Mises.org: Economics 101: The Price of Gas

Occasionally we come across analysis or missives dealing with high gas prices to tangential issues.

However, this terrific 591 words article by Mr. Sterling T. Terrell published at the Mises.org is a concise and incisive encapsulation of the dynamics of today's gas prices.

Quoting Mr. Terrell's entire article (highlight mine)

Gas prices are up and oil executives are once again testifying before Congress. Clearly, many politicians, pundits, and consumers lament the rising cost of gas. Before we join them in their chorus, let us take a step back and ask this question: Are gas prices really all that high?

A change in price can be a result of inflation, taxes, changes in supply and demand, or any combination of the three.

First, we need to take into account inflation. The result of the Federal Reserve printing too much money is a loss of purchasing power of the dollar: something that cost $1.00 in 1950 would cost about $8.78 today. As for gas prices, in 1950 the price of gas was approximately 30 cents per gallon. Adjusted for inflation, a gallon of gas today should cost right at $2.64, assuming taxes are the same.

But taxes have not stayed the same. The tax per gallon of gas in 1950 was roughly 1.5% of the price. Today, federal, state, and local taxes account for approximately 20% of gas's posted price. Taking inflation and the increase in taxes into account (assuming no change in supply or demand) the same gallon of gas that cost 30 cents in 1950 should today cost about $3.13.

Neither have supply or demand remained constant. The world economy is growing. China and India are obvious examples. At the same time, Americans continue to love driving SUVs and trucks. As for supply, we are prohibited (whatever the reasons may be) from using many of the known oil reserves in our own country. Furthermore, due to government regulation, the last oil refinery built in the United States was completed in 1976. In addition, the Middle East is politically unstable which leads to a risk premium on the world's major source of oil. It is obvious that the demand for oil has grown while supplies have been restricted.

The average price of gas in the United States today is approximately $3.25. The question is, why are gas prices not higher than they are?

Blaming greedy oil companies on the rising price of gas is simply irresponsible. The profit margins of a few selected industries are as follows:

Murray Rothbard considered this the best text available on price theory.

The water utility industry has higher profit margins than major oil and gas firms! Why isn't every CEO with profit margins above that of the oil companies made to testify before Congress for "price gouging"? Clearly, greedy corporate profits are not the issue.

Again, while just over nine percent of the price of a gallon of gas goes to oil company profits, approximately twenty percent of the price of a gallon of gas is composed of federal, state, and local taxes.

Those who want the government to step in and do something about the high price of gas are either forgetful of recent history or too young to remember the oil crisis of 1979. During that time, restrictions on the price of gasoline led to the inability of some to find gas at all. Price ceilings always lead to shortages. The only thing worse than having to pay "too much" for gas is not being able to find gas at any price.

Let us not be swayed by politicians out for power or by reporters out to create news where none exists. Facts and economic logic should prevail rather than rhetoric.

End quote

Economist: Business Environment Index

The global business environment ranking chart as constructed by the Economist magazine based on: macroeconomic stability, infrastructure, flexible labor market, quality of the workforce and policy conduciveness for businesses.

The chart is a mix picture which includes the best places to do business to important economies and their respective ratings.

This from the Economist,

``DENMARK is the best place to conduct business over the next five years, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit's six-monthly business-environment index. Out of 82 countries Denmark scores highest in most of the ten measures used, such as macroeconomic stability, infrastructure and policy towards private enterprise. Its flexible labour market and highly educated workforce are particularly attractive to businesses. America slips four places to its lowest position since the index began in 1997 as economic and financial conditions look set to deteriorate and trade protectionism to increase. Venezuela tumbles 12 places to languish just below another socialist bastion, Cuba. Only Angola is a worse place to do business.”

Overall, the chart exhibits the degree of openness to markets and its antipode…socialism.

Has The Phisix Entered An Initial Bottoming Out Phase?

``Asset managers without long-term lock-ups (or with impatient clientele) are surely more likely to be asset gatherers—appealing to the poorer judgment of their clients who want instant returns and low volatility. Those asset managers are no different than politicians—winning votes with popular short-term promises at the expense of long-term consequences. Politicians figure the next guy will be left holding the bag and have to deal with the mess. Short-term money managers, figure their clients will.” –Josh Wolfe, Forbes Nanotech, Timeless Space & the Mismeasure of Risk

It’s been quite a while since we’ve dealt with the stock market.

Nonetheless, as seen from my little social world, it seems that the present market activities have shifted the emotional reactions by market participants from one of inquisitiveness (in search for explanations) to one of deafening silence. In just over six months amidst a stinging 25% loss from the market’s peak, enthusiasm in the marketplace has remarkably suffered from a scathful drubbing. Viewed from the market’s psychological cycle, could this account for a transition from the denial stage to submission phase so soon?

