Monday, August 06, 2012

Phisix: Managing Through Volatile Times

Understanding the effect of emotion on your actions has never been more important than it is now. In the midst of this great financial and economic crisis that grips the world, Central Banks are printing money in one form or another. This makes our investment world even more prone to bubbles and panics than it has been in the past. Either plague can kill you.-Barton Biggs (1932-2012)

My mantra of “Bad News is Good News” has gone mainstream.

I begin this week’s outlook with an excerpt from the Wall Street Journal’s Real Time Economics Blog[1],

The U.S. stock market has recently been buoyed by notions of central bank nirvana, an expectation of more easing help for economies and therefore a boon for riskier assets such as stocks here and in Europe.

So a ‘bad’ jobs number for the economy might still have been interpreted as ‘good’ in stock markets because of the presumed certainty of easing in September from the Federal Reserve.

Stocks are indeed rallying, perhaps on the notion that the economy is not destined to decelerate into full stall, and because the gain might not be ‘good’ enough to be ‘bad,’ ‘bad’ meaning it would deter an active Fed from moving.

“Bad news is good news is” may also extrapolate to permanent quasi-booms in that if true, means that there will never be a bust. Political talk have almost always wished away economic laws.

Symptoms of Bipolar Disorder from Bubble Policies

“Bad news is good news” today emanates from the entrenched expectations by financial markets that central bank interventions will effectively counteract on the unfolding negative developments in the economic realm.

In the past, financial securities including the stock markets reflected on the adverse changes in the economic and financial dimensions through price declines.

Today, the concept of central bank inflationist “nirvana”, which represents in psychology “conditioned stimulus”[2], has severely been distorting the price mechanism of the financial marketplace.

Financial markets become operationally detached from reality. And central bank assurances and pledges of rescues have only underscored the moral hazard of policy making that has been evident through policy induced rampant speculations.

The popularity of inflationism as the great Professor Ludwig von Mises once warned is about getting something from nothing[3].

The popularity of inflation and credit expansion, the ultimate source of the repeated attempts to render people prosperous by credit expansion, and thus the cause of the cyclical fluctuations of business, manifests itself clearly in the customary terminology. The boom is called good business, prosperity, and upswing. Its unavoidable aftermath, the readjustment of conditions to the real data of the market, is called crisis, slump, bad business, depression. People rebel against the insight that the disturbing element is to be seen in the malinvestment and the overconsumption of the boom period and that such an artificially induced boom is doomed. They are looking for the philosophers' stone to make it last.

This has not just been theory. To my experience such policies have indeed been manifesting negative influence to the unsuspecting public. For instance, my counsel to take on a defensive posture have been begrudged and misinterpreted by some as depriving them of the opportunity to earn [and of course, the urge to satisfy one’s dopamine neurons...or the gambling instinct]

Yes inflationism brings out the worst in many people.

Yet for the past two weeks, global equity markets have exhibited increasing symptoms of a bipolar disorder[4] through flashes of abruptly shifting manic-depressive moods that has been ventilated on the markets through sharp volatilities.

Under pressure from increasing evidences of a global economic slowdown, financial markets have been treated promises to inflate—such as European Central Bank’s Mario Draghi recent pledge to do “whatever it takes to save the Euro[5]”—that has prompted financial markets to soar[6]

clip_image001

The two day risk ON mode from the pep talk by ECB President Mario Draghi resulted to a short term price convergence from supposedly disparate asset classes that has been labeled as the “Super Mario’s trifecta”[7].

The furious synchronized rally in global stocks (represented by the US S&P 500), can also be seen in gold and in US 10 treasury prices.

An almost similar pattern has emerged this week.

clip_image003

Again following early accounts of weaknesses in the financial markets, reports of a concession have been in the works by ECB and EU officials that could likely facilitate for the much anticipated “Big Bazooka”, fired up the global equity markets on Friday[8].

Most of the biggest gains last Friday were seen in major European equities bellwethers such as the Stox 50, the German Dax and UK’s FTSE 100.

clip_image004

However in contrast to the previous week, in the bond markets, US treasuries fell (yields increased) but Spanish (orange) and Italian (green) 10 year bonds climbed or yields fell.

For the past two weeks, each time reality returned to the markets (as seen by the spike in yields and selling pressures in equity) the recourse of ECB’s Mario Draghi has been to wheedle the markets with pledges.

Friday’s massive rally in the US came despite the questionable gains in the job report (as indicated by the above opening excerpt)—the improvements in the US job markets has eclipsed the increase in the unemployment rates, and importantly, has discounted on the large number of the people who dropped out of the labor force[9].

This implies that the real reason behind the rally in the US markets has been about the return of the global RISK ON mode initiated from the prospective ECB-EU deal which may be forged anytime.

Nonetheless, despite all the popular attributions of the recent rally, the constant declarations of support by central bankers have apparently been mainly designed to keep short sellers at bay.

