Wednesday, June 13, 2012

The Coming Age of Capital Controls?

Bureaucrats in Brussels have been floating trial balloons on capital controls

The Daily Mail reports

EU finance chiefs today admitted holding contingency ‘discussions’ about possibly putting limits on Greek cash machines to stop mass withdrawals if Greece quits the euro.

European Commission officials also discussed imposing border checks and capital controls in a bid to stop a possible flight of funds.

‘There are indeed discussions, and we are asked to clarify what is foreseen in EU treaties,’ said Commission spokesman Olivier Bailly following a raft of press reports claiming this had happened.

He refused to reveal the precise details of the talks but admitted some of these ideas had been discussed under ‘disaster scenarios’.

He said the commission is ‘providing information about EU laws regarding treaties,’ that mean capital ‘restrictions are possible’ on the grounds of ‘public order and public security.’

However, he stressed that the commission was not planing on the basis that Greece would leave the euro depending on the outcome of elections on Sunday.

More from Simon Black at the Sovereign Man

Some of these measures have already been implemented sporadically; customers of Italian bank BNI, for example, were all frozen out of their accounts starting May 31st upon the recommendation and approval of Italy’s bank regulator. No ATM withdrawls, no bill payments, nothing. Just locked out overnight.

In Greece, the government has taken to simply pulling funds directly out of its citizens’ bank accounts; anyone suspected of being a tax cheat (with a very loose interpretation in the sole discretion of the government) is being releived of their funds without so much as administrative notification.

It’s no wonder why, according to the Greek daily paper Kathimerini, over $125 million per day is fleeing the Greek banking system.

Capital controls are part of the grand scheme of financial repression policies designed by bankrupt governments to expropriate private sector resources.

Aside from capital controls, other measures include, raising taxes, inflationism, negative interest rates, price controls and various regulatory proscriptions.

Simon Black lucidly explains the nitty gritty and the moral issue of capital controls,

capital controls are policies which restrict the free flow of capital into, out of, through, and within a nation’s borders. They can take a variety of forms, including:

- Setting a fixed amount for bank withdrawals, or suspending them altogether

- Forcing citizens or banks to hold government debt

- Curtailing or suspending international bank transfers

- Curtailing or suspending foreign exchange transactions

- Criminalizing the purchase and ownership of precious metals

- Fixing an official exchange rate and criminalizing market-based transactions

Establishing capital controls is one of the worst forms of theft that a government can impose. It traps people’s hard earned savings and their future income within a nation’s borders.

This trapped pool of capital allows the government to transfer wealth from the people to their own coffers through excessive taxation or rampant inflation… both of which soon follow.

The thing about capital controls is that they’re like airine baggage fees; ultimately, all governments want to do it, they’re just waiting on the first guy to impose them so that they can shrug their shoulders, stick it to the people, and blame ‘industry standards’.

Moreover, capital controls were a normal part of the global economic landscape for most of the 20th century, right up to the 1970s. It’s been a long time coming for governments to return to that model.

A return to capital controls would extrapolate to deglobalization and protectionism whose likely outcome would be the Great Depression of the 21st century. I hope and pray that these parasites will not succeed.

Pavlovian Markets Rise on ECB’s Proposed Deposit Guarantees

US and European stocks went back into a Risk ON mode last night while Asian stocks climb again today on another report of a planned stimulus: Deposit Guarantees.

From Reuters

European Central Bank Vice-President Vitor Constancio made a fresh push for the bank to become the supervisor of the euro zone's biggest banks on Tuesday, saying the wording of Europe's founding treaty meant it would be an easy change to make.

The ECB is the driving force behind a three-pillar plan for a euro zone banking union, consisting of central monitoring of banks, a fund to wind down big lenders and a pan-European deposit guarantee.

As previously pointed out, ‘guarantees’ signify as the politician’s and mainstream’s travesty where the public has been made to believe that government’s stamp or edicts can simply do away with the laws of economics. Everyone is made to look at the intended goal, while ignoring the reality of who pays for such guarantees and how to get there. Yet the crisis, since 2008, continues to worsen. These guarantees are really meant to pave way for massive inflationism

Nevertheless the past few days has seen an incredible surge in volatility

image

Monday, the US S&P had a fantastic rollercoaster 2% ride. The major US benchmark was initially up on the news of Spain’s bailout, but the day’s gains had been reversed where the S&P closed sharply down 1.14%. Last night was another huge 1.13% upside close which offset Monday’s decline.

The Risk ON-Risk OFF landscape has obviously been intensifying, all premised on government’s Pavlovian classic conditioning. I worry that these huge swings could become a dangerous precedent that could ominous of, or increase the risk of a ‘crash’, which I hope it won’t.

Financial markets has been transformed into a grand casino.

Caveat emptor

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Chart of the Day: US Money Supply Hits Wall, Points to Trouble Ahead

I pointed out last Sunday that in response to the ongoing capital flight from crisis affected European nations, the US Federal Reserve have resorted to the contraction of its balance sheet which may further prompt for a decline in money supply. This may have been compounded by the culmination of Operation Twist.

clip_image001

Chart and the following quote from goldmoney.com

Simply put: the more sluggish money supply growth is, the more likely it is that we see a stock market and broader economic crash that would make 2008 look like child’s play.

