I, Nutella: No one knows how to make the Nutella

Another example of simple product, the Nutella, the international brand name of a hazelnut chocolate spread, that depends on the complex chain of international division of labor.

In a latest study, the OECD uses the Nutella as an example of global value chains.

And in the tradition of Leonardo Read’s classic I, the Pencil, where “not a single person on the face of this earth knows how to make” the pencil, the same applies to the Nutella

From the Atlantic: (hat tip Scott Lincicome)

Some 250,000 tons of Nutella are now sold across 75 countries around the world every year, according to the OECD. But that’s not what’s amazing about it. Nutella, it turns out, is a perfect example of what globalization has meant for popular foodstuffs: Not only is it sold everywhere, but its ingredients are sourced from all over the place too.

Even though Ferrero International, which makes the stuff, is headquartered in Italy, it has factories in Europe, Russia, North America and South America. And while certain inputs are supplied locally—like, say, the plastic for the bottles or milk—many others are shipped from all over the world. The hazelnuts are from Turkey; the palm oil is from Malaysia; the cocoa is from Nigeria; the sugar is from either Brazil or Europe; and the vanilla flavoring is from France.

The OECD mapped it all out. Have a look:

Quote of the Day: I, Coffee

For instance, even the relatively simple GVC [global value chain] of Starbuck's (United States), based on one service (the sale of coffee), requires the management of a value chain that spans all continents; directly employs 150,000 people; sources coffee from thousands of traders, agents and contract farmers across the developing world; manufactures coffee in over 30 plants, mostly in alliance with partner firms, usually close to final market; distributes the coffee to retail outlets through over 50 major central and regional warehouses and distribution centres; and operates some 17,000 retail stores in over 50 countries across the globe. This GVC has to be efficient and profitable, while following strict product/service standards for quality. It is supported by a large array of services, including those connected to supply chain management and human resources management/development, both within the firm itself and in relation to suppliers and other partners. The trade flows involved are immense, including the movement of agricultural goods, manufactured produce, and technical and managerial services.

This version of Leonard Read's "I, Pencil" or in the above "Nobody knows how to make a coffee" is from UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2013, p. 142. (hat tip Econolib's Professor David Henderson)

How Free Trade Promoted Peace in Mindanao

It is refreshing to read about anecdotes of how the largely unappreciated free markets works unnoticeably in the Philippine setting

Dave Llorito World Bank’s communications officer at World Bank’s East Asia blog writes

“It was a war zone, one of the most dangerous places on earth.” 

That’s how Mr. Resty Kamag, human resource manager of La Frutera plantation based in Datu Paglas (Population: 20,290) in Maguindanao (the Philippines) described the national road traversing the town from the adjacent province.

Residents and travelers, he said, wouldn’t dare pass through the highway after three in the afternoon for fear of getting robbed, ambushed or caught in the crossfire between rebels and government soldiers.

“That was before the company started operations here in 1997,” said Mr. Kamag. La Frutera operates a 1,200-hectare plantation for export bananas in Datu Paglas and neighboring towns, providing jobs to more than 2,000 people.

“Today, the town is peaceful,” he said. “Travelers now come and go without fear of getting harmed. People have better things to do.”

La Fruta Inc. is the Philippines largest banana exporter, whose chairman and president Senen Bacani was conferred the 2006 Entrepreneur of the year award in 2006 by the SGV Ernst and Young (wiki Pilipinas).

And to promote trade, the private sector led by La Fruta and other private firms made huge investments in the region’s infrastructure.

Again Mr. Llorito:

A joint project by foreign investors (Unifruitti group) and Filipinos including Toto Paglas, a charismatic Muslim leader, La Frutera spent millions building roads, bridges, irrigation systems and other facilities.

The company infuses the local economy with 11 million pesos of monthly payroll, encouraging local entrepreneurs to set up retail shops, banks and small businesses. Other companies like Del Monte followed suit establishing agribusiness plantations in other parts of the province.

Today, paved highways cut through thriving towns and fields planted to rice, corn, coconuts, palm oil, rubber trees, and bananas.

The point is that markets on its own will invest and finance on infrastructure projects without the need for taxpayer exposure and for government directive.