Yet any deal will likely prompt Spain (and or Italy) to access the fast depleting European Financial Stability Facility EFSF (temporary fund) first. The ECB would likely function as bridge financier as the access to the European Stability Mechanism (permanent fund) will have to be fully ratified by EU member states, notwithstanding the much awaited German Supreme Court ruling on the opposition filed by several German lawmakers against the German parliament’s swift passage of the bailout fund or the ESM[10].

As I noted in a blog, I think that the US Federal Reserve may defer on the mulled QE as they are likely to wait for the ECB to take the initiative and consequently watch for the effect before taking action.

The Foggy Outlook of US Markets and the US Economy

clip_image006

Let me add that the strong Friday rally in the US stock markets may not be that convincing as market internals reveals of a “narrowing breadth” or declining participation of gains by key index issues. This means that the large gains posted by the S&P 500 have been mostly concentrated to a few index heavyweights.

Also the Dow transports appear to diverge with the Dow Jones Industrials. According to one of the 6 basic tenets of the Dow Theory[11], the averages must confirm each other. A genuine economic recovery will become evident in the profits of both transports and industrials which should get reflected on the respective prices of these benchmarks. Thus, the conflicting signals translate to market ambiguity.

The jumbled outlook in the market internals may even signify signs of distribution or of the diminishing forces of the bulls.

This could also signal indirect interventions by political authorities via ETFs as the Bank of Japan (BoJ) has been openly conducting.

clip_image007

Bad news is good news.

US stocks markets respond to Pavlovian classical conditioning even as the quarterly spread between companies raising or lowering earnings guidance has been materially deteriorating during the past four consecutive quarters[12].

clip_image008

With 45% of revenues of the S&P 500 index companies exposed to the world economy[13] the decline in earnings guidance should be expected considering the intensifying downdraft of global economies[14].

Mohamed El-Erian, CEO of one of the leading investment firms, PIMCO, has even expressed apprehensions by citing “frightening”, “serious, synchronized slowdown”[15]

But a US slowdown may come from both internal and external forces

clip_image009

Capital spending in the US as measured by new factory orders has also shown significant downturn.

Dr. Ed Yardeni observes[16], (see left chart on the left window)

As go profits, so goes business spending. The recent stall in S&P 500 forward earnings isn’t a good omen for new factory orders, which have already stalled so far this year. Profitable companies expand their capacity by spending more on plant and equipment. Unprofitable companies scramble to cut their costs by reducing their capital outlays. In the real GDP accounts, the pace of capital spending has been slowing. It rose 5.3% (saar) during Q2 following a gain of 7.5% during Q1. Last year, such spending increased 8.6%.

And this has also been true with US export orders (right window from Sean Corrigan/Zero hedge[17])

clip_image010

There always will be something to be optimistic about. The question is which force will likely have a more powerful influence, the positive or the negative?

So far the continuing expansion of US business and industrial loans looks like one of the major bullish signs, but this would be highly dependent on business or capital spending indicators.

Also seasonality of stock market performances during US presidential elections, as well as, extreme bearishness of hedge funds (right window) and continued efflux by retail investors (left window Wall Street Journal[18]) represent as “crowded trade” sentiment.

Overall, I cannot see how seasonal forces and or how sentiment will overcome current fundamental deficiencies brought about the global central banking tentativeness and political gridlocks which has been prompting for today’s sluggish (bubble popping) economic outlook.

Seasonal forces mainly rely on the statistical probabilities of historical performance. This assumes previous historical conditions in the context of mathematical aggregates, as if the past had similar conditions. In reality conditions of the past have been unique. This makes reliance on statistics as a poor road map of the future.

Black Swan author and distinguished mathematician and iconoclast Nassim Nicolas Taleb in an interview with McKinsey Quarterly[19] warns about the inappropriate use of statistics

The field of statistics is based on something called the law of large numbers: as you increase your sample size, no single observation is going to hurt you. Sometimes that works. But the rules are based on classes of distribution that don’t always hold in our world. All statistics come from games. But our world doesn’t resemble games. We don’t have dice that can deliver. Instead of dice with one through six, the real world can have one through five—and then a trillion. The real world can do that.

The world is complex while aggregates rely on constants and assume simplifications.

Sentiments, on the other hand, signify as symptoms to an underlying cause.

The Phisix Ascendancy Depends on the Developments in the US

What do all these have to do with the Phisix and ASEAN stocks?

Everything.

I believe that the Phisix outperformance may continue for as long as the US does not fall into a recession.

China remains to be a significant factor too but she will likely be subordinate to the developments in the US. [I may be wrong here, as a deeper downturn in China may likely to affect many emerging market commodity exporters as well as the global supply chain networks]

However should the US economy and the financial markets capitulate to market forces, who will be exposing the massive misdirected investments through falling asset prices and through an economic recession, the chances are local and regional financial markets will likewise suffer from such agonizing cyclical adjustments.

Again like in 2007-2008 the Philippines and ASEAN may be subject to the risk of contagion.