Since US Federal Reserve is likely to respond forcefully to any material convulsions in the financial markets, a “crash” does not seem inevitable (yet). But this should NOT be discounted.

Like it or not, expect further turbulence and volatility ahead.

Be careful out there.

Aftermath of Boom Bust Policies: US Family Net Worth Fell Nearly 40% Between 2007-2010

From the Wall Street Journal Blog (bold emphasis mine)

Families’ median net worth fell almost 40% between 2007 and 2010, down to levels last seen in 1992, the Federal Reserve said in a report Monday.

As the U.S. economy roiled for three tumultuous years, families saw corresponding drops in their income and net wealth, according to the Fed’s Survey of Consumer Finances, a detailed snapshot of household finances conducted every three years.

Median net worth of families fell to $77,300 in 2010 from $126,400 in 2007, a drop of 38.8%–the largest drop since the current survey began in 1989, Fed economists said Monday. Net worth represents the difference between a family’s gross assets and its liabilities. Average net worth fell 14.7% during the same three-year period.

Much of that drop was driven by the housing market’s collapse. Families whose assets were tied up more in housing saw their net worth decline by more. Among families that owned homes, their median home equity declined to $75,000 in 2010, down from $110,000 three years earlier.

Between 2007 and 2010, incomes also dropped sharply. In 2010, median family income fell to $45,800 from $49,600 in 2007, a drop of 7.7%. Average income fell 11.1% to $78,500, down from $88,300. That was a departure from earlier in the decade. During the preceding three years, median income had been constant, while the mean had climbed 8.5%.

Family incomes also dropped the most in regions of the country hardest hit by the housing market tumble. Median family income in the West and South decreased substantially, while those in the Northeast and Midwest saw little change.

This serves as evidence of how interest rate policies (zero bound rates) which attempts to induce a “permanent quasi boom” essentially impoverishes a society.

The market’s fierce backlash from Keynesian snake oil policies, serves as another validation or the realization of admonitions from the great Ludwig von Mises.

He who wants to "abolish" interest will have to induce people to value an apple available in a hundred years no less than a present apple. What can be abolished by laws and decrees is merely the right of the capitalists to receive interest. But such decrees would bring about capital consumption and would very soon throw mankind back into the original state of natural poverty.

Capital consumption indeed.

Postscript:

Policymakers instead has been shifting the blame on China than accepting their mistakes and has further pursued similar set of policies. This means we should expect the same results overtime. Yet part of the imbalances caused by the boom phase of bubble cycles has been to overvalue a currency.

As a side note, politicians and mercantilists have long blamed China for alleged currency manipulation. The US Treasury recently avoided a direct confrontation by refusing to label China as one. That's because the US Treasury has become beholden to China, as evidenced by the privilege of direct access. This represents the another case where the mythical pot calls the kettle black.

Why Spain’s Bailout may NOT Work

Author and derivatives analyst Satyajit Das at the Minyanville.com has an insightful dissection of why Spain’s bailout will not likely succeed (all bold emphasis mine)

1. Spain’s bailout package overlooks the requirements of larger banks

The amount -- 100 billion euros or more depending on the independent assessment of the needs of Spanish banks -- may not be enough. On the surface, the amount appears around three times the 37 billion euros the International Monetary Fund says is needed. The capital requirements of Spanish banks may turn out to much higher -- as much as 200 billion to 300 billion euros.

The IMF assumes only the smaller Spanish savings banks (the Cajas) will need help. In reality, the larger Spanish banks may also require capital.

Spain’s banks have over 300 billion euros in exposure to the real estate sector, mostly through loans to developers. Around 180 billion euros of this exposure is considered “problematic” by Spain’s central bank.

Estimates suggest that there are about 700,000 vacant newly built homes, but including repossessed properties the total could be as high as 1 million or even higher. At current sales levels, it will take many years to clear the backlog, which will be compounded by more properties being completed and coming onto the market. Housing prices have fallen by 15% to 20% but are forecast to fall eventually by as much as 50% to 60%. A severe recession and unemployment of 25% means that losses on Spain’s over 600 billion euros of home mortgages loans are likely to also rise.

2. The bailout excludes sovereign debts

The proposed amount also does not include any provision for write-downs on holding of sovereign debt. Local banks are estimated to hold over 60% of outstanding Spanish government bonds.

3. The conditions of Spain’s bailout may prompt for a domino effect or demand for changes in the conditions or covenants of existing bailouts by other crisis affected EU nations.

The bailout will be provided with no conditions, which creates its own problems. The lack of conditions may lead to Greece, Ireland, and Portugal seeking relaxation of the terms of their assistance packages. The lack of conditions also prevented the IMF from contributing.

4. The bailout lacks the discipline of keeping the house in order, unlike crisis affected Asian economies during the 1997 Asian Crisis.

In an opinion piece in the Financial Times, Jin Liqun, chairman of the supervisory board at the China Investment Corporation, pointedly noted the contrast between the treatment of European and Asian countries.

Viewed from China, the management of the eurozone debt crisis offers a stark contrast to the handling of the 1997-98 east Asian crisis. In that episode, Thailand, South Korea and Indonesia were all forced to implement tough austerity programmes imposed by the International Monetary Fund.... Unlike many of today’s Europeans, the people of east Asia did not have the luxury of large relief funds from outside their countries. The people had to tolerate hardship...In a poignant case, the Korean people contributed gold and household foreign exchanges to the government to help ease fiscal pressure.