The marketplace is a dynamic environment fluidly responding to permanently changing conditions. That’s what makes it so challenging. Yet, most participants seem to believe that this endeavor assumes like a game of dice throws; with limited variables at play that renders a quantified outcome. Instead, for us, the prospects of the risk return outcomes in the financial markets could be assessed from mostly a combination of market action (sentiment, cycles and technical indicators), and importantly fundamentals.

Sentiment Measures: Accumulation By Long Investors A Positive Signal

In my previous article Phisix: “Fear Is A Foe Of The Faddist, But The Friend Of The Fundamentalist”, we elaborated on several market internal measures to gauge investor sentiment where in particular we dealt with the Daily trades, which for me, serves as the best measure for speculative activities. See figure 1.Figure 1 PSE Daily Trades: From Speculators to Long Buyers

Daily trades incorporate the daily transactions of ALL market participants, i.e. from scalpers to punters to traders to investors be it from local or foreign participants.

Here we noted that since the Phisix segued into the advance phase in 2003 and more than doubled in price value (1,000 to 2,200), daily trades has mostly drifted from somewhere between 2,500 to 5,000- where we assumed the average as somewhere around 3,000 to 4,000 a day but interspersed with intermittent anomalies.

In short, the growth in the Phisix during the 2003-2006 cycle could be construed as coming from limited punts and mostly from fundamental accumulation and thus has not been indicative of a bubble in progression.

This is important to understand because secular inflection points or major cyclical long term trend reversals almost entirely emanate from “bursting bubbles” in the world of central bank money, where asset classes are inflated by monetary policy induced credit or leverage driven speculative excesses which eventually either collapse under its own weight or from policies meant to curtail its pernicious repercussions to the real or main economy.

It was only during the last quarter of 2005 where daily trades consistently trended higher, which incidentally coincided with the firming of the Peso, from which we surmised the strength of the Peso as having possibly drawn in more participation from the locals and consequently the increased episode of speculation.

Yet as the US mortgage and credit bubble imploded and spread globally and into the Philippine Stock Exchange, the subsequent loss has, as expectedly, reduced interests of market participants (mostly punters) who were caught with losing positions or have found stock market investing as an unworthy alternative or importantly where present losses have stricken fear into the hearts of the investing public with its recent volatility and with the social bearing consequences from the recency bias-meaning the impact of the herding/bandwagon effect (“with everybody losing, why should I dabble with stocks?”).

This is what I wrote then, ``This leads us to deduce that once the 3,000 level per day is met, the Phisix could mark a BOTTOMING OUT since fundamental based buyers are likely to dominate the Phisix investing space!”

Put differently, the present figures as shown in the daily trades chart reveal that the chapter of speculative froth has closed with the exogenous triggered meltdown.

Figure 2: PSE: Diminishing Peso Volume on Reduced Volatility

But this also means that the “reversion to the mean” by the daily trades suggests that in the CONTEXT OF SENTIMENT the Phisix could now be in the INITIAL PROCESS of carving out A BOTTOM.

Coupled with the STILL ELEVATED NUMBER of daily issues traded (another measure of sentiment), a meaningful decline in the Peso volume of cumulative daily transactions to the 2006 levels (see red line in figure 2) on inchoate signs of declining volatility in the face of the unblemished Phisix’s long term trend, the diminished activities of punters could be read altogether with the other developments in a positive light. So in the dimension of the market action in the PSE, we could be actually seeing signs of the Phisix “bottoming out”.

As a REMINDER, when we say potential bottoming, it either means an extended process of base building or consolidation or a slow recovery (usually a U shaped chart) because it takes awhile or more time to reestablish the confidence lost from the recent traumatic encounters.

Moreover, we shouldn’t expect a similar pace of outperformance as the previous years (not yet for the meantime anyway) or a V-shaped recovery since the risk environment abroad still manifests some indications of persistent credit tensions. Besides, any V-shaped recovery could mark another Bull Trap as discussed in “Missing Rallies or Catching A Falling Knife?”.

The important point to understand in a bottoming out process is that the downside risks are seen subsiding compared to its upside potentials, or that the odds of further market weakness seems to be declining compared to the odds of future gains, although it may take sometime to accomplish the latter. In other words, on an investment standpoint, gradual accumulation is likely to be a better option today than selling.

Further Confirmation Required

Figure 3: stockcharts.com: Global Benchmarks are Recovering

Could the Phisix go lower from here? Absolutely. But most likely it will attempt to find a base using the recent lows (2,772) as a yardstick. To go beyond it means all our bets are off.

