Showing posts with label Middle East politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Middle East politics. Show all posts

Monday, February 08, 2016

Headline of the Day: The Political Tool Called the OFWs

From today's Inquirer

A belated recognition of risk by the establishment?



Yet from my December 2014 warning:
Yet if oil prices remain at below the cost to maintain the GCC’s and oil producing welfare states which may end up with the cutting of social services, how far before Arab Springs or popular revolts emerge?

And yet how will the blowing up of the Middle East bubble extrapolate to Philippine OFW remittances? More than half or about 56% of OFWs according to the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) have been deployed to this region. Will OFWs (and their employers) be immune from an economic or financial crisis? This isn’t 2008 where the epicenter of the crisis was in the US, hence remittances had been spared from retrenchment. For this crisis, there will be multiple hotbeds. The ongoing crashes in oil-commodity spectrum have already been showing the way.
Saudi Arabia is state of economic funk. As evidence, she has declared a cut on political spending in response to ‘record’ budget deficit, have been drawing from her foreign currency reserves to bridge this record deficit (forex reserves has plunged 11% from August 2014 highs), Saudi’s sovereign wealth fund has been selling equities (mostly European equities) also designed to shore up her government’s finances, and lastly, statistical GDP has been falling and has been expected to fall further.

Saudi’s plight has not entirely been about oil, but also about her huge welfare state. She has been an active geopolitical player in the Middle East where Saudi forces have been militarily involved in the Yemen civil war against Iran supported Shia Houthi insurgents.

And it has been more than Yemen. The Saudi Arabia government has long helped in the plotting of the overthrow of the Syria’s Assad regime which she has been forthright

Syria’s civil war, which is an extension of the proxy war between the US and Russia (aside from Ukraine), has become an enormous humanitarian disaster.

And Saudi’s anti Assad stance brings her directly against the alliance of supporters of the Syrian regime: Russia, Iran, Iraq and China which raises the risks of escalation of war in the region...

In short, if my suspicions are correct, given the economic and political deterioration in the region, hiring trends in the Middle East may have been on a downswing.
This may not even be a recognition of risk.

Why?


Because such headline seems intended to impress upon or mentally condition the public to lay blame the surfacing internal or domestic problems to external forces. 

Yet once this becomes a reality, such dynamic will not prevent the expose of economic and financial imbalances brought about by sins of omission and commission of the government via the BSP's bubble blowing policies.


Moreover, the emergence of such crisis will only be used to impose more interventions to expand the power of the state. As a famous statist dictum goes: Never let a serious crisis go to waste. It's an opportunity to do things you could not do before. 


Finally, in the season of political circus, what more than to use "modern day heroes" or the OFWs as a source for political grandstanding or to generate votes! As if the government can do anything to substitute prospective job losses with their "planning" and "programs"


Yet why worry? Based on government statisticians, economic contributions from OFWs have become inconsequential



Said differently, in 2015, all of a sudden, the role OFWs remittances have become trifle to the touted consumer spending meme! Or OFWs have been stripped of their role as " heroes".


Yet as for the consumer spending populist dogma, visit the most popular malls (as I had during the past days) and see how much store turnovers and vacancies have grown! Yet the OFW crisis has yet to arrive.




Wednesday, January 06, 2016

Quote of the Day: The Saudi Arabian Government is the Ultimate Inspiration and Financial Benefactor of the Islamic State

A lengthy excerpt from analyst David Stockman from his latest article on the Middle East crisis:
The truth is, the long era of the so-called oil crisis never happened. It was only a convenient Washington invention that was used to justify statist regulation and subsidization of energy domestically and interventionist political and military policies abroad.

Back in the late 1970s as a member of the House Energy Committee I argued that the solution to high oil prices was the free market; and that if politicians really wanted to cushion the purely short-term economic blow of a Persian Gulf supply interruption the easy and efficient answer was not aircraft carriers, price controls and alternative energy subsidies, but the Texas and Louisiana salt domes that could be easily filled as a strategic petroleum reserve (called SPRO).

During the Reagan era we unleashed the energy pricing mechanisms from the bipartisan regime of price and allocation controls which had arisen in the 1970s and began a determined campaign to fill the SPRO. Thirty-five years later we have a full SPRO and a domestic and world economy that is chock-a-block with cheap energy because the pricing mechanism has done its job.

In fact, OPEC is dead as a doornail, and the real truth has now come out. Namely, there never was a real oil cartel. It was just the House of Saud playing rope-a-dope with Washington, and its national oil company trying to do exactly what every other global oil major does.

That is, invest and produce at rates which are calculated to maximize the present value of its underground reserves. And that includes producing upwards of 10 million barrels per day at present, even as the real price of oil has relapsed to 50 year ago levels.

What this also means is that Imperial Washington’s pro-Saudi foreign policy is a vestigial relic of the supreme economic ignorance that Henry Kissinger and his successors at the State Department and in the national security apparatus brought to the table decade after decade.

Had they understood the energy pricing mechanism and the logic of SPRO, the Fifth Fleet would never have been deployed to the Persian Gulf. There also never would have been any Washington intervention in the petty 1990 squabble between Saddam Hussein and the Emir of Kuwait over directional drilling in the Rumaila oilfield that straddled their historically artificial borders.

