June CPI’s Decline Reflects Demand-Side Slowdown: Will the BSP Join Global Peers in Easing Policies, and Will the Government Pursue 'Marcos-nomics Stimulus'?

 

The current political status quo, however, is built around protecting investors—rather than the taxpayers who ultimately pay all the bills—from risk. This method of turning debt into inflation is attractive to governments and their Wall Street enablers because it shifts the burden of runaway spending to ordinary savers and consumers who pay the real price of de facto inflationary default through price inflation, unaffordable homes, stagflation, and falling real wages—Ryan McMaken 

In this issue

June CPI’s Decline Reflects Demand-Side Slowdown: Will the BSP Join Global Peers in Easing Policies, and Will the Government Pursue 'Marcos-nomics Stimulus'?

I. Global Central Banks Predominantly on an Easing Trajectory

II. The BSP’s Programming of the Inflation Narrative via the Confirmation Bias

III. Widening Inequality: Headline CPI vs. Bottom 30% CPI Hits 22-Year High!

IV. June’s Demand Side Disinflation: Non-Performing Loans Surge in May

V. Escalating Deficit Spending as a Floor on the CPI; Will Belated Rate Cuts Sow the Seed of the Next Wave of Inflation?

June CPI’s Decline Reflects Demand-Side Slowdown: Will the BSP Join Global Peers in Easing Policies, and Will the Government Pursue 'Marcos-nomics Stimulus'?

The decline in June CPI was broad-based and signifies primarily a demand-side factor. And with global central banks on an easing spree, will this and deficit spending anchor the "Marcos-nomics stimulus"?

I. Global Central Banks Predominantly on an Easing Trajectory

Figure 1

Easy money policies have made a dramatic comeback, and charts reveal that global central banks have been reinforcing the market's propensity for leveraged speculative activities.

For the first time since October 2020, the Bank of America (BofA) reports that there were zero rate hikes from central banks last June. (Figure 1, topmost and middle charts)

Ironically, even as inflation has yet to be fully contained or subdued, this aggregate easing trajectory reinforces the path dependency of authorities, primarily in support of the swelling of government control of the economy channeled through the rapid expansion in deficit spending (partly via the war economy), boosting asset prices which serve as collateral, and the backstopping of systemic leveraging (debt expansion).  

In the same vein, the uptrend in US government deficit spending should serve as a template for the world. (Figure 1, lowest image) 

In the Asian region, governments like Thailand (USD 13.5 billion for household debt relief), South Korea (USD 18 billion for Micro Businesses), and Indonesia (USD 28 billion-Free Meal for schools) have been rolling out various forms of politically targeted subsidies in "support of the economy." 

II. The BSP’s Programming of the Inflation Narrative via the Confirmation Bias 

The Philippine June CPI data illustrates such conditions from the lens of the Philippine political economy. 

Business Times/ Reuters July 5, 2024: PHILIPPINE annual inflation was at 3.7 per cent in June, easing from the previous month on a slower increase in utility costs, the statistics agency said on Friday. The rate, which was below the 3.9 per cent forecast in a Reuters poll, brought the average reading in the six months to June to 3.5 per cent, within the central bank’s 2 to 4 per cent target range. The Philippine central bank said inflation was expected to have settled between the 3.4 to 4.2 per cent range in June. 

This outlook represents an update of our June 10th post, predicting the temporary peak of the recent bounce in inflation.

Firstly, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) exercises significant control over the inflation narrative.

Before releasing the Consumer Price Index (CPI) data, the BSP projects a path that serves as the basis for consensus estimates, representing the survey's "normal distribution."

While media outlets focus on the BSP's annual targets when reporting CPI numbers, the public often overlooks the deviation of the consensus median estimate from the actual outcome. It also discounts their flawed predictive track record.

The selective attention from the "pin the tail on the donkey" approach perpetuates "confirmation bias," reinforcing the public's preconceived notion that authorities have complete control over the economy.