Amen to that.

Western politicians think that they can elude the laws of nature. Markets will eventually prevail.

5. The bailout overestimates on the sources for funding.

Future international support, either bilateral or through the IMF, may be difficult.

The funds will come from either the European Financial Stability Fund or the still to be approved European Stability Mechanism. Since 2010, the eurozone has committed 386 billion euros to the bailout packages for Greece, Ireland, and Portugal. In theory, the EFSF and ESM can raise a further 500 billion euros, beyond the commitment to Greece, Ireland, and Portugal, allowing them to contribute the 100 billion euros for the recapitalisation of the Spanish banking system. The EFSF/ESM also assumes that it “can leverage resources." The reality may be different.

For a start, Finland has indicated that it may seek collateral for its commitment, an extension of its position on Greece which the European Union ill-advisedly agreed to.

As Spain could not presumably act as a guarantor of the EFSF once it asks for financing, Germany’s liability will increase further from 29% to 33%. France’s share also increases from 22% to 25%. The liability of Italy, which is in poor shape to assume any additional external financial burden, rises from 19% to 22%.

The EFSF’s AA+ credit rating may now be reduced. Irrespective of the rating, the EFSF and ESM will have to issue debt to finance the bailout. Support for any fund raising by these instrumentalities is uncertain.

Commercial lenders have been reducing European exposure. Emerging market members with investible funds lack enthusiasm for further European involvement. Lou Jiwei, the chairman of China Investment Corporation, the country’s sovereign wealth fund, has ruled out further purchases of European debt: “The risk is too big, and the return too low."

6. Spain’s bailout will worsen Spain’s financial ratios which could likely dissuade participation from the private sector.

The bailout also does not address fundamental issues.

The funds will be lent to the Spanish government, probably its bank recapitalisation agency Fondo de Reestructuracion Ordenada Bancaria (FROB), rather than supplied directly to the banks because of legal constraints. This will add 11% of GDP to Spain’s debt level. The transaction will do nothing to reduce the country’s overall debt level -- over 360% of GDP before this transaction.

Spain’s access to capital markets or its cost of debt is not addressed. The last auction of Spanish government bonds saw yield around 6.50% per annum with the bulk of bonds being purchased by local banks. Spain and its banks also face pressure on their own ratings, which are now perilously close to becoming non-investment grade.

The bailout may actually adversely affect the ability of Spain and its banks to funds. Commercial lenders are now subordinated to official lenders. Based on the precedent of Greece, this increases the risk significantly, discouraging investment.

The European Union has stated that it believes that these measures will help the supply of credit to the real economy and assist a return to growth. This optimism is unlikely to be realised.

Restoring the bank’s solvency will not result in an increase in credit. The capital will allow existing bank debts to be written off. Spanish banks have limited access to funding. They are heavily reliant on the European Central Bank for money, a position which the assistance does not address.

Interventionism begets more interventionism which substantially deepens the distortions of the markets, through more misallocations or malinvestments and which consequently aggravates the problems.

Policymakers do NOT have the KNOWLEDGE and the RESOURCES to deal with the worsening crisis.

The basic 'commonsense' solutions are to keep the proverbial house in order through fiscal discipline “austerity”, allow unsustainable institutions to fail or for the markets to clear and to induce competitiveness by removing structural political and regulatory obstacles (e.g. labor market reforms).

Yet commonsense has been disregarded for wishful thinking.

The current path of policies of sustained bailouts only increases the risk of MORE inflationism which serves as the fundamental reasons to be bullish on gold and commodities.

Quote of the Day: Economics is a Display of Abstract Reasoning

Economics, like logic and mathematics, is a display of abstract reasoning. Economics can never be experimental and empirical. The economist does not need an expensive apparatus for the conduct of his studies. What he needs is the power to think clearly and to discern in the wilderness of events what is essential from what is merely accidental.

That’s from the great Ludwig von Mises from his magnum opus Human Action. (hat tip Mises Blog).

As Oil Prices Slump, China Imports Record Amount of Oil

China has not just been buying RECORD amounts of gold, it seems that China has also been gobbling up RECORD amounts of crude oil.

From Bloomberg,

China, the world’s second-biggest oil consumer, increased crude imports in May to a record high as refineries raised processing rates and oil prices declined.

The country bought a net 25.3 million metric tons, or 5.98 million barrels a day, more than it exported last month, according to data published today on the website of the Beijing- based General Administration of Customs. That compares with the previous high of 5.87 million barrels a day in February.

The jump in oil purchases helped spur a 12.7 percent gain for the nation’s imports last month, exceeding economists’ estimates. Refineries boosted processing rates last month as some facilities resumed operations after scheduled maintenance while Brent oil in London entered a so-called bear market on June 1 after sliding more than 20 percent from this year’s peak.

“International crude oil prices have been falling in the past two months, so more crude was probably shipped in to fill commercial and state emergency stockpiles” as prices could rise again, Gong Jinshuang, a Beijing-based senior engineer at China National Petroleum Corp., the nation’s biggest oil company, said by telephone.

Purchases cost an average $120 a barrel, compared with about $123 in April, Bloomberg calculations from the customs data showed. China’s imports of crude were 25.48 million tons in May, while exports were 180,000 tons

image

A chart of soaring oil imports from Zero Hedge who rightly points out that this means China seemingly has not been hoarding the USD

Gold and oil functions as benchmark commodities or as lead commodities.