Trade reduces war and promotes social harmony and cooperation due to the division of labor.  

As the great Ludwig von Mises wrote (Omnipotent government p.122)

Social cooperation and war are in the long run incompatible. Self-sufficient individuals may fight each other without destroying the foundations of their existence. But within the social system of cooperation and division of labor war means disintegration. The progressive evolution of society requires the progressive elimination of war.

How Inflationism Undermines the Division of Labor

Technology guru and Forbes columnist Josh Wolfe writes, (bold and italics original)

Chief Investment Officer of Guggenheim Partners Scott Minerd has just noted the Faustian bargain the Fed has made with quantitative easing (a term itself in its complexity quickly confuses the masses). He notes simple bond math that shows the real risk to the Fed’s actions and the the strength of our dollar [paraphrased here]:

In 2008 pre-crisis

• The Fed had $41B in capital and ~$872B in liabilities = debt/equity ratio of 21:1
• The Fed’s had a portfolio with $480B in Treasuries with duration of ~2.5 years. (a useful rule of thumb is that duration of a bond x the change in interest rate = change in value of the bond)
• Thus a 1% rise in interest rates would cause a 2.5% drop in its holdings ~$12B

In 2011 post-crisis

• The Fed’s had portfolio of $2.6 T in liabilities = debt/equity ratio of 51:1 (up from 21:1)
• Duration = ~8 years.
• Thus a 1% rise in interest rates would cause an 8% drop in its holdings ~$200B
• That decline would exceed its capital by about $150bn

From here: as Minerd’s clear logic lays out: if the economy expands, then interest rates rise, then the Fed’s holdings drop, then it might not have enough sellable assets to reduce the money supply and maintain the value of the US dollar. And then if there are doubts about the dollar, the Fed is the buyer (and printer) of last resort, setting the stage for the risk of runaway inflation. So: “To hedge against [a decline] in the dollar’s purchasing power, investors [are migrating to] gold, commercial property, and artwork.”

While these may prove to preserve capital for the individual, for society it may be far better to have these assets invested in productive profit-seeking business and financing innovation and emerging technologies, than sitting in vaults, piling up on dirt or hanging on walls.

Inflationism drives economic imbalances through the pricing system by disrupting the feedback mechanism (profit and loss to reflect on demand and supply), in conjunction with the coordination process of the allocation of resources (through the production system).

As Professor Gary North explains,

Without reliable, predictable pricing, most people would make errors most of the time in estimating what things should cost. This is as true of our decisions as producers as consumers.

Money allows us to make bids in the market for the ownership or use of scarce resources. These bids are our responses as both consumers of goods and suppliers of goods. If prices no longer convey predictable information over time, planning becomes chaotic. Producers and consumers will erroneously forecast the state of supply and demand. Our errors add up over time. We produce losses. We find that we have consumed our capital. We cannot replace what we have consumed at prices we thought would prevail.

Hedging on assets against inflation keeps capital away from productive undertaking.

More the inflationism means greater volatility, instability and most importantly reduced economic activities. Inflationism also rewards political class and their cronies at the expense of society.

Quote of the Day: Freedom is Indivisible

First, let me say that freedom is indivisible. You cannot lose a part of your freedom, the freedom of speech, the freedom to buy, the freedom to print, without eventually losing all of your freedom. Of course, all freedom is based on economic freedom. Freedom is indivisible. No one man invented the airplane. It took many, many men to invent today's jet. It took a lot of history, a lot of just minor improvements.

My great teacher, Mises, asks, "What is the automobile of 1969?" He answers his own question: "It is just the automobile of 1909 with thousands upon thousands of minor improvements." Everyone who suggested an improvement did it with the hope that he would make a profit. Many made suggestions that fell by the wayside. But it was the freedom of those men to work on improving the automobile that has given us the automobile that we have today. No one man invented it, neither did one man produce it.

This is from the late economist Percy L. Greaves, Jr’s must read article (it's really a transcript from a talk) about the essence of Economics.

Video: I, Smartphone (Made Everywhere)

This is video is the modern day representation of Leonardo Read's must read classic I, Pencil.