III. Widening Inequality: Headline CPI vs. Bottom 30% CPI Hits 22-Year High!

Next, authorities bask in the glow of reported slowdown in inflation, they quickly claim credit or take a victory lap.

Inquirer.net, July 5, 2024: The lower inflation rate registered in June — at 3.7 percent — is proof that the administration’s economic policies have been effective, House of Representatives Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez said on Friday.

However, few notice that data from the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) reveals a different story—this includes officials. 

In fact, it shows that inflation has had an adverse impact on households at the bottom 30%, leading to a widening inequality gap.

Figure 2 

The gap between the national CPI and the CPI of households in the bottom 30% has surged to its highest level since the post-Asian crisis in 2002! (Figure 2, topmost graph) 

While the bottom 30% buys goods at the same prices from the same stores as everyone else, their higher inflation rate highlights the disproportionate loss of purchasing power against goods and services.

The slowdown in the statistical inflation rate has barely alleviated conditions, affecting not only the lowest-income households but also average households, while elites benefit from direct access to the formal banking system and capital markets to safeguard their assets.

Evidence?

Including government external borrowings, FX deposits in Philippine banks have soared to Php 3.324 trillion in May 2024, marking the third-highest level recorded, in tandem with the surging US dollar-Philippine peso pair. (Figure 2, top and middle windows) 

Given the low penetration levels of formal finance and financial literacy, this surge in FX deposits could be interpreted as FX "speculation" by elites and upper echelons of households within the BSP’s jurisdiction. 

Amazing, right?

IV. June’s Demand Side Disinflation: Non-Performing Loans Surge in May

Authorities may view the slowing inflation rate as an accomplishment, but the easing of the CPI is likely to slow further for several politically unpalatable reasons:

Figure 3

One. The PSA's CPI month-on-month rate continues to decline, in contrast to its strengthening which had backed the previous uptrend in the CPI. (Figure 3, upper chart) 

Two. Outside of food CPI, there has been a sustained moderation of the Core (non-food and non-energy inflation) which posted a steady 3.1% in June. Importantly, prices have been falling across the board. Paradoxically, food inflation has been moderating globally. (Figure 3, lower diagram)

Figure 4 

Three. Philippine treasury traders have bet against inflation. T-bill rates have been coming off their recent highs, and the narrowing of the treasury curve or a "bullish flattening" has highlighted weaker inflation and slower GDP growth, supporting the BSP's desired rate cuts. (Figure 4, top and bottom charts)

Four. While the slowing inflation rate has been perennially sold to the public as a supply-side phenomenon, the real story is that this represents a demand-side downturn. 

For instance, in June, we pointed out the surge in consumer credit card and salary loan non-performing loans (NPLs) in Q1 2024. These NPLs have now surfaced to the "core" from the "fringes." 

Businessworld, July 5, 2024: THE BANKING INDUSTRY’S nonperforming loan (NPL) ratio soared to a near two-year high in May, data from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) showed. The Philippine banking industry’s gross NPL ratio rose to 3.57% in May from 3.45% in April and 3.46% a year ago. This matched the 3.57% ratio in July 2022. It was also the highest in 23 months or since 3.6% in June 2022.

The BSP data on the banking system’s selected performance indicators confirm our view that the accelerating accounts of consumer borrowings (and businesses) have been used to roll over or refinance existing record debt rather than for consumption.

Therefore, refinancing has been used by the banking system to conceal the mounting liquidity and solvency issues that are plaguing it. 

We are oblivious to the actual numbers of "zombie" institutions, which survive by constantly rolling over debt and remaining afloat solely through the accumulation of debt. 

Aside from relief measures and regulatory subsidies, the banking system continues to accumulate imbalances, exacerbated by the BSP's pseudo "tightening" policies, which are actually easy money policies. 

In reality, the BSP cannot afford to "tighten" as it did in 2018, as it would risk triggering a domino effect or contagion due to the growing liquidity and solvency issues. 

