US Manufacturing Update: Separating Fact From Fiction

Here is a very interesting update on the state of US manufacturing.

Guess what? Contrary to mainstream expectations, US manufacturing has once again regained the world's supremacy.

This quote from Business Insider's liberal author, Mr. Vicente Fernando who calls it, ``American Manufacturing Making A Mockery Out of Skeptics" (bold emphasis mine)

Mr. Fernando quotes Noah Weisberg @ Goldman: "And within that global cyclical recovery, it may come as a surprise to many that the US is not obviously lagging – what Exhibit 3 shows is that the US manufacturing ISM index level is now among the highest across the world, higher than Europe, but also higher than BRICs. In other words, at least for the time- being the US manufacturing recovery is among the paciest, and the most recent round of quarterly earnings results also seemed to support this with both domestically and globally exposed companies reporting solid results."

"The U.S. ISM is shown by the thin purple line below, which has risen higher than even the BRICs (the dotted black line)."

"Hate to deliver good news, but last week, the U.S. ISM manufacturing index blew away expectations and generally killed it."

"While high U.S. unemployment remains a pressing problem, investors need to differentiate between leading and lagging economic indicators. Yes, there are a lot of economic data sets out there with dubious predictive value, but the ISM manufacturing index is one of best regarded and most reliable leading indicators for the U.S. economy. Employment, meanwhile, is a lagging indicator -- it improves way after everything else does. (Which is of course unfortunate for those who are unemployed, who must wait)."

Well this is should be a reminder for those who subscribe to the reductionist perspective, which tends to tunnel onto a single or select variables (e.g. wages), usually glosses over other very important and relevant interactive factors, especially in a highly complex economy as today. Hence generalizations premised on these frequently leads to wrong conclusions.

For purposes of additional discussion, here is Professor Mark Perry on the alleged but exaggerated state of "depressed" US manufacturing.

Manufacturing’s Death Greatly Exaggerated

By Mark J. Perry

(all bold emphasis and underscore mine)

Here’s some pretty grim news about the U.S. manufacturing sector—manufacturing employment in the United States fell below 12 million this year for the first time since 1946, and is now at the lowest level (11,648,000 manufacturing jobs in November) since March of 1941 (see chart, data here). Since the recession started in December 2007, manufacturing employment has fallen for 24 consecutive months, as the U.S. economy shed an average of 89,000 manufacturing jobs each month for the last two years. From the peak manufacturing employment of 19.5 million jobs in 1979, the American manufacturing workforce has shrunk by more than 40 percent, as almost 8 million manufacturing jobs have been eliminated over the last 30 years, with almost 6 million of those losses taking place just since 2000. And there’s nothing to suggest that the trend won’t continue, so we can expect even more manufacturing job losses in the future.

But here’s where the news about the manufacturing sector gets a little better. According to the Federal Reserve, the dollar value of U.S. manufacturing output in November was $2.72 trillion (in 2000 dollars), which translates to $234,220 of manufacturing output for each of that sector’s 11.6 million workers, setting an all-time record high for U.S. manufacturing output per worker (see chart below). Workers today produce twice as much manufacturing output as their counterparts did in the early 1990s, and three times as much as in the early 1980s, thanks to innovation and advances in technology that have made today’s workers the most productive in history. So at the same time that manufacturing employment has been declining to record low levels, manufacturing output keeps increasing over time, and the amount of output that each manufacturing worker produces keeps rising almost every month to new record high levels.

And here’s some more good news. For the year 2008, the Federal Reserve estimates that the value of U.S. manufacturing output was about $3.7 trillion (in 2008 dollars), and the nearby chart shows how the U.S. manufacturing sector compares to the entire Gross Domestic Product of the world’s five largest non-U.S. economies in 2008 (data here): Japan ($4.9 trillion), China ($4.3 trillion), Germany ($3.7 trillion), France ($2.9 trillion), and the United Kingdom ($2.7 trillion). Amazingly, if the U.S. manufacturing sector were a separate country, it would be tied with Germany as the world’s third-largest economy.

Bottom Line: As much as we hear about the “demise of U.S. manufacturing,” how we are a country that “doesn’t produce anything anymore,” and how we have “outsourced our production to China,” the U.S. manufacturing sector is alive and well. Despite declines in employment, the productivity of manufacturing workers has never been higher, and the United States is still the world’s largest manufacturer."

End quote

My additional Comments:

Let me add that if people buy for different reasons, not limited to the lowest prices with other considerations such as quality, familiarity or trust in the provider or brand, reputation (social status), social motives (charity, gifts, donation), keeping up with the Joneses', charisma of the salesperson and etc..., the obverse side is that investors don't invest only because of low wages. Otherwise we'd see Zimbabwe and African nations as the largest exporters or manufacturers, since they have the cheapest currencies due to the lowest standard of living which redound to the lowest labor costs.

