Bastiat on The Case for Unilateral Free Trade

The great Frédéric Bastiat makes the case for unilateral free trade. (source Mises Institute)

We have just seen that whatever increases the expense of conveying commodities from one country to another — in other words, whatever renders transport more onerous — acts in the same way as a protective duty; or if you prefer to put it in another shape, that a protective duty acts in the same way as more onerous transport.

A tariff, then, may be regarded in the same light as a marsh, a rut, an obstruction, a steep declivity — in a word, it is an obstacle, the effect of which is to augment the difference between the price the producer of a commodity receives and the price the consumer pays for it. In the same way, it is undoubtedly true that marshes and quagmires are to be regarded in the same light as protective tariffs.

There are people (few in number, it is true, but there are such people) who begin to understand that obstacles are not less obstacles because they are artificial, and that our mercantile prospects have more to gain from liberty than from protection, and exactly for the same reason that makes a canal more favorable to traffic than a steep, roundabout, and inconvenient road.

But they maintain that this liberty must be reciprocal. If we remove the barriers we have erected against the admission of Spanish goods, for example, Spain must remove the barriers she has erected against the admission of ours. They are, therefore, the advocates of commercial treaties, on the basis of exact reciprocity, concession for concession; let us make the sacrifice of buying, say they, to obtain the advantage of selling.

People who reason in this way, I am sorry to say, are, whether they know it or not, protectionists in principle; only, they are a little more inconsistent than pure protectionists, as the latter are more inconsistent than absolute prohibitionists.

The following apologue will demonstrate this.

Stulta and Puera

There were, no matter where, two towns called Stulta and Puera. They completed at great cost a highway from the one town to the other. When this was done, Stulta said to herself, "See how Puera inundates us with her products; we must see to it." In consequence, they created and paid a body of obstructives, so called because their business was to place obstacles in the way of traffic coming from Puera. Soon afterwards Puera did the same.

At the end of some centuries, knowledge having in the interim made great progress, the common sense of Puera enabled her to see that such reciprocal obstacles could only be reciprocally hurtful. She therefore sent an envoy to Stulta, who, laying aside official phraseology, spoke to this effect: "We have made a highway, and now we throw obstacles in the way of using it. This is absurd. It would have been better to have left things as they were. We should not, in that case, have had to pay for making the road in the first place, nor afterwards have incurred the expense of maintaining obstructives. In the name of Puera, I come to propose to you, not to give up opposing each other all at once — that would be to act upon a principle, and we despise principles as much as you do — but to lessen somewhat the present obstacles, taking care to estimate equitably the respective sacrifices we make for this purpose." So spoke the envoy. Stulta asked for time to consider the proposal, and proceeded to consult, in succession, her manufacturers and agriculturists. At length, after the lapse of some years, she declared that the negotiations were broken off.

On receiving this intimation, the inhabitants of Puera held a meeting. An old gentleman (they always suspected he had been secretly bought by Stulta) rose and said, "The obstacles created by Stulta injure our sales, which is a misfortune. Those we have ourselves created injure our purchases, which is another misfortune. With reference to the first, we are powerless; but the second rests with ourselves. Let us, at least, get rid of one, since we cannot rid ourselves of both evils. Let us suppress our obstructives without requiring Stulta to do the same. Some day, no doubt, she will come to know her own interests better."

A second counselor, a practical, matter-of-fact man, guiltless of any acquaintance with principles, and brought up in the ways of his forefathers, replied: "Don't listen to that Utopian dreamer, that theorist, that innovator, that economist, that Stultomaniac. We shall all be undone if the stoppages of the road are not equalized, weighed, and balanced between Stulta and Puera. There would be greater difficulty in going than in coming, in exporting than in importing. We should find ourselves in the same condition of inferiority relatively to Stulta as Havre, Nantes, Bordeaux, Lisbon, London, Hamburg, and New Orleans are with relation to the towns situated at the sources of the Seine, the Loire, the Garonne, the Tagus, the Thames, the Elbe, and the Mississippi, for it is more difficult for a ship to ascend than to descend a river. (A Voice: Towns at the mouths of rivers prosper more than towns at their source.)

"This is impossible. (Same Voice: But it is so.) Well, if it be so, they have prospered contrary to rules." Reasoning so conclusive convinced the assembly, and the orator followed up his victory by talking largely of national independence, national honor, national dignity, national labor, inundation of products, tributes, murderous competition. In short, he carried the vote in favor of the maintenance of obstacles; and if you are at all curious on the subject, I can point out to you countries where you will see with your own eyes road makers and obstructives working together on the most friendly terms possible, under the orders of the same legislative assembly, and at the expense of the same taxpayers, the one set endeavoring to clear the road, and the other set doing their utmost to render it impassable.

The following passage resonates on the political stumbling block, mentioned by Bastiat above, for unilateral free trade:

The compelling economic case for unilateral free trade carries hardly any weight among people who really matter…

But the problem free traders face is not that their theory has dropped them into Wonderland, but that political pragmatism requires them to imagine themselves on the wrong side of the looking glass. There is no inconsistency or ambiguity in the economic case for free trade; but policy-oriented economists must deal with a world that does not understand or accept that case. Anyone who has tried to make sense of international trade negotiations eventually realizes that they can only be understood by realizing that they are a game scored according to mercantilist rules, in which an increase in exports—no matter how expensive to produce in terms of other opportunities foregone—is a victory, and an increase in imports—no matter how many resources it releases for other uses—is a defeat. The implicit mercantilist theory that underlies trade negotiations does not make sense on any level, indeed is inconsistent with simple adding-up constraints; but it nonetheless governs actual policy. The economist who wants to influence that policy, as opposed to merely jeering at its foolishness, must not forget that the economic theory underlying trade negotiations is nonsense—but he must also be willing to think as the negotiators think, accepting for the sake of argument their view of the world.