Nor would there have been any “crusader” boots trampling the allegedly sacred lands of Arabia or subsequent conversion of Bin-Laden’s fanatical Sunni mujahedeen, which the CIA had trained and armed in Afghanistan, to the al-Qaeda terrorists who perpetrated 9/11.

Needless to say, the massive US “shock and awe” invasion thereafter which destroyed the tenuous Sunni-Shiite-Kurd coexistence under the Baathist secularism of Saddam Hussein would not have happened, either. Nor would the neocon war mongers have ever become such a dominant force in Imperial Washington and led it to the supreme insanity of regime change in Libya, Syria, Yemen and beyond.

In short, the massive blowback and episodic eruptions of jihadist terrorism in Europe and even America that plague the world today would not have occurred save for the foolish policy of Fifth Fleet based energy policy.

Still, there is an even more deleterious consequence of the Kissinger Error. Namely, it has allowed the House of Saud, along with Bibi Netanyahu’s political machine, to egregiously mis-define the sectarian and tribal conflicts which rage in today’s middle-east.

The fact is, there is no such thing as generic Islamic terrorism. The overwhelming share of the world’s 1.3 billion or so Sunni Muslims are not remotely interested in Jihaddism.

Likewise, the 200 million adherents of the Shiite Muslim confession are not terrorists in any religious or ideological sense. There are about 60 million Shiite in India and Pakistan and their quarrel, if any, is rooted in antagonisms with Hindu-India, not the West or the US.

Similarly, the 80 million Shiite domiciled in Iran, southern Iraq, southern Lebanon and the Alawite communities of Syria have been host to sporadic terrorist tactics. But these occurred overwhelmingly in response to efforts by outside powers to occupy Shiite communities and lands.

That is certainly the case with the 20-year Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon, which gave rise to Hezbollah defense forces. It is also true of the Shiite uprisings in Baghdad and southern Iraq, which gave rise to the various militias that opposed the US occupation.

Moreover, post-1979 Iran has never invaded anyone, nor have the Shiite communities of northern Yemen, who are now being bombarded by Saudi pilots driving US supplied war planes and drones.

In short, there has never been a Shiite-based ideological or religious attack on the West. The anti-Americanism of the Iranian theocracy is simply a form of crude patriotism that arose out of Washington’s support for the brutal and larcenous regime of the Shah—–and which was reinforced during Iraq’s US aided invasion of Iran during the 1980s.

By contrast, the real jihadi terrorism in the contemporary world arose almost exclusively from the barbaric fundamentalism of the Sunni-Wahhabi branch of Islam, which is home-based in Saudi Arabia.

Yet this benighted form of medieval religious fanaticism survives only because the Saudi regime enforces it by the sword of its legal system; showers its domestic clergy with the bounty of its oil earnings; and exports hundreds of millions to jihadists in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Turkey, Iran, Egypt and numerous other hot spots in the greater middle east.

At the end of the day, the House of Saud is also the ultimate inspiration and financial benefactor of the Islamic State, as well. Had it not provided billions in weapons and aid to the Syrian rebels over the last five years, there would be no civil war in Syria today, nor would ISIS have been able to occupy the dusty, impoverished towns and villages of the Upper Euphrates Valley where it has established its blood-thirsty caliphate.

So this weekend’s execution of a Saudi Shiite cleric who never owned a gun or incited anything other than peaceful protest among the downtrodden Shiite communities of eastern Arabia is truly the final straw. It was a deliberate provocation by a reprehensible regime that has so thoroughly corrupted the War Party that it even managed to have Washington shill for its preposterous appointment to head of the UN Commission on Human Rights!

Saturday, March 28, 2015

Ron Paul: Yemen Exploding: Is The Stage Set for the Big War?

I recently asked if the bombing by Saudi Arabian government on Yemen’s Houthi movement will have a ripple effect: 
Will this proxy war lead to a tit for tat with Iran? Will this foment an expanded theater of conflict between the US backed by her allies against the Russia-China alliance? (As side note: Russia and Iran recently signed a defense pact)
In his latest outlook, the great Ron Paul expands this view: (source: Ron Paul Institute/Lew Rockwell.com) [bold mine]
Rapid changes are occurring in Yemen. Ever since United States had to leave its military base there, other powers have been lining up to benefit from the chaos. It has been revealed that Saudi Arabia has commenced bombing targets in Yemen. Egypt has announced its support for the Saudi effort. I am quite confident that this support is in compliance with our instructions to our puppet leader now in charge in Egypt. The current president of Yemen, Hadi, a leader who took over after the Arab Spring revolution, has been removed from power. He is said to have escaped to Saudi Arabia, and those who are now in charge in Yemen will most likely kill him if he returns.

Yemen has been instrumental in the US effort to fight al-Qaeda in the region. Unsuccessfully, I might add. The Houthis who have deposed Hadi are said to get their support from Iran and are now likely the strongest political force in the country. But they will not have an easy time of it. Too much is at stake for the United States and Saudi Arabia. We don’t read much about the Saudi Air Force being involved in military conflict, but the seriousness of the situation has prompted them to do exactly that. There are also reports that 150,000 or more troops are massed near the borders of Yemen for a probable invasion. It is assumed that other Arab nations will be involved, along with Egypt. One report said that it appears the country is “sliding toward a civil war.” I would suggest that it’s past sliding toward the civil war, and, rather, is involved deeply in a civil war that is now spreading outside its own borders.