Two points here:

One, nobody knows how to make a product on their own or the folly of self-reliance as peddled by politicians. This emphasizes the importance of the division of labor (or Prof. Kling's Patterns of sustainable trade and specialization).

Second, division of labor implies that products have been "made everywhere", which today, extrapolates to the global supply chain networks or "globalization"--which is why politically colored claims of "Made in China" have been utterly fallacious.

What the Political Rhetoric “You Didn't Get There on Your Own” Means

When a politician preaches that “you didn't get there on your own” they may only be half right. That’s because our world operates on the principle of division of labor where no one really produces things on their own.

No one, on his own, even knows how to make a simple product like the pencil, as Milton Friedman explained

But what the politicians really mean is that every entrepreneurial success (wealth) has been owed to the government.

The distinguished Thomas Sowell exposes such myth or deception {bold emphasis mine]

Let's stop and think, even though the whole purpose of much political rhetoric is to keep us from thinking, and stir our emotions instead.

Even if we were to assume, just for the sake of argument, that 90 percent of what a successful person has achieved was due to the government, what follows from that? That politicians will make better decisions than individual citizens, that politicians will spend the wealth of the country better than those who created it? That doesn't follow logically -- and certainly not empirically.

Does anyone doubt that most people owe a lot to the parents who raised them? But what follows from that? That they should never become adults who make their own decisions?

The whole point of the collectivist mindset is to concentrate power in the hands of the collectivists -- which is to say, to take away our freedom. They do this in stages, starting with some group that others envy or resent -- Jews in Nazi Germany, capitalists in the Soviet Union, foreign investors in Third World countries that confiscate their investments and call this theft "nationalization."

Freedom is seldom destroyed all at once. More often it is eroded, bit by bit, until it is gone. This can happen so gradually that there is no sudden change that would alert people to the danger. By the time everybody realizes what has happened, it can be too late, because their freedom is gone.

All the high-flown talk about how people who are successful in business should "give back" to the community that created the things that facilitated their success is, again, something that sounds plausible to people who do not stop and think through what is being said. After years of dumbed-down education, that apparently includes a lot of people.

Take Obama's example of the business that benefits from being able to ship their products on roads that the government built. How does that create a need to "give back"?

Did the taxpayers, including business taxpayers, not pay for that road when it was built? Why should they have to pay for it twice?

What about the workers that businesses hire, whose education is usually created in government-financed schools? The government doesn't have any wealth of its own, except what it takes from taxpayers, whether individuals or businesses. They have already paid for that education. It is not a gift that they have to "give back" by letting politicians take more of their money and freedom.

When businesses hire highly educated people, such as chemists or engineers, competition in the labor market forces them to pay higher salaries for people with longer years of valuable education. That education is not a government gift to the employers. It is paid for while it is being created in schools and universities, and it is paid for in higher salaries when highly educated people are hired.

One of the tricks of professional magicians is to distract the audience's attention from what they are doing while they are creating an illusion of magic. Pious talk about "giving back" distracts our attention from the cold fact that politicians are taking away more and more of our money and our freedom.

Bottom line: Reading between the lines helps to protect one from getting hoodwinked by political glib talkers.

Quote of the Day: Economics versus Social Darwinism

Economics doesn't point to people and say, "Look what they can't do." Economics instead asks, "Well, what can they do?" If the answer is "something productive," then the Law of the Comparative Advantage implies gains to trade. Economics, known for its hard-headed methods, culminates in an optimistic and humane conclusion: Regardless of their Darwinian "fitness," the existence of people - even those well below average - makes the world a better place.

This is from Professor Bryan Caplan at the Econolog.com [hat tip Prof Don Boudreaux]

Quote of the Day: Division of Labor Cheeseburger Edition

Writes Waldo Jaquith, (hat tip Professor Arnold Kling)

I realized that my prior plan hadn’t been ambitious enough—that wasn’t really from scratch. In fact, to make the buns, I’d need to grind my own wheat, collect my own eggs, and make my own butter. And I’d really need to raise the cow myself (or sheep, and make lamb burgers), mine or extract from seawater my own salt, grow my own mustard plant, etc. This past summer, revisiting the idea, I realized yet again that I was insufficiently ambitious. I’d really need to plant and harvest the wheat, raise a cow to produce the milk for the butter, raise another cow to slaughter for its rennet to make the cheese, and personally slaughter and process the cow or sheep. At this point I was thinking that this might all add up to an interesting book, and started to consider seriously the undertaking.

