Showing posts with label Future Comment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Future Comment. Show all posts

Monday, 26 September 2011

Time For QE2?



Despite Project Merlin, it would appear that there is a problem with the UK banks lending to UK non-financial corporations. The graph indicates that, since 2009, lending has been negative in absolute terms. If we factor in an inflation rate in the region of 5%, then lending in real terms has been negative since about 2008.

The policy of quantitative easing, where the Bank of England injected £200 bn into the monetary system, lowered interest rates to an effective nominal rate of about -2.5% in nominal terms and stimulated GDP by about 1.5% to 2%. This was a great success. It meant that we suffered a recession instead of an economic slump. However, it was also something of a blunt instrument in that much of the injection did not make it to the real economy. The policy also diverted cash from one idle pool of money (the gilts market) into another (the stock market). It is no accident that the FTSE 100 share index rose by 50% during the period in which the Bank of England made its purchases.

That, of course, does not mean that the policy would continue to work if it were to be repeated. For the policy to work, there needs to be a more direct link between bond purchases and bank lending. The proposal for QE2 to but bank bonds rather than gilts might go some way to address that problem. It would be a way to give Project Merlin some teeth. There is the possibility of some capital loss on the part of the Bank of England, but given the levels of profit made during the onset of the credit crunch, these do not need to be substantial.

If monetary policy is to be the chosen route - and I have to say that a fiscal stimulus aimed at low income families would be more preferable - then a monetary easing directed at small business is unlikely to do much harm. It may even help to boost growth a bit.

© The European Futures Observatory 2011

Sunday, 25 September 2011

Not Quite The Whole Truth

This is a curious example of a story not quite telling the whole truth. We are told that "Britain's banks, moreover, are not among the most exposed to Greek debt. " That part is true. But it is not the whole truth. French and German banks hold about two thirds of the Greek sovereign debt. Any action to prop up Greece, is also action to prop up the French and German banking systems - a point missed by many French and German voters.

However, from where did the French and German banks get the money to buy Greek sovereign debt? It is the case that British banks lent the French and German banking system over €1 trn. Any pain felt by French and German banks will be quickly transmitted to the UK banking system. From this, we ought to deduce two conclusions. First, nobody can afford to be smug about the pain of others. We are all in this together. Second, any politician who claims that the cost to their constituency of a Greek failure would be minimal either knows the truth and is not telling it, or doesn't know the truth and really ought to.

© The European Futures Observatory 2011

£1.75 trillion deal to save the euro - Telegraph

Tuesday, 8 February 2011

British Banks–The Gift That Keeps On Giving

The news that Mr Osborne intends to make the bank levy more stringent than originally planned. Needless to say, the apologists from the financial economy are crying ‘foul’ and warning of a mass exodus from these shores. The trouble is that they did exactly the same last year – with the introduction of the one off tax on bank bonuses – and here they are again, still trading in London.

Two aspects of the proposals need highlighting. First, there is a view prevalent in the country at the moment that whilst the banks caused the mess that all of the taxpayers are having to clear up, the banks are not enduring a fair share of the pain. At a time when libraries are closing, essential social services are being cut back, and education spending is being reduced, we are also seeing the prospect of record profits in the banking sector and a return to stellar bank bonuses. The banks will gain little sympathy beyond the circle of sycophants over these proposals. Many will feel that they may not go far enough.

Second, there is the question of how the economy should be balanced in the future. Many question the wisdom of returning to an economy that is top heavy in the financial economy. A reduction in the reliance upon the banking sector would actually make the economy a bit more resilient to the shocks within the global economy. Those of that view point to Germany as an example of a balanced economy that has weathered the recession quite well. This addresses the issue of bank exile. If the risky, toxic, bank operations were to be driven away from the UK – say to New York or Hong Kong – would it be such a bad thing?

To me, this seems like something of a turning point. Until now, Mr Osborne had appeared to have been a captive of the banking fraternity and the financial economy. Only recently did he say that the ‘Banker Bashing’ had gone too far. Now he is bashing banks himself. Does this represent a major change in policy? Does he realise that for his gamble to pay off, he needs to rebalance the economy away from financial services and towards manufacturing exports? Let’s hope so!