The Philippine economy and financial system have been gradually devolving into a Ponzi finance-economy. (Prudent Investor, 2024)

Figure 5

Aside from the historic high of held-to-maturity (HTM) assets, rising non-performing loans (NPLs) could exacerbate liquidity tightening in the banking system and exert pressure on banks' accounting profits. (Figure 5, topmost chart)

Loan growth in the banking system has declined in similar fashion to 2018-19, with NPLs on the rise following rate hikes from the increase in the CPI.  (Figure 5, middle and lowest graphs)

Rising NPLs would not only slow loan growth but also negatively impact banks' investment portfolios, increase credit risks, and deteriorate asset quality, ultimately affecting capital conditions. 

While the BSP has employed various regulatory and liquidity measures to disguise the decaying conditions in the banking system, eventually, the chickens come home to roost or these measures will eventually prove ineffective.

Figure 6

Haven’t you noticed? Banks have been increasing their borrowings from the public. While they market these as 'green' or 'sustainable' bonds to piggyback on politically favored themes, they are essentially debt. 

At Php 1.398 trillion, the banking system's outstanding bills and bonds have nearly reached Php 1.44 trillion—levels similar to those seen in 2019 (pre-pandemic). (Figure 6, upper diagram) 

Of course, everyone calls this "sound banking"…until it isn’t. 

The government will release labor data tomorrow, on July 8th. 

Other economic sensitive data, such as external trade and manufacturing, have yet to be released. 

Nonetheless, the S&P Global PMI reported a softening of the manufacturing conditions last June. (bold added) 

The first half of 2024 ended with a further improvement in operating conditions across the Filipino manufacturing sector, as per the latest PMI® data by S&P Global. Output and purchasing activity rose at accelerated rates. However, June marked a notable slowdown in new orders growth. Moreover, manufacturing companies in the Philippines continued to reduce their backlogs, and further trimmed back their staffing levels. Turning to prices, despite a fresh rise in cost burdens, the rate of input price inflation remained weaker than that seen historically. Meanwhile, charges were raised at a softer pace in June. The headline S&P Global Philippines Manufacturing PMI – a composite single-figure indicator of manufacturing performance – fell to a three-month low of 51.3 in June, from 51.9 in May. (S&P Global, July 2024) 

The Philippine PMI seems to have been plagued by a "rounding top." (Figure 6, lower image) 

A slowdown in credit usage by businesses and households will likely exert downward pressure on inflation and GDP.  

V. Escalating Deficit Spending as a Floor on the CPI; Will Belated Rate Cuts Sow the Seed of the Next Wave of Inflation?

On the other hand, inflation could find a floor from the ramping up of deficit spending. 

May's expenditure was historic as it almost reached the three-year streak of record-breaking December levels. 

For instance, the Philippine government proposes to import costly fighter jets, which, if pursued, would swell trade deficits and increase the need for external borrowings, potentially further weakening the Philippine peso. Instead of pursuing this path, it might be more effective to focus on resolving territorial disputes via negotiations. 

It's as if these jets would make a significant difference in deterrence and actual combat. 

Figure 7

Nevertheless, helped by May's expenditure-driven budget deficit, May’s public debt soared by 8.9% YoY and 2.2% MoM to a record Php 15.35 trillion in May.

The all-time high in public debt was primarily fueled by a surge in foreign debt (up 8.8% YoY and 4.2% MoM) that spiked its share of the total from 31.4% to 32%. (Figure 7, topmost graph) 

It is no surprise that public debt dynamics are correlated with the USD/Philippine peso exchange rate, as well as with the CPI. (Figure 7, middle image) 

Alongside the transformation of the banking system's business model towards consumer spending, the trickle-down "spending one’s way to prosperity" economic development paradigm focuses on centralizing the economy via the credit-financed record savings-investment gap, channeled through the "twin deficits." This translates to an increasing reliance on foreign savings. 

Subsequently, the deepening reliance on credit increases the incentives for the BSP to ease its monetary policies. 

This also implies that the USDPHP rate is driven nearly entirely by the policy path, as confirmed by data, rather than monetary policy differences between the Fed and BSP. 