This was written by then international trade economist Paul Krugman in 1997 prior to his tergiversation of the free trade doctrine to become consumed by the forces of mercantilism whom he once condemned. (hat tip Professor Don Boudreaux) Given the temptations to power from "the economist who wants to influence that policy", Mr. Krugman reminds me of the transformation of Anakin Skywalker into Darth Vader

India to Open Retail Business

With bad news proliferating out there, this has been a refreshing development: India will open more segment of her economy.

From Bloomberg,

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has embarked on the biggest gamble of his second term, pushing through policy changes opposed by members of his own coalition as he seeks to revive the economy and the fortunes of his embattled party.

After two years of stalled policy making and amid slumping support, Singh’s Congress party-led cabinet Sept. 14 allowed overseas retailers to enter India, and said foreign airlines can own minority stakes in local carriers. While the second-largest party in the alliance, Trinamool Congress, vowed to take a “drastic step” if Singh, 79, doesn’t abandon the laws and roll back a diesel price increase, opposition lawmakers called for a nationwide strike over policies they say will trigger job losses and hurt the poor.

“Congress has been committing harakiri by doing nothing,” Satish Misra, a political analyst at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi, said by phone yesterday. “They have been pushed around so much that it was time to fight back.”

The architect as finance minister of India’s 1990s economic opening and recently the object of media ridicule, Singh may have judged that rivals unprepared for elections are not likely to try to topple the government, Misra said.

His administration has 18 months until the next election to ease gridlock in Parliament over corruption allegations and restore confidence in its management of an economy growing at near its slowest pace in three years. Warnings of a ratings downgrade to junk status and a 67-percent drop in foreign direct investment in the last quarter are spurring the boldest policy initiatives of a government re-elected in 2009.

Since India joined China to open her economy in the 90s, India’s GDP per capita has ballooned (chart from tradingeconomics.com)

So it’s really not a gamble for Mr. Singh. He recognizes the powers of economic liberalization. Instead resistance to change emanates from those entrenched political forces who doesn’t want to lose their privileges through protectionism and cronyism.

They are the same forces whom has been blaming gold imports for so-called trade deficits where in reality gold has become a fall guy for insatiable spending by politicians.

Economic liberalization is the only antidote to vicious central banking policies.

US Foreign Policy Backlash: Egypt’s President Morsi Defies the US

The US seems to be losing allies with her militant foreign policies. The well attended Non Aligned Movement held in Tehran Iran included US protégé Egypt’s President Mohammed Morsi, who apparently flouted pressures from the Washington.

Writes Eric Margolis at the lewrockwell.com,

To Washington’s further annoyance, Egypt’s new president, Mohammed Morsi, shrugged off threats of a cut in US aid and flew to Tehran. Under the 30-year Mubarak dictatorship, Egypt had been a bulwark against Iran. But no more. The increasingly assertive, independent Morsi made clear that Egypt would follow its own foreign policy interests rather than those of the US and Israel, as in the past.

Morsi has surprised just about everyone. When he stumbled into power earlier this year he was regarded as a plodding nobody, selected by the all-powerful military to do its bidding and not make trouble. The Muslim Brotherhood leader, a former space engineer, threw off his cloak of humility and quickly proceeded to muzzle Egypt’s bullying US-backed military, the key to US domination of Egypt for the past 40 years.

How Morsi pulled this off without facing a military coup remains a mystery. But he certainly had the backing of most Egyptians. It took Turkey’s Islamist Lite government a decade to push the swaggering generals back to their barracks and bring real democracy.

The Egyptian leader stunned everyone by openly blasting the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad, calling for its replacement by an elected, democratic government. Egyptian intervention in the bloody Syrian conflict may help pave a way to a peaceful settlement. It could also rekindle ancient Egyptian-Syrian rivalry for leadership of the Arab world.

In spite of issuing dulcet banalities about Egypt’s turn to democracy, Washington is extremely unhappy with Egypt’s newly elected government. Egypt will no longer be a discreet defender and ally of Israel, as under Mubarak, but a rival power that genuinely demands a Palestinian state and sees no reason to confront Iran or other US foes.

The US is responding to Egypt’s newfound independence by muttering about cuts to its annual $1.3 billion donations to Egypt’s military and millions more in secret payments. However, the Saudis and Gulf Arabs are lending cash-strapped Cairo $3 billion and the US-run IMF another $4.8 billion in loans. Interestingly, President Morsi just visited China where he received pledges of aid.

In past years, most non-aligned conferences, whose objective was to find a middle way between the West and Soviet Empire, produced only hot air, often quite anti-American. As America’s world power declines after the loss of two wars and deep recession, the NAM meeting in Tehran maybe a step, albeit small, towards moving away from today’s unipolar world towards a more balanced, equitable international system.

Egypt’s supposed disobedience and the success of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has very important implications

One, the US seems to be losing geopolitical capital.

The motivation by incumbent political class to stir up conflicts around the world has been getting the opposite response than intended by Washington.

Part of the militant imperial policies has been meant to divert public’s attention from the steepening deterioration of the domestic fiscal and economic conditions. Part of these has been designed to justify and protect the businesses interests of the military industrial complex and of the imperial or geopolitical ambitions of neoconservatives.

Yet the apparent success of the NAM also exhibits of the implied impact of globalization, where trade rather than war have become the key domestic agenda for many, if not most, of developing countries. (For instance Russia became the 156th member of World Trade Organization last August 22)

Second, the erosion of the imperial status, through the prospective realignment of geopolitical power or “towards a more balanced, equitable international system”, extrapolates to the decline of the US dollar standard.

Current policies of inflationism embraced by the US along with her Western peers, which radically conflicts with globalization, will compel more developing countries to cooperate as regional or as specific nation trading blocs than depend on the US. Thus realignments will not just be within the context of geopolitics, but also in the currency spectrum.