© The European Futures Observatory 2011

Increased bank tax to raise £2.5bn - UK Politics, UK - The Independent

George Osborne levy attacked by banks and Ed Balls - Telegraph

Wednesday, 2 February 2011

Can Interest Rates Control Inflation?

As the titanic struggle between the real economy and the financial economy intensifies, the question has arisen about using interest rates as a tool to reduce the current bout of inflation. We have argued that they would be rather a bunt instrument simply because they would address the symptom and not the cause of the disease. The current bout of inflation is the result of the rising world price of commodities. This has mainly been caused by the recovery of the Icarus Economies in Asia, it is a demand led inflation.

Raising interest rates work by dampening demand to such a point that, as sales fall, companies respond by cutting their prices (or, at least, not raising them as fast). Demand is reduced by taking money out of the economy. That money doesn’t disappear though. Instead, it acts as a wealth transfer out of the real economy and into the financial economy. No wonder that it is the banks and financial institutions who are leading the charge for higher interest rates.

Which leads us back to the politics of the current situation. For Mr Osborne’s Gamble to pay off he needs the real economy to deliver growth through investment and exports. These are not helped by higher interest rates. Which creates a dilemma. In order to collect from his gamble, Mr Osborne has to turn his back on his natural constituency in the City.

We live in interesting times!

© The European Futures Observatory 2011

FT.com / Comment / Letters - Raising interest rates is a poor tool to fight inflation

Sunday, 16 January 2011

Business As Usual?

One of our contentions is that the financial economy and the real economy each run to a different rhythm. At times when both of the economies are synchronised, tremendous gains are made. When they are out of step, then problems arise. Our current economic difficulties originated in a hic-cup in the financial economy. There was an edifice of credit given too easily to people who were patently unable to repay the loans (what Will Hutton calls the ‘Ponzi Economy’), regulators who were unwilling to regulate this lending, and  a financial sector driven by greed and personal enrichment to expand this lending beyond safe limits. All of this came tumbling down when the financial economy hit a speed bump.

It was by no means certain that the contagion in the financial economy would need to spread into the real economy. After all, the bursting of the ‘Dot.com Bubble’ only had mildly recessional implications. However, a combination of a poor and tardy policy response – particularly in the US – allowed the contagion to bleed from the financial economy into the real economy. And here we are, where we are – the worst recession since the 1930s.

The financial economy and the real economy are still out of step. Across the OECD, unemployment remains high, there is still a relatively large debt overhang in the public and household sectors, and the output gap remains higher than previously experienced. All of this suggests that the real economy needs further fiscal and monetary stimulation. The financial economy, on the other hand, has largely recovered from where it was during the credit crunch. Credit is flowing again - albeit at much reduced trading volumes - the financial system has been shored up, bank profits have returned, and even large bonuses are back on the agenda of bankers. The danger, as the financiers see it, is the nascent inflation that could result from the recent monetary expansion. The financial economy needs interest rates to be increased as part of a monetary contraction.

In many respects, this reflects a desire to return to ‘business as usual’. Of course, if I were an investment banker, I would see the logic behind returning to stellar salaries as quickly as possible. However, the policy of ‘business as usual’ implies that we continue to make the mistakes that put us into recession to begin with. This suggests that the financial economy has yet to come to terms with the paradigm shift that the recession has caused.

For example, the conventional wisdom that proved to be unwise in 2008 states that if inflation is building, then interest rates should be increased and monetary policy should be contracted. If the MPC were to follow the suggestion of Andrew Sentance to increase interest rates, would it work? We think not. The main inflationary pressures that we are currently experiencing are structural in nature caused by rising food, energy, and commodity prices. Raising interest rates may cause Sterling to appreciate a little (or it may not), taking the pressure off those food, energy, and commodity prices denominated in US Dollars, but the impact on global food, energy, and commodity prices is likely to be negligible. UK interest rates would have to rise very far in order to have an impact on global commodity prices.

Instead, such a policy is likely to do severe damage the real economy. Low inflation rates and a low value of Sterling, which fell by between 20% to 25% in the period 2007-10, have stimulated the UK manufacturing sector that exports to Europe, the US, the Middle East, and the Far East – i.e. those economies based around the Euro and the US Dollar. Whilst the cost of imported materials have risen, this is unlikely to lead to a domestic inflationary spiral because of the sheer size of the output gap. There is too much slack in the economy, particularly with the public sector redundancies starting later this year, for inflation to get out of hand.