And as I recently pointed out

It could also be possible that China’s quickening pace of gold hoarding could be as insurance against a potential cataclysmic currency crisis that could be unleashed from political responses by major central banks to avert a global recession.

Add oil to the insurance factor or “flight to real value” on the increasing risk of a crack-up boom (currency crisis)

As the great Ludwig von Mises explained

with the progress of inflation more and more people become aware of the fall in purchasing power. For those not personally engaged in business and not familiar with the conditions of the stock market, the main vehicle of saving is the accumulation of savings deposits, the purchase of bonds and life insurance. All such savings are prejudiced by inflation. Thus saving is discouraged and extravagance seems to be indicated. The ultimate reaction of the public, the "flight into real values," is a desperate attempt to salvage some debris from the ruinous breakdown. It is, viewed from the angle of capital preservation, not a remedy, but merely a poor emergency measure. It can, at best, rescue a fraction of the saver's funds.

By the way, I have been reiterating the point that financial markets will be faced with sharp volatilities in both direction but with a downside bias.

image

Yesterday oil spiked up on the news of Spain’s bailout, but got smashed at the end of the trading session.

Clearly boom bust dynamics at work.

China’s New Loans Unexpectedly Surged in May

Some good news in China.

From Bloomberg,

China’s new loans exceeded estimates in May and more money went into longer-term lending, signaling support for investment projects that may help to prevent a deeper economic slowdown.

Local-currency lending was 793.2 billion yuan ($125 billion), the People’s Bank of China said on its website yesterday. That was the most on record for the month of May and more than analysts’ 700 billion yuan median forecast. Loans extended for a year or more accounted for 34 percent of the total, up from 28 percent in April.

Premier Wen Jiabao’s efforts to engineer a resurgence in the world’s second-biggest economy may be aided by the jump in lending and signs of resilience in exports. At the same time, industrial-output growth was close to the lowest since 2009 in May, indicating additional measures will still be needed after last week’s interest-rate cut.

“Over the past several months, investors have been concerned that a large share of loans was for short-term financing, and hence would not help boost growth as much as large investment projects,” said Zhang Zhiwei, the Hong Kong- based chief China economist at Nomura, who previously worked for the International Monetary Fund. “The rising share of medium and long-term loans in May helps address this concern.”

HSBC Holdings Plc (5) said new loans may surge to as much as 1 trillion yuan this month. Nomura’s Zhang said the proportion of longer-term lending remains “relatively low” and has room to rise as banks lend more to infrastructure projects.

‘More Impressive’

M2 money supply grew 13.2 percent last month from a year earlier, compared with an estimate of 12.9 percent, yesterday’s report showed. The gain was 12.8 percent in April. New lending was up from 681.8 billion yuan in April.

“The lending figures are all the more impressive because loan growth in the first half of the month was reportedly extremely weak,” said Mark Williams, an economist at Capital Economics Ltd. in London who formerly advised the U.K. Treasury on China. “These figures point to a sharp rebound in lending in late May and suggest that banks and borrowers have responded rapidly to the government’s new emphasis on supporting growth.”

The nation’s top economic planning agency, the National Development and Reform Commission, is speeding approvals for investment projects. Baosteel Group Corp. and Wuhan Iron & Steel Group last month secured permission to build factories after previous delays caused by overcapacity concerns.

Efforts to bolster growth also include reductions in bank reserve requirements and delays in tightening rules for lenders’ capital. China has no plan to introduce stimulus on the scale unleashed during the global crisis in 2008, according to the state-run Xinhua News Agency.

image

While this may put a floor on the current downdraft, it is not clear where the bulk of the longer-term lending is coming from.

Since there has been NO declared fiscal stimulus (YET) while the private sector seems on a lull, signs are that most of these growth emanates from state owned companies (SOEs), such as Baosteel Group Corp. and Wuhan Iron & Steel Group.

If this is true then China’s stealth stimulus have been redirected to SOEs.

Up to what extent will this covert stimulus be? That should be the main question.

China’s shadow banking system from SOEs, local and regional government agencies have already been faced with huge loans of questionable quality to the tune of $1.7 trillion. The implication is that China’s government will either tolerate further inflation of her existing bubble or that such dramatic (but desperate) moves may be symbolic—engineered to spur a bandwagon effect to fire up ‘confidence’ or perk up the ‘animal spirits’—and thus be limited.

Like how global financial markets initially responded to announcement of Spain’s bailout, where embattled bulls surged out of the gate but whose rally eventually foundered as reality sunk in, short term spikes—from bailouts or as the above account—should be reckoned as knee jerk reactions rather than sustainable trends.

Further vigilance is required. Pay close heed to the Shanghai index, the yuan and the commodity markets/currencies.

Monday, June 11, 2012

Quote of the Day: An Inevitable Unity to Market Phenomena

And it was realized that there is an inevitable unity to market phenomena that even power cannot undermine. It was discovered that in the social arena there is something at work that even the one holding power cannot bend and to which, in achieving his ends, he must conform no differently than in submitting to the laws of nature. In the entire history of human thought and the sciences, there has never been a greater discovery.