The increasingly desperate political-economic power cabals working behind the scene may force the issue by pushing the Washington to go to war with either Syria or Iran. But such wars will not do away with the deepening trend towards economic, financial, political and moral bankruptcy the US has been challenged with. Instead wars will continue to nibble away at the social fabric and the political economic foundations of the US.

As a side note, interestingly China pushes forward with the Non Aligned Movement plank

At the Xinhua, Ma Zhaoxu, Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs was quoted, (bold emphasis mine)

Non- aligned movement is an important platform for developing countries to move forward together. China supports the non-aligned movement for its positive role played in international affairs. China and other developing countries share similar histories, and face the common task of keeping world peace and boosting development. China will work together with the members of non-aligned movement to push the international order in a more fair and rational direction. China's attendance at the NAM summit also delivers an important message that China will always deepen traditional friendships and expand mutually beneficial cooperation, as well as maintain common interests with other developing countries.

More signs of China’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde relationship with ASEAN.

Information Age: Fly In Fly Out Workers

I have been saying that the information age will radically alter the way we do things.

Signs of such transformation can be seen in Indonesia where some foreign expats practice what Tim Staermose of Sovereign Man calls as the ‘fly in fly out’ work.

In the modern age, the concept of clearly defined national and supranational borders is a symbol of a bygone model made obsolete by technological and philosophical change. It’s amazing we still pay so much attention to them.

The Internet has made it possible to build relationships with people across the world who share your interests and beliefs, not the color of your passport.

Modern transport and telecommunication options make it possible for someone to live in one place and earn money in another… or in the case of large companies, to headquarter somewhere and earn money everywhere.

This trend is increasingly prevalent here in Bali as an increasing number of foreigners are making a permanent home here. To these new residents, national boundaries are becoming less relevant.

One group is called the ‘fly in fly out’ mine workers. Perth, Western Australia is in the midst of a mining boom, and it’s just three hours’ flight from Bali. Rather than pay the stupidly high costs of living in Australia, a growing band of miners are basing themselves in Bali. They fly down to Perth to work for 14 days straight in the mines (staying out on site), and then fly back to Bali for their 14 days off to relax with family and friends.

Given that it takes the typical Balinese one month to earn what a worker in Australia can make in a day, the cost of living in Bali is understandably MUCH lower… and in my opinion, is much higher quality.

The dual forces of the information age and globalization will usher in the growing obsolescence of the political flimflam concept called as “nationalism”.

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.

Will North Korea Pursue Economic Liberalization?

This should signify as a wonderful development if this would materialize.

From Reuters,

Impoverished North Korea is gearing up to experiment with agricultural and economic reforms after young leader Kim Jong-un and his powerful uncle purged the country's top general for opposing change, a source with ties to both Pyongyang and Beijing said.

The source added that the cabinet had created a special bureau to take control of the decaying economy from the military, one of the world's largest, which under Kim's father was given pride of place in running the country.

The downfall of Vice Marshal Ri Yong-ho and his allies gives the untested new leader and his uncle Jang Song-thaek, who married into the Kim family dynasty and is widely seen as the real power behind the throne, the mandate to try to save the battered economy and prevent the secretive regime's collapse.

The source has correctly predicted events in the past, including North Korea's first nuclear test in 2006 days before it was conducted, as well as the ascension of Jang.

The changes could herald the most significant reforms by the North in decades. Previous attempts at a more market driven economy have floundered, most recently a drastic currency revaluation in late 2009 which triggered outrage and is widely believed to have resulted in the execution of its chief proponent.

"Ri Yong-ho was the most ardent supporter of Kim Jong-il's 'military first' policy," the source told Reuters, referring to Kim Jong-un's late father who plunged the North deeper into isolation over its nuclear ambitions, abject poverty and political repression.

The biggest problem was that he opposed the government taking over control of the economy from the military, the source said, requesting anonymity to avoid repercussions.

North Korea's state news agency KCNA had cited illness for the surprise decision to relieve Ri of all his posts, including the powerful role of vice chairman of the ruling party's Central Military Commission, though in recent video footage he had appeared in good health.

Ri was very close to Kim Jong-il and had been a leading figure in the military. Ri's father fought against the Japanese alongside Kim Jong-il's late father Kim Il-sung, who founded North Korea and is still revered as its eternal president.

The revelation by the source was an indication of a power struggle in the secretive state in which Kim Jong-un and Jang look to have further consolidated political and military power.

Kim Jong-un was named Marshal of the republic this week in a move that adds to his glittering array of titles and cements his position following the death of his father in December. He already heads the Workers' Party of Korea and is first chairman of the National Defence Commission.

Observe that despotic or totalitarian regimes, in realization of the futility of their centralized political institutions, have slowly been giving way to globalization.

However this runs in contrast to formerly free (developed) economies who seem to be progressively headed towards fascism if not despotism.

The opposite path of political directions represents the major force that will drive wealth convergence.

Graphic: Made Everywhere, Even the Apparel Industry has been Globalized

“Made in China” has been a politically colored phrase not only in the US (US Olympic Uniform controversy), but also in the Philippines –the other day while on a cab, I heard a similar balderdash coming from a local radio announcer, who in ranting against China over territorial disputes included such false claims.

In reality, even the apparel or clothing industry has been about globalization, particularly the supply chain network. (hat tip Scott Lincicome)

To add, the apparel industry’s value added comes from design and post production facilities (marketing and distribution), an article from the Businessweek/Bloomberg.com points this out,

Garment manufacturing is a low-cost commodity business. Most of the value in the apparel industry comes from design, technology, sales, marketing, and distribution—not manufacturing. The successful players in apparel, such as Ralph Lauren and Nike, figured this out long ago.