This also implies that the Phisix needs to be further buttressed by MORE TECHNICAL ACTION to underpin such cyclical transitions, matched by DURABILITY from possible renewed pressures from EXTERNAL INFLUENCES or AN EXTERNALLY LED RECOVERY see figure 3, which is most likely the case today.

Utilizing global benchmarks, signs of “decoupling” has still not been palpable, but surprise surprise…global markets appear to be recovering even in the face of an onslaught of bad news…persistent credit crisis, more signs of US economic slowdown, declining corporate earnings in developed countries, surging consumer prices worldwide, soaring oil, food and other commodities.

Major benchmarks as the US S & P 500 (center window), the Dow Jones World Index (top most pane), emerging markets (window below center) and Asia Dow Jones ex-Japan (bottom pane) have made substantial recoveries.

Emerging markets appear to be leading the recovery front with a possible breakout attempt over the coming sessions on the back of record breaking commodity prices… yes, Crude Oil at an astounding US $117 a barrel!

We see very strong performances from key emerging bourses as Brazil and Mexico (both attempting to breakout to record highs),South Africa (at record highs) and Russia (likewise nearing record highs).

On the other hand, China’s previous sizzling performance (jumped sixfold in over 2 years) has suddenly blown cold deflating by 41% year to date and by 49% from its October pinnacle, it is my guess that China’s performance could probably mimic Saudi’s Tadawul Index which also exploded sixfold during the bubble years of 2004-2006 and eventually gave back 65% of its gains. Today the Taduwul index has been in consolidation since late 2007 and up by over 35% from the recent troughs.

Figure 4 stockcharts.com perf charts: Phisix Underperforms!

Yet, the Phisix continues to lag major bourses as shown in figure 4 courtesy of stockcharts.com which shows the performances of the major benchmarks along with the Philippine benchmark since the global markets broke down in October of 2007.

Emerging markets have recovered most of their losses and is down by only about 5% compared to Dow Jones world index -10%, Dow Jones Asia Pacific ex-Japan -14% and the S & P 500 -11% while the Phisix is down 19.5% hardly distant from its recent lows.

This lagging performance could be traced to the uncertainties surrounding the potential impact of the recent rice crisis to risks of social upheaval and to the risks of the deterioration of the country’s fiscal position, which I think is (one) overstated, (two) a temporary phenomenon and lastly a self-inflicted predicament as the local authorities have themselves been responsible for painting this “crisis” impression turbocharged by a sensationalist media (diversionary political ploy perhaps?).

Deeper Negative Real Rates As Potential Impetus

Finally, I read an article where the IMF recommended to Philippine monetary authorities to further cut rates amidst the present environment in the expectations that inflation pressures will taper and the US dollar will recover which should temper oil and commodity prices.

Figure 5: US Global Investors: US Money and Global Money To The Sky!

I think the IMF projection is too optimistic. One, contrary to my expectations of a stronger dollar early this year, the US dollar index has remained soft. Two, the global credit and US economic woes are likely to linger with more forthcoming “socialization” programs. This implies further pressure on the US dollar. In short, a US dollar recovery in the second half is unclear. Third, a revival of US economic growth in the second semester is also uncertain. Fourth, the pumping of money by global governments (see figure 5 by US global investors) has less been able to bridge the capital vacuum required to rebuild confidence in the US financial system. Instead, the money intermediated into the global financial system are being channeled or “finding a home” into commodities and basic goods, thus higher consumer prices or as tagged by media “inflation”.

At present rate, consumer prices are rising faster than what is expected by authorities, thus at the prevailing clip, rising consumer prices could eclipse present borrowing and lending pegs, aside from the coupon rates across the yield curve by our sovereign debt papers. Plainly put, the purchasing power of the Peso continues to erode as the prices of consumer goods soar.

And when the public doubts the viability of the purchasing power of the currency, it loses its function of “store of value” which means the public may actively “hoard” goods, financial assets as stocks or tangible assets as real estate as a substitute “store of value”.

If our authorities will comply with the IMF or maintain the present interest rate fixings, then it is promoting a negative real rate environment. Such environment essentially penalizes savers and encourages speculation and hoarding. The irony here is that government sets the policy, but “arrests” people who would simply be responding to the incentives set forth by the designated regulatory climate.

On the other hand, if authorities increase rates, given the continuing plight of the US dollar, they may attract speculative capital from overseas given the window of interest rate arbitrage which may lead to increased pressures for domestic money growth and again higher “inflation”. Damned if you, damned if you don’t.

