How about we take advantage of today’s lull in markets to pass on a few observations from last week’s Agora Financial Investment Symposium in Vancouver? There are three points worth passing on, mulling over, and sorting out.
First, the debt deflationists reared their collective head. The argument, in a nutshell, is that falling values on financial assets (homes, shares, mortgages) lead to a reduction in aggregate consumer wealth and thus demand and a general slowdown. People spend less, slowing down the economy, production, and wages.
The result, the argument goes, is a fall in the general level of prices. It begins with the bust in financial asset values, but works its way, eventually, into the real economy through slower consumer spending and final demand. It is one reason the debt deflationists given for falling commodity prices, including gold.
It’s worth thinking about. But the trouble is, so far as we can see, that debt deflation is nearly impossible when you have a modern central bank willing to expand the money supply by any means necessary. Not that Ben Bernanke is the Malcolm X of Central Banking. But you take the point, we hope.
The point is, as our old friend Gary North pointed out today, the Fed may let regional banks fail. But it will never let big banks fail (they own the Fed). And it will be the buyer of last resort for things like U.S. Treasury bonds, should it ever come to that. That’s an important point, being the buyer of last resort.
What it practically means is that the Fed can create new money out of thin air and trade it for debt-backed assets owned by the banks or issued by the government. It can even buy shares in public companies (or Fannie and Freddie.) In the world of modern central banking, the Fed can always exchange cash for debt or impaired assets. And if that doesn’t work, the government can always use fiscal policy to just mail people checks which they’ll have to spend.
It’s not falling prices we reckon you should worry about. If the world’s fiat money system utterly collapses, then yes, we’ll see a general decline in the price level. But until then, inflation is the bug-bear to worry about. Anything can be monetized by the central bank, and before this whole perverse period in financial history is over, many things will.
Another point from Vancouver? The rise in per-capita incomes in the developing world is what’s driving commodity demand at the margin (the Bowen Basin in Queensland, the Pilbara in WA). The question everyone wants to know the answer to is how vulnerable the emerging markets are to a slowdown in U.S. consumer demand.
That is, can emerging market savers and consumers survive the period between the decline of the U.S. as the global growth engine and what comes next? What comes next is emerging markets driving global growth through their own domestic demand. But they aren’t ready to do that, at least not at the same level the debt-fuelled U.S. consumer manages.
Per capita incomes in the developed West range from US$25,000 to US$44,000. In the developing world (China and India) because they have so much larger populations, it will be awhile before per capita incomes even hit US$5,000 per year. But when they do, it kicks off a new phase of demand for resources as discretionary incomes rise.
Our take? Commodity demand in emerging markets is just now entering its most resource intensive phase. But the credit crisis and high energy prices will take some steam out of the emerging markets. They will still emerge. But it might take longer…and the transition to a post-American consumer driven world will be bumpy.
Finally, the best quote of the conference came from Doug Casey. “America is turning into the kind of place where everything that isn’t banned is compulsory.” It probably goes for Australia too.
There is a long list of things you can’t do or say anymore. But no one really learns anything by being told what they can or can’t do. You don’t make people healthier, smarter, or more moral by making them less free to make and learn from their own mistakes.
Take trans fat. Will California really make people healthier by banning it? Or will they just make people even more stupid and childish and dependent on the government? You can’t make people healthy. They have to want to be healthy and have healthy habits. What’s surprising about the world we live in is how many people are willing to be told what to do by someone, anyone. And just how afraid some people are of being accountable for their own actions, or just being truly free.
In the markets, NAB threw CEO John Stewart under the bus after last Friday’s shocking result. Heads must always roll when mistakes are made.
Still, it looks like the banks will get a bit of breather today. Wall Street rallied overnight. Oil fell. This, plus the lack of any explicit earnings disasters, gave stocks room to breathe and to rally.
By the way, not that we’re crowing about it, but it looks like we may have been pretty close when we called the oil top at $145. Granted, it went a couple of bucks higher. But these things ebb and flow. And oil’s price flowed higher than anyone expected, at least for now. It’s time for some ebbing.
The only other news worth nothing is that the government of WA gave the nod to locally backed project for building the port (and eventually rail) infrastructure to open up the iron ore province in the Midwest. We’re headed out that way in a few weeks to speak in Geraldton.
What was interesting about yesterday’s decision by the WA government is that it favoured a local consortium, with Japanese backing, over a Chinese-backed project. The decision prevents a mine-to-port control of the Midwest by Chinese interests. But where does it leave things?
In this our Asian century, many Aussie projects won’t get doing without foreign JV partners. The same is true in the Midwest. But will those partners be Chinese, Japanese, or both? We reckon if the Midwest is going to become Pilbara Jr., it will have to be both. But nobody really knows the endgame yet.
Markets and Money