On the other hand, there are many other factors that determine investments; particularly hurdle rate, access to finance or credit, access to capital, access to workers, access to markets, access to raw materials, access to energy, access to information or connectivity, transportation costs, security of property rights, transaction costs, political stability, labor productivity, labor skills, labor hiring and firing statutes, tax rates, legal or regulatory compliance costs or burdens, sanctity of contracts, economic freedom and others.

World bank classifies some of them into the cost of doing business (see methodology in link).

Essentially you can classify them into comparative advantages and division of labor.

And guess what? The common characteristics of these top exporters other than China is that they are highest ranking in terms of the global standings in economic freedom (heritage) and have also the lowest costs in doing business (World Bank).

Mental shortcuts are favorite instruments for the conveyance of political propaganda/manipulation, ergo we should be leery of them.

The Evils Of Devaluation

``The much talked about advantages which devaluation secures in foreign trade and tourism, are entirely due to the fact that the adjustment of domestic prices and wage rates to the state of affairs created by devaluation requires some time. As long as this adjustment process is not yet completed, exporting is encouraged and importing is discouraged. However, this merely means that in this interval the citizens of the devaluating country are getting less for what they are selling abroad and paying more for what they are buying abroad; concomitantly they must restrict their consumption. This effect may appear as a boon in the opinion of those for whom the balance of trade is the yardstick of a nation's welfare.”-Ludwig von Mises, The Objectives of Currency Devaluation, Human Action, Chapter 31

Policies can be said to be socially beneficial if gains exceed the costs.

By such measure we can say that devaluation, as seen by some as a necessary evil, is nothing but an illusion.

How? Because devaluation:

1. Undermines the role of the US dollar as international currency reserve.

The role of the US dollar as the world’s currency reserve is to provide the medium of exchange function not only for national use but for the global economy. This means that the main channel of providing liquidity for international exchange is to have strong (overvalued) currency that imports more than it exports. By expanding current account deficits, the US finances global transactions mostly invoiced in US dollars.

However once the US dollar reaches a point where deficits would be vented on the currency, the role of the US dollar as the sole international currency reserve may be in danger.

The global central bank holdings of US dollar have reportedly been down to about 62% from over 70% during the past years. Moreover, as discussed in What Global Financial Markets Seem To Be Telling Us, the clamor to replace the US dollar standard has been getting strident.

Last week, a Latin American trade bloc of 9 members, the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) declared that it would cease using the US dollar for regional commerce next year (Chosun English).

All these means that if the US continues to devalue its dollar, to point of losing its privileges from international seignorage [net revenue derived from issuing currency], or its international currency reserve status, this would translate to diminished access to global finance to fund domestic (trade or fiscal) deficits, reduced access to more goods and services worldwide, and a diluted leverage on the geopolitical sphere.

In short, the cost of devaluation greatly overwhelms the alleged benefits.

2. Overestimates the role of international trade as the share of the US economy.

One of the mainstream reductio ad absurdum is to overemphasize or, on the other hand understate, the role of global trade in the US economy, depending on the bias of the commentator.

For instance, some deflation proponents use 13% of import share to the US economy as rationale to downplay the transmission mechanism of global inflation to the US economy.

Using the data from wikipedia.com, we note that exports account for only 9% ($1.283 2008) of the US economy ($14.441 trillion 2008) while imports account for 15% ($2.115 trillion). The point is international trade accounts only one fourth of the US economy.

Yet common sense tells us that policies that allegedly promote 9% (exports) of the US economy at the expense of 91%, which is deemed by some as being net beneficial to the economy, is deceiving oneself or is consumed by political or economic ideological blindness, or is totally ignorant of the tradeoffs of the cost and benefits from said policies or is extending the intoxicating influence of political propaganda.

3. Creates Systemic Inflation Which Overwhelms Advantages From Currency Depreciation

When governments decide to devalue, it embarks on credit expansion or conduct fiscal spending or other monetary tools or a combination of these policies, in support of special interest groups, as in the case of the US, the banking system (for media, the exporters) for a specific goal (debt repudiation or promotion of exports/tourism).

This in essence would lead to a redirection of investments or a diversion of real resources from other activities.

If the currency depreciates as a result of the government actions but the impact of which does not reflect on domestic prices, then the interest groups supported by such policies or those that engage in foreign currency exchange or trade will likely incur large profits.

However, once prices adjust to manifest the impact of the currency depreciation on imports and to producer and consumer goods, then the short term advantage erodes.

According to Dr. Frank Shostak, ``the so-called improved competitiveness on account of currency depreciation means that the citizens of a country are now getting less real imports for a given amount of real exports. In short, while the country is getting rich in terms of foreign currency, it is getting poor in terms of real wealth, i.e., in terms of the goods and services required for maintaining peoples' life and well-beings. As time goes by however, the effects of loose monetary policy filters through a broad spectrum of prices of goods and services and ultimately undermine exporters profits. In short, a rise in prices puts to an end the illusory attempt to create economic prosperity out of thin air.” (bold emphasis added)

In short, the beneficial impact of devaluation to certain groups will likely be short term and will eventually be offset by inflation.