The neoconservatives, I am sure, will blame everything on Iran. And it’s likely Iran may have been involved in giving some type of support to the Shia that now are on the verge of taking over the country. But one must ask, “How does this compare to the support the United States has given to over 100 countries in recent years, with a major portion going to the Middle East?” There’s a big difference between a country becoming involved in a crisis next door and a country getting involved 6000 miles away.

It looks like the former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, a military dictator who was deposed in the Arab Spring revolution, is now aligned with the Shia Houthis who are supported by Iran. This will not be tolerated by the United States, and we can expect the US to provide indirect military assistance to those who are prepared to invade Yemen and install a US friendly dictator.

Foreign forces’ bombs and occupation will serve to unify the citizens of Yemen despite their other differences. As a matter of fact, it’s been our presence in this country for more than a decade that has been an aggravating factor. The fact that al-Qaeda type rebel forces have done well in the various countries in recent years is because they gain support from the local people with the promise that the foreign invaders will be expelled. This certainly is true when it comes to the type of support that the people give, tacit or otherwise, to the very ruthless ISIS forces. It amazes me how these ragtag rebels can out-fight and outfox various countries whose forces are larger and better armed. The so-called rebels find that their promise to expel the invaders is a strong motivating factor to gain support for the military resistance. The catch-22 is that the more we or any other nation try to subdue a foreign country, the stronger the opposition becomes.

This new expansion of the war in Yemen is a bad sign. The situation could easily worsen, involve many countries, and last for a long time to come. The stage for the “Big War” may well be set and we will be hearing a lot more about Yemen and the Arabian Peninsula in the coming months. If this war gets out of hand, I would expect that the benefits of $45 per barrel of oil will soon end. There is no doubt in my mind that the American people — financially and for security reasons — would be better served if we just came home and avoided these nonsensical military interventions that are carried out in behalf of various special interests that control our foreign policy.


The proxy war map from the Zero Hedge

The Yemeni factions from Stratfor

Thursday, March 26, 2015

Hot: Saudi Arabia Begins Bombing Operations on Yemen

Wow. A new front in the Middle East war has just opened. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has just begun bombing operations on Yemen targeted against Yemen 'rebels'.

From the New York Times: (bold mine)
Saudi Arabia announced on Wednesday night that it had begun military operations in Yemen, launching airstrikes in coordination with a coalition of 10 nations.

The strikes came as Yemen was hurtling closer to civil war after months of turmoil, as fighters and army units allied with the Houthi movement threatened to overrun the southern port of Aden, where the besieged president, Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi, has gone into hiding.

Yemen shares a long border with Saudi Arabia, a major American ally, and the Saudis had been reported to be massing forces on the Yemen frontier as Mr. Mansour’s last redoubt in Aden looked increasingly imperiled.

The rapid advances by the president’s opponents included the seizure of a military air base and an aerial assault on his home. There were unconfirmed reports that the president had fled the country by boat for Djibouti, the tiny Horn of Africa nation across the Gulf of Aden.

The region’s most impoverished country, Yemen has been a central theater of the American fight against Al Qaeda, and its possible collapse presents complex challenges to the Obama administration as it struggles to deal with instability and radical extremism in the Middle East.

Along with Syria, Iraq and Libya, Yemen is now the fourth state to veer toward political disintegration in the aftermath of the Arab Spring revolts that first erupted four years ago.

By Wednesday morning, Houthi forces had seized Al Anad air base, which until recently had been used by American counterterrorism forces, about 35 miles from Mr. Hadi’s refuge in Aden, the country’s second-largest city.
If current developments represents “political disintegration in the aftermath of the Arab Spring revolts that first erupted four years ago”, then how much more will a sustained below $50 oil add to the current strains?

How will current developments impact both the Middle East's domestic and regional politics?

Interestingly, US president Obama once hailed Yemen's government as a model for fighting extremism. Apparently the imperialist strategy garbed as the "war on terror" has backfired and collapsed.

Yet more interesting developments from the said news…
The Houthis, a minority religious group from northern Yemen, practice a variant of Shiite Islam and receive support from Iran.
More questions. Will this proxy war lead to a tit for tat with Iran? Will this foment an expanded theater of conflict between the US backed by her allies against the Russia-China alliance? (As side note: Russia and Iran recently signed a defense pact)

Aside from politics, how will an expanded war frontier and low oil prices impact the economies of Middle East nations? 

How will an expansion of regional political strains impact Philippine OFWs and remittances?

Will the endless printing of money and zero bound rates by global central banks defuse such tensions to continually send stocks perpetually higher?  Or will inflationism aggravate on the tensions?

Very interesting.