With global central banks easing, the BSP can justify its shift to an accommodative stance. 

And as noted earlier, the BSP easing and increased public spending in support of GDP growth could signify the "Marcos-nomics stimulus." 

In light of this, the Philippines would most likely join the ranks of its neighbors in throwing down the gauntlet of stimulus. 

It wasn't until a single 100-basis-point rate cut that the CPI began to rise, accelerate, and sow the seeds of the present 9-year CPI trend. (Figure 7, lowest chart) 

Are we witnessing a repetition of the inflation cycle? 

___

References 

Ryan McMaken, Three Lies They’re Telling You about the Debt Ceiling May 23, 2023, Mises.org 

Prudent Investor, Has the May 3.9% CPI Peaked? Are Filipinos Really Spending More On Non-Essentials? Credit Card and Salary Loan NPLs Surged in Q1 2024! June 10, 2024  

S&P Global, Production growth sustained, although underlying demand trends soften S&P Global Philippines Manufacturing PMI July 01, 2024 PMI.SPGLOBAL.com

 

The Phisix Amidst the Korean Peninsula Stand-Off

Domestic headlines continue to banner on the verbal showdown and belligerent artifice between the US and North Korea.

DPRK’s Declaration of War and War Posturing

While I think that this seems more a vaudeville than of a real threat, geopolitical brinkmanship can always deteriorate into a real thing. Inflated egos of political leaders may impulsively react on events that could push posturing into a full scale war. All that is needed is an event that may serve as the Casus Belli[1].

North Korea or Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) has already declared a “state of war”[2] with its wealthier kin, South Korea or Republic of Korea (ROK) last March 30, 2013. But through the week, all that has occurred have been the mobilization or a show of force from contending parties. 

Yesterday North Korea reported to have moved its two medium range missiles, the Musudan missiles, which has a range of 1,865 miles and has the capability to strike at South Korea, Japan and US bases in the Pacific, supposedly for a missile test[3]. 

Yet despite all the North Korean rhetoric and propaganda about launching a nuclear war with the US, her nuclear missiles hardly have the range and capability to reach the US[4].

On the other hand, the US has transferred anti-ballistic missile defence system to Guam[5] along with several B-1 ("Bone") Lancer strategic long-range bombers.

The US has also “secretly” deployed the E-6 Mercury “Doomsday plane” which has been reportedly “tasked with "providing command and control of U.S. nuclear forces should ground-based control become inoperable" and whose core functions include conveying instructions from the National Command Authority to fleet ballistic missile submarines and also to further command post capabilities and control of land-based missiles and nuclear-armed bombers”, according to the Zero Hedge[6].

In other words, should there be a full scale war, such may include the use of nuclear weapons. The outcome, hence, is likely to be devastating and cannot be compared to any previous conventional wars.

Thus any comparisons with modern wars as the 1982 Falklands War between the UK and Argentina[7], the 1991 US-Iraq Gulf War[8], the 1999 Kargil war between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir region[9], the 2003 US Invasion of Iraq[10], the Afghanistan War[11] or the 5 day South Ossetia war between Russia and Georgia[12] represents apples-to-oranges.

South Korea and the US will have to deal with North Korea’s 12-27 nuclear weapons with a TNT yield of 6-40 kilotons[13]. The atomic bombs that leveled Hiroshima “Little Boy” gravity bomb and Nagasaki “Fat Man” gravity bomb had TNT yields of 13-18 kilotons and 20-22 kilotons respectively[14].

Why is War Unlikely; North Korea’s Geopolitics of BlackMail

In 2010 I expressed doubts that a war in the Korean Peninsula will take place. I still maintain such skepticism.

Why?

North Korea is an impoverished state whose weapons are mostly dilapidated and obsolete, and whose vaunted millions of soldiers are likely to be starving, ill equipped and poorly trained[15].