That’s from the great Ludwig von Mises, The Myth of the Failure of Capitalism in Volume 2 of the Selected Writings of Ludwig von Mises (sourced at the Mises Blog)

Many people carry the insane notion that they can defeat the laws of nature whether in sports, the financial markets, economics or socio-political policies. And the crowd just loves them. Unfortunately nature eventually prevails and exposes the fabled emperor has really no clothes.

At the end of the day, the market system conforms best to the laws of nature.

Does your Philhealth Contribution Help the Poor?

There has been this politically correct idea which attempts to rationalize private sector contribution to the Philippine national health universal coverage as having a charity effect of helping the underprivileged or the needy.

Let us examine if this claim is valid.

First what is PhilHealth?

From Wikipedia.org, (bold original)

The Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) was created in 1995 with the aim of placing a renewed emphasis on achieving universal coverage. It is categorized as a tax-exempt, government-owned and government-controlled corporation (GOCC) of the Philippines, and is attached to the Department of Health. It states its goal as insuring a sustainable national health insurance program for all.

So the essence of Philhealth’s function is supposedly a “national health insurance program”

But does Philhealth’s concept of insurance match with the real definition of insurance?

Here is the defintion of Insurance from Wikipedia.org (bold original)

Insurance is a form of risk management primarily used to hedge against the risk of a contingent, uncertain loss. Insurance is defined as the equitable transfer of the risk of a loss, from one entity to another, in exchange for payment. An insurer is a company selling the insurance; the insured, or policyholder, is the person or entity buying the insurance policy. The amount to be charged for a certain amount of insurance coverage is called the premium. Risk management, the practice of appraising and controlling risk, has evolved as a discrete field of study and practice.

So the concept of insurance is the EQUAL transfer of risk from contributors in exchange for payments called as Premium.

If I do not make a claim today on my insurance coverage funded by my accrued premium payments, then my share of my claim to the company’s resources gets transferred to OTHER premium payers who are in demand of the use of resources for one reason or another. Insurance thus is a transfer of risk from ONE premium payer to OTHER premium payer/s where the insurer tries to profit from matching the distribution of assets and liabilities over time.

Let us find out if there is an EQUAL transfer of risk based on how Philhealth is funded?

Again Wikipedia.org, (bold original, italics mine)

Funding for the scheme varies based on the population covered, although the majority of funds flow from general taxation. Premiums for the formal sector are set by law to be up to 3% of monthly income. Premiums for both the poor and the informal sector are 1,200 pesos annually (about 25 USD). However, the cost of insurance for the poor is fully subsidized by the central and local governments. National government allocate more than 9 billion pesos annually to meet its three-year target.

Funding by population is as follows:

-Formal sector: Employer and the employee split the required premium 50/50%.

-Indigents: Central and local governments fully subsidize, with local governments contributing (on average) 25% of the premium and national government contributing (on average) 75% of the premium.

-Retirees: Lifetime free membership for those who are 60 years old and older and have paid 10 years worth of premiums during employment in the formal sector.

-Non-poor, Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs), and others not eligible for other three categories: Premiums paid by individuals, referred to as the individual paying program (IPP).

Apparently there is NO equal transfer of risk as “premium” payments are mostly paid for or subsidized by taxes.

Who are covered by Philhealth’s programs? (italics mine)

PhilHealth coverage is theoretically available to the entire population. The enrollment process differs based on the population group. For example, all formal sector workers must enroll at the start of employment. The poor are identified and enrolled by the local government.

The population is tagged to one of the four major population categorizations:

-Formal sector

-Indigents that are financed by central and local governments

-Retirees (non-paying members) who have already paid 120 months of membership

-The individual paying program (IPP) for those not eligible for the other three categories

The benefits package is essentially the same for each population group. The exception is for indigents and the Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) who have additional outpatient primary care benefits (with the providers paid by capitation) however these benefits are available only through public providers.

However, the enrollment process for each population category differs. For the formal sector, employees are enrolled upon the start of employment. It is mandatory that all employees enroll in health insurance. No exceptions are allowed for the size of the company. For the poor, the local government determines “poorness” and enrolls those who are determined poor. For the rest of the population there is open enrollment—one can walk into a local enrollment office anytime to enroll.

Is Philhealth an insurance company?

No it isn’t. There is NO equal sharing of risk and thus is NOT qualified as an insurance company in the conventional terms.

Instead, Philhealth is a health coverage WELFARE program (verbally embellished by the term "insurance") funded mainly by taxpayers and complimented by an employment MANDATE (or as a form of tax on BOTH the employer and the employee).

So taxpayers get an additional whammy from a barrage of existing taxes: VAT, income, capital gains, estate tax, inflation tax among the many others. Of course, this is aside from Philhealth contributions which has been put in place in the name of universal health coverage.

The impression that taxes help the poor is deceptive. Taxes help the politicians and the bureaucracy which uses the poor as justification for coercive extraction of resources from the private sector. Taxes also serve as redistribution from productive use of resources towards consumption which diminishes investment and employment opportunities.

Aside, the welfare state promotes the culture of dependency and entitlement, as well as, reckless behavior which do not alleviate the position of the poor.

In reality, taxes help keep the “poor” poor

Does your contribution to Philheath fund the needy?

If we based this claim on coverage, then the rich, middle-class and most importantly the OFWs, whom has special treatment through “additional outpatient primary care benefits” have likewise been beneficiaries of everyone’s contribution.