Yet there has been little evidence in support of a regional decoupling.

And this brings us to the risk-reward trade off: I believe that under current conditions excessive optimism for the sustained ascension of the Phisix seems unwarranted. This is until central banks of major economies lay down their cards on the table or until we see some substantial improvements in the economic dimensions for major economies. However considering that inflationist policies has dominated much of the world’s economic and financial markets much of the misallocated capital will likely translate to the unwinding of speculative positions through economic and financial losses.

Also given the fluidity of developments as manifested by the alternating manic-depressive phases of how events unfold, the risks seems high that any policy errors may prompt for a swift and dramatic deterioration of conditions that may wipe any gains that may be temporarily acquired.

For me, to be excessively sanguine over local stock markets under the present conditions means the following;

1. unbounded faith in the capabilities of global and local central bankers (as well as politicians) to fix the current predicament.

2. belief that geopolitical and national political gridlocks will be resolved soon

3. a firm disposition to the theory of decoupling where the Philippines is presumed as having distinctive immunity to the risks of a global recession

4. to be hopeful that current global economic slowdown has reached an inflection point and will recover immediately

5. to simply believe for the sake of believing.

All the above simply posits of the severe underestimation of the risks conditions.

As English biologist Thomas Henry Huxley[20] once commented,

Logical consequences are the scarecrows of fools and the beacons of wise men

A US recession may not be in the cards yet, as we need to see more evidence on this. However considering the heavy dependency on the Fed’s or central banking steroids, much of the fate of the US economy will likely depend on how US political authorities will react. For instance if the FED forcefully inflates then this would likely produce a temporary patch.

While the risks of a US recession may not be imminent, such risks seem to be growing.

More Symptoms of the Philippine Boom-Bust Cycle

One of the big factors that has, so far, worked in favor of domestic stock market, as I have repeatedly been pointing out[21], has been the negative real rates which has impelled for a domestic version of yield chasing dynamic.

clip_image012

This yield chasing dynamic in the domestic financial market and the economy has been supported by a steep yield curve, which is likely to accelerate a credit driven boom. The Philippines has the steepest yield curve in Asia (chart from ADB[22]).

Such credit boom has already been visible via a double digit loan growth of the banking industry last May[23].

clip_image014

Also the business cycle has become quite evident in the performance of the stocks.

The banking and capital intensive property sectors have outclassed all other sectors. [If there should be no US recession, my guess is that mining and oil will resume as the market’s darlings in 2013]

As I wrote last November[24]

Although I am not sure which sector should give the best returns over the short term, I am predisposed towards what Austrian economics calls as the higher order stages of production or the capital goods industries, which are likely the beneficiaries of the business cycle, specifically, mining, property-construction and energy, as well as financials whom are likely to serve as funding intermediaries for these projects.

But again such credit driven boom will likely be subject or sensitive to the developments in the international sphere, and given the current conditions, I suspect that the credit boom may be deferred.

Miniature Bubbles: The Calata Episode

clip_image016

Negative real rates also give us miniature boom bust cycles or bubbles within bubbles.

I think the experience by Calata Corporation[25] [PSE: CAL], the recently listed agri product distributor, looks like a great example.

I recall of the passionate or even heated debates on a social network forum over the so-called merits of ‘investing’ based on corporate ‘fundamentals’.

Since the company listed in May, the wild price fluctuations of the issue exhibits, not of public’s perception about the company’s business model, but about the quick buck or short term mentality and the emotionally charged (greed and fear) speculative activities.

My guess is that most of those who dabbled with the issue have suffered excruciating losses than gains as Calata now trades below the IPO price at 7.5 pesos a share.

And yet due to the excessive volatility, like their counterparts in the Eurozone and elsewhere, the local authorities via the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently launched an investigation for possible “stock market manipulation”[26].

This would seem more like chapter of witch-hunting that will likely end up nowhere. Nonetheless, such activities are seen as good for the populist politics of “do something”.

This unfortunate Calata incident also reveals of the way government deals with symptoms rather the disease, and who adroitly shifts the blame of the unintended consequences of social policies to the private sector.

While the Calata episode may not be representative of the entire Philippine stock markets yet, the basic lesson is that negative real rate regime molds the public’s orientation towards short term thinking, and importantly, whets on the public’s gambling appetite.

Yes many will always find ‘excuses’ to endeavor on supposed rationally based ‘investments’ when in reality they are only after “high risk-low return” dopamine seeking punts.

Negative real rates compel them towards speculative activities which in aggregate will become the dominant feature of the financial marketplace and the economy. Political suppression of interest rates therefore lays the foundations to the business or bubble cycles as speculations replace productive undertakings.

The Calata event signifies as the tip of the iceberg. Eventually as the markets go higher there will be more incidences of miniature bubbles ahead. Yet as the Japan bubble bust of 1990, Tequila crisis of 1994, Asian crisis of 1997, LTCM episode of 1998, dot.com bust in 2000 and US housing mortgage bubble bust 2008 have all shown, the broader market will likely transform into a full scale credit driven bubble if social policies remain attuned towards inflationism or the creation false prosperity from policy induced credit expansion.