Monday, October 20, 2014

Phisix: Real Time Market Crashes and The S&P Smells Domestic Credit Bubbles

The advice that sounds the best in the short run is always the most dangerous in the long run. Everyone wants the secret, the key, the roadmap to the primrose path that leads to El Dorado: the magical low-risk, high-return investment that can double your money in no time. Everyone wants to chase the returns of whatever has been hottest and to shun whatever has gone cold. Most financial journalism, like most of Wall Street itself, is dedicated to a basic principle of marketing: When the ducks quack, feed ‘em. --Jason Zweig

In this Issue

Phisix: Real Time Market Crashes and The S&P Smells Domestic Credit Bubbles
-Strong US Dollar Wreaks Havoc to Asia’s Stock Markets
-Bulls Desperately Yearns For Steroids
-Have Stock Market’s Price Discovery and Discounting Function Been Lost? The Russell 2000 Example
-Phisix: The Massaging of the 7,000 Level
-Real Time Market Crashes: the Appetizer, the Main Course and the Dessert
-The S&P Smells Credit Bubbles in the Philippines

Phisix: Real Time Market Crashes and The S&P Smells Domestic Credit Bubbles

What a week.

Volatility has returned with a stunning vengeance!

Strong US Dollar Wreaks Havoc to Asia’s Stock Markets

I have warned in mid-September[1] that the sharp rise of the US dollar index has traditionally been accompanied or has highlighted a risk OFF environment.
Yet a rising US dollar has usually been associated with de-risking or a risk OFF environment. Last June 2013’s taper tantrum incident should serve an example.
The US dollar index zoomed by a whopping 8.7% from July until its recent peak October 3. Since the October zenith, the US dollar index has retraced some 1.7%. 


The recent cascade in Asian currencies, based on Bloomberg-JP ADXY (upper window) relative to the US dollar, has been in conjunction with swooning Asian ex-Japan stocks (AAXJ).

The ADXY as I recently explained[2] comprises of the Chinese yuan 38.16%, Korean won 12.98%, Singapore dollar 11.07% Hong Kong dollar 9.22% Indian rupee 8.75% Taiwan dollar 6.1% Thai baht 4.92% Malaysian ringgit 4.3% Indonesia rupiah 2.85% and Philippine peso 1.65%.

The descend of Asian currencies only commenced at the end of August even as the US dollar index has risen against her Developed Market (DM) peers since July. The reinvigoration of the US dollar index undergirds a transmission mechanism which for me represents a symptom of the diffusion of declining “liquidity”.

Since the debilitation of Asian currencies, many major Asian equity benchmarks have exhibited meaningful deterioration in prices: based from the recent highs relative to Friday’s close; Japan’s Nikkei has been down 11.1%, Australia’s All Ordinaries off by 7%, Taiwan’s TWII retraced by 10.5% which has been larger than the June 2013 Taper Tantrum where the TWII lost 8.8%, Hong Kong’s Hang Seng slid 9%, South Korea’s KOSPI dropped by 8.7% and Singapore’s STI down by 5.54%.


But of course, I doubt that this scenario will last, since we seem to be seeing a spreading of the outbreak of the US dollar triggered global asset deflation.

As I recently noted[3]
Developed Asia has apparently borne the brunt of the selling pressures relative to emerging Asia. Apparently, this has been due to the stronger US dollar which has affected the relatively more export dependent nations.

Also the degree of response differs.

In June 2013, Developed Asia’s drastic response has equally been met by dramatic recoveries. For emerging Asia, the recovery has been gradual and only picked up speed during the second quarter of 2014.

So a divergence developed, emerging Asia’s belated ferocious rally came in the face where developed Asia began to reveal signs of stock market strains as the US dollar gained momentum against the region's currencies.

Developed Asia’s weakness has been reinforced by the US. Since the US has been de facto leader of the world, in terms of central bank sponsored debt financed asset inflation, the recent tremors in her booming overextended and overvalued stock markets has spread to cover most of the major world equity benchmarks. Such strains seems to have diffused to Asia’s high flyers which aside from ASEAN, includes the New Zealand (NZ50), India (SENSEX) and even Vietnam (Ho Chi Minh).

So divergences seem as transitioning into convergence.

As one would note, initial pressures surfaced on Emerging Markets (June 2013), then this spread to Developed Markets (revealed by divergent market internals), and now a seeming convergence (both developed and emerging markets)—the periphery to the core dynamic.

The feedback from such phenomenon loops in a two way transmission mechanism. If the downside volatility will continue to reassert its presence in the stock markets of developed economies led by the US, then this should reinforce the current convergence downhill trend in Asia and in emerging markets. And pressures on Asia and EM markets will likewise reverberate on Developed Markets.
From the mainstream perspective weak currencies translates to strong exports. This hasn’t been true. But this hasn’t been the issue.

Yet current events have been more than an issue of exports but of liquidity and debt. 

When Asian central banks support their domestic currency, they effectively sell their foreign currency reserves and buy local currency mainly through the banking system. The current infirmities in Asian currencies has led to either the cresting or to declining foreign exchange reserves for many Asian governments such as Hong Kong (September), South Korea (September), Singapore (September), Australia (August), India (October), Malaysia (August), Thailand (September) and the Philippines (September). 