Because the economics are bad, most U.S. apparel manufacturing operations folded decades ago. Only 97,000 Americans still have jobs in apparel production, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, and most of them are making highly specialized products like DuPont Kevlar uniforms that cannot be made elsewhere.

But just because America doesn’t manufacture apparel anymore doesn’t mean we can’t lead the industry. In fact, the world’s largest apparel companies are almost all U.S.-based, including Nike, VF, PVH, and Ralph Lauren, to name a few. These companies have grown a combined 146 percent during the past 10 years, adding more than $27 billion in revenue. Nike has created more than 15,000 new jobs in the U.S. during this time, Ralph Lauren almost 10,000. And unlike the low-paying production jobs next to sewing machines, these are well-paying jobs in marketing, accounting, design, and management.

These companies are winning globally by out-designing, out-innovating, and out-marketing the competition. Nike, for example, is unveiling a new TurboSpeed running suit at the London Olympic Games that it claims can reduce 100-meter sprint times by .023 seconds. Nike’s gear will be used by teams from many countries, including Russia, China, and of course, the U.S.

What Nike and Ralph Lauren don’t do is make their own products, in the U.S. or elsewhere—and this has become their competitive advantage.

Both companies source products from hundreds of independent manufacturers in more than 30 countries (less than 3 percent coming from the U.S.). The flexibility allows them to be cost-competitive globally. It also allows their design teams to focus on creating the most exciting new products possible without having to worry whether they can be made on a legacy production line.

Remember Fruit of the Loom? Brown Shoe Co.? Cannon Mills? Levi Strauss? In 1970 these were the largest U.S. apparel and fabric companies. They all owned their own U.S. manufacturing plants. They all struggled to innovate and grow, and they either went bankrupt or were bypassed by more nimble competitors who had no factories. If only they had outsourced …

Not only is outsourcing good for business, but the future of the American economy is dependent upon it.

So let’s stop whining about a few “Made in China” tags and start cheering for all of the great athletic performances made possible by superior U.S. innovation.

So when you hear someone rail about “Made in China” you can be assured that the person regurgitating such absurdities have either been ignorant of the real developments or have been deliberately employing deception as part of political propaganda to invoke nationalist (us against them) sentiment.

Quote of the Day: Global Competition is the 21st Century Reality

instead of pursuing a 20th century trade policy model that seeks to secure market-access advantages for certain producers, policy should be recalibrated to reflect the 21st century reality that governments around the world are competing for business investment and talent, which both tend to flow to jurisdictions where the rule of law is clear and abided; where there is greater certainty to the business and political climate; where the specter of asset expropriation is negligible; where physical and administrative infrastructure is in good shape; where the local work force is productive; where there are limited physical, political, and regulatory barriers, etc. This global competition in policy is a positive development because — among other reasons — its serves to discipline bad government policy.

That’s from Daniel Ikenson at the Cato Institute.

Will the Phisix Divergence Last?

My source of livelihood has almost entirely been from the local stock market, particularly investing, as I am hardly or rarely a short term trader.

Thus, objective and thorough investigations, assessments and analysis have been IMPERATIVE on me. And as part of my investing philosophy, I try to avoid getting married to a position, in as much as assuming the HIGH RISK role of becoming a stock market CHEERLEADER.

Losing money means my family will starve and this is why I cannot afford to lose money. Therefore such punctilious efforts, on my part, to deal with risks represent what have been known as stakeholder’s problem—where my incentives to attain relevant knowledge are prompted by the degree of my stakes in the financial marketplace. Since I depend on the markets thus I have to know the possible risks attendant to my positions.

And this outlook which I share with you, has not only been based on my battle hardened experience, but also from my candid evaluations of the conditions of the risk environment.

I am not here for an egotistical trip as many have been wont to.

Separating Signals from Noise

I have long been an adherent to the wisdom of the legendary trader Jesse Livermore. I have repeatedly been posting one of my favorite Mr. Livemore’s aphorisms here (bold emphasis mine)

I began to realize that the big money must necessarily be in the big swing. Whatever might seem to give a big swing its initial impulse, the fact is that its continuance is not the result of manipulation by pools or artifice by financiers, but depends on underlying conditions. And no matter who opposes it, the swing must inevitably run as far and as fast and as long as the impelling forces determine.

Simply said, profits are to be made based on underlying conditions which drives the general trend, and importantly, serves as the critical source of big swings.

And this is why I give heavy emphasis at the unfolding events based on the big picture. Unlike most practitioners, I am hardly swayed by vacillations from ticker tape activities.

Yet, ticker tape activities and the big picture frequently represent the noise and signal problem

Nassim Nicolas Taleb in his forthcoming book wonderfully explains the psychological impact from noise and signal[1]

we are not made to understand the point, so we overreact emotionally to noise. The best solution is to only look at very large changes in data or conditions, never small ones.

Just as we are not likely to mistake a bear for a stone (but likely to mistake a stone for a bear), it is almost impossible for someone rational with a clear, uninfected mind, one who is not drowning in data, to mistake a vital signal, one that matters for his survival, for noise. Significant signals have a way to reach you. In the tonsillectomies, the best filter would have been to only consider the children who are very ill, those with periodically recurring throat inflammation.

There was even more noise coming from the media and its glorification of the anecdote. Thanks to it, we are living more and more in virtual reality, separated from the real world, a little bit more every day, while realizing it less and less. Consider that every day, 6,200 persons die in the United States, many of preventable causes. But the media only reports the most anecdotal and sensational cases (hurricanes, freak incidents, small plane crashes) giving us a more and more distorted map of real risks. In an ancestral environment, the anecdote, the “interesting” is information; no longer today. Likewise, by presenting us with explanations and theories the media induces an illusion of understanding the world.

And the understanding of events (and risks) on the part of members of the press is so retrospective that they would put the security checks after the plane ride, or what the ancients call post bellum auxilium, send troops after the battle. Owing to domain dependence, we forget the need to check our map of the world against reality. So we are living in a more and more fragile world, while thinking it is more and more understandable.