And in spite of the North Korea’s vaunted war machinery, wherein much of the misallocation of the nation’s resources had been directed, the North Korean army is in a state of dilapidation and obsolescence: they seem ostensibly good for parades and for taunting, but not for real combat…

Thus, based on socio- political-economic and military calculations, the North Koreans are unlikely to pursue a path of war, because the odds are greatly against them. And their political leadership is aware of this.

And as I previously pointed out, North Korea is the embodiment of the environmental politics of known as “Earth hour”[16]. Except for the North Korea’s capital, Pyongyang, satellite photos reveal that at night, the entire country has mostly been dark or without light, which is in stark contrast to South Korea (left window).

Moreover, North Korea has recently been plagued by hyperinflation[17]. 

Since July 2010, price inflation as measured by rice prices has pole-vaulted by 5x. So we can’t discount that such war histrionics may have been meant to divert public’s attention from internal economic woes, and instead, like typical politicians North Korean leaders have used foreigners as scapegoats for policy failures.

Except for nuclear weapons, North Korea isn’t likely to win a conventional war against South Korea, even without US support.

South Korea can afford to defend herself with a modern well equipped well trained army given the wide difference of her economic growth[18], capital surpluses and wealth disparities. But the problem is that she may have substantially relied or delegated to the US much of the home or national defense duties.

Given such reality, political leaders of North Korea have long used nuclear weapons as bargaining chips to indulge on the geopolitics of blackmail. 

So unless North Korea’s Kim Jong-un has gone rogue and suicidal, the odds are that North Korea’s Kim will unlikely take on this war path. 

Besides, Kim’s wife Ri-Sol-ju has reportedly given birth to their first baby in secret[19]. A war would mean sacrificing both their political privileges and their lives. And they know this.

Yet a conventional war may perhaps open the gateway for ordinary North Koreans to make a mad dash out of their highly repressive country. 

And it isn’t also far fetch to think that a war may inspire many of North Korea’s military to immediately surrender or pledge allegiance to the South or mount a mutiny, given the horrors of the North Korean dictatorship. Just recently a North Korean official was executed by mortal shell for infringing on the rules covering the 100 day mourning period for the late King Jong il[20].

Of course such faceoff hasn’t been all about North Korea’s fault.

Aside from the sanctions imposed by the UN due to DPRK’s third missile tests, North Korean leaders may have been traumatized by recent US military air exercise involving heavy bombers[21].

Notes the historian Eric Margolis[22],

During the 1950-53 Korean War, US B-29 heavy bombers literally flattened North Korea. That’s why North Korea reacted so furiously when US B-52 heavy bombers and B-2 Stealth bombers skirted its borders late last month, triggering off this latest crisis. The B-2 can deliver the fearsome ‘MOAB’ 30,000 lb bomb called "the Mother of All Bombs" designed to destroy deep underground command HQ’s (read Kim Jong-un’s bunker) and underground nuclear facilities.

The real threat from a realization of a full scale war really hasn’t really been just about North Korea’s nuclear missiles but about the possible involvement of other nations as China, whom has long been North Korea’s key ally, and of Russia whom has had on and off relationship with the DPRK[23]. Although recently China’s leaders have expressed concern over the bellicose rhetoric of North Korea’s leaders[24], events may turn out differently once the shooting war begins. 

Remember the Casus Belli of World War I had been the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria[25], which invoked the assembly of opposing alliances that lead to the outbreak of war[26]. The opposing alliances then consisted of the Allies (based on the Triple Entente of the United Kingdom, France and Russia) on one side. And the Central Powers (originally the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy; but, as Austria–Hungary had taken the offensive against the agreement, Italy did not enter into the war), on the other side.

The US Military Industrial Complex and Stock Market Scenarios

Lastly the US seems to have been itching for a war either with Iran or with North Korea. Yet North Korea has long served as a useful public bogeyman which benefited of the US military industrial complex and the neoconservative politicians who support them.