Maybe stock markets abroad have been recovering not because of improving fundamentals but rather from the second wave of tsunami of excess money flooding the global monetary system. As Fritz Machlup wrote, "... continual rise of stock prices cannot be explained by improved conditions of production or by increased voluntary savings, but only by an inflationary credit supply."

Rice Crisis: Adverse Side Effect From Hefty Political Subsidies

``Inflation is like sin; every government denounces it and every government practices it." - Frederick Leith-Ross 1887 -1968 civil servant and authority on international finance

We have cited the negative impacts of the ongoing rice crisis in How Surging World Rice And Food Prices Could Impact the Philippines and Rice Crisis: The Superman Effect And Modern Agriculture to the heightening the risks of social instability, more intrusive government policies which may hamper market mechanisms that may have a lasting side effect and harm the economy over the long run aside from impairing the balance sheets of the national government. In addition, we attributed the inefficiencies and imbalances of the industry to the lack of market signals aside from the webs of laws that has severely distorted the marketplace.

Combined, these added risks may impose a hefty risk premium to our asset class, where the hurdle rate of investments returns must significantly be greater relative to the given risk environment. And with today’s risk averse environment, high risk premiums represents an unattractive proposition for investors.

Yet, in vigil to the unfolding crisis, what we have observed was that anecdotally speaking, the problem of rice shortages is one concerning government “subsidized” National Food Authority (NFA) rice more than a general or nationwide rice shortage.

We don’t see people lining up for commercial rice because commercial rice partially reflects market prices. Whereas subsidized rice is entirely and artificially sold cheap to the “poor”, at a loss to the account of the government and charged to future taxpayer’s money in order to buy political stability. As an aside, we don’t see “riots” in the street yet (as reported by some news accounts) although we do see snaking queues for NFA rice.

The problem is that government subsidies have been compounding on the dysfunctional government controlled market for rice. The greater the price difference between commercial rice and subsidized rice, the greater the tendency to have a “crisis”, as some people have used such opportunity to “arbitrage” for profit -buy subsidized NFA rice, repackage and resell them at commercial rates, thus leading to more speculative pressure.

The following news reports depicts of the harsh realities from perverted government policies,

``The governor also directed the mayors to assess economic conditions in their areas, investigate the reported adulteration of rice through the mixing of cheaper NFA rice with commercial supply, and to submit periodic reports and recommendations to his office.” (Inquirer.net)

``Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez personally caught at least one dealer mixing National Food Authority (NFA) and commercial rice in his home province of Iloilo over the weekend.” (gmanews.tv)

As we have written earlier, government policies create the incentives from which the people respond to, yet they get arrested from skewed regulations.

Yes, there is indeed a global rice problem. But the problem in the domestic setting is a basically an adverse side effect from hefty political subsidies.

Price Signals Work In Some Areas

Just consider; record food prices have started to impact investments decisions elsewhere in the world.

For instance, Russia plans to be a major exporter of grains within 5 years banking on the unused 20 to 25 million hectares of land for such purposes. (agrimarket.info).

Amazingly, even in Afghanistan the food crisis have borne a rare positive unintended effect, swapping heroin for wheat, this excerpt from Telegraph’s Con Coughlin (highlight mine),

``In parts of Helmand Afghan farmers are this year sowing wheat instead of poppy - not because they have suddenly been converted to the argument that producing heroin is not in the national interest.

``Market forces have been the deciding factor - with wheat prices doubling in the past year, and the street price of heroin falling, it is now more cost effective to grow wheat.”

In the US, farmers have started to opt out of the cropland conservation program which HAD KEPT THEM FROM CULTIVATION to cash in on the booming agriculture industry pls. refer to figure 6. See how government policies even in the US have contributed to the underinvestment-overinvestment cycle?

In the past, depressed food prices benefited consumers, yet the program was designed aimed at sustaining US farmers by effectively curbing supply through subsidies. Farmers were paid for not producing on their cropland!

Figure 6 New York Times: As Prices Rise, Farmers Spurn Conservation

Now that agricultural prices are skyrocketing, half of those enlisted in the conservation program have dropped out.

This from New York Times’ David Streitfeld

``Born nearly 25 years ago in an era of abundance, the Conservation Reserve Program is having a rough transition to the age of scarcity. Its 35 million acres — about 8 percent of the cropland in the country — are the big prize in this brawl…

``Such problems were never contemplated when the Conservation Reserve was conceived as part of the 1985 Farm Bill. Participants bid to put their land in the program during special sign-ups, with the government selecting the acres most at risk environmentally. Average annual payments are $51 an acre. Contracts run for at least a decade and are nearly impossible to break — not that anyone wanted to until recently…

``The program peaked late last summer, with more than 400,000 farmers receiving nearly $1.8 billion for idling 36.8 million acres. Put all that land together and it would be bigger than the state of New York.”

