figure 5. While both did suffer from a very short term decline they eventually proceeded higher.

Also economic data proved that the Kobe earthquake had been much less of an impact.

Figure 6: Kobe Earthquake had limited impact (Danske Bank)

According to Danske Bank[12]

From a macroeconomic point of view, the overall impact from the Kobe quake in January 1995 was limited. Industrial production dipped in February in the wake of the quake not least because of Kobe’s importance as a distribution centre, but recovered in the following two months as reconstruction started. It is harder to see any visible impact on GDP growth in 1995, but on balance we believe the impact will be positive because of the positive impact from reconstruction. Hence, the quake today is unlikely to derail the current recovery in Japan. If anything it will be a short-term boost to growth.

As you can see, when viewed from many comparisons, and from other angles, the source of “pessimism” fades.

Critical Analysis Matters

Eventually the issue boils down to uncertainty versus risk.

Event uncertainty, unless further worsened by more unseen untoward events (such as the risk of nuclear meltdown), will tend to get discounted. People learn to weigh in on the risk-reward balance as they see through the events unfold.

The diminishing returns of information or marginal value of information as I previously wrote[13],

Because the emergence of such unforeseen events are considered as uncertainty (immeasurable risk, and not possible to calculate), the markets work to reappraise of ‘uncertainty’s’ influence or impact, which gradually digests on them. So the influence of uncertainty depends mostly on the scale and the time value of influence...

Once the markets learned of and adjusted to such uncertainty, or to the new information, and subsequently established its cost-benefit expectations around it, uncertainty gets to be transformed into risks (measurable potential losses) via discounting. Discounting, thus, signifies as the diminishing returns of information or the marginal value theorem applied to information.”

And this is why critical analysis matters alot.

Broken Window Fallacy and Conclusion

On the other hand, I can’t see how such reconstruction can be positive overall.

Numerous people lost their precious lives which also mean lost human capital. Damaged property also equates to capital losses. And such capital losses are NOT captured by statistics on nominal GDP.

Capital meant for increasing productivity will now have to be redirected towards replacement. And replacement adds no value, and that’s why there’s no growth in the overall.

But what I wouldn’t deny is that there will be some sectors or entities who will profit from these. I think Filipino labourers will see an opportunity to grab. And yes, statistics could register a short term boost. But again statistics don’t capture the human experience.

On balance, the negative impact of disasters on the financial markets tends to be short term as effects of disasters get to be discounted overtime.

The underlying market trends will likely be determined by the general market direction overtime and not from a lasting impact of Japan’s earthquake-tsunami.

---

[1] See Aftermath of Japan’s Earthquake: Risk of A Nuclear Reactor Meltdown, March 12, 2011

[2] Economist Daily Charts, Terrifying tremors, March 11, 2011

[3] See Economic Freedom And Natural Disasters: Haiti's Tragic Earthquake, January 15, 2010

[4] Wikipedia.org 2010 Haiti earthquake

[5] Wikipedia.org 1990 Luzon earthquake

[6] Wikipedia.org 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami death toll and casualties

[7] Wikipedia.org Pacific Ring of Fire Japan

[8] See Science Models Fail To Predict Japan’s Earthquake, March 12, 2011

[9] Japan Times, Population decline worsening January 15, 2010

[10] Bespoke Invest, Japan's Stock Market Post Kobe Earthquake in 1995, March 11, 2011

[11] Wikipedia.org Great Hanshin earthquake

[12] Danske Bank, Japan: Impact from quake should prove limited, March 11, 2011

[13] See “I Told You So!” Moment: Being Right In Gold and Disproving False Causations, March 6, 2011