4. Neglects The Role of Division Of Labor In Terms Of Imports and Exports

Adding to the fallaciously oversimplistic methodology by which mainstream seem to look at the world as operating from a homogeneous form of capital, whose product is produced by a single type of labor and sold as one dimensional product to an indiscriminate market affected by the same degree of price sensitivity, they also seem to think that exports have little correlation to imports, whereby final product sold abroad are all locally designed or processed- raw material sourcing, assembly, manufacturing, packaging, testing and etc...

The mainstream forgets about re-exports or imports of semi assembled products, parts or components that make up another product to be re-exported.

Applied to Asia, global parts and component trades have increasingly made up manufacturing output (see figure 3)

Figure 3: ADB: Emerging Asian Regionalism

To quote the ADB, ``In Integrating Asia, the share of parts and components trade (PCT) in manufacturing trade shot up from 24.3% in 1996 to 29.4% in 2006. That is a remarkable rise, not least since worldwide its share has scarcely increased, edging up from 19.6% to 20.2% over the same period.

``As a share of GDP, PCT is among the highest in the world in the ASEAN (especially in Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand) and in Taipei,China, perhaps because the relatively small size of their economies makes specializing in small niches of comparative advantage particularly important. Broadly speaking, the success of these economies is based on policies that welcome foreign companies, encourage technological upgrading, and build strong connections with world markets, as well as on their proximity to Asian neighbors following similar strategies. PCT is particularly significant among ASEAN countries: it rose from an average of 35% of manufacturing trade in 1996 to 43% in 2006. The PCT share in the PRC nearly doubled over the same period, from 12.5% to 24.0%, while in India it remained at around 10.0%.” (bold emphasis mine)

In short, in a world where the integration of the global economy has been deepening to reflect on the specialization or division of labor, imports has significantly contributed to manufactured products which are eventually re-exported. Such trade specialization constitutes as the lengthening of the economic structure.

Figure 4: ADB: How A Typical Hard Drive Is Produced

As an example, the ADB shows how Asia’s parts and component trade (PCT) for a hard disk drive, assembled in Thailand, is networked within Asia and partly outside the region. And that’s merely for a hard disk, which also is only a component for a computer set.

So currency prices haven’t been the only factor that shapes production, but importantly trade openness, comparative advantages, division of labor and variability of markets as the ADB points out.

Here, globalization reveals that the division of labor and comparative advantage has been more than just “ideal” or “theoretical”. Instead, these economic forces depict of its pervasiveness in the global economic capital construct. They have even proven to be a more potent force than simply acquiring market share via currency price adjustments.

Talk about a genuine multiplier effect from free trade!

5. Overlooks On The Role of Societal Transition

One of the reasons why many support the government’s devaluation policies has been underpinned by concerns that US manufacturing output as a share of GDP has been declining.

The misimpression is that jobs have been exported out to third world countries.

Again, mainstream myopia which only looks at the surface sees jobs as one dimensional in nature. Their highly mechanistic viewpoint can’t seem to distinguish between low-scale low-value highly-commoditized jobs vis-à-vis high value specialized jobs or can’t seem to comprehend or digest the role of comparative advantage and specialization or division of labor in a world which practices globalization or freer trade.

The US supposedly is the premiere representative of the world’s democratic capitalism which implies that she has once been the world’s freest economy. Yet it is when an economy is economically free or open to trade that the advantages of comparative advantage and specialization can be seen and felt most.

For instance: in the 2008 capital goods accounted for the top US exports, according to US Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, ``Capital goods represent the largest goods export category (end-use) for the U.S. with $469.5 billion worth of exports in 2008. The U.S. trade surplus in capital goods rose $12.8 billion to reach $15.7 billion in 2008, up from a surplus of $2.9 billion in 2007.”

On the other hand, top imports for 2008 crude oil, passenger cars, medicinal preparation, automotive accessories, other household goods, computer accessories, petroleum products, cotton apparel, telecom and video equipments (world’s richest countries). This means that aside from final consumption goods, the US imports parts and components for assembly or re-exports as well as raw materials.

The other way to look at this is that the US sells goods or services which reflect on its advance “technology age” state (capital goods) while buying input goods for reprocessing or commoditized goods for the end user.

Simply said, if the world has evolved from the agricultural era (agricultural economy) to the industrial era (manufacturing economy), then we are presently in a transition towards the information age or the post industrial society as identified by Alvin Toffler in his Third Wave Theory.

This means that the lengthening or expanding phase of an economy’s capital structure in an information age extrapolates to a bigger share of contribution from information and technology based goods and services relative to the overall economy.

As much as the share of output in agriculture shrank relative to the overall economy during the industrial era, today’s modern economy should see a smaller or declining contribution from the vestiges of the agricultural and the industrial output relative to economy.