And this is the point at which we arrive. If it is UK policy to nurture the exporting manufacturing sector, then interest rates need to be held low for some time to come, despite the occurrence of structural inflation. If, on the other hand, interest rates are raised, then it signals a surrender to the financial economy and a return to ‘business as usual’.

If this occurs, the we ought not to complain too much about bankers bonuses. After all, that is part and parcel of our economic policy.

© The European Futures Observatory 2011

BBC News - UK interest rates remain at 0.5%

The Economist | The outlook for exports: Trade winds

Friday, 29 October 2010

Anyone For Tea?

The forthcoming mid-term elections have taken on the hue of a referendum on the popularity of President Obama. A mere two years ago, the President was billed as a new and dynamic political force in America. His rally cry was ‘Hope’, his exhortation ‘Yes, we can.’ And yet, the programme seems to have come off the boil. ‘Hope’ now turns out to be ‘Hype’ and, in an unguarded moment on a TV show recently, he now says ‘Yes, we can. But, …’ If the polls are anywhere near to being correct, the President’s party is facing a substantial defeat in the voting next week. As an outsider looking in, I am interested in why America has fallen out of love with Obama? Why is it that his opponents are so hostile towards him? What exactly is driving the extreme views of the Tea Party opponents to the President?

I guess that the single word answer is ‘recession’. America is experiencing a recession that is at the worse end of the OECD experience, and this is exposing some of the fractures within American society. However, we like to take a longer view of these fractures in seeking an explanation.

According to Edward Luce of the FT, “the annual incomes of the bottom 90 per cent of US families have been essentially flat since 1973 – having risen by only 10 per cent in real terms over the past 37 years”. This is quite an interesting statistic because it also explains so much. If income has flatlined in this period, and living standards have been increasing, then how has the American Dream been paid for? By an increase in household debt. It would appear that American consumers have been borrowing to improve their living standards. A good part of this increase in debt was underwritten by a boom in the housing market, as households used their mortgages as credit cards.

Of course, there is nothing inherently unstable about this money-go-round until the music stops. Once that occurs, then everyone wants to ditch the parcel rather than being left with a dud asset. As the credit crunch – essentially a financial phenomenon – bled into the real economy, the resulting recession has had two important consequences. First, there is an acute shortage of credit to finance further expansion of consumer expenditure (more on this later), and second, there arises unemployment at sufficient volumes that the servicing of existing debt is called into question.

This is compounded by the composition of the borrowers. Many of those who have borrowed to finance their lifestyles are of the Boomer generation, and one thing that characterises the Boomers is their deep sense of entitlement. We now have a situation where a generational cohort, who are accustomed to being treated like spoilt children, have had their toys taken away from them. They are angry. They are angry enough to form Tea Party groups. They are angry enough to call into question whether their own President is American. They are angry enough to give credence to extremists such as Glenn Beck. And they may just be angry enough to vote into office someone like Christine O’Donnell, who is manifestly unfit for office.

It could be quite easy for Europeans to become smug over the discomfort of America. However, just an element of deep thought stops this train of thought. It is the angry, white, lower middle class who are giving electoral backing to the Neo-Nazi parties in the UK. It is the respectable burghers who are giving electoral support to the anti-Islamic parties in the Netherlands. It is the middle class establishment who are behind the hounding of the Roma in France and Italy. There are angry middle class voters across the developed world at the moment.

This is likely to be a feature of our near future. If recovery is sluggish (the best case scenario) or if recession makes a re-appearance (the worst case scenario), it is unlikely that middle class household balance sheets will be repaired quickly. In the past, the world has waited for American households to start borrowing to finance their consumption, thus kick-starting the world economy. This is unlikely to happen for some time – American households are simply too maxed out. This suggests that middle class anger will remain for some time to come, which will make our politics just a little more xenophobic and our economies just a little less globalised.

We call this trend the ‘New Nationalism’.