Our Mises Moment Answers Mainstream’s Conundrum of Market-Fundamental Disconnect

``But on the other hand inflation cannot continue indefinitely. As soon as the public realizes that the government does not intend to stop inflation, that the quantity of money will continue to increase with no end in sight, and that consequently the money prices of all goods and services will continue to soar with no possibility of stopping them, everybody will tend to buy as much as possible and to keep his ready cash at a minimum. The keeping of cash under such conditions involves not only the costs usually called interest, but also considerable losses due to the decrease in the money’s purchasing power. The advantages of holding cash must be bought at sacrifices which appear so high that everybody restricts more and more his ready cash. During the great inflations of World War I, this development was termed “a flight to commodities” and the “crack-up boom.” The monetary system is then bound to collapse; a panic ensues; it ends in a complete devaluation of money Barter is substituted or a new kind of money is resorted to. Examples are the Continental Currency in 1781, the French Assignats in 1796, and the German Mark in 1923.”-Ludwig von Mises, Interventionism: An Economic Analysis, Inflation and Credit Expansion

The mainstream is obviously very perplexed.

They can’t seem to figure what’s going on with market prices that can’t seem to match “fundamentals”.

Take this as an example. ``With oil inventories high and demand down year on year, yet prices surging, "fundamentalists" are puzzled” observes Liam Denning of the Wall street Journal.

Skeptical of the fundamental –market disconnect, the unconvinced Mr. Denning concludes his article with, `` Ultimately, however, the danger for China, and commodities bulls, is that Beijing's efforts fail to fully offset the harsh realities afflicting the world economy as a whole.” (bold highlight mine)

Figure 6: Wall Street Journal: China Watch The Body Language

Many have attributed the rise in oil or iron ore prices primarily to China see figure 6. But the unpleasant fact is that this isn’t just about oil or iron ore or China.

It’s about policy induced inflation whose growing influences are being ventilated on markets and which has been percolating and distorting the real economy.

And the primary mechanism for such release valve has been the US dollar.

As we wrote in last week’s Mainstream Denials And The Greenshoots of Inflation, a broadening category of the commodities have been experiencing price gains. So it’s not only oil or iron ore or gold but a whole range of commodities which includes food prices.

In addition, it isn’t just China or Sovereign Wealth Funds, but a broader spectrum of participants have joined the bandwagon as buyers of commodities. As we noted in Hedge Funds Pile Into Commodities, hedge funds have been growing exposure to commodities.

Even life insurance outfit as Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co. ``has bought gold for the first time the company’s 152-year history to hedge against further asset declines” (Bloomberg) could be signs of possible major reconfigurations of investments flows towards commodities.

My recent post which surprisingly turned out with a high number of hits, deals with Hedge Fund Ace John Paulson who made an amazing allotment of 46% of his portfolio into gold and gold related investments [see Hedge Fund Wizard John Paulson Loads Up On Gold]! He didn’t say why, but the message was loud and clear! What a statement.

Aside, Bond King and regulatory arbitrageur Bill Gross recently wrote to warn the public to diversify away from US dollar before ``central banks and sovereign wealth funds ultimately do the same amid concern about surging deficits” (Bloomberg)

He thinks that the US has reached a “point of no return”, again from the same Bloomberg article, ``“I think he’ll fail at pulling a balanced rabbit out of a hat,” Gross said from Pimco’s headquarters in Newport Beach, California. “They are talking about -- once the economy in the U.S. renormalizes -- the move back toward balance or much less of a deficit. I suspect that will be hard to do.”

Moreover, a public gold fever (not swine flu) appears to have infected ordinary Chinese sparked by the revelation of massive gold accumulations by the China’s government. According to the China Daily, ``Inspired by the increase in the government gold reserves, the more savvy investors are also buying shares of Chinese gold producers on the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the smaller Shenzhen Stock Exchange.”

Furthermore, drug trades have reportedly been reducing transactions based in the US dollar and could have possibly been replaced by trades in gold bullion (telegraph).

This Dollar based concerns won’t be complete without Russia’s continued outspoken campaign to replace the US dollar as the world’s international reserve currency, which apparently not only got support from major Emerging Markets as China and Brazil, but even the IMF has reportedly jumped on the bandwagon saying that replacing the US dollar is possible.