Figure 5: Carpe Diem: Manufacturing Output and Productivity at Record Highs

Nevertheless, contrary to mainstream’s fanatical obduracy, US manufacturing in terms of productivity is at a record high (left window).

Moreover, while manufacturing jobs have been on a decline to reflect on productivity gains (right window), it is only during the last year’s recession where a drop of manufacturing output from record highs occurred. Still yet, all these, signify the advancement and not retrenchment of US manufacturing at the present state.

As University of Michigan’s Professor Mark Perry recently observed, ``More and more manufacturing output with fewer and fewer workers should be considered a positive trend for the U.S. economy, not a negative development. We should think of it the same way as the trend in farming over the last 150 years - we're much better off as a country, with a much higher standard of living, with 3% of Americans working on farms compared to 150 years ago when about 65% of Americans toiled on farms. If we can continue to produce more manufacturing output with fewer workers, we'll be better off as a country, not worse off.” (bold highlights mine)

So anyone who expects a return of the conditions of the industrial manufacturing age in today’s post industrial society simply suggest of the curtailment of progress or a throwback in time similar to Argentina in the 1930s or is against human progress.

And to adopt a protectionist economy combined with massive devaluation, which likewise signifies fear of competition, is a sure route towards decadence.

6. Promotes Capital Flight

Mainstream outlook seem to discern people as irresponsive to the incentives provided for by the governing circumstances. They haughtily presume of better intelligence than most of the society. While they could be somewhat correct, in terms of information (and not knowledge), we know that macro thinking is a poor substitute to the knowledge of F.A. Hayek’s “man-on-spot”.

This implies that when major policies which tend to have a momentous impact on society are undertaken, people consequently will respond in accordance to how such policies are transmitted into their respective fields or industries. In other words, in the marketplace a micro outlook is fundamentally superior than a presumptive model based macro analysis.

And devaluation policies would likely have an unintended effect: capital flight!

While there will be some sectors or interest groups that would benefit from a reconfiguration of investment flows, the alternative bet would be for capital to flow out of the country which have been engaged in policy devaluation and flow into assets of foreign currencies which have not or to real assets.

Economist David Malpass, a columnist at Forbes magazine, recently wrote an incisive article articulating how capital flight will subdue any tinge of benefits from devaluation.

Mr. Malpass wrote, ``Some weak-dollar advocates believe that American workers will eventually get cheap enough in foreign-currency terms to win manufacturing jobs back. In practice, however, capital outflows overwhelm the trade flows, causing more job losses than cheap real wages create. This was the lesson of the British malaise, the Carter malaise, the Mexican malaise of the 1990s, Yeltsin's Russian malaise through 1999 and the rest. No countries have devalued their way into prosperity, while many—Hong Kong, China, Australia today—have used stable money to invite capital and jobs. The more the dollar devalued against the yen in the 1970s and '80s, the more Japan gained share in valued-added manufacturing, using the capital from weak-currency countries to increase productivity. China is doing the same now. It watches in chagrin as the U.S. pleads with it to strengthen the yuan, adding productivity fast with the dollars rushing its way in search of currency stability” (bold emphasis mine)

Figure 6: Casey Research: Drumbeats For The US Dollar

Systemic inflation aggravated by capital flight is likely to overwhelm any purported gains from devaluation.

Currently, foreign flows into the US by both private and official sectors appear to be in a swan dive as the interest to own US securities have evaporated (see figure 6).

If capital flight from US residents and foreigners snowball into a tsunami, then the risks of exchange controls could be in the horizon.

This would be different from the recent capital controls imposed by Brazil, which uncannily slapped a 2% tax on foreign capital flows into fixed income and the stock market (Bloomberg). Such unorthodox move was meant to stem the tide of capital inflows where the Brazilian government deems the recent surge of the real and its stock market as indications of a seminal bubble.

Conventionally, capital controls are instituted to curb capital from stampeding out of a national economy or from the region.

Applied to the Asian financial crisis of 1997 which had been largely blamed by the domestic officialdom on speculative hedge funds, Joe Studwell in Asian Godfathers, Money and Power in Hong Kong and Southeast Asia argue that local tycoons were more culpable, ``An enquiry after the crisis found little evidence that hedge funds and other leverage investors played a significant role. There was widespread in the region of massive capital flight orchestrated by local tycoons; but Singaporean and Hong Kong banking secrecy is such that this is impossible to quantify.”

Exchange controls only serve to appropriate the properties of its constituents and of foreigners. By adopting a close door policy in finance and trade, the impact would be to dramatically increase the risk profile of a country. This should translate to a reduction of wealth via a markdown on assets as investors will pay less to own income flows or property or demand higher premium than where there is full convertibility of the currency.

The bottom line is present policies aimed at attenuating the US dollar risks not only capital flight from foreigners but also from local residents.

