Showing posts with label economy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label economy. Show all posts

Wednesday, 25 August 2010

If this is true then the US (and the UK for that matter) is doomed


I was reading the BBC article “US existing home sales drop to 10-year low” which was discussing the 27.2% fall in US existing homes during July compared to June. Of course the government were blamed because they ended tax credits designed to boost home sales. I could today talk about why the government are even in the market trying to boost sales when it should be a free market that is not manipulated. But I won’t because I came across a couple of quotes from Carey Leahey at Decision Economics which concerned me greatly. These were "I think [the July figure] is just suggestive of an economy that is definitely slowing down" and "unfortunately, it is a situation where we can't have a meaningful recovery without a meaningful consumer recovery, and we can't have a meaningful consumer recovery without a recovery in housing."

Thursday, 5 August 2010

It was all so predictable - Bank of England Rate held at 0.5% - August 2010 Update

Today’s decision by the Bank of England to hold the Official Bank Rate at 0.5% for the 17th month in a row was so predictable that I nearly didn’t bother posting today. As I’ve been saying for a while I think they are going to try and inflate some debts away but I’m starting to become concerned by this strategy for a number of reasons.

Sunday, 16 May 2010

GDP per capita – BRIC vs PIGS vs UK, USA, Germany

We hear every day about the gross domestic product (or GDP) of countries. For example, it is always seen as negative if GDP is decreasing (by definition the UK enters a recession if there are 2 quarters of negative GDP) and positive if GDP is increasing. For the Average Joe on the street though I think GDP is not as important as GDP per capita which just doesn’t seem to ever discussed in the media or by government. For example:
- In an extreme I think if GDP started to fall but the population (through migration for example) fell at a faster rate then it is very possible that a person’s standard of living could actually be increasing. This is because the average persons GDP per capita would be increasing meaning that they should also be increasing their salary.

Monday, 10 May 2010

The Bank of England continues with their unpublished strategy – UK Bank Rate held at 0.5%


The Bank of England today held interest rates at 0.5% for the fifteenth month in a row and decided to do no more quantitative easing (QE) for now. Meanwhile in the real world the retail prices index (RPI) has risen from 3.7% to 4.4% and the measure supposedly followed by the Bank of England, the consumer prices index (CPI), has risen from 3.0% to 3.4%. The banks must be enjoying every minute of this. It gives them the chance to rebuild their balance sheets by borrowing short term at what are effectively negative interest rates. They also don’t seem to need savers so give us two fingers through low interest rates on our savings.

Saturday, 8 May 2010

The numbers just roll so easily off the tongue

Ten billion here, a trillion there. It all rolls so easily off the tongue as governments continue to both spend more than they “earn” and bail out banks & other institutions. How often though do you think about what these sums actually represent? That’s something I did today which I thought I would share. Firstly let’s try and appreciate what a billion dollars, that’s $1,000,000,000, is by looking at three images courtesy of pagetutor.com. The first sets the scene with a $100 note, then the second image piles these $100 bills into a million dollars and finally the last image piles these $100 bills into 10 pallets of money to give one billion dollars. Impressive isn’t it. Now let’s look at just two news items from Thursday.

Monday, 12 April 2010

Are we back to blowing asset bubbles already?

Last week saw Alan Greenspan interviewed as part of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. The Times reported that during this interview “Mr Greenspan denied his policies encouraged the type of risky lending that spurred the financial crisis. The long-time Fed Chairman - whose reputation has been deeply undermined by the crisis - denied low interest rates and loose regulation had encouraged lenders and borrowers to take ever greater risks."

Sunday, 11 April 2010

Where is the economic recovery?

I keep hearing in the news about how fragile the economic recovery is that we are currently seeing. I don’t know about you but I don’t see any economic recovery. What I am currently seeing is nothing more than a mirage that has been caused by massive fiscal stimulus by governments borrowing money (or as I like to think of it, stealing money from the future generations) that they didn’t have or worse by printing money (quantitative easing etc). I am yet to see any evidence that would make me think we are seeing a genuine recovery.

Saturday, 10 April 2010

An appropriate quote for how the economy should be managed

MoneyWeek every week publishes a series of quotes. In this week’s issue one of these particularly leapt out at me. In my opinion it really sums up how the UK government (or for that manner any government) should manage the economy and highlights how far away from this philosophy we are today.

Saturday, 3 April 2010

The government keeps spending our taxes to inflate house prices

I am yet to buy a house as I believe that house prices are still overvalued. I try and demonstrate this monthly with the house affordability ratios that I present. This current government however seems intent on using our taxes to prop up this property market bubble. This offends me because my (and your) taxes are being used against me to keep me out of the market and also as an electioneering tool.

Wednesday, 17 March 2010

Can the British pound fall any further?

At the time of writing sterling today had risen by 0.6% to be 1.5344 against the US dollar. Part of the contributor to this was a fall in UK unemployment of 33,000 for the 3 months to January 2010 putting unemployment at 2.45 million or 7.8% today. Now I don’t watch this indicator regularly however if you read into the figures a little deeper it doesn’t look all rosy to me.

Tuesday, 16 February 2010

A History of Severe Real S&P 500 Stock Bear Markets – February Update


Looking at the first chart which shows the real (inflation adjusted) S&P 500 (or its predecessor) stock market I have identified three historic severe stock bear markets. These I am defining as stock markets where from the stock market reaching a new high, they then proceeded to lose in excess of 60% of their real (inflation adjusted) value. These are best demonstrated by the second chart which shows each of these stock bear markets and the fall in percentage terms from the peak. So briefly what were these bear markets (full details here).