So the claim that Philhealth benefits the poor is a BLATANT MISREPRESENTATION as the health welfare program’s coverage has been asymmetrically distributed, with a bias towards OFWs.

In fact, benefits are skewed AGAINST the poor based on access to Philhealth, let me repeat the last paragraph,

However, the enrollment process for each population category differs. For the formal sector, employees are enrolled upon the start of employment. It is mandatory that all employees enroll in health insurance. No exceptions are allowed for the size of the company. For the poor, the local government determines “poorness” and enrolls those who are determined poor. For the rest of the population there is open enrollment—one can walk into a local enrollment office anytime to enroll.

Because of the employment mandate, the formal sector has automatic enrollment-access while the “poor” will have to be screened by local politicians.

In short, access to Philhealth has been politicized and largely depends on the interests of local officials who may use Philhealth as means to secure votes or for other personal agenda.

The “poor” is, thus, not privileged under this TRANSFER or REDISTRIBUTION program.

Bottom line: Based on the above, the claim that private sector’s contributions to Philhealth have the “charitable” consequences to the poor is unfounded and baseless or propaganda from mouthpieces of the government.

Postscript: Accounts of corruption or malversation of funds or dipping on the coffers of the welfare institution aggravates the plight of the poor which underscores the waste and inefficiencies from such programs.

Expect a Continuation of the Risk ON-Risk OFF Environment

Today’s controversial split decision loss by World champion and Filipino boxing legend Manny Pacquiao serves as a vivid example of the self-imposed limits of nature on people.

As I pointed out on my blog[1], about 2 hours prior to the Pacquiao-Bradley match, Pacquiao has almost reached the natural speed limits of boxers, where the law of diminishing returns from ageing will turn the tide against him. Pacquiao’s contemporaries, the greatest boxers of the pasts, essentially sought retirement by mid-30s. Mr. Pacquiao is 33 and turns 34 this December.

And contrary to popular expectations, today’s match reveals that the venerable (in sports, not in politics) Filipino champion Manny Pacquiao is just like everyone else, a mortal. A victory from a rematch will not take away the laws of nature. The Pacquiao-Bradley fight heralds the twilight of the Pacquiao boxing era.

Pacquiao’s experience applies to the markets, the inflationism is a policy that will not and cannot last.

For the past few weeks, I have been emphasizing on this[2].

Like it or not, UNLESS there will be monumental moves from central bankers of major economies in the coming days, the global financial markets including the local Phisix will LIKELY endure more period of intense volatility on both directions but with a downside bias.

I am NOT saying that we are on an inflection phase in transit towards a bear market. Evidences have yet to establish such conditions, although I am NOT DISCOUNTING such eventuality given the current flow of developments.

What I am simply saying is that for as long as UNCERTAINTIES OVER MONETARY POLICIES AND POLITICAL ENVIRONMENTS PREVAIL, global equity markets will be sensitive to dramatic volatilities from an increasingly short term “RISK ON-RISK OFF” environment.

And where the RISK ON environment has been structurally reliant on central banking STEROIDS, ambiguities in political and monetary policy directions tilts the balance towards a RISK OFF environment.

Proven True: Sharp Volatility on Both Directions With A Downside Bias

This week, local markets confirmed my assessments.

Today’s dramatic volatilities have been representative of the gross distortion of the financial markets from sustained interventionism in various forms.

Unlike Pacquiao’s predicament, while it may be so that peak inflationism has yet to be reached, I believe that we are nearly there. All it would probably take is a global recession which will likely be met by the fully loaded firepower of central bankers.

Because the Phisix missed the selloff during the previous week as global markets got clobbered which I suspect has been due to some interventions by non-market forces, Monday’s 3.4% quasi-crash seems like a belated ventilation of the downside volatility that I have been concerned with.

clip_image001

Yet bulls remain in the hopeful that stock markets will continue to climb, I am not sure. Again, evidences don’t seem to confirm this and that the conditions I have stated above has yet to be met.

Also the current actions in the Phisix serve as a wonderful example of the tradeoffs between magnitude and frequency, where the frequency of accrued small gains can easily be wiped out by rare short bout/s of huge moves.

One of my favorite radical thinkers Nassim Nicolas Taleb called this the Turkey problem.

I explained in February of 2011[3]

clip_image002

The Turkey is fed from day 1 and so forth, and as a consequence gains weight through the feeding process.

From the Turkey’s point of view such largesse will persist.

However, to the surprise of the Turkey on the 1,001th day or during Thanksgiving Day, the days of glory end: the Turkey ends up on the dinner table. The turkey met the black swan.

The turkey problem is a construct of the folly of reading past performance into the future, and likewise the problem of frequency versus the magnitude, both of which serves as the cornerstone for Black Swan events.

In short, to avoid being the turkey means to understand the risk conditions that could lead to a cataclysmic black swan event (low probability, high impact event).

And this is why it has been IMPERATIVE to establish the underlying risk conditions affecting the marketplace rather than simply guessing on where short term fluctuations are headed for.

Given the current conditions, I wouldn’t want to be the turkey that ends up on the dinner table.

I would rather identify a trend that can provide me the opportunities for measured price moves in the face of established risk conditions given a time window to work on. Luck, to paraphrase the distinguished French chemist and microbiologist Louis Pasteur[4], favors the prepared.