As for the present state of the markets my bottom line is: For as long as global central bankers remain hesitant and only resorts to talking up the markets, in the face of a deepening slump in the global economy, I think global financial markets including the Philippines will be subject to intense price oscillations or a high risk environment.

Given the high correlationships of financial markets which has been the reason for RISK ON RISK OFF environments. Prudent investing means not having to put all your eggs in one basket.


[1] Real Time Economic Blog Are Jobs Data Bad Enough to Be Good for Stocks? Wall Street Journal, August 3, 2012

[2] Wikipedia.org Classical conditioning

[3] Mises, Ludwig von 9. The Market Economy as Affected by the Recurrence of the Trade Cycle XX. INTEREST, CREDIT EXPANSION, AND THE TRADE CYCLE, Human Action, Mises.org

[4] Wikipedia.org Bipolar disorder

[5] See What Draghi’s Statement “The ECB is Ready to do Whatever it Takes to Preserve the Euro” Means, July 29, 2012

[6] See The Magic of Central Banking Talk Therapy, July 28, 2012

[7] See Explaining Super Mario’s Trifecta, August 4, 2012

[8] See Will the Accord by the ECB-EU Politicians Pave Way for the Big Bazooka? August 3, 2012

[9] See Has Friday’s Surge by the US Stock Markets Been about the ‘Positive’ Jobs Report? August 4, 2012

[10] See Global Financial Markets: Will the EU Summit’s Honeymoon Last? July 2, 2012

[11] Wikipedia.org Dow theory

[12] Bespoke Invest Bad Guidance Continues, July 29, 2012

[13] See Why Current Market Conditions Warrants a Defensive Stance, July 9, 2012

[14] US Global Investors The Race for Resources, Investor Alert, August 3, 2012

[15] See PIMCO’s Mohamed El-Erian: “Frightening” Global Synchronized Slowdown, August 3, 2012

[16] Yardeni Ed, Capital Spending, Dr. Ed’s Blog July 31, 2012

[17] Zero Hedge US Export Orders Are Collapsing August 2, 2012

[18] Zweig Jason When Will Retail Investors Call It Quits? August 2, 2012, Wall Street Journal

[19] Mckinsey Quarterly Taking improbable events seriously: An interview with the author of The Black Swan December 2008

[20] Wikipedia.org Thomas Henry Huxley

[21] See Investing in the PSE: Will Negative Real Rates Generate Positive Real Returns? November 20, 2011

[22] ADB Key Developments in Asian Local Currency Markets AsianBondsOnline July 30, 2012

[23] Business Inquirer, Bank lending maintains double-digit growth rate in May—BSP, July 11, 2011

[24] See Phisix-ASEAN Equities: Awaiting for the Confirmation of the Bullmarket November 13, 2012

[25] Philippine Stock Exchange Calata Corporation

[26] Business Mirror Calata shares plummet as SEC confirms probe, August 2, 2012

Sunday, August 05, 2012

Prediction Record of the US Federal Reserve: The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow

The US Federal Reserve’s supposed transparency has only been exposing their string of serial forecasting blemishes.

Evan Solitas has been tracking the Fed’s performance and observed, (bold emphasis mine)

The Bernanke Fed has made a significant effort since June 2009, when the NBER judges the recession to have ended, to increase transparency by providing guidance about future policy and macroeconomic forecasts. What is striking, however, is how this transparency has not prevented in the slightest the intellectual dishonesty in ignoring its failure to meet its own goals.

A disparaging but not unfair comparison would be to little orphan Annie. "The sun'll come out tomorrow," Annie sang. "Bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow there'll be sun." The 3-to-4 percent recovery growth we've been long promising will come out tomorrow, the FOMC basically says every quarterly meeting. Bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow there'll be lower unemployment.

The Fed must love tomorrow. Because, as they say, it's always a day away.

What I mean by this is the Fed makes projections, misses them by miles and consistently in the wrong direction, and then doesn't own up to it. They just push back their forecast. The forecasts are not inappropriately optimistic, either -- it's just that the Fed's actions have fallen short, and that there is zero accountability to target the forecast.

Their transparency, however, allows us to demonstrate thoroughly the extent of this failure.

Their fundamental error: the haughty assumptions that human action can be aggregated into mathematical expressions similar to natural sciences or positivism.

The late economist Percy Greaves lucidly explained of the mainstream’s basic shortcomings (bold emphasis mine)

Reason and experience show us that there are two separate realms: the external world of physical, chemical, and physiological phenomena, and the internal world, in our minds, of our thoughts, feelings, valuations, and purposes in life. There is no bridge connecting these two spheres. They are not connected automatically. We always have the right to choose our actions. Identical external events often produce different human reactions, and different external events sometimes produce identical human actions. We do not know why.