The bottom line is that many people get confused when working to separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff or when filtering signal from noise. People with lesser stakeholdings are likely to emphasize on the noise which usually signify as “an illusion of understanding the world” and or embrace steeply biased (but unworkable and highly flawed) theories.

The Dopamine Fetish

I would also add that part of the psychological-neuroscience aspect in dealing with markets has been about dopamine neurons.

People’s dopamine neurons, or brain chemicals, gets fired up when rewards attained are GREATER than expected. In contrast, REGRETS are symptoms of depressed dopamine neurons. Thus short term thinking and short term trading have MOSTLY been about the fetish for dopamine trips.

A study on neuroscience suggests that dopamine flows are pervasive during early stages of a ballooning bubble, reflecting desire for profit. However as the bubble peaks, dopamine flows tend to culminate in a cessation just before the market burst[2]

Monetary policies by central banks also whet or induce dopamine powered speculative behaviors[3].

The lesson here is that we should manage our dopamine flows rather than allowing dopamine neurons to dominate the risk-reward tradeoffs that confront our investing decisions. This is basically about Emotional Intelligence (EI)

Let me further add that the technical construct of the Philippine Stock Exchange has been skewed to inculcate upon the public of the upside bias for issues listed on the markets, as well as, the component index.

The rational for this seems to be part of the political designs to exhibit economic booms.

Take shorting. While shorting has been legalized, rigorous procedural and regulatory compliance requirements have made shorting impractical. So we have a facility that has hardly been used.

And since market participants only earn from an UPSIDE price move, thus logically, the dominant entrenched PSYCHOLOGICAL bias would be for the public to yearn for the stock market to go only in one direction—UP.

Next, complimenting the psychological and physiological aspect, monetary policies have also been rewarding speculative activities at the expense of savings and production.

So intensifying speculative activities extrapolates to the herd effect in motion.

Where the basic function of the stock market has been about the cost of buying future income stream relative to insecurities (risk and uncertainty), such functionality has been negated or substituted by rationalizations for price chasing momentum.

Writes Kevin Dowd, Martin Hutchinson, and Gordon Kerr at Cato Forum for monetary policies[4],

Low interest rate policies not only set off a malinvestment cycle but also generate destabilizing asset price bubbles, a key feature of which is the way the policy rewards the bulls in the market (those who gamble on the boom continuing) at the expense of the sober minded bears who keep focused on the fundamentals, instead of allowing the market to reward the latter for their prudence and punish the former for their recklessness. Such intervention destabilizes markets by encouraging herd behavior and discouraging the contrarianism on which market stability ultimately depends. A case in point is the Fed’s low interest rate policy in the late 1990s: this not only stoked the tech boom but was maintained for so long that it wiped out most of the bears, who were proven right but (thanks to the Fed) too late, and whose continued activities would have softened the subsequent crash. The same is happening now but in many more markets (financials, general stocks, Treasuries, junk bonds, and commodities) and on a much grander scale. Such intervention embodies an arbitrariness that is wrong in principle and injects a huge amount of unnecessary uncertainty into the market.

In essence, the inflationary boom psychology has been distorting economic reasoning.

Add to this the leash effects of bailout policies.

The bottom line is that inflation fueled bull markets have become a religion to many.

And advises to undertake prudent positions—based on appraising the risk environment that may adversely affect one’s portfolio—has been seen as sacrilege.

Short Selling Not Recommendable; Contagion Risks

I also do NOT recommend shorting in the Philippines for the following reasons

-the cost to undertake shorts positions have been enormous relative to prospective gains (if a short position is required the best is to do it from overseas)

-a full blown BEAR market for the Philippines has NOT been yet established, although the RISKS from such scenario seem to be STRENGHTENING.

-global regulators have periodically been intervening. The degree of intervention mostly through bailout policies comes with such INTENSITY such that these can TORCH shorts on short notice. A good example has been Europe’s LTRO which singed Euro shorts at the start of the year[5]

-global regulators have innate biases against short sellers. They have done so lately through direct market interventions, such as drastic imposition of shorting bans which forces short covering to investors at a loss. A great example has been the shorting bans on Europe stock markets in mid-2011[6] in the political belief that speculations, and NOT insolvency, have been the fundamental problem that besets the Eurozone. Yet in spite of the bans, European stock markets continue to bleed PROFUSELY. This represents a vivid example of the “illusion of understanding the world” by political agents who always try to shift what has truly been their mistake to the markets.

Lastly I do NOT wish or DESIRE for a bear market.

Because of the limitations to take on hedge positions, bear markets or even phases of consolidation with a downside bias or volatility translates to income drought for me or most market participants (see the structural bull market bias above)

While I am an optimist who believes that the Phisix will reach 10,000 sometime in the future, I am also a REALIST who understands that external forces have a HUGE influence to actions of the local stock markets and that NO trend goes in a straight line.

In suggesting of the countercyclical trend amidst a secular trend I wrote in March[7],

I am not certain whether we will see a repeat of the discontinuities similar to the 1986-1997 bull market cycle or will suffer more than the past cycle before reaching my goal or if the Phisix will proceed to double. What needs to be monitored are drivers of the current trends and the whereabouts of the present boom cycle based on internal and external dynamics.

In short, the PHISIX, despite the secular trend, is VULNERABLE to a CONTAGION risk.

Could this week’s Phisix Divergence Represent an Anomaly?

The local benchmarket, the Phisix, majestically bucked the global stock market carnage last week.

As one would note, the Phisix has not only outperformed the region, the local benchmark basically defied gravity.

China and Malaysia joined the Phisix, as outliers, with hefty gains amidst a sea of red.

Yet such divergences have given the dopamine to Pollyanna trippers the ammunition to declare “bottom” for the market.