© The European Futures Observatory 2010

FT.com / Reportage - The crisis of middle-class America

On the Way Down: The Erosion of America's Middle Class - SPIEGEL ONLINE

BBC News - Number of Americans living in poverty 'increases by 4m'

Glenn Beck Leads Religious Rally at Lincoln Memorial - NYTimes.com

BBC News - Profile: Christine O'Donnell, Delaware Senate candidate

Growing Number of Americans Say Obama is a Muslim: Pew Research Center

Thursday, 28 October 2010

Ageing Europe

We often hear the argument that, over the next decade or two, the European economy is likely to come off the boil owing to the ageing of the population of Europe. This is, and always has been, stuff and nonsense. The forecast only makes sense if everything stays the same. Of course, it doesn’t.
To start with, the enlargement of the EU has brought into Europe tens of millions of young workers from Bulgaria and Romania – they will make an appearance in the European jobs market from 2014 onwards. Then there are the tens of millions of young Turks whose hopes are pinned to Turkish accession. And then, on top of that, there are tens of millions of youngsters in North Africa, who are awaiting the spread of Europe across the Mediterranean. All of these will swell the European workforce.
Of course, there are those who do not want to see an enlarged EU. Their answer to the impending labour crisis is to enlarge the workforce organically – mainly by raising the age at which Europeans retire. It is in this context that the recent raising of the French retirement age can be viewed. France is lukewarm about Turkish accession to the EU, which implies that French workers will have to retire later as a consequence.
© The European Futures Observatory 2010
BBC News - Q&A: French strikes over pension reforms

Wednesday, 27 October 2010

Ever Increasing Union

It is often argued that the fragmentation of the EU at the national level is one of the handicaps that is preventing Europe from achieving its full commercial destiny. The cause of integration is seen to be at the heart of the European project, which is why infrastructure projects take such prominence. During the industrial revolution, rail provided an integrating force, but at the national level. Rail is now set to provide an integrating force at the European level. The link between London and Cologne is really quite important – Cologne is the rail hub that opens Scandinavia, The Baltic, and Eastern Europe to traffic from Western Europe. I am sure that the Franco-German tiff will be resolved. They usually are. What excites me is the prospect of the pan-European service being available from 2013.
Of course, all this is saying is that I am a rail fan rather than a fan of flying. Guilty as charged!
© The European Futures Observatory 2010
A Franco-German train tiff: Ils ne passeront pas | The Economist

Tuesday, 26 October 2010

Bush III

So much for the hope create by Obama’s election. In one way, he is behaving like the third Bush. On coming to office, there was a solemn promise to close Guantanamo Bay within a year. That deadline came and passed. He is still pursuing with the Military Tribunals – a judicial black hole where ‘normal’ trial rights are suspended, where public reporting is suspended, where evidence based upon hearsay, coercion, and torture is admissible. There are those who argue that the pursuit of the military tribunals is a war crime in itself!
We now have the case of Omar Khadr. A young man from Canada who was coerced into a confession by the threat of being gang raped to death has now entered into a plea bargain with his US prosecutors. If he pleads guilty, which he has, he will be eligible to serve any remaining time in his native Canada. It is hard to see which injustice cries the loudest.
Is it the extraction of a confession under duress? Is it a plea bargain where a guilty plea brings a much lighter sentence? Is it his complete abandonment by Canada?
I have never thought highly of Obama – to me he is just another US President of the same mould, more hype than hope, perhaps – but I did used to think highly of Canada. I’m less inclined to do so now.
© The European Futures Observatory 2010
BBC News - Canadian militant pleads guilty at Guantanamo tribunal

Monday, 25 October 2010

Productivity–vs- Competency

The public sector is pulling back in the expectation that the private sector will expand to fill the gap in terms of services and social care. The reasoning behind this is that the private sector has a higher labour productivity than the public sector. Normally it does. However, nothing is without cost. Higher productivity in private sector basically means that the job is done cheaper than the public sector could do it. We tend to think in terms of public sector waste (one source of productivity loss), but we should also think in terms of private sector incompetency (one source of productivity gain). One way in which higher productivity is delivered is through cutting corners in staff costs – usually by not training staff adequately to do the job.
The case of the poor man who was left brain dead by incompetent private sector agency staff who were not trained adequately for their outsourced public sector role provides a taste of what is to come in the next few years. It would be a shame if the cost savings from the outsourced social and health services were simply absorbed into higher lawyers fees resulting from the level of incompetence (and negligence) derived from swapping productivity for competence.
© The European Futures Observatory 2010
BBC News - Tetraplegic man's life support 'turned off by mistake'