Price Signals Don’t Work On Some

As you can see, market prices have impacted investment decisions in some parts of the world, but others have not responded to the price stimulus because agricultural inputs (as fertilizers, seeds and fuel) have likewise risen and have posed as a deterrent to increasing production.

This excerpt from MSN’s analyst Jim Jubak (underscore mine),

``There, higher costs for fuel, seed and fertilizer have led farmers to cut back on planted acreage. The promise of higher prices for crops harvested in the future doesn't work if you can't afford the materials you have to pay for now, especially when credit comes at ruinous interest rates -- if it's available at all. Farmers in these areas also don't have access to the commodities futures market, so they can't lock in today's higher prices for future grain delivery.

``That means paying today's high costs is too big a gamble for poorer farmers, who can't afford to bet that grain prices will be as high tomorrow as they are today. All this has led to situations like this one: In Pakistan, farmers will produce a smaller wheat crop this year because they've cut their use of fertilizers after a 50% price increase in the past year.”

As we have previously argued, the lack of commodity markets have prevented farmers in developing countries as the Philippines from capitalizing on today’s higher prices to fund their inputs or for capital investments, thus access to capital.

Whereas the complete dependence on the traditional networks (traders or merchants) for the sales of their products and limited access to funding has been a major obstacle to the farmers to increase output since they are subjected to market inefficiencies emanating from a wall of laws, distortive subsidies and are in bondage to special interest groups for their markets.

Technically speaking the market price signals have not filtered to these economic agents enough for them to allocate capital and resources efficiently.

Copious But Fallow Agricultural Lands

Yet, the irony is that the Philippines has been blessed with a sizeable area for agriculture, this according to the Philippine Department of Agriculture,

``The Total area devoted to agricultural crops is 13 million hectares. This is distributed among food grains, food crops and non-food crops. Food grains occupied 31% (4.01 million hectares), food crops utilized 52% (8.33 million hectares) while 17% (2.2 million hectares) were used for non-food crops.

``For food grains, the average area utilized by corn was 3.34 million while rice occupied 3.31 million hectares.

``Of the total area under food crops, coconut accounted for the biggest average harvest area of 4.25 million hectares. Sugarcane with 673 thousand hectares; Industrial crops with 591 thousand hectares; 148 thousand hectares for fruits; 270 thousand hectares for vegetables and rootcrops; 404 thousand hectares for pasture and 133 hectares for cutflower.

``According to land capability, 78.31% of the alienable and disposable land are prime agricultural areas, 6.1 million hectares are highly suitable for cultivation.

Statistics are a mirage. The assumption presented here is that these all these lands are in production, but somewhere somehow this doesn’t account for the complete picture as Philippine agriculture land is punctuated with idle lands following years of underinvestment.

In fact, last year, the Philippine government arranged to lease over ONE MILLION hectares or close to 10% of the country’s agricultural property to the China’s Jilin Fuhua Agricultural Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd. (Fuhua Co.) because of idle, uncultivated or undeveloped properties!

This from Gemma Bagayaua of GMA Newsbreak, ``Would you rather let a million hectares of agricultural land remain undeveloped due to lack of capital or lease them to a foreign company?

``This, according to a ranking official of the Department of Agriculture (DA), is the government’s main consideration when it decided to lease to China’s Jilin Fuhua Agricultural Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd. (Fuhua Co.) some one million hectares of Philippine land under vague terms. The area covers about a tenth of all Philippine agricultural land.

``The DA says that the memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Chinese company is just an additional strategy to meet the department’s goal under the Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP), which is to develop two million hectares of agricultural land…

``Fuhua Co. intends to plant hybrid rice, corn, and sorghum in these lands. The contract is expected to bring in about US$3.87 billion in investments.

As you can see low productivity from the lack of capital investments brought upon by market contorting policies are essentially responsible for this recent crisis.

Bottom line: the government’s predicament can be resolved by inducing more investments to the industry by eliminating these supply rigidity barriers through dramatic reforms by eliminating or reducing subsidies, by opening the industry to competition and the development of a commodity spot and futures market for increased capital access and for pricing efficiency. Yes, there will be some social costs, some people will starve with temporary high prices. But private socio-civic groups can work with government to provide for charitable donation instead of placing the burden squarely on the government.

The rice cropping cycle is a short one (3-6 months) from which fallow lands can easily be cultivated and contribute to the supply output and stabilize the present situation. Thus I think, this problem can be settled in the medium term.