I have yet to be convinced.

The gist of the weekly gains or 52% of the Phisix came from Thursday’s activities.

Ironically, the sizable gains occurred in the backdrop of staggering US and global markets.

Media and experts has alluded to reports of sturdy domestic economic growth[8], the hints of a possible upgrade[9] by US rating agency Moody’s on the credit standing of the Philippines and the closure of milestone impeachment trial[10] with a conviction of the accused which favors the administration as reasons for this.

I beg to differ.

I raised this concern on this last Thursday[11]. The Phisix went down to as low as 67 points at the early session, dragged by the selloffs in the US and Europe. But suddenly, aggressive and systematic buying of heavyweights (blue chips) throughout the day pushed the Phisix to close at almost at the peak (76.81) at 73 points. The pendulum swing from loss to gain represented an astounding 2.8%!!!

Buyers seem to have, ironically, been resolutely aggressive to push up prices in an environment of MOSTLY falling stock market prices globally, perhaps in the assumption that local stocks will soon experience a strong surge.

Or is it?

The weekly performance of the heavy cap issues reveals that gains of the Phisix were mostly seen through Ayala Corp (AC), JG Summit (JGS), Banco De Oro (BDO), Metrobank (MBT), SM Investments (SM), International Container (ICT), PLDT (TEL) and Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI).

The logical part for any buyers under such scenario would be to make use of the dour sentiment to take advantage of price declines to bargain hunt. Yet these have not been the case.

Let me lay out my suspicions.

I do not think that these has been due to general market sentiment, although pushing up the PHISIX index succeeded to give a boost to the general market sentiment.

Thursday closed with a mixed showing between advancers and decliners with the latter having a slight edge. On a weekly basis advancers took a slight lead over decliners showing modest improvement in the market breadth or sentiment.

Second my naughty thoughts suggests that Thursday actions was likely executed to create an impression of economic ‘confidence’. I am not so sure why though. Perhaps to squelch demand for signing waivers for top officials.

Buyers suddenly became price insensitive. The likelihood is that non-market entities may have been responsible for aggressively pushing up Big Caps. I would suspect that these may have been government institutions such as the SSS, GSIS or others.

While it is true that Thursday a net foreign buying, the bulk of these buying can be traced to cross trades at DM Consunji.

Besides, net foreign buying data may not reveal of the real extent of activities that took place. Foreign buying can represent overseas based subsidiaries or branches of locally owned corporate vehicles or tycoons, as well as, foreign based politically allied corporations.

Of course I may be wrong and that there may have been special factors driving up the Phisix.

But if my suspicions are valid then such interventions are likely to produce short term effects.

As example the Bank of Japan’s (BoJ) $13.3 billion[12] interventions DID bring down the Yen for about a month. However the Yen has been regaining lost grounds since. This effectively has neutered tax payer financed interventions. In short $13.3 billion down the drain.

Another question that begs to be asked is WHY the PHSIX alone?

While Malaysia did post hefty weekly gains next to the Phisix, the Malaysia’s benchmark (FBMKLCI:IND, green) has almost missed out the recent bull market. On the other hand, Thailand (SET:IND, orange) and Indonesia (JCI:IND, red) which shared or alternated the lead with the Phisix, since last year, has wilted significantly.

Yet it can be observed that ASEAN’s stock markets have been nearly been moving in nearly synchronous fashion UNTIL the peak in May of this year.

This only means that last week’s gains by the Phisix either represents an ANOMALY or that the Phisix LEADS Asia.

My bet is on the former.

The Decoupling Myth

I have been saying that current environment have been dominated by POLITICAL uncertainty which for the Philippines and ASEAN represents a CONTAGION risk.

If global markets stock markets have been pricing in a bust or the unwinding of malinvestments which is being transmitted to the global economies, then it would dangerous, if not reckless, to presume immunity or “decoupling” where trade and investment linkages of ASEAN economies have been deepening relative to the world.

ASEAN economies have largely been exposed to developments abroad through merchandise trade (exports and imports).

The Philippines merchandise trade represents over 50% of GDP, while Malaysia and Thailand are over 100%.

This means any meaningful economic slowdown in the region or in the world will negatively impact economic growth.

Add to this the potential slowdown effect on remittances and supply chain networks.

The deepening of financial globalization also means the integration of emerging Asia’s capital markets[13] with the world (left chart) and with intra-region (right pane).

In short, the false notion of DECOUPLING will likely melt in the face of a global recession or when a full blown financial crisis, if such phenomenon transpires.

Let me be clear, the conditional term is an IF, while global economies have indeed been slowing down, a global recession or worldwide contagion from euro’s financial crisis has yet to become evident in Asia.

Of course a decoupling COULD happen if there should be massive inflation or even hyperinflation from any of these major economies. However, under the current circumstances this is unlikely to happen.

This means that for those in the belief that the Philippines can decouple from the world, the following chart should be a helpful reminder…

2007-2008 signifies as the contagion based bear market.

Neither has there been an economic recession during the said period nor did earnings fall materially. But the Phisix entered a full blown BEAR Market and lost about 50% peak-to-trough as a result of an exogenously driven financial crisis in 2007-2008.

Of course 2008 is different from today. In fact, today has been worst compared to the 2008 crisis. In 2008 the crisis was limited to the banking, property and mortgage industry. Today the crisis dynamics has shifted to envelop banks AND sovereigns. Not to mention that world wide government debts have surged[14] and that US fiscal deficits have skyrocketed (at $1.327 trillion or 8.2 times larger than 2007[15]).

Yet for those who should insist on decoupling, then I wish you the best of luck.