7. Raises The Risks Of Global Currency War

The perils of using models for prediction would be the assumption that conditions of the past have similar dynamics today. For instance, when Fed Chair Ben Bernanke used the Great Depression as paradigm for measuring the success of devaluation, he probably assumes that the US dollar today can devalue against other currencies without much resistance or would be cordially tolerated by other central bankers.

This would be highly presumptuous.

During the Great Depression, the US managed to devalue because it operated under a gold standard. President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s EO 6102 basically confiscated gold from every Americans in 1933 from which gold’s role as the public’s medium of exchange had been indefinitely suspended.

Since President Richard Nixon closed the Bretton Woods standard in 1971, otherwise known as the Nixon shock, the US dollar has assumed the role of gold as transaction currency for international exchange and as anchor reserve currency for global central banks.

Compared to gold based notes whose rate of issuance would depend on the rate of output from extracting gold from the ground, which is vastly limited due to the high cost and the attendant risks from mining, should the US decide to massively devalue, it could easily facilitate these using the Federal Reserve’s printing press or the technology enhanced digital press. Yet this would impact fundamentally all currencies, given its role as the world’s foreign reserve currency.

To consider according to wikipedia.org, 14 countries are unofficial users of the US dollar or has a dollarized economy. In addition, 23 countries are pegged to the US dollar. If the US dollar continues with its descent in response to the prevailing policy actions, then basically all 37 countries will be importing inflation from the US. Yet, their economies haven’t been afflicted by the same debt woes.

This may lead to a supply shock, where massive waves of money will be chasing after scarce supply of real goods or property.

Moreover, one can’t discount that the other central bankers may not be as cordial or as permissive as Ben Bernanke expects them to be and might attempt to counteract the US devaluation policies by arbitrarily conducting their own currency weakening process.

At the end of the day, if more and more government hops into the devaluation bandwagon then we could countenance a global currency war. And a global currency war risks a horrendous hyperinflation on a worldwide scale.

Ludwig von Mises has admonished us on the possibility of such risks, ``If one looks at devaluation not with the eyes of an apologist of government and union policies, but with the eyes of an economist, one must first of all stress the point that all its alleged blessings are temporary only. Moreover, they depend on the condition that only one country devalues while the other countries abstain from devaluing their own currencies. If the other countries devalue in the same proportion, no changes in foreign trade appear. If they devalue to a greater extent, all these transitory blessings, whatever they may be, favor them exclusively. A general acceptance of the principles of the flexible standard must therefore result in a race between the nations to outbid one another. At the end of this competition is the complete destruction of all nations' monetary systems.” (bold emphasis mine)

Devaluation is a risk endeavor which US policymakers appear likely to undertake (or in my view “gamble on”) in order to neutralize the impact from an unmanageable debt burden plaguing its system.

And this has been cheered upon by their exponents. Yet given the above, it would seem that policymakers and their cheerleaders don’t truly have the necessary understanding or comprehension of the risks involved or has vastly underestimated them.

Devaluation isn’t a necessary evil. Devaluation can take the form of the inflation demon, from which having emerged from the inferno, may wreak more systemic havoc than expected. After all, in the context of history, devaluations have been the seeds to the extinction of currencies. This time may not be different.

What Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Have To Do With Today’s Financial Crisis

``The most popular method of deprecating capitalism is to make it responsible for every condition which is considered unsatisfactory. Tuberculosis and, until a few years ago, syphilis, were called diseases of capitalism. The destitution of scores of millions in countries like India, which did not adopt capitalism, is blamed on capitalism. It is a sad fact that people become debilitated in old age and finally die. But this happens not only to salesmen but also to employers, and it was no less tragic in the precapitalistic ages than it is under capitalism. Prostitution, dipsomania, and drug addiction are all called capitalist vices. Ludwig von Mises Economic Teaching at the Universities

Lessons from Nassim Taleb

There are two important things I’ve learned from my favorite iconoclast Nassim Taleb, the chief proponent of the Black Swan Theory.

One is that he cautions the public to indulge in the study of markets or economies centered upon highly flawed but popular econometric models which are nothing but algorithms designed to operate on sterilized environments similar to classroom or laboratory conditions.

Since these computer models unrealistically operate on the assumption that every factor can be anticipated, examined and evaluated, risks are therefore assumed to be under control. Yet, the complex nature of our world can lead to manifold variables which can’t be read, evaluated or anticipated. The impact of which is known as randomness or the BLACK SWAN, a low probability but HIGH impact event, and is the nemesis of these ‘quant’ models. For instance the humongous losses in today’s financial crisis have been be partially blamed on the failure of quant models to anticipate risks from statistical fat tails.

Second, the other lesson taught by our unorthodox savant is to avoid getting trapped with cognitive biases such as projecting past connections and outcomes into the future.

The Sanctity of Delusion

Today we are told that the world is going to the sewer.

That is because the US, which has functioned as the only major ‘aggregate demand’ of the world, can’t live up to its role as it is undergoing a deep recession. In corollary, these experts further assert that the world won’t be able won’t replace the US as the provider of demand because of its sheer size. In other words, past performance guarantees tomorrow’s outcome.