So, the science of human action is different from the physical sciences. We cannot experiment with human beings except in a physiological, medical, or biological sense. In the realm of ideas, we cannot experiment as we can in the physical sciences. We cannot duplicate situations in which all things are maintained the same as before. We cannot change one condition and always get the same consequences. We cannot experiment with human actions, because the world, its population, its knowledge, its resources are all constantly changing and cannot be held still.

In economics we must use our minds to deduce our conclusions. We have to say, Other things being equal, other things being the same, this change will produce such and such an effect. We have to trace in our minds the inevitable results of contemplated changes. We are dealing with changeable human beings. We cannot perform actual experiments, because the human conditions cannot be duplicated, controlled, or completely manipulated in real life like chemical experiments in a laboratory. Therefore, there are great differences between economics and the physical sciences. We cannot experiment and we cannot measure. There are no constants with which to measure the actions and the forces which determine the actions and the choices of men. In order to measure you must have a constant standard, and there is no constant standard for measuring the minds, the values, or the ideas of men.

More, Federal Reserve (central bank) 'experts' are unlikely to produce unorthodox or radical or ‘out of the box’ thinking as they are supposed to uphold the institutions that employ them, thus the “zero accountability”. It's not about being right or wrong but what needs to broached by such institutions.

Bluntly put, their studies are basically designed to rationalize or justify the existence of their institutions. You may call this biased analysis. Also the conflict of interests between politicized money and the citizenry highlights the agency problem or the principal agent dilemma.

And such outlook applies to almost all political and politically affiliated institutions.

Why is this important? Because the Fed or central bank policies or centrally planned monetary actions have essentially been derived from their analysis or outlook.

And analysis with consistently large deviance from economic reality would only translate to high probability that their accompanying actions would have negative implications or consequences than the intended or expected goals or objectives.

Policy errors, thus, are likely to be the rule than the exception.

In short, we shouldn’t trust central bankers. We don’t even need them.

Thus, prudent investors need to anticipate of such centrally planned monetary misdiagnosis-malpractice, and take appropriate action to protect or insure themselves from their adverse effects.

Don’t forget half of every transactions we make has been coursed through political (fiat legal tender based) money. And distortions of the economics of money through interventions only extrapolates to parallel disruptions in the production or economic structure. This is why boom bust cycles and hyperinflation exists.

Saturday, August 04, 2012

Explaining Super Mario’s Trifecta

The Buttonwood’s Notebook columnist (Philip Coggan) of the Economist provides a presumable explanation of last week’s rally following ECB Prez Mario Draghi’s pledge to do “Whatever it Takes to Save the Euro

AN interesting note from the always-perceptive Dhaval Joshi at BCA Research shows that July was a remarkable month. It was the only month in the last 400 in which European stocks, the German 10-year bund and gold rallied by more than 2.5%. Even when Mr Joshi uses a lower 2% hurdle, the last simultaneous rally on this scale was February 1987, and there have been only seven such months in the last 30 years.

Normally, you would expect the conditions for a simultaneous rally to be rare. Inflation would be good for gold and bad for bonds; a recession would be good for bonds and bad for equities and so on.

Super Mario was partly responsible for July's trifecta with his promise to do whatever it takes to save the euro. Equities rallied on the hope that Europe's economy would avoid a catastrophe; gold rallied because the ECB would likely create money; and bunds rallied because the ECB would save all the costs of Spanish rescue from falling on the German taxpayer. or at least that is a plausible explanation, based on the fundamentals. An alternative is that this was a risk-on rally in which investors moved money out of cash and into any likely asset class.

I may add a more important dimension to the above explanation: shorts had been deliberately set up for the ambush

image

One example: Euro shorts collapsed by 10% in one week and 35% in one month.

Notes the Zero hedge,

And where two months ago, the net short position in the EUR hit an all time record, north of -200K contracts, in the interim this number has contracted by over a third, and as of minutes ago was revealed to be "just" 139K in the week ending July 31, a 10% drop in shorts in one week. Why is this important? Because while short covering rallies have long been yet another narrative to keep shorts on the sidelines, the probability of such an event has declined dramatically now that the bulk of the weak hands have been kicked out, and the net exposure is back to January 2012 levels.

Underneath all the supposed noble sounding rhetoric to save the Euro, interventionism has mostly been about price controls or the manipulation of markets.

Is Hong Kong’s Free Economy a Myth?

Hong Kong has been known as the freest economy in the world.

But skeptics argue that such claims may not be accurate as Hong Kong’s capitalist political economy may have been shadowed by cronyism.

Writes Eddie Leung and Pepe Escobar at the Asia Times,

For the Heritage Foundation is a matter of routine to rank Hong Kong as the freest economy in the world - with a whopping overall score of 89.9 compared with a world average of 59.5. This Milton-Friedmanesque paradise is extolled for "small government, low taxes and light regulation".