In other words, determining the whereabouts of the stages of the boom bust cycle should be more of the priority than just the price levels.

clip_image004

Volatility has been ubiquitous and not limited to the Phisix. The US S&P 500 has been experiencing the same degree of turbulence.

Under current environment it would be very risky to interpret sporadic moves as sustainable trends.

clip_image006

Even gold has not been spared from drastic pendulum swings.

While I am still exceedingly bullish gold over the long run, I think there will equally be strong vacillations on both directions. Perhaps gold will undergo a consolidation phase first. But a severe downside move cannot be discounted.

Yet going back to the Phisix, the major Philippine bellwether was down only by 1.35% over the week which means 60% of Monday’s losses had been recovered.

clip_image008

At the world markets, this week’s performance has been in sharp contrast with that of the previous.

Monday’s quasi-crash by the Phisix has partially been offset by intra-week succession of gains whose rebound comes in the light of a global rally founded on multiple reports of rescues.

The markets cheered when ECB’s president Mario Draghi declared that “We monitor all developments closely and we stand ready to act”[5]. Also proposals for a grand rescue mechanism via a regional banking union had been floated[6] to the delight of steroid addicted markets.

Meanwhile, the US Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke employed the same I will backup the markets spiel with “As always, the Federal Reserve remains prepared to take action as needed to protect the US financial system and economy in the event that financial stresses escalate”[7] US markets soared.

India’s Prime Minister also chimed in to promise more engagement of fiscal spending on infrastructure projects[8].

Notice that outside Russia’s equity markets, the best gainers had been stock markets which made promises of rescues, particularly the India, US, Germany and France.

Ironically, the reaction has been different for those who actualized easing policies.

Australia pursued policy easing by chopping policy interest rates by 25 basis points for mortgages and business loans[9]. However, Australia’s stock market seems to have ignored the monetary stimulus by closing almost unchanged for this week.

clip_image010

More dramatically, China also did respond by cutting of interest rates for the first time since 2008, coupled with the further loosening of controls over lending and deposit rates[10]. Yet instead of recovering, China’s major equity bellwether, the Shanghai index slumped by 3.88% this week.

Again the Shanghai index also manifested the same volatility symptoms as with the rest. The difference is that the downside of China’s equity markets has been more elaborate and possibly signifies the admission of the severity or depth of China’s economic junctures and possibly too of the manifestations (or say protests) of the inadequacy of policy responses.

The point to emphasize is that financial markets has been vastly distorted and importantly, have been held hostage by politics.

As the illustrious Ayn Rand rightly explained[11],

When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing – when you see money flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors – when you see that men get richer by graft and pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed.

Risk ON-Risk OFF: Capital Flight, Bursting Bubbles and Political Gridlock

If the solution to the current crisis is about having more “stimulus”, then it would be ironic to have seen trillions upon trillions of dollars of “stimulus” thrown into the system, since 2008, and yet see the crisis linger, if not intensify.

Mainstream thinkers have been utterly lost or confused with the current situation for the simple reason that the commonsensical approach of keeping one’s house in order has been eschewed and substituted for the philosopher’s stone of bailouts and money printing. In a world based on aggregates, commonsense is a scarcity while fantasies are in abundance.

Where the problem has been about the lack of competitiveness and economic opportunities from too much regulation, bureaucracy and welfare spending, the propounded solution has been to “tax”, “spend”, “inflate”, “regulate” or “centralize” as if government can increase productivity by edict or by throwing money from helicopters.

Common sense also tells us that if these things worked we don’t need to work at all.

clip_image011

Yet when the law of diminishing returns for these interventionist measures becomes apparent, they ask for more of the same set of actions. The problem of debt requires to be solved by more debt (see above [12]). It’s like if your problem has been about alcohol then you should take more alcohol!

clip_image012

For the mainstream, money is wealth. Print money and everything gets solved. These have been the same prescription that has been complicating today’s crisis scenario with “exit” and “drachmaisation” therapy.

Yet instead of people willing to accept sacrifices for the “common good” as so expected by omniscient mainstream experts, reality reveals the opposite, people run and hide for cover.

There has been accelerating exodus of foreign money from Spain’s banking and financial system as shown above.

Dr Ed Yardeni notes[13],

According to data compiled by Spain’s central bank, foreigners reduced their deposits at Spanish credit institutions by 102.3 billion euros from a record high of 547.1 billion euros during June 2011 to 444.7 billion euros during March. In March alone, the outflow was 30.9 billion euros, and it probably accelerated during April and May…

The TARGET2 balances are more or less consistent with the trends in M2 money supply measures over the past year showing that they are falling in Spain and Greece while rising in Germany. On balance, M2 in the euro zone was up 2.8% y/y during April. This suggests that while the area's depositors are moving their funds from the periphery to the core countries, they aren’t fleeing the euro. However, the recent plunge in the euro suggests that they may be starting to shift funds into the US dollar.

Such exodus or capital flight out of the crisis affected EU nations has been destabilizing money supply conditions around the world.

Residents of these economies obviously don’t like to get robbed of their savings through the loss of purchasing power or through policies of devaluation. Devaluation theory is getting hit right smack on the faces of statist experts.

clip_image013

I pointed out last week that Swiss bonds have turned negative.