---

[1] Taleb Nassim Nicolas Noise and Signal — Nassim Taleb Farnam Street, May 29, 2012

[2] ChangingMinds.org The Neuroscience of Financial Bubbles

[3] See How US Federal Reserve Policies Stimulates the Public’s Speculative Behavior, May 8, 2012

[4] Dowd Kevin, Hutchinson Martin, and Kerr Gordon The Coming Fiat Money Cataclysm

and the Case for Gold

[5] Marketwatch.com Euro hits 3-month high on LTRO hopes, February 24, 2012

[6] Wall Street Journal, Europe Short Bans Extended, August 26, 2011

[7] See Phisix: The Journey Of A Thousand Miles Begins With A Single Step, March 12, 2012

[8] ABS-CBNnews.com.ph PH eco grows 6.4% in Q1; highest in ASEAN, May 31, 2012

[9] Businessmirror.com.ph Moody’s raises PHL to ‘positive’ May 29, 2012

[10] See The Lessons and Validity of Public Choice Theory Applied to the Chief Justice’s Corona Impeachment, May 29, 2012

[11] See Phisix: Very Impressive Day or Month End Close for May 2012, May 31, 2012

[12] Bloomberg.com Japan Adopts Stealth Intervention As Yen Gains Threaten Exporter Earnings February 7, 2012

[13] ADB ONLINE Asia Capital Markets Monitor August 2011

[14] Zero Hedge, Presenting Dave Rosenberg's Complete Chartporn, June 1, 2012

[15] Weiss Martin Lehman-Type Megashock Looming, Money and Markets May 21, 2012

The Emergence of Capitalist Cuba?

I previously pointed out that the post-Fidel Castro Cuba has broken the proverbial ice of electing to take the road of economic liberalization.

Eric Margolis at the lewrockwell.com examines and predicts Cuba’s future…

Thanks to Raul’s recent reforms, small private enterprise is bubbling up everywhere. Aid and oil from Venezuela has kept the island afloat. People are more outspoken, a little less wary of the secret police and informers. One feels growing energy pulsating into Havana’s delightful old city. With its beautiful buildings, friendly, attractive people, and little music bars with their electrifying salsa bands, Havana is poised to resume its role of 50 years ago as the most fun – and perhaps wickedest city – in the world. All it needs are more hotels, better food, and waves of young Yankee partyers. Already, some 100,000-200,000 Americans sneak into forbidden Cuba each year.

America’s Great Satan, Fidel Castro, is sidelined by age and illness, but Cubans still love their national papa figure. Brother Raul, now pushing 81, has gained respect for his leadership. But once the Castro era is over, what will happen?

Either a power grab by the military and old guard, or the half million Miami-based Cubans will return and rebuild Cuba. A tsunami of US money will swamp Cuba, washing it into the modern world but erasing much of its austere charm and sense of community. Many friends of Cuba do not look forward to this change, though Cubans desperately need relief from their threadbare existence.

More evidence of Cuba’s reforms from Kansas City.com (bold emphasis added)

Across Cuba, there are entrepreneurs like Suarez and Hidalgo, striking out on their own as locksmiths, plumbers, electricians and the like. They've always existed, but operated on a smaller scale, illegally, in the informal economy.

"I can make more money," Suarez said, comparing his take with the official government monthly salary of $20.

In the past 24 months, Cuba's communist government has announced a series of economic openings intended to ease its announced plan to trim the country's bloated government payroll by 1 million jobs and to buy time as the country transitions away from the reign of the two Castro brothers who've ruled since 1959 but now are in their 80s.

The reforms include expanded self-employment, a liberalization of rules for family-run restaurants, more flexibility for Cuban farmers to sell their products, and even creation of fledgling real estate markets in big cities such as Havana and Santiago.

Most of the 181 newly allowed self-employment categories involve menial labor, and services such as beauty salons, barber shops and plumbers. The government says it has granted 371,000 licenses.

The reforms, however, remain far from free-market capitalism. Not included among the openings are medicine, scientific research and a range of technical jobs that the government has kept under its control. There are no wholesale businesses to provide goods and services to entrepreneurs.

What Cuba’s gradualist reforms has done so far has been to legitimize parts of her huge informal economy.

And the direction of Cuba’s reform will likely deepen and accelerate overtime as political leaders realize that their survival will depend on a wealthier citizenry from economic freedom.

Perhaps like Myanmar, whom has been slated to open a stock exchange by 2015, Cuba may even consider reviving the Havana Stock Exchange which was closed in 1960.

Bottom line is that globalization vastly aided by the internet, or the information age, have begun to pry open formerly closed economies. Forces of decentralization have swiftly been diffusing across the world.

And given the huge potentials of the reformist nations of Cuba and Myanmar, especially coming from a depressed level, investors ought to keep an eye on these prospective frontier markets.

The Scarborough Shoal Standoff Has Not Been About Oil

Despite the blaring headlines, the domestic equity market seems to have discounted the supposed impasse between China and the Philippines over the disputed Scarborough Shoal.

I think the market response over risks of a military confrontation of war seems justified.

Media’s report of the territorial contest between the Philippines and China has been rife with insinuations that the motivations of the kerfuffle has been about “ rich in oil and gas reserves as well as fish stocks and other commercially attractive marine life”[1].

Yet current developments have not been supportive of such oversimplified implications.

China as Major Beneficiary of the Shale Oil Revolution

First of all, the growth of China’s crude oil imports has been falling.

That’s because China’s slackening demand for crude oil has been substituted for soaring demand of cheaper natural gas. China’s natural gas imports are expected to balloon by 45% in 2012[2].

Next, media entirely overlooks the ongoing Shale gas boom where advancements in technology principally through hydraulic fracking and horizontal drilling—complimented by computer programs which simulates well development before drilling (which controls costs), advance fiber optics and even use of microphones to measure seismic events[3]—has enabled access to immense commercial quantities of shale based natural gas.

The shale gas revolution has not just been transforming the energy sector, but changes have been diffusing into a vast area of the global economy.