Much is made of "business freedom" and "labor freedom". True - you can open a business in three days; you just need a Hong Kong ID, a form and US$350. But depending on the business, you will be squeezed by monopolies and oligopolies in no time. And if you are "labor", chances are in most cases you can only aspire to some sort of glorified slavery.

Heritage researchers may be excused for losing the plot between dinners at the Mandarin Oriental and partying in Lan Kwai Fong, both favored drinking and dining spots near the central business district. Behind all those luxury malls and the best bottles of Margaux, real life Hong Kong has absolutely nothing to do with a free economy encouraging competition on a level playing field. It's more like a rigged game.

The dark secret at the heart of Hong Kong is the unmitigated collusion between the government and a property cartel - controlled by just a few tycoons; the Lis, the Kwoks, the Lees, the Chengs, the Pao and Woo duo, and the Kadoories (more about them on part 2 of this report). These tycoons and their close business associates also happen to dominate seats on the 1,200-member Election Committee that chooses Hong Kong's chief executive…

We should be back again to a Chinese maxim: land is power. All the conglomerates controlled by Hong Kong tycoons are fattened on owning land. The local government is the sole supplier of land. So no wonder it keeps a vested interest in the property market - and that's a huge understatement - as it pockets fortunes from land sales and premiums on so-called "lease modifications".

As for the maxim that prevails across the city's property market cycles, it's always been the same: "Buy low and sell high".

Read the rest here.

Hong Kong has certainly not been an ideal laissez faire economy as no country in this world has been.

But rankings of economic freedom, whether by Heritage Foundation or by the Fraser Institute, has been relatively established and have not been measured on absolute terms.

It is also important to note that for as long as the distribution of any resources are politically determined, the natural outcome will be one of collusion, horse trading, favoritism and corruption.

Virtuous or moral government is an illusion more than Hong Kong’s free economy is a myth.

Government officials are human beings too limited by knowledge problem, cognitive biases, value preferences (determined by education, religion, culture, ideologies, family values and etc…), peer pressure, social standings, career ambitions and etc...

While some of Hong Kong’s wealthiest may have made their fortunes from cronyism (or politicized real estate policies), the above critics who resort to claims of “oligopolies and monopolies” that leads to “high prices land policy” and “glorified slavery” fails to recognize that Hong Kong’s property boom has also been influenced by the US Federal Reserve policies via the US dollar peg.

Also Asia’s increasing social mobility has been an influence to Hong Kong’s property market.

Hong Kong has been the second hottest property market in the world according to MSNBC.com

The growing wealth of mainland Chinese, coupled with China’s property restrictions, has led to an influx of mainland buyers into Hong Kong’s residential market in recent years. According to industry estimates, three in 10 deals in Hong Kong’s luxury property markets are done by mainland Chinese buyers.

Property restrictions too add to the politicization of Hong Kong’s real estate market.

Finally the above authors seem to have misunderstood the meaning of competition by which they ascribe to flawed neo-classical concepts of oligopolies and monopolies through “captive markets” or “limited competition”.

Let me quote the explanation of Austrian economist Dr. George Reisman (bold emphasis mine)

Actual price competition is an omnipresent phenomenon in a capitalist economy. But it is completely unlike the kind of pricing envisioned by the doctrine of "pure and perfect competition." It is not the product of a mass of short-sighted, individually insignificant little chiselers, each of whom acts to cut his price in the hope that his action won't be noticed by any of the others. The real-life competitor who cuts his price does not live in a rat's world, hoping to scurry away undetected with a morsel of the cheese of thousands of other rats, only to find that they too have been guided by the same stupidity, with the result that all have less cheese.

The competitor who cuts his price is fully aware of the impact on other competitors and that they will try to match his price. He acts in the knowledge that some of them will not be able to afford the cut, while he is, and that he will eventually pick up their business, as well as a major portion of any additional business that may come to the industry as a whole as the result of charging a lower price. He is able to afford the cut when and if his productive efficiency is greater than theirs, which lowers his costs to a level they cannot match.

The ability to lower the costs of production is the base of price competition. It enables an efficient producer who lowers his prices, to gain most of the new customers in his field; his lower costs become the source of additional profits, the reinvestment of which enables him to expand his capacity. Furthermore, his cost-cutting ability permits him to forestall the potential competition of outsiders who might be tempted to enter his field, drawn by the hope of making profits at high prices, but who cannot match his cost efficiency and, consequently, his lower prices. Thus price competition, under capitalism, is the result of a contest of efficiency, competence, ability.

Price competition is not the self-sacrificial chiseling of prices to "marginal cost" or their day by day, minute by minute adjustment to the requirements of "rationing scarce capacity." It is the setting of prices perhaps only once a year — by the most efficient, lowest-cost producers, motivated by their own self-interest. The extent of the price competition varies in direct proportion to the size and the economic potency of these producers. It is firms like Ford, General Motors and A & P — not a microscopic-sized wheat farmer or sharecropper — that are responsible for price competition. The price competition of the giant Ford Motor Company reduced the price of automobiles from a level at which they could be only rich men's toys to a level at which a low-paid laborer could afford to own a car. The price competition of General Motors was so intense that firms like Kaiser and Studebaker could not meet it. The price competition of A & P was so successful that the supporters of "pure and perfect competition" have never stopped complaining about all the two-by-four grocery stores that had to go out of business.