Indonesia’s rupiah has been testing the January 2014 lows (USD-IDR). Curiously, Indonesia’s foreign exchange reserves as of September 2014 have been rising since July 2013 (but still down 10.8% from July 2011 record high). This ironically comes in the face of swelling twin deficits, particularly fiscal deficit (2013), a big part of which has been from fuel and electricity subsidies, and current account deficit (2Q 2014). It looks as if the Indonesian government has been stuffing their foreign exchange reserves through external borrowings in 2013 or as seen from 11% year-on-year growth based on August figures from Bank of Indonesia. This may have been intended to superficially improve their macro outlook

The siphoning of domestic currency in the financial system could be seen as partial tightening. This is unless the domestic banking system continues to rollout liquidity through credit expansion to neutralize such actions.

Yet weak domestic currency relative to a strong US dollar means more domestic currency required to pay for US denominated liabilities.


The region, like a sponge, has been soaking up humungous amount of foreign (aside from domestic) debt, Morgan Stanley recently warned that emerging Asia’s foreign debt has ballooned to $2.5 trillion from $300 billion over the last decade, which has “surpassed extremes seen just before” the Asian financial crisis[4]. The above is an example of the dramatic upscaling of Asia’s foreign borrowing growth (chart from Financial Times’ Alphaville).

A weak domestic currency relative to stronger US dollar also means more domestic currencies required to pay for imports which should add to consumer price inflation pressures.

Price instabilities from currency volatility function as obstacles to real economic growth as they distort economic calculation and the economic coordination process.

Yet price instabilities are products of interventionism, or in the present case inflationism, as part of the financial repression policies.

So systemic high debt levels in and of itself are stumbling blocks to economic growth, while slowing growth increases risks of a credit event. Because high debt levels extrapolates to increased fragility, thus they are vastly sensitive to changes in domestic and foreign interest rates, foreign exchange ratios and inflation rates which may serve as a trigger for their unraveling.

Thus a sustained rise in the US dollar relative to Asia and emerging Asia increases the risks of a regional credit event.

Coming from an electrified ramp, the US dollar index and the US dollar-Asian currencies for now seems in a pause. So the lull may serve as a window for a technical bounce. 


With the collapse in the yields of US treasury long term (10 year notes and 30 year bonds), I doubt if such hiatus will last.

Bulls Desperately Yearns For Steroids

Yes a technical bounce may be due early next week.

Friday’s monster ‘short covering’ rally in US-European markets from oversold conditions should filter into Asia. But the question is how lasting will this rebound be?

Friday’s gigantic rally has been largely anchored from hopes of more central banking support.

The seeds of Friday’s rally have been sown when San Francisco Federal Reserve President John Williams said that “If we really get a sustained, disinflationary forecast ... then I think moving back to additional asset purchases in a situation like that should be something we should seriously consider”[5]

US markets recovered from Thursday’s over 1% lows for the S&P and Dow Jones Industrials when St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank President James Bullard said “Inflation expectations are declining in the U.S. That’s an important consideration for a central bank. And for that reason I think that a logical policy response at this juncture may be to delay the end of the QE.”[6]

Markets starved for support responding in exemplary Pavlovian classical conditioning fashion may have read Mr. Williams and Mr. Bullard’s statements as representing the sentiment of the Fed.

Friday’s run came as the European Central Bank’s Benoit Coeure stated that they will “start buying assets within days”[7].

Such statements intended to mitigate the current selloff demonstrates what I have been saying as political agents fearful of short term consequences from a financial market downturn: I recognize the problem of addiction but a withdrawal syndrome would even be more cataclysmic

It has been in a not so distant past we saw the same furious degree of rally, predicated on Fed minutes which signaled an extended low interest rates regime and a talk down of the US dollar, only to be neutralized the following day, so a fantastic rollercoaster ride in a span of two days (October 8th and 9th). What this suggests has been of the narrowing room for the market’s permissiveness to central bank jawboning.

Will the effect of last week’s signaling of more S-T-I-M-U-L-U-S last longer? Or will the recent past repeat?

Have Stock Market’s Price Discovery and Discounting Function Been Lost? The Russell 2000 Example
When the bulls stormed back to reclaim the Philippine Phisix 7,400 which they failed to hold, I wrote[8],

Logic also tells us why the current stock market conditions are unsustainable: Has the stock market permanently lost its fundamental function as a discounting mechanism for it to permit or tolerate a perpetual state of severe mispricing as seen by excessive valuations of securities???

If the answer is YES, then PEs of 30, 40,50, 60 and PBVs 3,4,5,6,7 can reach, in the words of cartoon Toy Story character Buzz Lightyear “to infinity and beyond”!!!

If the answer is NO, then the obverse side of every mania is a crash.
Take the US small cap Russell 2000 (RUT), which has been the de facto leader to the current downturn of the US markets. 

From its twin March and July peaks (double top?) to its recent lows last week, the small cap benchmark has declined by 13%. Yet following the substantial two day bounce, the RUT remains down 10.45% as of Friday. 


Yet according to Wall Street Data’s market data center on P/E and Yields of Major Indices, RUTs trailing 12 month PE ratio remains at a staggering 69.99 also as of Friday. Bulls would say this is a buy. But such a call would be absurd for the simple reason of overpaying for a security or egregious mispricing. Unless the rate of earnings growth races far far far faster than its price increase, increases in the RUT equates to PE multiple expansion. 

Yet based on small business sentiment from National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) survey in September[9], optimism seems to have climaxed. Small business optimism has hardly grown in 2013. However there has been a short burst of optimism sometime in the second quarter from whence it has been a struggle. Government mandates, red tape and taxes remain as the largest impediment to small business growth according to the survey.