Further reflection revealed that it’s quite impractical—nearly impossible—to make a cheeseburger from scratch. Tomatoes are in season in the late summer. Lettuce is in season in spring and fall. Large mammals are slaughtered in early winter. The process of making such a burger would take nearly a year, and would inherently involve omitting some core cheeseburger ingredients. It would be wildly expensive—requiring a trio of cows—and demand many acres of land. There’s just no sense in it.

A cheeseburger cannot exist outside of a highly developed, post-agrarian society. It requires a complex interaction between a handful of vendors—in all likelihood, a couple of dozen—and the ability to ship ingredients vast distances while keeping them fresh. The cheeseburger couldn’t have existed until nearly a century ago as, indeed, it did not.

Philippines as Call Center Capital of the World Has Not Been about Wages

If markets are to function freely, we are likely to see division of labor and competition based competitive advantage as the main force driving economic growth.

One such remarkable evidence has been the booming call center industry of the Philippines which has recently been enthroned as “A New Capital of Call Centers” by the New York Times.

And contra Keynesians, who see economics as operating in a homogenous dynamic, the local boom HAS NOT BEEN about wage LEVELS.

From the New York Times (bold emphasis mine)

Over the last several years, a quiet revolution has been reshaping the call center business: the rise of the Philippines, a former United States colony that has a large population of young people who speak lightly accented English and, unlike many Indians, are steeped in American culture.

More Filipinos — about 400,000 — than Indians now spend their nights talking to mostly American consumers, industry officials said, as companies like AT&T, JPMorgan Chase and Expedia have hired call centers here, or built their own. The jobs have come from the United States, Europe and, to some extent, India as outsourcers followed their clients to the Philippines.

India, where offshore call centers first took off in a big way, fields as many as 350,000 call center agents, according to some industry estimates. The Philippines, which has a population one-tenth as big as India’s, overtook India this year, according to Jojo Uligan, executive director of the Contact Center Association of the Philippines.

The growing preference for the Philippines reflects in part the maturation of the outsourcing business and in part a preference for American English. In the early days, the industry focused simply on finding and setting up shop in countries with large English-speaking populations and low labor costs, which mostly led them to India. But executives say they are now increasingly identifying places best suited for specific tasks. India remains the biggest destination by far for software outsourcing, for instance.

Executives say the growth was not motivated by wage considerations. Filipino call center agents typically earn more than their Indian counterparts ($300 a month, rather than $250, at the entry level), but executives say they are worth the extra cost because American customers find them easier to understand than they do Indian agents, who speak British-style English and use unfamiliar idioms. Indians, for example, might say, “I will revert on the same,” rather than, “I will follow up on that.”…

In addition to language skills, the Philippines has better utility infrastructure than India — so companies spend little on generators and diesel fuel. Also, cities here are safer and have better public transportation, so employers do not have to bus employees to and from work as they do in India.

The Philippine call center boom has been about serving the needs of consumers, where consumers perceive that the Philippine preference for American English has been providing her the comparative edge, and of the more superior utility infrastructure investments made by local companies.

Quoting David Ricardo (Mises Wiki) [bold emphasis mine]

Under a system of perfectly free commerce, each country naturally devotes its capital and labor to such employments as are most beneficial to each. This pursuit of individual advantage is admirably connected with the universal good of the whole. By stimulating industry, by rewarding ingenuity, and by using most efficaciously the peculiar powers bestowed by nature, it distributes labor most effectively and most economically: while by increasing the general mass of productions, it diffuses general benefit, and binds together, by one common tie of interest and intercourse, the universal society of nations throughout the civilized world. It is this principle which determines that wine shall be made in France and Portugal, that corn shall be grown in America and Poland, and that hardware and other goods shall be manufactured in England.