This from Bloomberg, ``The IMF’s so-called special drawing rights could be used as the basis for a new currency, First Deputy Managing Director John Lipsky told a panel discussing reserve currencies at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum today.

``“There are many, many attractions in the long run to such an outcome,” Lipsky told a panel discussing reserve currencies at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum today. “But this is not a quick, short or easy decision,” he said, adding that it would be “quite revolutionary.” (bold highlight mine)

And worst of all, US dollar as a safehaven status has been scoffed at by Chinese students! Incredible.

This from Reuters, ``"Chinese assets are very safe," Geithner said in response to a question after a speech at Peking University, where he studied Chinese as a student in the 1980s.

``His answer drew loud laughter from his student audience, reflecting skepticism in China about the wisdom of a developing country accumulating a vast stockpile of foreign reserves instead of spending the money to raise living standards at home.” (bold highlight mine)

It’s obviously a question of what degree of the Chinese population has been represented by the adverse reactions of Chinese students on Mr. Geithner’s statement. If these students account for a majority of China’s sentiment, then it is quite obvious that the public will likely be shunning the US dollar as mode of payment or as transactional currency or as medium of exchange (sooner than later) despite the Chinese policymakers’ avowed insistence to buy US dollar assets (but on a short term basis) which is no less than politically premised, as previously discussed here and here.

All these account for votes of displeasure over policies governing the US as reflected on its currency the US dollar, which mainstream can’t seem to comprehend.

As I wrote in my March outlook Expect A Different Inflationary Environment (emphasis added), ``This leads us to surmise that most of global stock markets (especially EM economies which we expect to rise faster in relative terms) could rise to absorb the collective inflationary actions led by the US Federal Reserve but on a much divergent scale. Currency destruction measures will also possibly support OECD prices but could underperform, as the onus from the tug-of-war will probably remain as a hefty drag in their financial markets.

``And this also suggests that commodity prices will also likely rise faster (although not equally in relative terms) than the previous experience which would eventually filter into consumer prices.

``In other words, the evolution of the opening up of about 3 billion people into the global markets, a more integrated global economy and the increased sophistication of the financial markets have successfully imbued the inflationary actions by central banks over the past few years. But this isn’t going to be the case this time around-unless economies which have low leverage level (mostly in the EM economies) will manage to sop up much of the slack.”

So far everything that we have said has turned out to be quite accurate.

But we seem to be transitioning to the next level.

This brings us to the question why the public seems to be gravitating towards commodities?

Ludwig von Mises has an explicit answer which I unearthed in Stabilization of the Monetary Unit? From the Viewpoint of Theory,

``If people are buying unnecessary commodities, or at least commodities not needed at the moment, because they do not want to hold on to their paper notes, then the process which forces the notes out of use as a generally acceptable medium of exchange has already begun. This is the beginning of the “demonetization” of the notes. The panicky quality inherent in the operation must speed up the process. It may be possible to calm the excited masses once, twice, perhaps even three or four times. However, matters must finally come to an end. Then there is no going back. Once the depreciation makes such rapid strides that sellers are fearful of suffering heavy losses, even if they buy again with the greatest possible speed, there is no longer any chance of rescuing the currency. In every country in which inflation has proceeded at a rapid pace, it has been discovered that the depreciation of the money has eventually proceeded faster than the increase in its quantity.”

So let us break these down into stages:

First, the loss of the currency’s purchasing power.

Second, is the loss of a currency’s function as medium of exchange or the “demonetization process”.

Third, is the accelerating feedback loop between the first two stages which brings upon the irreversibility of the process and

Finally, the total collapse of the currency.

So there you have it. The public’s increasing exposure to commodities is fundamentally a question of the viability of the present monetary standards.

So far the political path and market responses have been behaving exactly as described by Prof. von Mises.

Hence, I call this the Mises Moment.