The existence of a “bellicose” and “provocateur” DPRK has justified US military power build up in Asia. Jack A. Smith writing at Anti-War.com[27] 

Washington wants to get rid of the communist regime before allowing peace to prevail on the peninsula. No “one state, two systems” for Uncle Sam, by jingo! He wants one state that pledges allegiance to — guess who? In the interim, the existence of a “bellicose” North Korea justifies Washington’s surrounding the north with a veritable ring of firepower. A “dangerous” DPRK is also useful in keeping Tokyo well within the U.S. orbit and in providing another excuse for once-pacifist Japan to boost its already formidable arsenal.

Not only “war is the health of the state”[28], war signifies as good business for the politically anointed since defense industry benefits from subsidies or wealth transfer from taxpayers to politicians and military industrial complex.

So how the Korean Peninsula standoffs affect the domestic and the regional stock markets?

I see four potential scenarios with different outcomes. 1. No war. 2. Limited conventional war. 3. Limited war but with use of nuclear weapons. 4. World War III.

The stock markets will hardly be affected given the first two situations: no war or a limited conventional war. I lean towards the first scenario.

Nonetheless if the second condition occur, central banks are likely to inflate more. US monetary base surged during World War II, and also climbed during the Vietnam War.

If nuclear weapons will be used, the stock markets may be affected. But this will largely depend on the location and the extent of the damages.

Remember if DPRK’s Kim will go berserk and become suicidal then he may wish for retribution or make a statement against the West. Thus we should not dismiss the possibility that the DPRK may target nations with the least anti-ballistic defence or nations who are most vulnerable to their missiles. This puts Southeast Asia on such a list.

In this nuclear age, World War III means that we can kiss the stock markets goodbye and pray that we survive the nuclear holocaust.

Ignoring all these would signify as “denigration of history” or the false assumption that one is immune from misfortunes or disasters.

---

[1] Wikipedia.org Casus belli

[2] Bloomberg.com Mongolia Seeks to Play Peacemaker as North Korea Declares ‘War’ March 30, 2013

[3] Guardian.co.uk North Korea readies missile launch as fears of a covert cyberwar grow April 6, 2013

[4] Foreign Policy Blog Battle of the maps: North Korea's actual missile capability vs. North Korea's threatened missile capability March 29, 2013

[5] Reuters.com Extra line of defense – graphic of the day April 4, 2013

[6] Zero Hedge US Secretly Deploys B-1 Strategic Bombers, E-6 "Doomsday" Planes Near North Korea April 5, 2013

[7] Wikipedia.org Falklands War

[8] Wikipedia.org Gulf War

[9] Wikipedia.org Kargil War

[10] Wikipedia.org 2003 Invasion of Iraq

[11] Wikipedia.org Afghanistan War

[12] Wikipedia.org Russia-Georgia War

[13] Wikipedia.org North Korea and weapons of mass destruction

[14] Wikipedia.org Nuclear Weapon Yield

[15] See Will A War Break Out In The Korean Peninsula? November 28, 2010

[16] See Earth Hour: North Korean Version March 31, 2010

[17] Steve H. Hanke, North Korea’s Hyperinflation Legacy, Part II Cato.org December 7, 2012

[18] Washington Post Kim Jong Il’s economic legacy, in one chart December 19, 2011

[19] CSMonitor Did Kim Jong-un and his wife have a baby? March 5, 2013

[20] Daily Mail North Korean official is executed by MORTAR SHELL for drinking during 100-day mourning period for late 'Dear Leader' Kim Jong-il October 24, 2012

[21] Bloomberg North Korea Vows Military Action Against More U.S. B-52 Flights March 20, 2013

[22] Eric Margolis War in Korea April 6, 2013

[23] Wikipedia.org North Korea–Russia relations

[24] Washington Post China expresses concern over North Korea’s rhetoric April 7, 2013

[25] Wikipedia.org Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria

[26] Wikipedia.org World War I

[27] Jack A. Smith, Behind the US-North Korean Bluster Anti-war.com April 4, 2013

[28] Randolph Bourne War is the Health of the State Bureau of Public Secrets

Charts of the Day: World Military Spending and Arms Trade

Two related charts of the day

First world defense spending

The Economist speculates that if the current rate of growth persists, China will surpass the US in terms of military budget. 