Based on their economic premise, where supply exists only as a function of demand, then with today’s imploding private sector credit bubble, which has deeply dented the demand equation, must be replaced and absorbed by the government. Therefore, the government’s role MUST be to create artificial demand by printing up as much money in order to sustain the bursting bubble structure.

Tersely said, from the private sector, the credit bubble now is being reconfigured to one known as a government credit bubble. And this seems to be what we are seeing all around the world. From nationalization, “bad bank” or other means of government interventions, the idea is to transfer the leverage and the attendant losses to the government.

The same logic says that if Bernard Madoff was a fraud, and had operated on an unsustainable platform which didn’t last, the government’s insistence of operating on the same an unsustainable platform, but charged to the taxpayers and meant for the “good of the citizenry”, MUST SUCCEED. The difference was that Madoff was a felon, while governments sustaining bubbles for chimerical prosperity, are deemed as legitimate and for a good cause.

Unfortunately for Madoff, he was an individual and not privileged to conduct the same scheme which is equally being thrown to the public by governments. But the underlying principle of both Madoff and the governments is the same: to get something from nothing!

In other words, you resolve the problem of drug addiction by providing more drugs. If you are Madoff you get charged with drug pushing. But if you are the government, you receive plaudits for a fighting for a good cause.

In a reality check, unsustainable trends which can’t last, won’t! NO amount of the printing press nostrums will make illusions a reality.

Reality has finally landed in Zimbabwe. The Mugabe-Gono government finally capitulated to the marketplace realities by allowing the depressed African economy to trade in foreign currencies which in effect jettisoned the local currency, the Zimbabwe dollar. This also means the Mugabe-Gono government will fall soon. And in the same vein, all nationalizations or government guarantees are only as good as the real capital standing behind these.

Does the words of Karl Marx in Das Kapita in 1867…``Owners of capital will stimulate the working class to buy more and more of expensive goods, houses and technology, pushing them to take more and more expensive credits, until their debt becomes unbearable. The unpaid debt will lead to bankruptcy of banks, which will have to be nationalized, and the State will have to take the road which will eventually lead to communism"…ring a bell?

Fairy Tales Cures and Self Righteousness

Yet popular opinion believes in fairytale cures.

To call for market forces to rectify the situation, one risks being labeled as insane, inhuman or bloodless.

Nevertheless just look at level of desperation policymakers are into so as to consider ridiculous ideas to restore an unsustainable structure of economic growth:

-In déjà vu to the hog reduction program of the Great Depression of the 1930s, US policy makers are considering to boosts car sales via a program known as "cash for clunkers". (CNNmoney) Yes, the US government plans to buy and junk old cars so as to motivate its populace to buy new ones. If the policy gets enacted, this is going to be a waste of productive resources.

-Moreover, they are considering “to renegotiate mortgages it owns that might otherwise enter foreclosure” (Washington Post) or allow “bankruptcy judges to modify the mortgages of troubled homeowners” (Washington Post) all at the expense of the property rights of American people.

To add, not content with plans to impose tons of regulations on the national level, the statists have been contemplating on to expand impositions abroad. Signs of protectionism, which had greatly contributed to the Great Depression of the 1929, are surfacing in the political arena. At the confirmation hearing, Treasury Secretary Tim Geither unleashed what he “believes that China is manipulating its currency” (Wall Street Journal). In addition, the stimulus bill which was recently passed by Congress contained a “Buy America” rider (Washington Post).

All these actions seem to agitate for a mutually devastating global trade war.

And why would authorities engage in such potentially calamitous actions? We understand 3 possible things: economic ignorance, messianic complexity or plain political rhetoric.

Realities say that the US doesn’t produce enough, that’s why it incurs trade deficit. And a trade war would mean massive catastrophic shortages. Think oil. The US imports 60% of its oil requirements (CNNmoney). If world trade shuts, the economic implication would be a collapse in the US economy with a geopolitical implication of a possible World War 3.

And also considering that the US is the largest debtor nation in the world, it wouldn’t be far where a trade war would also extrapolate to an equally internecine debt default. And what’s to stop these interventionists fools from inciting a war economy or the misguided belief that only war, after everything else fails, can stimulate the economy?

Now we turn the tables and wonder who is insane, inhuman or bloodless? Does provoking a trade war which has dire consequences similar or worst in scale than the Great Depression a humane and charitable option? How altruistic is it, if the world goes into war out of the desire to stimulate the economy? How does hyperinflation as in the case of Zimbabwe lead to progress? How charitable can it be to live a world of self delusion?

Does the 2008 Global Trade and Production Collapse Signify Posttraumatic Stress Disorder?

If a bubble structure can be characterized by unrestrained credit creation, speculative excess seen in asset inflation and unparalleled concentration of financial wealth and power, then in as much as the massive wage or income disparities or “Shameful bonuses” in Wall Street relative to the average Americans had been a function of a bubble structure, the world’s production-supply chain structure have also been partly been built around the same bubble environment.