I agree that there have been accounts of cronyism in Hong Kong. But Hong Kong’s largely open economy has also been materially influenced by external forces (monetary transmission and mainland immigration and or speculation), focusing on one at the expense of the other only exposes of analytical bias and would signify a big mistake.

Thus to conclude that Hong Kong’s political economy has veered towards an oligarchic-monopolistic environment would “currently” seem exaggerated as there has been little evidence of the deficiency of price competition in the context of the promotion of efficiency, competence and ability.

I say “current” because Hong Kong seems to have taken the slippery slope towards China’s mixed economy (by the introduction of minimum wages) which may change the incumbent political economic setting.

Hong Kong may not be a laissez faire or classical liberal paradise, but relatively speaking, I don’t think that Hong Kong’s free market has been a myth, especially not when compared to the Philippines.

Has Friday’s Surge by the US Stock Markets Been about the ‘Positive’ Jobs Report?

That’s how media paints it.

This Bloomberg headline serves as an example “Dow Posts Longest Weekly Rally Since October After Jobs Report”

Here is an excerpt: (bold emphasis mine)

U.S. stocks rose for a fourth week, giving the Dow Jones Industrial Average the longest rally since October, as better-than-forecast jobs data erased a four-day drop amid investor disappointment with global stimulus efforts.

Technology companies climbed the most among the 10 industry groups in the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index. Apple Inc. (AAPL) jumped 5.2 percent amid speculation the company may join the Dow, while First Solar Inc. (FSLR) soared 18 percent on surging profit. Better- than-expected earnings at MetLife Inc. (MET) and Frontier Communications Corp. (FTR) sent their stocks up at least 9 percent. Knight (KCG) Capital Group Inc. plunged 61 percent after a trading error spurred a $440 million loss.

The S&P 500 added 0.4 percent for the week to 1,390.99. The benchmark index for American equities extended its 2012 gain to 11 percent. The Dow climbed 20.51 points, or 0.2 percent, to 13,096.17, the highest level since May 3.

We’ve come to fall into this trap if you will, when it comes to central banks, we want something from them immediately and if we don’t get it, the market gets disappointed,” Mark Freeman, who oversees about $13 billion as chief investment officer at Westwood Holdings Group Inc. in Dallas, said in a phone interview. “At the end of the day, the fundamentals matter, and the fundamentals are doing OK.”

Equities reversed weekly losses on the final day, with the S&P 500 jumping 1.9 percent, after a Labor Department report showed American payrolls climbed more than forecast even as the jobless rate unexpectedly rose. The benchmark index slumped 1.5 percent in the previous four days as European Central Bank President Mario Draghi and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke failed to reassure investors on immediate efforts to bolster the economy.

The unemployment data ROSE despite the better than expected payroll figures? How’s that?

That’s because many people dropped out of the labor force.

From CNN Money: (bold emphasis mine)

Employers said they added 163,000 jobs in the month, according to a Labor Department report released Friday, much better than the 95,000 jobs economists had forecast.

But at the same time, the unemployment rate unexpectedly rose to 8.3% as households claimed they lost 195,000 jobs.

The government's monthly jobs report comes from two separate surveys: one that looks at employer payrolls, and the other which questions households. Those two reports went in opposite directions in July, confusing the overall reading on the job market.

"There are two sides of this report, and unfortunately both sides are not telling us the same thing," said Ellen Zentner, senior U.S. economist for Nomura. "This is a report showing the economy expanded at a greater pace in July than in June, but households are still telling us they're in pain.

How will “fundamentals matter” if the US economy and the financial markets have been heavily dependent on the Fed's steroids, as if to imply that monetary policies have neutral or only positive effects on the economy and the markets? Such observation is unfounded: the US Fed's balance sheets have ballooned but unemployment and economic growth remains sluggish.

Yes the CNN interprets the report as “confusing” even as the markets allegedly saw them as substantially positive.

Some positive developments eh?

Yet the breakout by the US stock markets seem to lack support as seen from internal market dynamics.

image

Bespoke Invest has a nice insight: (chart theirs too) [bold mine]

While the S&P 500's price has been in a steady uptrend, cumulative breadth for the index has actually been pretty weak. As shown in the lower chart, with each successive higher high in the index, breadth has actually been making a lower high.

Typically, it is optimal to see breadth trends confirming the moves in price, but the recent narrowing of breadth is indicative of fewer stocks participating in the rally, and likely a sign that more managers are underperforming.

“Fewer stocks participating in the rally” means two things for me, one the insufficiently supported rally could signs of developing weakness rather than strength; although most of the buying seems to have been directed at index heavyweights—Could the Fed or proxies of the Fed be behind this (too big to fail banks or the Plunge Protection team), ala the Bank of Japan via ETFs?