AMERICA still spends over four times as much on defence as China, the world’s second-biggest military spender. But it has been clear for some time that on current trends China’s defence spending will overtake America’s sooner than most people think. What is less clear is when that date will be reached. It all depends on the underlying assumptions. The 2013 edition of the Military Balance published by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) shows convergence could come as soon as 2023. That is based on extrapolating the rate of Chinese military spending since 2001—a 15.6% annual growth rate—and assuming that the cuts in the America's defence budget required under sequestration are not modified. The latter is more likely than the former. The latest Chinese defence budget is based on spending increasing by a more modest 10.7% annually. That would mean that China overtakes America in 2032.

However, if China’s headlong economic growth stalls or if more money is needed to serve the health and social needs of rapidly-ageing population, China might slow spending on its military by something like half its current projection. If that happens, the crossover point could be delayed by up to a decade. It is also possible (though at present America’s fiscal travails suggest otherwise), that as China rises, America will feel forced to start spending more if the security guarantees it currently makes to allies such as Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are to retain their credibility into the third decade of the century. Already, China spends more on defence than all of those three together. It is all very well for America to talk about a strategic rebalancing towards Asia, but if the money is not there to buy the ships, the aircraft and all the expensive systems that go with them, it will eventually sound hollow.

The Economist is right to suggest that this trend may not continue as this will likely depend on the state of the China's economy. Of course this will really depend on priorities of the Chinese government.

But what they sorely missed is of the real nature of “strategic rebalancing”, which is not supposed to be about military buildup but about trade.

They forget about Bastiat’s wisdom where “if goods don’t cross borders, armies will”

Second chart global arms trade.

The Reuters notes that China has taken the fifth spot in arms exports with Pakistan being the main recipient.

An arms race serves as dangerous signal for world peace. Such also functions as a thermometer of the desperate state of welfare-warfare governments, who by resorting to inflationism, attempts to divert domestic political economic problems towards geopolitics. And they do this primarily through nationalist overtones.

The sad part is that instead of the remedy of channeling resources into productive uses, an arms race means more economic hardship for society, aside from greater risk of war.

As the illustrious American author Ernest Hemingway rightly admonished,

The first panacea for a mismanaged nation is inflation of the currency; the second is war. Both bring a temporary prosperity; both bring a permanent ruin. But both are the refuge of political and economic opportunists

Unfortunately people hardly ever learn.

Chart of the Day: China’s Defense Spending

From Reuters (chart included)

China will raise military spending by 10.7% this year to 740.6 billion yuan ($119 billion). China’s defense spending is contained at about 5.4% of total expenditure, up from 5.3% last year, and remains at about one-fifth of the Pentagon’s spending 

This compares to the Philippines at $1.8 billion (2010) which represents .81% of GDP (Index Mundi) or $209 billion in 2011 or 1.08% of GDP (Wikipedia.org)

I am not suggesting that the Philippines should compete with China to bolster her military expenditures.

What I am also saying is that the Philippines lacks the capability to match China’s armed forces.

On the contrary the Philippines should cut government spending which should include that of the military’s. The focus instead should be on fostering trade relations with the every nation in this world. Trade relations will reduce the opportunities for conflict because trade promotes harmonious relations even among diversified interest groups.

Nevertheless expanding and nurturing a huge army will eventually take a toll on the economy as scarce resources are diverted for non-productive activities.

Moreover, huge armies become a temptation for adventurism and domestic instability. Japan’s pre-World War II political and economic policies which led to the dominance of the military in shaping national decisions should serve as example.

The ‘late’ al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden once predicted that the overall strategy of guerilla warfare has been a war of attrition meant to bankrupt or financially bleed her foes, particularly the US. In the same way the Soviet Russia lost the Afghan War.

Developing political economic conditions in the US, predicated on the growing warfare and welfare state, have been indicating the path of such politics dictated internal decay.