So there has barely been any worthwhile justification for buying at current levels since doing so would necessitate reliance on a “Greater Fool” who would expect PE ratio to rise to even more ridiculous levels. When crowds buy because of expectations of a greater fool, then this isn’t about investing but about GAMBLING.

For the week, the RUT closed 2.8% up. But according to the Bank of America, the small cap rebound has been due to “net short positioning largest since 2008 after fifth consecutive week of selling.”[10] In short, the RUT’s rebound has essentially been about a massive short squeeze. 

Such massive short squeeze, which represents the “biggest weekly short-squeeze in 11 months” according to the Zero Hedge has been evident in the most shorted issues and has contributed to the “miraculous surge in Dow Transports, Small Caps, and Homebuilders”[11]

That’s exactly the role of modern day inflationism: destroy the market’s price discovery mechanism so that people will be hardwired to see asset levitation as permanent feature.

Unfortunately some political groups seem to have realized that such an arrangement isn’t sustainable.

An example the IMF[12] (bold mine, italics original): Policymakers are facing a new global imbalance: not enough economic risk-taking in support of growth, but increasing excesses in financial risk-taking posing stability challenges… At the same time, prolonged monetary ease has encouraged the buildup of excesses in financial risk-taking. This has resulted in elevated prices across a range of financial assets, credit spreads too narrow to compensate for default risks in some segments, and, until recently, record-low volatility, suggesting that investors are complacent. What is unprecedented is that these developments have occurred across a broad range of asset classes and across many countries at the same time. Finally, corporate leverage has continued to rise in emerging markets.

Phisix: The Massaging of the 7,000 Level

Such perversion of market mechanism can also be seen in the Philippines.

The Philippine Phisix would have seen larger losses if not for price massaging last Thursday.

The 2.78% dive by the domestic equity benchmark last Monday has been offset by mid-week gains. The Phisix closed 2.29% over the week.

Following the 1% decline in the US markets, the Phisix opened Thursday down by 44 points.

But certain entities ensured that the downside momentum wouldn’t take hold. So the same parties spent three-fourths of the session in a scramble to push up 3 key index heavyweight issues in order to buoy the index. At the pinnacle, the Phisix approached the 1% gain while almost all bourses in the region hemorrhaged, except for Australia ASX 200 which closed marginally higher (.18%). Even Indonesia’s JCI which was marginally up near the end of the session closed in the red.

It was a bizarre spectacle: Domestic panic buying in the face of an apprehensive region!

At one point I even asked myself, have domestic punters become so dense?

When the session closed, market breadth didn’t share the sanguinity of the Phisix. Declining issues were down relative to advancers by a ratio of almost 2:1. The day’s 37.39 or .53% gains had been centered again on a two sector-three company pump.

Yet this can’t be about momentum, since the attempted crossover to a new high, momentum seems to have faded. Monday’s 2.78% drubbing underscored this point.

The only possible explanation for such peculiar reaction has most likely been not about profits but about symbolisms.

The 7,000 level has served as a symbolical trophy which wounded bulls have been reluctant to relinquish and has fought fiercely to hold. Or that stock market operator/s had to ensure that 7,000 level would be maintained regardless of valuations or profits but for other agenda.

As I recently wrote[13],
Phisix 7,000 and 7,400 will have to be reclaimed as the 2016 national election nears. Rising stocks because of G-R-O-W-T-H may help spur chances for a re-election or for the election of an appointed representative. So much of these 3 company pump or massaging of the Phisix may have been part of the publicity machinery campaign to boost the political capital of the incumbent. If public pension money have been used, then pensioners may likely face future funding problems.

Sad to say economic realities have began resurface which should upend and expose all the delusions that has enthralled the public during the past 6 years.

The bottom line: the obverse side of every mania is a crash.
Real Time Market Crashes: the Appetizer, the Main Course and the Dessert 

The obverse side of every mania is a crash.

This isn’t just my slogan anymore, it has become a reality.


There is no exact numerical threshold to define a crash.

However if stocks of developed economies as Japan and Taiwan fall by 5% in a week, this looks like a crash for me. Emerging Asia Vietnam has been the third nation to fall over 5% for this week. For three Asian national benchmarks to collapse is a worrying sign for me. 

But this is just the appetizer.

Now to the main course.


If Friday’s titanic rally (see red bars) has made people believe that Europe’s crash[14] has been averted then they are misreading the whole market action.

Let me cite an example: Greece’s Athens Index flew by 7.21% Friday, but at the end of the week the same Greek index has been down by a staggering -7.27%. This implies that Friday’s rally chipped off only half of the Greek benchmark’s horrific losses over the week. Without Friday’s gains, the Greek bellwether would have been down by a shocking 14.4%!

Those huge gains last Friday has not been able to cover the weekly losses (blue bars) of Portugal (-3.36%), Italy (-2.6%) and Spain (-2%).

I placed a green oval on them for emphasis.

Interestingly, Friday’s stock market surge has also failed to erase the weekly losses of the bigger European peers, France 1%, Switzerland 1.5% and Netherlands 1.8%.