The same with Denmark’s 2 year bonds[14] as resident and foreign money flees Greece, Italy, Portugal or Spain. People from these nations would rather pay Swiss and Denmark’s central banks for safekeeping of their money than risk real losses from devaluation and the real risk of a collapse of the banking system.

clip_image015

The US Federal Reserve has partly countered the surges of capital flows by contracting their balance sheet.

This is perhaps comes along with the culmination of Operation Twist[15]—or the selling bonds with maturities of 3 years and below, which should lead to a decline of money supply and which eventually implies of negative effects on the markets. I would suspect that the gold markets have been sensing this thus the current volatility

Of course, once the episode of today’s capital flight from the Eurozone diminishes (which should amplify the money contraction), the FED will likely try to neutralize this by replacing or buy back of the assets which they earlier sold. Unfortunately the FED does not know beforehand when this will be happening, thus will only resort to reactive measures.

The uncertainty in the monetary actions should lead to heightened volatility that would be transmitted into the markets.

Hence, we should EXPECT very volatile markets ahead.

clip_image017

There could be another problem for further monetization of debts. Even if central bankers decide to print more money as another temporary patch to the current turmoil, the availability of their preferred asset[16], government bonds, has accounted for a steep decline. This implies that any future central bank purchases will likely be centered on mortgages and or privately issued securities (equities?).

The bottom line is that the combined effects of interventionism through price controls and bailouts which had prevented markets from clearing malinvestments or misallocated overpriced resources ALONG WITH sharp vacillations of capital flows as consequence of capital flight AND indecisive central bankers in the face of steroid dependent markets have been prompting for the recent market stresses.

This hasn’t been about imaginary ‘liquidity traps’ but of people’s subjective responses to perceived to political risks and policy uncertainties.

Yet as of this writing Spain has asked for $125 billion of rescue fund[17] as firewall from a potential fallout from the elections in Greece.

Does this imply a smooth sailing for the markets? We will see.

image

And as ramifications to the current dislocations in the monetary sphere out of policy indecisions and of political standoffs, it’s really hard to be unrealistically sanguine when forward indicators of factory activities have shown a synchronized decline[18]. The UK and Eurozone are in a recessionary mode, China is on the borderline while the US seems to be rolling over.

One offsetting factor has been today’s reported surge in China’s external trade[19]. Again this should be monitored rather than taken at face value given all of the above.

Yet we should ask; what if today’s (Pavlovian) stimulus conditioned markets become blasé to further promises from policy procrastination? How would the markets respond?

Again we need to seek clarity in all these than just recklessly plunging into markets centered on the belief that rescues would inherently come along and ride like a white knight to save the proverbial damsel in distress. The reality is that money does not grow on trees.

Thus we should expect the continuation of the Risk ON Risk OFF environment until concrete actions would have been taken.

It is only from here where we can have a sense of direction. And where we can assess and decide as to what position to take.

It is unfortunate that Pacquiao had to lose, but reality has long been staring at him which he denied, and may continue to deny. Many thought he was impervious and invincible too. They were all wrong.

The same with popular expectations for sustained bailouts, reality stares at our faces which we continue to deny. Yet the mounting intensity of crisis upon crisis has been admonishing us of the increasingly tenuous system. Public opinion will be proven wrong too.

Yet I am not saying that we should all be 100% cash. I am saying is that we should get less exposed to equities and overweight cash until conditions change. If the ECB and the FED collaborate on a maximum overdrive to stuff their balance sheets in exchange for green pieces of papers marked by Benjamin Franklins to the public, then we should make a swift move back into commodity based insurance positions. I suspect that come the next phase of interventions, it won’t be a risk ON risk OFF landscape but possibly one of STAGFLATION.

In the meantime be very careful out there.


[1] See On Manny Pacquiao’s Boxing Career, June 10, 2012

[2] See The RISK OFF Environment Has NOT Abated, May 27, 2012

[3] See Dealing With Financial Market Information February 27, 2012

[4] Wikipedia.org Louis Pasteur

[5] Bloomberg.com Draghi Says ECB Is Ready To Act As Growth Outlook Worsens, June 6, 2012

[6] See Eurozone’s Proposes Grand Bailout: Regional Banking Union, June 7, 2012

[7] Telegraph.co.uk Ben Bernanke says Fed ready to act if crisis intensifies, June 7, 2012

[8] See HOT: India Joins Pledge for Stimulus June 7, 2012

[9] Reuters.com ANZ cuts variable mortgage rates by 25 basis points June 8, 2012

[10] See HOT: China Cuts Lending Rates and Deposit Rates, June 7, 2012

[11] Rand, Ayn Atlas Shrugged Money padworny.com p. 387

[12] Price Tim Fixed Cobden Center March 12, 2012

[13] Yardeni, Ed Europe June 4, 2012 yardeni.com

[14] Bloomberg.com Denmark Government Bonds 2 Year Note Generic Bid Yield

[15] Wikipedia.org History of Federal Open Market Committee actions

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

[17] Bloomberg.com Spain Seeks $125 Billion Bailout As Bank Crisis Worsens, June 10, 2012

[18] Yardeni Ed, Global Manufacturing June 5, 2012 yardeni.com

[19] Bloomberg.com China May Export Growth Tops Estimates As U.S. Demand Rises, June 10, 2012