Author Matt Ridley explains[4],

Chemical companies, which use gas as a feedstock, are rushing back from the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Mexico. Cities are converting their bus fleets to gas. Coal projects are being shelved; nuclear ones abandoned.

The shale gas revolution has become a key factor in bringing back many energy intensive manufacturing companies to the US such as steel, chemical and fertilizer companies[5].

So contrary to the claims of mercantilists, who blindly and wrongly sees protectionism through inflation or devaluation as means to regain competitiveness, access to abundant and cheap energy can be one avenue towards attaining competitive and comparative advantages.

Yet a deepening of the Shale gas revolution would benefit China too, since China has the largest technically recoverable resources of shale gas[6] in the world.

As proof the intensifying trend towards Shale gas revolution, just recently, French Total SA[7] and British Royal Dutch Shell PLC[8] have just forged deals to explore, develop and produce shale oil in China. There will be massive investment flows to develop Shale not only in China but around the world.

Mostly because of Shale, Natural gas around the world is expected to boom and has the biggest potential to replace crude oil.

In China, production of natural gas via shale, coal bed methane and tight gas are expected to explode[9]. This would mirror on the skyrocketing demand for natural gas[10].

With China’s shale oil boom having yet to ignite, it would seem a paradox for China to politically squabble over relatively meager oil and gas field as compared to the immense domestic reserves that has yet to be tapped. Besides China can do more by investing in other countries than trigger a shooting war.

Political Smoke and Mirrors over Scarborough Shoals and Spratlys

In addition, China’s political economy has now been highly dependent on international trade.

Merchandise trade (sum of imports and exports) is now about half of China’s economy. This means that since China has deeply been embedded to globalization, any military conflict or a war would be self-destructive not only to the average Chinese but to the China’s incumbent political institutions and leaders, as well.

Moreover, given that most of ASEAN nations has been “closely linked[11]” to the US, any military clash may be a magnet for the involvement of the US militarily.

And conventional warfare will be dissimilar from the way wars has been fought in the 20^th century, given the proliferation of nuclear armaments. Future wars will likely be more about technology based engagements (computer, robotic, biotech and nanotech along with nuclear and special ops[12]) than conventional warfare or guerrilla or terror tactics. Yet China has yet to reach such state of sophistication

And as I have mentioned in the past[13], the gunboat diplomacy would work against China’s attempt to establish the use her currency the yuan as the region’s currency reserve[14].

And given the above, China’s antagonistic foreign policy approach over the disputed islands hardly seems about the securing more “oil and gas reserves”, and seems patently contradictory to her overall interests.

This brings us again to the following postulates.

China has been buying less of US treasuries[15] or financing less the US. China has also been taking flaks from US politicians whom have used “blame China” (as well as “blame the rich”) to advance their political platforms in the coming elections.

And perhaps one way to placate US politicians has been for China to act as a complicit bogeyman in order to promote US arms sales to Asia. More arms sales could translate to more donations by US defense industry to candidates of both parties in the coming elections.

Notes the opensecret.org[16]

Although the defense sector contributes far less money to politicians than many other sectors, it is one of the most powerful in politics. The sector includes defense aerospace, defense electronics and other miscellaneous defense companies.

I have been repeatedly pointing out such a possibility[17].

Also another possible angle would be to use current territorial disputes as diversion to current internal political struggles in China. Last Thursday most websites in China became inaccessible[18]. Was the widespread internet blackout a result of Indonesia’s quake? Or has this been related to recently rumored coup attempt[19]? Appeal to nationalism via military conflicts or nationalism based controversies are frequently used by politicians as decoy or diversion to real (social, economic or political) problems.

China could also be testing the strength of ASEAN ties to the US, to ascertain or measure as to what extent growing trade relations have brought Chinese influence into the region’s politics.

Bottom line: Unless China political leaders have lost their minds, I find the unfortunate Scarborough Shoal affair (as well as Spratly’s incidents) as suspiciously more about political ‘smoke and mirrors’ maneuvering and more vaudeville than an issue about territorial claims.

---

[1] Inquirer.net 9 Chinese boats leave Scarborough shoal, April 15, 2012

[2] China.org.cn Oil imports to grow slower, February 3, 2012

[3] See Shale Oil Revolution: (Laissez Faire) Capitalism Deals Peak Oil a Fatal Blow, March 24, 2012

[4] Ridley Matthew Gas Against Wind, March 13, 2012 Rationaloptimist.com

[5] Wall Street Journal, Steel Finds Sweet Spot in the Shale, March 26, 2012

[6] Nextbigfuture.com Global shale gas boosts total recoverable natural gas resources by 40%, April 6, 2011

[7] Wall Street Journal Total Extends Its China Ties, March 18, 2012

[8] Wall Street Journal Shell Reaches Chinese Shale-Gas Deal March 21, 2012

[9] US Energy Information Administration INTERNATIONAL ENERGY OUTLOOK 2011, September 19, 2011

[10] The Energy Markets and Money blog China Shale Gas... The New Frontier, March 19,2012

[11] Xinhuanet.com Interview: ASEAN members may be manipulated by U.S. on South China Sea issue: analyst, November 11, 2011

[12] Casey Doug Learn To Make Terror Your Friend January 7, 2012 lewrockwell.com

[13] See China Deepens Liberalization of Capital Markets April 4, 2012

[14] See Why China’s Currency Regime Shift Is Bullish For The Peso, June 28, 2010

[15] Merk, Axel Falling Treasuries: A Currency Perspective, March 20, 2012 gold-eagle.com

[16] opensecret.org Defense

[17] See Has the Tensions over Spratly’s Islands been about US Weapons Exports? June 28, 2011

[18] Wall Street Journal Blog, Mystery Blocks Put China Internet on Edge, April 12, 2012

[19] See China’s Coup Rumors: Signs of the Twilight of Centralized Government?, March 22, 2012