Global Wealth Convergence

Economist Timothy Taylor writes, (bold emphasis mine)

It is possible that although inequality within many countries is rising, global inequality is actually falling. After all, a number of countries with lower levels of per capita income, like China and India, have been experiencing rapid growth. Perhaps from a global viewpoint, the gap between high and low incomes is diminishing even though within countries, that gap has been rising.

What looks more like Aristotle’s the “whole is greater than the sum of its parts” is what I call as the global wealth convergence dynamic

Mr. Taylor quotes an IMF study suggesting that China and India has been key factors that have been led to this,

What is the evidence on global inequality? Branko Milanovic offers a useful figure, where inequality is measured by the Gini coefficient. For those not familiar with this term, the quick intuition is that it is a measure of inequality where 0 represents complete equality of income and 100 represents complete inequality (one person has all the resources). Here is a figure showing Gini coefficients for relatively equal Sweden, the less equal U.S. economy, the still-less-equal Brazilian economy, and the world economy.

Milanovic writes: "Global inequality seems to have declined from its high plateau of about 70 Gini points in 1990–2005 to about 67–68 points today. This is still much higher than inequality in any single country, and much higher than global inequality was 50 or 100 years ago. But the likely downward kink in 2008—it is probably too early to speak of a slide—is an extremely welcome sign. If sustained (and much will depend on China’s future rate of growth), this would be the first decline in global inequality since the mid-19th century and the Industrial Revolution.

One could thus regard the Industrial Revolution as a “Big Bang” that set some countries on a path to higher income, and left others at very low income levels. But as the two giants—India and China—move far above their past income levels, the mean income of the world increases and global inequality begins to decline."

My intuition is that globalization has functioned as one of the most critical variable contributing to the global wealth convergence.

China and India’s merchandise trade has ballooned from 10% in 1976 to over 50% and 30% respectively even after the 2008 crisis. That’s because trade is a mutually beneficial action which leads to prosperity.

From Ludwig von Mises, (Nation, State and Economy p.165)

Economic history is the development of the division of labor. It starts with the self-contained household economy of the family, which is self-sufficient, which itself produces everything that it uses or consumes. The individual households are not economically differentiated. Each one serves only itself. No economic contact, no exchange of economic goods, occurs.

Recognition that work performed under the division of labor is more productive than work performed without the division of labor puts an end to the isolation of the individual economies. The trade principle, exchange, links the individual proprietors together. From a concern of individuals, the economy becomes a social matter. The division of labor advances step by step. First limited to only a narrow sphere, it extends itself more and more. The age of liberalism brought the greatest advances of this sort.

Classical Liberalism: Towards A Less Violent World

Steve Pinker at the Wall Street Journal brings us a good news: there has been a declining trend of violence worldwide.

Mr. Pinker writes,

Believe it or not, the world of the past was much worse. Violence has been in decline for thousands of years, and today we may be living in the most peaceable era in the existence of our species.

The decline, to be sure, has not been smooth. It has not brought violence down to zero, and it is not guaranteed to continue. But it is a persistent historical development, visible on scales from millennia to years, from the waging of wars to the spanking of children.

Mr. Pinker attributes the “six major declines of violence” as the process of pacification, civilizing process, the Humanitarian Revolution, the Long Peace, the New Peace and the cascade of "rights revolutions.

He further notes that 3 peacemakers are responsible for the deepening trend towards greater peace.

1. the pacificist state

2. commerce

3. cosmopolitanism or the expansion of people's parochial little worlds through literacy, mobility, education, science, history, journalism and mass media.

In my earlier posts, I showed Hans Rosling in two videos explaining how people have become remarkably wealthier over the past 200 years, through the division of labor (how washing machine enhanced out lives).

Today, I quoted Matt Ridley saying that the successful evolution of the homo sapiens came from trade.

In short, liberalism has been the primary force responsible for bringing about civilization, wider access to information and knowledge, increasing wealth, vastly improved quality of life and charity, all of which has led to lesser appetite for violence.