In addition, it has not been just stocks anymore. Pressures have begun to spillover to Europe’s periphery bonds. The Greek government’s 10 year bonds have endured most of the selloff so far, followed by Portugal, Italy and Spain.

Once market carnage shifts to cover bonds then a crisis can be expected.

So will Europe has fully recover this week’s crash? Or will the crash find a second wind? My bet is on the latter.

Bullish eh?

Now for the dessert.


Since oil has collapsed to $80 level, apparently equity benchmarks of Gulf oil producing nations have crashed by even a larger scale.

As caveat, since their bourses have been closed last Friday, they haven’t partaken of the rally which should come early this week.

Anyway, Oman’s Muscat has collapsed by 7.06%, UAE’s Dubai Financial crashed 9.84% and Saudi’s Tadawul dived by 12.02%! Nonetheless year to date the returns have mostly been positive: Bahrain 15.87%, Oman .55%, Saudi 24.69% and UAE 26.73%. Kuwait is the exception down -1.84%. The obverse side of every mania is a crash.

A collapse in oil prices has very significant ramifications for the welfare states of these nations. Current levels of oil prices have now been below the break-even point to maintain the welfare states of most oil producing nations. Only Kuwait, UAE and Qatar have a small surplus.

It’s not just welfare state, sinking oil prices will affect the region’s economic activities, debt exposure as well as domestic, regional and geopolitics.

Here is what I recently wrote[15]
Some will argue that this should help consumption which subsequently implies a boost on “growth”, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

Current events don’t seem to manifest a problem of oversupply. To the contrary current developments in the oil markets seem to signify a problem of shrinking global liquidity and slowing economic demand whose deadly cocktail mix has been to spur the incipient phase of asset deflation (bubble bust)

Others argue that this could part of an alleged “predatory pricing” scheme designed as foreign policy tool engaged by some of major oil producers to strike at Russia, Iran or even against Shale gas producers in the US.

This would hardly be a convincing case since doing so would mean to inflict harm on the oil producers themselves in order to promote a flimsy case of “market share” or to “punish” other governments.

Say Shale oil. There are LOTS more at stake for welfare states of OPEC-GCC nations than are from the private sector shale operators (mostly US). Shale operators may close operations or defer investments until prices rise again. There could also be new operators who could pick up the slack from existing “troubled” Shale oil and gas operators. Such aren’t choices available for oil dependent welfare governments of oil producing nations. As one would note from the above table from Wall Street Journal, at current prices only Kuwait, the UAE and Qatar remains as oil producers with marginal surpluses.

And a shortfall from oil revenues means to dip on reserves to finance public spending. And once these resources drain out from a prolonged oil price slump, the risks of a regional Arab Spring looms.

And the heightened risk of Arab Springs would further complicate the region’s social climate tinderbox. Add to this the economic impact from a weak oil prices-strong dollar, regional malinvestments would compound on the region’s fragility.

Thus, the adaption of "predatory pricing" supposedly aimed at punishing other governments would only aggravate the region’s already dire conditions that risks a widespread unraveling towards total regional chaos.
Let me add more. Government adaption of "predatory pricing" will have far reaching effects than just economics. That’s because governments of oil producing nations have the welfare functions to consider. And it is because of such welfare mechanism that has provided political privileges to those incumbent leaders such that losing grip on political power would hardly be an option. So there will most likely be counteractions. The repercussions won’t be seen in media until it becomes evident.

Saudi Arabia has lately stated that they will protect their oil market share[16]. What if those affected oil welfare deficit governments resist? What if Russia or any of Saudi’s chief adversaries, say Iran, for instance finance rogue groups within Saudi to sabotage the latter’s pipelines? 


So predatory pricing will spur more geopolitical complications that would heighten the region’s stability risks already hobbled by intensifying wars.

Greater stability risks in the Middle East are bullish for stocks?

The S&P Smells Credit Bubbles in the Philippines

I was once the lone crusader in saying that the Philippine financial markets and her economy has been a bubble.

Not anymore. The establishment is beginning to smell of bubbles, as in the case of the S&P.

From Bloomberg[17]: (bold mine)
By year-end, Philippine companies would take as long as a record four years to repay debt using operating earnings, said Xavier Jean, the Singapore-based director of corporate ratings at Standard & Poor’s. By comparison, the figure is one year or less for Indonesian businesses, and about two years for Malaysian ones. Philippine corporate exposure to foreign debt climbed to 26 percent of total debt last year from 15 percent in 2011, he said, citing a study of 100 Southeast Asian firms.

“The big risk is that they mis-time market conditions and they don’t slow down capital spending soon enough before another financial crisis occurs,” Jean said in an Oct. 15 interview. “If one of the conglomerates starts facing some financial tightness, you could have confidence issues between the banking system and the conglomerates.”
More…
“At present, we view refinancing risk as moderate because companies have a lot of cash,” Jean said. “But large cash balances aren’t going to remain there forever if they keep spending the cash they have.”

In a financial crisis, company revenue and cash flows can suffer, creating the potential of short-term debt repayment problems, he said. In such a situation, banks mightn’t be willing to extend additional lines of credit, he said.