Unfortunately, with the populist tendencies tilted towards more socialism, the next step by the leadership would probably be to force other croplands into rice production, thereby yes, providing short term solutions of having sufficient supplies but at the expense of the farmers (rice prices will go down and squeeze income) or for other crops which we will see prices go to the roof (think sugar, vegetables and others).

Philippine Peso and The US Dollar Burdened By Socialization

Finally, many argue that the Philippine Peso will fall as a consequence to the increased subsidies by the Philippine government. Our view is that they are only partially correct because in the analysis of the valuation of currencies requires studies on BOTH the circumstances underpinning the currencies to which are valued against. To illustrate, if the Philippine Peso is gauged against the US dollar (which is the traditional benchmark), then the factors in support of the probable value of the currencies, both the US and the Philippines, should be assessed. Remember, the currency market is a zero sum game where one wins, the other losses.

True enough, the present actions to subsidize the poor with cheap rice by the Philippine government may impair its fiscal conditions, BUT the US government is likewise undertaking a massive nationalization of its financial and banking system aside from the borrowers afflicted by the US housing bust. In other words, two countries whose currencies are valued against each other are both effectively debasing their currencies for political expediency.

One thing we can be sure with, the more government intervenes with our lives the more we are likely to see a diminished standard of living.

Starve thy Neighbor: From Food to Fertilizers

The global “Starve thy Neighbor” policies continue. First, food exporting countries have been curtailing exports. Now, they are restricting sales of fertilizers, which may come at the expense of expanding output…

Excerpted from William Bi of Bloomberg,

“China, the world's largest grain producer, will increase export duties on all fertilizers and some related raw materials by 100 percentage points to ensure domestic supply for farmers during the main growing season.

“The changes will be effective from April 20 to Sept. 30 and will increase export taxes on fertilizer products to between 100 percent and 135 percent, the Ministry of Finance said in a statement on its Web site today. Current tariffs on fertilizers are zero, 30 percent or 35 percent, depending on the category, according to the site.

“China, grappling with soaring food costs, has boosted subsidies and grain prices to stem declining interest in farming. Lower exports from China, a major supplier of some products such as urea and ammonium phosphate, may further stoke global prices of fertilizers, with some trading at records on demand for food and biofuels.

``The government is sacrificing the fertilizer industry to protect farming,'' as grain production is critical to China's struggle with inflation, Xu Hongzhi, a Beijing-based fertilizer analyst at Beijing Orient Agribusiness Consultant Ltd., said in an interview yesterday.

“If China effectively restricts exporting fertilizers, it could be ``fatal'' to global supplies of some products, such as ammonium phosphate, as it supplies between 20 to 30 percent of global trade volume of the plant feed, Xu said.

Read entire link here.

Nonetheless fertilizer prices have skyrocketed as shown below…

Decyfer DAP Fertilise fob Gulf Coast courtesy of Fullermoney.com

Other fertilizer charts at fullermoney.com…Decyfer MOP Fertiliser Vancouver, Decyfer Sulfur fertiliser fob Vancouver, Morocco Phosphate Rock.

More restrictions equal increased marketplace tensions and political instability…

Food Crisis: Farming In A Warmer World

Drought from a warmer weather in Australia and elsewhere is one of the factors contributing to the strains in the global food supply…

courtesy of New York Times

According to the NYT’s Keith Bradsher

“It is difficult to definitely link short-term changes in weather to long-term climate change, but the unusually severe drought is consistent with what climatologists predict will be a problem of increasing frequency…

“Drought has already spurred significant changes in Australia’s agricultural heartland. Some farmers are abandoning rice, which requires large amounts of water, to plant less water-intensive crops like wheat or, especially here in southeastern Australia, wine grapes. Other rice farmers have sold fields or water rights, usually to grape growers.

“Scientists and economists worry that the reallocation of scarce water resources — away from rice and other grains and toward more lucrative crops and livestock — threatens poor countries that import rice as a dietary staple.

“The global agricultural crisis is threatening to become political, pitting the United States and other developed countries against the developing world over the need for affordable food versus the need for renewable energy. Many poorer nations worry that subsidies from rich countries to support biofuels, which turn food, like corn, into fuel, are pushing up the price of staples. The World Bank and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization called on major agricultural nations to overhaul policies to avoid a social explosion from rising food prices.