Sunday, 24 October 2010

Globalisation Fast Tracked

The recent meeting of G20 Finance Ministers has actually achieved something worthy and tangible. In a bid to avoid a looming trade and currency war between the surplus and the deficit nations, the G20 Finance Ministers have agreed to rebalance the voting rights at the IMF. This may sound a bit arcane, but it does have a tangible impact. If globalisation is to continue as it has in the recent past, if we are to avoid a retreat into economic nationalism, then the global economy has to be rebalanced, which includes reform of the institutions, such as the IMF, that direct the global economy.
The detail of the reforms is interesting. 6% of the voting rights will be passed from European nations and given to the emerging economies. This reflects the change in global economic power. However, the US still retains 17% of voting rights, thus giving it a de facto veto over all decisions (an 85% majority is needed for decision-making). I wonder how long that will last? I guess that the loss of the US veto would suggest that the Dollar would no longer be the global reserve currency. I can see that coming, but not just yet.
© The European Futures Observatory 2010

Saturday, 23 October 2010

When The Well Runs Dry

What is the structural weakness in the US economy? Some might point to the flight of manufacturing, some might point to duff mortgages, but I would point to the parlous finances of the various States Governments. A recent article in The Economist considers the impact of retiring Boomers (along with their sense of entitlement), State finances, and the lack of funding for State pension schemes. Apparently, 7 out of 50 States will have exhausted their pension assets by 2020, and half will have run out of money by 2027. The impact of this on the State tax revenues makes even more interesting reading. It would seem that current employees are working under an illusion that the promises made are affordable, whereas they quite possibly are not, as the following table suggests.
image

Of course, the bond markets will intervene well before this scenario occurs, but it does suggest that, towards the end of this decade, a crisis in State funding – along the lines of the crisis in the Eurozone – will befall the Dollar.

Ooops … it looks as if we can’t afford to retire!

© The European Futures Observatory 2010

Thursday, 21 October 2010

QE2?

As we stand on the verge of the second round of Quantitative Easing (QE2), the twin questions of how it works and what it achieves remain to be answered. Some have attempted to answer the question in terms of orthodox economics. These answers have failed - mainly because the assumptions upon which QE is based are quite alien to orthodox economics. In orthodox economics, if you flood an economy with liquidity, then inflation will follow. That has happened to a minor extent, but nowhere near as much as has been previously suggested. Instead, we are experiencing a relatively mild recession (for now). This is explained in QE terms by the output gap - the difference between what we can produce and what we are actually producing. With an output gap in excess of 10%, monetary easing can still go quite some way before conditions in the real economy start to become inflationary.

QE is also being used to fine tune the economy. I rather suapect this to be something of a blunt instrument. The policy of fiscal tightening and monetary loosening is novel, but I do fear that the tightening might be overdone. For example, for Mr Osborne's plans to work, the private sector needs to generate something like a million jobs in the next four years in order to soak up that half million recently unemployed during the recession and the half million displaced public sector workers created in the recent spending review. This seems like a tall order at a time when GDP growth will be, at best, muted. A million jobs over the decade might be a more reasonable prospect.

Which brings us to Faisal Islam. His article for Prospect Magazine rather reflects conventional thinking. Stuck in the grip of a neo-classical base for his economics, he fails to grasp the key points of QE. In my view, this reflects the failure of economics more than anything else. Perhaps what we need is a new economics?

The Great Money Mystery – Prospect Magazine « Prospect Magazine

© The European Futures Observatory 2010

Wednesday, 20 October 2010

US inquiry into China rare earth shipments

Is this a story about the 'Age of Scarcity', or is it a story about the locus of Geo-politics shifting eastwards, or is it a story about the New Nationalism? The truth is, that it is all of them at once. Futurists have a knack of describing trends and scenarios as if they were separate and discrete views of the future. For analysis, it is better to assume that they are. In practice though, reality is a bit more messy. Many trends and scenarios inter-act with each other and need to be disentangled. The story of Rare Earth Elements is one such case in hand.

BBC News - US inquiry into China rare earth shipments

© The European Futures Observatory 2010