Debt held by the 17 Philippine companies included in the study nearly trebled to $40.7 billion in the first quarter of this year from end-2008, S&P estimated.
On San Miguel…
San Miguel, the biggest Philippine company, saw its debt surge more than five fold to 631.9 billion pesos ($14 billion) in the second quarter from end-2008 as it expanded into energy and infrastructure, according to data compiled by Bloomberg…
Debt Servicing…
The median ratio of net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization of Philippine companies is estimated to be 3.5 times to 4 times by the end of 2014, from 1.9 times in 2008, S&P’s Jean said.

The companies reviewed had varied financial risk profiles, S&P said in an Oct. 7 report. About 30 percent had large debt loads while some 25 percent had conservative balance sheets with moderate-to-low debt levels, according to the report.
The S&P rightly reads on the statistics of the surfacing Philippine debt problem. This is only because the substance of debt growth rates and levels can’t be ignored anymore.

However, the S&P fails to appreciate debt’s logical connection to the political economy, as well as how financial crisis unfolds.

In one of his latest speeches the BSP chief gives an update of the banking system[18]; as of March 2014, the Philippine banking system had 37.8 million depositors who had saved 7.7 trillion pesos in 46 million deposit accounts. 

The implication here is that of the 100 million population, only 37.8% are banked. I am not sure how the BSP defines “depositors” so I’ll just take on the top line number as it is. But if depositors include corporations, partnerships or even perhaps same individuals then the banking penetration number level could be a lot smaller than the nominal number cited.

My point is here is that there are only a minority group of people who have access to the banking and financial system.

Because only a minority group of people have access to the banking and financial system, debt absorption by these segment of people due to zero bound rates will tend to be large. This implies that both benefits and risks have been concentrated.

So consumer debt in the Philippines has been low because of the lack of access by the majority to the formal banking system. So it would foolhardy to make a statistical comparison with nations whose consumers have larger access to formal sector debt as against consumers who hardly share the same faculties or even on overall debt levels alone.

In addition because Philippine economic opportunities have been cornered by the elite where “just 40 of the country’s richest famillies account for, control and enjoy the benefits of 76 per cent of annual production” according to analyst Martin Spring, this means most of the country’s debt has been concentrated on the myriad of companies owned by these elites.

A wonderful example is San Miguel Corp, my prime candidate for a Lehman moment, whose debt which the Bloomberg quotes at 631.9 billion pesos ($14 billion) likely includes short, long term debt and financial lease liabilities[19].

In perspective, as of June 2014, the Philippine banking system’s total resources have been quoted at Php 10.606 trillion. So SMC’s liabilities represents around a startling 5.9% of the Philippine banking system! While a significant segment of SMC may come from non-banking sector debt, outside foreign holders of SMC debt, SMC’s debt papers may likely be held by domestic banks or by non bank financial institutions or by individuals (mostly elites through the formal financial system). Again this is because given the lack of access to the formal banking system by the majority, financial depth has been limited. In short SMC’s bank and non bank loans will circulate within the same concentrated system.

This implies that the supply side, which SMC has been part of, has provided the bulk of the statistical economic growth through the accelerated racking up of debt. And because of the rapid outgrowth in debt levels the supply side has now become too dependent on zero bound.

But again even at zero bound, debt has natural limits. Philippine debt uptake has become too evident to disregard, such that the usually blind establishment can already see them

And because the supply side which again has been the key source of demand for the economy, from which debt levels has grown far more than the output it provides, see 2Q GDP BSP Loan ratios table here, this means that if these companies follow the S&P’s prescription to “slow down capital spending soon enough” then the economic growth in the formal economy will follow suit or statistical economic growth will swoon.

And a slowdown in growth will bring about “confidence issues” that would lead to “financial tightness” and expose on the nature or degree of credit risks in the system.

And the reason there still has been a lot of cash has been because there is still “confidence” in the system, whereby access to the financial system remains ‘loose’ thus the system remains highly ‘liquid’.

However when confidence becomes an issue, or once there will be a corrosion in confidence such would lead to “financial tightness”. For instance a financial system margin call will evaporate excess cash almost instantaneously. Likewise, all assets will have to be repriced to reflect on the intensified demand to raise and acquire cash in order to settle obligations. And since every participant had been doing the same thing during the boom (borrow and spend), then the corollary would be that same participants will do the same thing when credit issues arise (sell to pay back loans).

Credit expansion led to money supply growth which provided artificial boost to the economy. In contrast credit contraction will shrink money supply and lead to a recession and a crisis due to the intensive build up of imbalances.

So whatever fundamentals we are seeing today (under the ambiance of confidence) will vastly be different with the fundamentals in the future (under the face of loss of confidence). Remember, confidence signifies a behavioral response or a symptom of entropic fundamental underpinnings. They don’t just happen.

The establishment is starting to grasp at what I have been saying all along.

The obverse side of every mania is a crash.







[4] Ambrose Evans Pritchard Morgan Stanley warns on Asian debt shock as dollar soars Telegraph.co.uk September 29, 2014














[18] Amando M Tetangco, Jr: Banking on social safety nets Balikat ng Bayan Awarding Ceremonies and the launching of the Personal Equity and Savings Option Fund of the Social Security System, September 25, 2014

[19] San Miguel Corporation Sec Form 17-Q Second Quarter 2014 p 29