“With rice, which is not used to make biofuel, the problem is availability. Even in normal times, little of the world’s rice is actually exported — more than 90 percent is consumed in the countries where it is grown. In the last quarter-century, rice consumption has outpaced production, with global reserves plunging by half just since 2000. A plant disease is hurting harvests in Vietnam, reducing supply. And economic uncertainty has led producers to hoard rice and speculators and investors to see it as a lucrative or at least safe bet.

“All these factors have made countries that buy rice on the global market vulnerable to extreme price swings.”

Read the entire article here

Does having more money bring happiness?

Does having more money bring happiness?

Yes…if you ask Betsey Stevenson and Freakonomics' Justin Wolfers as shown in the map below…

From NYT’s David Leonhardt, “In the paper, Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers argue that money indeed tends to bring happiness, even if it doesn’t guarantee it. They point out that in the 34 years since Mr. Easterlin published his paper, an explosion of public opinion surveys has allowed for a better look at the question. “The central message,” Ms. Stevenson said, “is that income does matter."

Read the entire article here or more from Freakonomics.

World's Hardest Working?

A chart of the most industrious workers of the world…

courtesy of the Economist

According to the Economist, “SOUTH KOREAN workers toil for over 45 hours every week on average, nearly seven hours longer than workers in any other OECD country. Americans put in 15% more hours on average than workers in the western (richer) bit of the European Union. Poorer Eastern Europeans work considerably longer. Flexible arrangements for part-time workers, generous welfare systems and a limit on the working week all contribute to western Europe's seeming indolence. But where more people work part-time the average working week is likely to be shorter. The Netherlands, where 45% of workers are part-timers, the highest proportion in any OECD country, has the shortest working week.”

10 Investment Themes from Credit Suisse

Giles Keating head of the Credit Suisse Global Economics and Strategy Group (GESG) outlines 10 investment themes for 2008 in the Credit Suisse Magazine, namely:

One: Frontier Markets-underpinned by growth stories of undeveloped financial markets as the Indian subcontinent like Pakistan, Parts of Africa and smaller markets in Asia and Latin America.

Two: Asian Currencies- a play on relative undervaluation and expectations of continued economic outperformance

Three: US Presidential Elections- a punt on the cyclicality of the US Presidential elections and industries likely to benefit from the biases/preferences of the incoming President or of the political party behind the new president, e.g. broad health care

Four: Inflation-Linked Bonds-a wager on the possible impact of monetary policies, “inflation-linked bonds do well in an environment where real interest rates tend to go down because of economic weakness, and when inflation remains an issue”

Five: Chinese Brand Names-a position on the growth potentials of China’s consumers

Six: Climate Change-today’s highly compelling political and economic theme focusing on environmental preservation ranging from alternative energy to water issues

Seven: Commodities- a bet on the commodity cycle.

Eight: Community Investment- themes focusing on the concept of “charitable giving” or “socially responsible” investing as microfinancing

Nine: Cheap Distressed Assets-"value" investments from the recent turmoil

Ten: Quality Credits-fixed income investments which ensures cash flows from quality issues in a slowing economy

World Economic Growth: Mixed Picture But No Depression

Through the IMF’s World Economic Outlook, economic growth forecasts for 2008-2009 are expected to deliver mixed results. From the Economist, “The world economy as a whole is expected to grow by 3.7% this year, well down on the fund's last estimate in January of 4.2%. America is expected to enter a mild recession this year—its growth forecast has been cut from 1.5% to just 0.5%. The prospects for Spain, Canada and Italy are also gloomy. But the forecast is sunnier for the developing world, whose economies are predicted to grow by 6.7% in 2008, led by China and India.”

courtesy of the Economist

So despite signs the US housing slowdown seems slowly spreading to the world compounded by continuing indications of credit strains, hopefully these projections are right…no global depression ahead.

US Housing Bust Goes Global?

Has the US housing Bust now turned into a contagion? It seems so. From Mark Lander of the New York Times (emphasis mine),

"The collapse of the housing bubble in the United States is mutating into a global phenomenon, with real estate prices swooning from the Irish countryside and the Spanish coast to Baltic seaports and even parts of northern India.

"This synchronized global slowdown, which has become increasingly stark in recent months, is hobbling economic growth worldwide, affecting not just homes but jobs as well...

"That reality is spreading. Once-sizzling housing markets in Eastern Europe and the Baltic states are cooling rapidly, as nervous Western Europeans stop buying investment properties in Warsaw, Tallinn, Estonia and other real estate Klondikes.

"Further east, in India and southern China, prices are no longer surging. With stock markets down sharply after reaching heady levels, people do not have as much cash to buy property. Sales of apartments in Hong Kong, a normally hyperactive market, have slowed recently, with prices for mass-market flats starting to drop.