In the words of the great Ludwig von Mises, (emphasis added)

Liberalism aims at a political constitution which safeguards the smooth working of social cooperation and the progressive intensification of mutual social relations. Its main objective is the avoidance of violent conflicts, of wars and revolutions that must disintegrate the social collaboration of men and throw people back into the primitive conditions of barbarism where all tribes and political bodies endlessly fought one another. Because the division of labor requires undisturbed peace, liberalism aims at the establishment of a system of government that is likely to preserve peace, viz., democracy.

Video: Hans Rosling On How The Washing Machine Enhances Our Lives

Fascinating talk by Hans Rosling. (hat tip: Steve Horwitz)

Despite The Disaster, Japan Reports Less Incidence Of Looting

Despite the horrible disaster, Professor William Easterly posits a very interesting observation and asks, why has there been no looting in Japan?

I quote Prof. Bill Easterly’s entire terse post... (bold highlight mine)

Amidst the heartbreaking devastation in Japan, many have noticed (especially this blog from the Telegraph) how much social solidarity — and little stealing — there has been. The Telegraph blogger Ed West notes vending machine owners giving out free drinks, in contrast to large-scale looting after Katrina.

Economists have been saying for a while that trust is a good candidate to be a major determinant of development. Think how much contract enforcement is critical to make trade and finance possible. Think how much easier contract enforcement is when nobody tries to cheat. This is supported by empirical studies correlating per capita income with a measure of trust, like that shown below, which is computed as …oh forget that, the current example is much more compelling.

Responding to tragedy, the Japanese have resources because they are rich, and it was their social solidarity that helped get them there.

While it may be argued that Japan’s homogenous society-a strong sense of group and national identity and little or no ethnic or racial diversity-could be attributed to such social cohesion, this idea of 'homogeneity' isn’t entirely true as such differences exists in Japan, like in all societies, as Harvard University professors Theodore Bestor (anthropology) and Helen Hardacre argues.

The economic development paradigm based on “Social solidarity that helped get them there” is perhaps what Henry Hazlitt explained in his The Foundations of Morality (quoted by Bettina Bien Greaves) as, (bold emphasis mine)

For each of us social cooperation is of course not the ultimate end but a means … But it is a means so central, so universal, so indispensable to the realization of practically all our other ends, that there is little harm in regarding it as an end in itself, and even in treating it as if it were the goal of ethics. In fact, precisely because none of us knows exactly what would give most satisfaction or happiness to others, the best test of our actions or rules of action is the extent to which they promote a social cooperation that best enables each of us to pursue his own ends.

Without social cooperation modern man could not achieve the barest fraction of the ends and satisfactions that he has achieved with it. The very subsistence of the immense majority of us depends upon it.

In short, a culture of (trust) social cooperation brought about by the interdependence of people founded on the division of labor, respect for private property and voluntary exchanges is what has mostly led to Japan's civil society that has greatly reduced the incidences of violence and theft even during bleak moments.

Gender Equality: Women's Growing Role In The Society

Below is an interesting chart from the Economist.

The Economist writes,

A CENTURY ago, women were scarcely allowed to vote, let alone stand for

election. Today women hold seats in parliaments across the world, and in one case are even in a majority. This is one of many achievements that will be celebrated on March 8th 2011, which marks the 100th anniversary of International Women's Day. Policies and quotas have helped women in politics and in business. In Norway, women make up nearly 40% of board members of the largest listed companies. Yet on average across Europe they only occupy one in every ten board seats. This may improve, with more women than ever now in the global business-school pipeline. In 2010, nearly 106,000 women sat the GMAT exam, an MBA entrance exam, accounting for over 40% of examinees. In the OECD, a club of mostly rich countries, 61% of women are active in the labour force. But the difference in male and female employment rates in many countries is still large and persistent. While progress has been made, there is a long way to go before gender equality is reached.

As people around the world learn to embrace the tenets of the division of labor, women will certainly play a greater role in the society.

Commodities And The Good Life

In a book review, the ever brilliant Matt Ridley narrates how commodities has contributed to economic progress and our good life.