And second such could also be indications of distribution days.

image

Table from Bloomberg.com

Bottom line: I would put more weight in the interpretation of Friday’s hefty index-based US stock market rally as a “sympathy move” to the monster rebound (see the above table) by the Europe’s equity markets based on the mounting expectations of the imminent unveilment or announcement of the ECB-EU’s big bazooka.

Friday, August 03, 2012

Quote of the Day: Freedom is Indivisible

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

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

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

Will the Accord by the ECB-EU Politicians Pave Way for the Big Bazooka?

Amazing volatility.

clip_image001

Graphics from Bloomberg

European markets appear to skyrocketing (after yesterday’s deep slump) on the proposed accord by the ECB and EU politicians.

From Bloomberg, (bold emphasis added)

After 2 1/2 years of incremental crisis management and false starts, a bargain is beginning to emerge between Europe’s politicians and central bankers over how to calm bond markets and end the debt tumult that threatens the euro’s survival.

The European Central Bank sketched out its side of the deal yesterday, offering to buy Italy’s and Spain’s bonds on the market as long as the euro governments’ bailout fund makes purchases directly from the two countries’ treasuries and ties them to tough conditions.

ECB President Mario Draghi offered only a glimpse of the new strategy, with the actual interventions weeks or months away and a host of obstacles standing in the way before Europe can claim to be on a path out of the crisis that emerged in Greece in late 2009. Investors looking for a quicker fix pushed down the euro, European stocks and bonds of at-risk countries.

“All of the announcements, if transferred into actual activity, would be close to the big bazooka approach that the markets are looking for,” said Charles Diebel, head of market strategy at Lloyds Banking Group Plc in London. “Market disappointment is hardly surprising in this context but we may well find this lays the groundwork for the grand plan in coming weeks.”

The conditions set by the ECB on EU governments, again from the same article…

A bond-buying program would require Italy and Spain to make austerity and economic-reform commitments -- or potentially only restate the ones they’ve already made -- and submit to international monitoring. Spain has already gotten over the stigma of relying on outside help by tapping a 100 billion-euro program to shore up its banks.

Draghi’s pledge took the ECB further away from its roots as a politically autonomous central bank, modelled on Germany’s Bundesbank, with prime responsibility for containing inflation and only a lesser focus on the broader economy and the stability of the banking system.

The Bundesbank’s leader, Jens Weidmann, was alone on the ECB’s 23-member policy council in expressing “reservations,” Draghi told the press. For now, Weidmann stayed silent, contrasting with the objections to the ECB’s original bond- purchasing program that were immediately voiced by his predecessor, Axel Weber, in May 2010.

I really doubt if the prospective deal will be complied with.

The political institutions of the EU have broken much of the self-made/imposed regulations (e.g. Maastricht criteria, changes in collateral eligibility rules and etc...) to accommodate the interests of the political authorities and the banking cartel.

Yet such agreement seems as justification for the deployment of ‘big bazooka’ inflationism, perhaps through the reactivation of the Securities Markets Programme (SMP) that would only defer on the day of reckoning or to buy time for whatever political reasons.

And I also think that the team Ben Bernanke and the US Federal Reserve may not be pulling the trigger for QE 3.0 perhaps until after the ECB-EU’s joint actions.

More from the same article,

One reason Draghi had to buy time is that European governments won’t be able to act until at least mid-September, the earliest possible startup date for the planned 500 billion- euro permanent rescue fund, the European Stability Mechanism. It faces a German supreme court ruling on Sept. 12.

Until then, Europe’s only rescue vehicle is the European Financial Stability Facility, with as little as 148 billion euros left over after last month’s approval of Spanish bank aid.

So the likelihood is that the deal will likely prompt Spain and or Italy to access the EFSF (temporary fund) first, from which the ECB may provide bridge financing until the ESM (permanent fund) is ready. Yet political authorities seem to optimistically think that these would be enough to deal with the crisis. They are most likely to be mistaken.

It’s just incredible to see how financial markets respond like a pendulum—swinging from one extreme end to another—in the collision of expectations from promises to inflate as against the reality of unsustainable arrangements and of the ongoing economic recession in the EU.

One might just easily generalize that financial markets have almost been rigged by the central banks.

Nonetheless, all talk about the prospective actions by the ECB-EU seems to have scarcely influenced on the price actions of gold and oil. While both are up signifying a return to the risk ON mode, the degree of gains have not been the same as the equities. Could gold be sensing something else?

Be careful out there.

Video: Legal Gun Ban in Australia Backfires

In 1996 and in 2003 the Australian government decreed a compulsory gun buy back program.

Yet like almost all prohibition regulations, the cure have been worse than the disease. [hat tip Charleston Voice]




Wikipedia has an account of the effects of the gun ban. More statistics on Australia's gun ban here.
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. ~Thomas Jefferson