And today’s bursting bubble which has prompted for “demand destruction” has been met by more “supply destruction”.

Yet what seems to be remarkable has been the sharp collapse in global production and trade.

Figure 3: IMF World Economic Outlook: Collapse of Global Industrial Production and Merchandise Trade

The chart IMF’s World Economic Outlook demonstrates the seeming peculiarity of the last quarter’s world trade and production activities.

If you are to compare with the dot.com days or the previous bubble bust and its ensuing recession, you’d notice that the same trends went into a steady decline over a period of time (years). But this hasn’t been the case last year. The outright collapse in just ONE MONTH by both economic variables suggests that world suddenly stopped doing anything and merely watched in shock and awe!

And why would the world do that? The obvious answer is the shock emanating from the near meltdown of the US banking system subsequent to the Lehman debacle. This has been prompted for by the institutional bank run in the US banking system as discussed in last October’s Has The Global Banking Stress Been a Manifestation of Declining Confidence In The Paper Money System?

So contrary to mainstream views which ANCHORS upon this collapse as their basis for prediction, we suggest instead that this could be a function of a Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) where according to Wikipedia.org, ``is an anxiety disorder that can develop after exposure to one or more terrifying events that threatened or caused grave physical harm.”

As an example, the 9/11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center was graphically captured in living color by media. The repeated airing of the deplorable terrorist event heightened the fear of air travel which thereby caused a shift or substitution in some of the public’s traveling patterns.

And the shift emanating from the fear, resulted to more casualties from the higher risk land transportation.

According to a study The Impact of 9/11 on Driving Fatalities: The Other Lives Lost to Terrorism by Garrick Blalock, Vrinda Kadiyali, Daniel H. Simon, ``We find that driving fatalities increased significantly following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, an event which prompted many travelers to substitute less-safe surface transportation for safer air transportation. After controlling for time trends, weather, road conditions, and other factors, we attribute an increase of 242 driving fatalities per month to additional road travel undertaken in response to 9/11. In total, our results suggest that about 1,200 driving deaths are attributable to the effect of 9/11. We also provide evidence that is consistent with the 9/11 effect on driving fatalities weakening over time as drivers return to flying. Our results show that the public response to terrorist threats can create unintended consequences that rival the attacks themselves in severity.”

Why is this so? According to Trevor Butterworth, ``Because fear strengthens memory, catastrophes such as earthquakes, plane crashes, and terrorist incidents completely capture our attention. As a result, we overestimate the odds of dreadful but infrequent events and underestimate how risky ordinary events are. The drama and excitement of improbable events make them appear to be more common.”

So given Mr. Butterworth’s tread, could we be “overestimating the odds of dreadful but infrequent events and underestimating how risky ordinary events are”?

Evidences of PTSD

Some evidences show we are.

One, global barter trade has been picking up. [see Does Growing World Barter Trade Suggests Of Bigger Cracks In Today's Monetary Order?]

According to the Financial Times, ``Officials estimated that they ranged from $5m for smaller contracts to more than $500m for the biggest.” It could be more. There have been accounts of barter since this episode has unraveled.

And the reported cause? ``Failure to secure trade financing as bank lending has dried up.”

The fact that governments have traded OUTSIDE the financial system, means demand and supply seems intact for basic necessities for them to conduct trade. The fundamental problem lies within the traditional means of facilitating payment and settlement via the banking system.

Two possible reasons why governments have been undertaking barter, which is a primitive method of trade:

One, the banking system remains dysfunctional despite the heavy interventions by global governments and

Two, there is a growing distrust for the present medium of exchange. The second finds a voice in Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s speech in Davos, ``Excessive dependence on a single reserve currency is dangerous for the global economy. Consequently, it would be sensible to encourage the objective process of creating several strong reserve currencies in the future. It is high time we launched a detailed discussion of methods to facilitate a smooth and irreversible switchover to the new model.”

The next evidence could be seen via the surging Baltic Dry Index see figure 4.

Figure 4: stockcharts.com: Rising Baltic Index=Rising Oil and Copper?

The Baltic Dry index according to the wikipedia.org is ``a number issued daily by the London-based Baltic Exchange. The index provides "an assessment of the price of moving the major raw materials by sea. Taking in 26 shipping routes measured on a timecharter and voyage basis, the index covers Handymax, Panamax, and Capesize dry bulk carriers carrying a range of commodities including coal, iron ore and grain.”

Plainly put, the Baltic Index is the cost of freight to move raw materials or basic commodities. It could be seen as a leading indicator.

So far the Baltic Index has risen by 60%, whereas oil and copper appears to be consolidating or “bottoming” even as the US dollar index has been going up. To recall, during the October-November collapse, the US dollar has inversely accompanied the rapid declines of the Baltic index as with the oil and copper.

The seeming divergence could be added signs of the diminishing influences of debt deflation.