"In New Delhi and other parts of northern India, prices have fallen 20 percent over the last year. Sanjay Dutt, an executive director in the Mumbai office of Cushman & Wakefield, the real estate firm, describes it as an erosion of confidence.

"Much of the retrenchment seems to be following the basic law of gravity: what goes up must come down. With low interest rates helping to inflate housing bubbles in many countries, economists said the confluence of falling prices was predictable, if unsettling.

"This is not the first housing downturn to cross borders, but its reverberations have been amplified by the integration of financial markets. When faulty American mortgages end up on the books of European banks, the problems of the United States aggravate the world’s problems."

A Nation Of Shoppers??!!

Forbes magazine recently unveiled the TEN world’s largest mall…

Here is the list:

1. South China Mall
Location: Dongguan, China
Year Opened: 2005
Gross Leasable Area: 7.1 million square feet

2. Golden Resources Shopping Mall
Location: Beijing, China
Year Opened: 2004
Gross Leasable Area: 6 million square feet

3. SM Mall of Asia

Courtesy of Forbes.com

4. Cevahir Istanbul
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Year Opened: 2005
Gross Leasable Area: 3.8 million square feet

5. West Edmonton Mall
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Year Opened: 1981
Gross Leasable Area: 3.8 million square feet

6. SM Megamall

Courtesy of Forbes.com

7. Berjaya Times Square
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Year Opened: 2005
Gross Leasable Area: 3.4 million square feet

8. Beijing Mall
Location: Beijing, China
Year Opened: 2005
Gross Leasable Area: 3.4 million square feet

9. Zhengjia Plaza
Location: Guangzhou, China
Year Opened: 2005
Gross Leasable Area: 3 million square feet

10. SM City North Edsa

courtesy of Forbes.com

From Forbes’ Tom Van Riper…

``They're springing up in Asia, but will they all last?

``Heading out to the mall--isn't that yesterday's way to shop?

``Not in Asia, where land is cheap and labor costs are low. A building boom has enormous shopping malls popping up in China, Malaysia and the Philippines, with India expected to jump into the fold soon. Based on gross leasable area, or the amount of space devoted to revenue-producing operations like stores, amusements and food, the continent is home to nine of the world's 10 largest malls, six of which have been built since 2004. That's added some 27 million square feet of shopping space to cities like Beijing and Guangzhou in China and Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia.”

Implications:

For Asia: does this signify signs of times…a booming Asia???

For the Philippines: 3 out of the 10 largest among the world’s malls! What an irony! Statistics say that the Philippines is classified as a “poor” country.

Yet to sustain 3 of the world largest malls (+more coming!) suggest that statistics “more than meets the eye”.

RGE on Philippine Rice Crisis

RGE Monitor recently posted a synopsis on the Philippines rice crisis entitled “Philippine Rice Shortage: A Homegrown Crisis?” on in their “SPOTLIGHT ISSUES”.

Listed below are some of the litany of sins (focusing mostly on internal problems; highlight mine) + my comments.

RGE: “Despite being an agricultural economy, Philippines turned into world's top rice importer (esp. long grain) after Marcos' deposition in 1986. Other rice shortages occurred during Spanish colonial era and US occupation.

RGE: “Rice shortages had common cause: Public policies encouraging production of crops for export rather than local demand

My comment: Previously depressed prices of rice prodded government to encourage this policy; still the unintended impact of regulations.

RGE: “Other internal causes of current rice shortage:

RGE:- “trade barriers that tighten rice supply - high import tariffs (50%) paid to NFA (National Food Administration) by private sector rice distributors/retailers, ban on private importation

My comment: subsidies always cause distortions

RGE:- “landlords convert agricultural land for non-farm use to avoid govt's land distribution program

My comment: When investments to the agricultural sector become a losing proposition then it is natural for landowners to diversify. This represents more of an effect and an aggravating circumstance.

RGE:- “low productivity due to poor irrigation, poor seed and fertilizer technology, higher cost of imported fertilizer due to higher feed and energy costs

My comment: Same premise, low returns equals low incentive for increasing productivity.

RGE - “use of rice as a political salve - subsidized rice diverted to the poor

My comment: Bullseye!

RGE - “uncompetitive local rice industry plagued with monopolies by special interest groups (in and out of gov't), inadequate marketing

My comment: Subsidies bestows undue privileges to favored groups. Here they monopolize the rice trade. And since farmers totally depend on “special interest groups” and the government for sales, market price signals have not diffused to them. Consequently, “special interest groups” control a bigger share of the income at the expense of the producers or farmers.

RGE: “NFA interventions unsuccessful at stabilizing rice prices”

My comment: Touché!