An excerpt…

The discovery of the elements shadows and to some extent explains this evolving history of specialisation. The ancients knew of just seven metals: gold, silver, copper, tin, iron, lead and mercury. By giving each specialised roles, they improved their living standards—tin for hardening bronze, lead for moulding, silver for coinage and so on. By the modern era only one more metal—zinc—had joined them (although platinum was known to natives of the Americas). But then came a steady flow of new metals, each of which finds its particular role in technology and society: tungsten for hardness, aluminium for lightness, chrome for polish, neodymium for magnets, barium for medicine. Each finds its niche as surely as each profession and vocation does in human society. Just as our story is one of specialisation, so the story of chemistry is one of purification.

Each metal marches into our lives along a path from novel to banal, says Aldersey-Williams. Aluminium was once so difficult to make that Napoleon III used aluminium cutlery for only his most favoured guests and gave his son, the Prince Imperial, an aluminium rattle. Then it became so cheap that it was considered, well, cheap. Titanium, once rare and exotic, is becoming ubiquitous. For niobium and tantalum, Aldersey-Williams writes, “the journey is just beginning.” This is a tantalising thought. There are so many elements whose talents we have barely begun to use.

Matt Ridley: When Ideas Have Sex

Great stuff from Matt Ridley, watch it....

iPhone Global Supply Chain, The Power of the Market Through The Division of Labor

The New York Times talks about supply chain structure of the iPhone and its costs,

``According to the latest teardown report compiled by iSuppli, a market research firm in El Segundo, Calif., the bulk of what Apple pays for the iPhone 4’s parts goes to its chip suppliers, like Samsung and Broadcom, which supply crucial components, like processors and the device’s flash-memory chip.

``In the iPhone 4, more than a dozen integrated circuit chips account for about two-thirds of the cost of producing a single device, according to iSuppli.

``Apple, for instance, pays Samsung about $27 for flash memory and $10.75 to make its (Apple-designed) applications processor; and a German chip maker called Infineon gets $14.05 a phone for chips that send and receive phone calls and data. Most of the electronics cost much less. The gyroscope, new to the iPhone 4, was made by STMicroelectronics, based in Geneva, and added $2.60 to the cost.

``The total bill of materials on a $600 iPhone — the supplies that go into final assembly — is $187.51, according to iSuppli.

However, when I reached the portion when the article mentioned “The world of contract manufacturers is invisible to consumers”, it dawned upon me that the author was dealing with wonders of the division of labor in passing.

Yes indeed, the iPhone is a product of a global division of labor!

And a great illustration of the magic of the division of labor was written by Leonard Read in his classic “I, the Pencil”, where he shows how people from diverse places and distinct cultures work spontaneously and invisibly in harmony to produce what seems like a simple product- the pencil- which you and I use.

The illustrious Milton Friedman does a great job discussing Mr. Read’s classic, below…

Rotarian Ludwig Von Mises' Message To Fellow Rotarians: The Principle Of Solidarity

I am pleased to discover that Dr. Ludwig von Mises was a Rotarian.

And in one of Rotary's tabloid, Dr. von Mises wrote about the principle of solidarity, a message I hope to share with fellow Rotarians.

From Dr. Ludwig von Mises (emphasis added)

"Service" is the device of the Rotarian.

In no sphere of human activity can this principle find an application on a larger scale than in economics. Human society being based on a division of labor, the work of individuals is of necessity piecework only. Every human being performs one task only and his activity is limited to a narrow field. Unaided by the work of others he cannot exist.

The manner in which every individual arranges his life presupposes the activity of other members of society in occupations which harmoniously complement his own work and vice versa. If we consciously specialize in one kind of activity, we can do so only because we count upon other individuals being ready to serve us just as we are prepared to serve them. It is here that the great principle of solidarity, which govern society, comes into play.

The principle of solidarity, however, does not lose its force at the frontiers of a country. Economic solidarity does not unite compatriots only, but it ties together all peoples. The European feeds on, and clothes himself in, the products which America, Asia, Africa, and Australia supply, giving in exchange the fruits of his industrial efforts. The present standard of life of all nations is based on the enormous increase of productivity of human work which has been made possible only by an international division of labor...

To recognize the need for solidarity in economic life and to affirm it by conscious action is service in the sense in which a Rotarian uses the word.

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.