Furthermore, even in the US, there are signs that production and inventory or supply destruction have been catching up with its counterpart demand destruction see figure 5.

Figure 5: Danske Bank: Is the US Manufacturing Sector Beginning to Recover?

These observations from the Danske Team (bold emphasis mine),

``First, prior to the recession the US manufacturing industry ran very lean inventories. Second, the liquidity squeeze from the credit crisis has led to an unusually fast alignment of production to demand fundamentals.

``Consequently, the pace of production is now undershooting the slowdown in demand. Hence, it will merely take stabilisation in demand growth to spark an industrial recovery.

The Danske team suggests that the first signs of recovery will be manifested over the ISM index which may stabilize and recover over the coming 3-6 months. In addition, a recovery in the ISM index will most likely add pressure to long US bond yields and signal stabilization in corporate earnings.

While I don’t necessarily share the optimism of the Danske team, the point is that the recent collapse have meaningfully adjusted both the demand and supply equation possibly enough to generate some market based (and not government instituted) revival.

So from growing world barter activities, buttressed by the rising Baltic Dry index, and a potential run down of inventories and similar downside adjustments in the supply side production could mean a semblance of restoration of global trade.

And if indeed the Danske Team is right about their forecast about the manufacturing recovery in the US, then this could signal a potential trough or nearing close of the US recession.

But then again, as a reminder, the cardinal sins in policymaking that could lead to prolonged bear markets: protectionism (nationalism, high tariffs, capital controls), regulatory overkill (high cost from added bureaucracy), monetary policy mistakes (bubble forming policies as negative real rates), excess taxation or war (political instability). Except for the last threat, the 4 seems likely a clear and present danger.

Will An Easing PTSD Lead To A Resurgent Asia?

Nonetheless, if the US supply side has adjusted to counterbalance the sharp fall in demand, then it is likely that the spate of sharp declines in the economic activities in most of Asia can be construed as the same degree of supply/production side adjustments.

Figure 6: DBS Bank: Asia’s Industrial Production Recovered earlier during the .com recession

Like in 2001, Asia’s heavy exposure to the technology sector hit exporters. Today, the sharp decline in US consumer spending has equally affected Asia’s exports as much as it also affected production. However, the sharp drop late last year could likely be explained by the Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) emanating from the distress in the banking system.

But unlike in 2001, which saw Asia as floundering from the nasty side effects of the Asian Crisis, where there essentially had been no domestic demand, this isn’t the case today. Asia has simply grown bigger and more dynamic and with ample shield from its high savings enough to potentially generate its own demand.

The recent DBS bank outlook says it best, ``Asia now generates almost as much new demand every year as the US- and it is that fresh demand that’s the very definition of global growth. The US is still a key driver and will remain so for a long time. But it is not the driver it used to be.” (bold emphasis mine)

And the Economist seems to agree, ``The question is, might domestic demand now take up some of the slack? There are reasons to think so. Falling commodity prices are boosting consumers’ purchasing power, just as they squeezed it last year. More important is the impact of monetary and fiscal expansion…(bold emphasis mine)

And the Economist sings to be singing a tune similar to ours, ``Asia has never before deployed its monetary and fiscal weapons with such force. Every country across the region has cut interest rates and announced a fiscal stimulus. In previous downturns, Asian governments were often constrained by dire public finances or the need to support currencies. But most countries entered this downturn with small budget deficits or even surpluses. All the main Asian emerging economies apart from India have relatively low ratios of public debt to GDP.” (bold emphasis mine)

In our Will “Divergences” Be A Theme for 2009?, we brought up the Austrian economics explanation that ``market rate of interest means different things to different segments of the structure of production.”

In essence we believe that convergent actions by global central banks will ultimately lead to divergent responses based on the capital and production structure of every economy.

Where the same amount of rain is applied to a desert land, forest land or grass land, the output will obviously be different. And to complement the DBS and Economist outlook, we recently said ``this crisis should serve as Asia’s window of opportunity to amass economic, financial and geopolitical clout amidst its staggering competitors. But this will probably come gradually and develop overtime and possibly be manifested initially in the activities of the marketplace.”

So to refrain from overestimating the odds of dreadful but infrequent events and underestimate how risky ordinary events are, we revert to the study of Garrick Blalock, Vrinda Kadiyali, Daniel H. Simon who concludes, ``Although we are unable to identify precisely reasons for either the 9/11 effect or its weakening, the existence of the effect is consistent with theoretical models in behavioral economics and psychology of inaccurate assessment of risks by consumers and exaggerated adjustments to risk assessments. The fortunate weakening of the 9/11 effect may be attributable to consumer learning over time in response to environmental changes. For example, the perceived risk of flying may have declined with the absence of any further terrorist incidents since 9/11, or travelers may have become accustomed to the increased inconvenience of flying.”

No we don’t just read past data and project them to the future like most of the experts. Instead, we try to understand that human action, to quote Ludwig von Mises, is a purposeful behavior!