And it must be remembered we are in the nuclear age, where the character of military conflict has changed relative to the 20th century.

As a final note charts of the US-China arms race in Asia I have previously posted here

Fiscally Pressured Governments go for Crony based Privatizations of ‘Public Goods’

Money pressured governments are looking to privatization of parts of politically sensitive functions such as security services.

The Telegraph reports,

Private companies will be running large parts of the UK's police service within five years, according to the world's biggest security firm.

David Taylor-Smith, the head of G4S for the UK and Africa, said he expected police forces across the country to sign up to similar deals to those on the table in the West Midlands and Surrey, which could result in private companies taking responsibility for duties ranging from investigating crimes to transporting suspects and managing intelligence.

The prediction comes as it emerged that 10 more police forces were considering outsourcing deals that would see services, such as running police cells and operating IT, run by private firms.

Privatization of government functions are akin to Public-Private Partnership (PPP) enterprises on political controlled or regulated sectors. They really NOT about free markets but about cronyism.

As I previously pointed out

PPP’s signifies as politically privileged economic rent/concessions to favoured private entities that will undertake the operations in lieu of the government. They will come in the form of monopolies, cartels or subsidies that will benefit only the politically connected.

Since the private partner partnerships aren’t bound by the profit and loss discipline from the consumers, the interest of the private partners will most likely be prioritized or aligned to please the whims of the new political masters.

And because of it, much of the resources that go into these projects will not only be costly or priced above the market to defray on the ‘political’ costs, but likewise, they will be inefficiently allocated.

Moreover, PPPs risk becoming ‘milking cows’ for these politically entitled groups and could be a rich source of corruption.

In the US even Keynesian high priest, Paul Krugman, who I vehemently disagree with on most issues, resonates with our perspective over the issue of phony privatizations (in Krugman’s case he refers to New Jersey’s “new kind of privately run halfway house” prison systems).

From Paul Krugman (hat tip Bob Wenzel, bold emphasis added)

So what’s really behind the drive to privatize prisons, and just about everything else?

One answer is that privatization can serve as a stealth form of government borrowing, in which governments avoid recording upfront expenses (or even raise money by selling existing facilities) while raising their long-run costs in ways taxpayers can’t see. We hear a lot about the hidden debts that states have incurred in the form of pension liabilities; we don’t hear much about the hidden debts now being accumulated in the form of long-term contracts with private companies hired to operate prisons, schools and more.

Another answer is that privatization is a way of getting rid of public employees, who do have a habit of unionizing and tend to lean Democratic in any case.

But the main answer, surely, is to follow the money. Never mind what privatization does or doesn’t do to state budgets; think instead of what it does for both the campaign coffers and the personal finances of politicians and their friends. As more and more government functions get privatized, states become pay-to-play paradises, in which both political contributions and contracts for friends and relatives become a quid pro quo for getting government business. Are the corporations capturing the politicians, or the politicians capturing the corporations? Does it matter?

The point, then, is that you shouldn’t imagine that what The Times discovered about prison privatization in New Jersey is an isolated instance of bad behavior. It is, instead, almost surely a glimpse of a pervasive and growing reality, of a corrupt nexus of privatization and patronage.

Additional thoughts:

This is proof that governments have really been getting desperate over their state of finances.

But, privileges are hard to let go. Instead, politicians have used austerity from today’s crisis as opportunity to dispense concessions to friends, allies or favored special interest groups for political goals. This signifies a form of economic fascism

Politicians use accounting trickery to shield reforms.

Moreover, such privatizations represent fundamental admissions that even the most sensitive ‘public goods’, whether security or defense and prison services, can be delegated or outsourced to the private sector. This implies that these services can be depoliticized and delivered, through the competitive marketplace or (hold your breath) even without government.

The answer isn't to privatize (euphemism for fascism-cronyism) but to depoliticize and liberalize the sector.

Lastly, these are writings on the wall in favor of the growing forces of decentralization.

When governments become totally bankrupt then the de-politicization or decentralization process of political functions will become apparent.