The first severe stock bear (marked in purple on the chart) market started with a new real high being reached in September 1906 and incorporated the 1907 Bankers Panic. From the high it took until January 1920 for the stock market to reach a real loss of 60.9% and then until December 1920 to reach its real low of -70.0%. That’s a period of 14 years and 3 months.

The second severe stock bear (marked in blue on the chart) market started with a new real high being reached in September 1929 and is obviously the period of the Great Depression. The markets passed through -60% on a number of occasions. In June 1932 the market reached its real low of -80.6%. That’s only a relatively short period of time however it really wasn’t over then as the market never really recovered and kept dipping back below -60% in real terms. 20 years later the market was still below the real -60% mark.

The third severe stock bear (marked in olive on the chart) market started with a new real high being reached in December 1968, incorporated the stock market crash of 1973 to 1974 and the 1973 Oil Crisis. From the market high it took until March 1982 for the stock market to reach a real loss of -60.9% and then until July 1982 to reach its real low of -62.6%. That’s a period of 13 years and 7 months.

So that brings me, as always, to the last line on the chart marked in red which shows the real bear market that we are currently in. This period began in August 2000 with the Dot Com Crash however we were unable to reach a new real high before the Global Financial Crisis took hold. In this real bear stock market we have been unable to break through -60% ‘only’ reaching -58.6% in March 2009. That is a period of only 8 years and 7 months.

As the second chart clearly shows we have now dipped back below the -40% line to be at -41.9% from -39.4% last month. We are now 9 years and 6 months into this severe bear market which is a relatively short period of time compared with the other severe bears shown. The previous bears all went below -60% in the years to come and at this point were:
- in 1916 at -25.4% and over the next year heading to -33.8%.
- in 1939 at -50.7% and over the next year pretty much standing still in real terms to reach -52.0%.
- in 1978 at -50.1% and over the next year heading to -53.1%.

I’m going to keep watching this comparison as I think it could be just starting to get interesting. Governments around the world are fast running out of borrowing capacity as Greece has aptly demonstrated. Closer to home the Bank of England has stated that more quantitative easing (QE) could be just around the corner. What will that do to inflation? The best growth that can be ‘created’ in the UK even with QE, bank bailouts and “cash for clunkers” is a miserly 0.1%. Finally, despite the big bonuses, I don’t see any evidence that the banking sector has repaired itself. I don’t see other developed economies being a whole lot better. Could we yet see that real -60% bear? History suggests there is still plenty of time for it to occur.

Assumptions include:
- Inflation data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. January and February ‘10 inflation is extrapolated.
- Prices are month averages except February ‘10 which is the 12 February ’10 S&P 500 stock market close.
- Historic data provided from Professor Shiller website.

Tuesday, 2 February 2010

A tale of two Central Banks – Reserve Bank of Australia vs Bank of England

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) announced today that they were keeping interest rates on hold at 3.75% after raising rates by 0.25% a month for 3 months in a row. According to the Financial Times this surprised most economists.

In my opinion the RBA seem to have timed their increases well. In September of 2009 the Australian Consumer Price Index (CPI) saw a low in this cycle of 1.26% and even though this was the case they started raising rates in October. We have now seen the RBA increase rates by 20% from their lows. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me for them to take a pause to see what effect this is having given CPI is still only 2.1% and given the inflation target for the RBA is as follows:

“The Governor and the Treasurer have agreed that the appropriate target for monetary policy in Australia is to achieve an inflation rate of 2–3 per cent, on average, over the cycle. This is a rate of inflation sufficiently low that it does not materially distort economic decisions in the community. Seeking to achieve this rate, on average, provides discipline for monetary policy decision-making, and serves as an anchor for private-sector inflation expectations.”

This target was introduced in mid 2003 and since that time the arithmetic average has been 2.7% so to me as a simple Average Joe they seem to be doing a reasonable job.

Now to the contrast which is the Bank of England. They have kept the Official Bank Rate at a record low of 0.5% now since March 2009. The Bank of England also saw the UK Consumer Price Index (CPI) reach a low in this cycle in September of 2009 at a rate of 1.1%. However instead of following the lead of the RBA they have sat on their hands allowing CPI to reach 1.5% in October, 1.9% in November and we now have the CPI at 2.9% (with last month being the largest month on month increase in history) and the Retail Prices Index (RPI) at 2.4%. I can’t see how they can allow this to occur given the Monetary Policy Framework under which they operate includes:

“The Bank’s monetary policy objective is to deliver price stability – low inflation – and, subject to that, to support the Government’s economic objectives including those for growth and employment. Price stability is defined by the Government’s inflation target of 2%. The remit recognises the role of price stability in achieving economic stability more generally, and in providing the right conditions for sustainable growth in output and employment. The Government's inflation target is announced each year by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the annual Budget statement.”

I think the Bank of England have now shown their hand and think they can control the inflation genie and allow “just a little bit of inflation”. I’m backing that they don’t raise interest rates this week. I guess only time will tell.

Tuesday, 26 January 2010

Stagflation and the UK Q4 GDP Numbers

Firstly, some quotes to think about:
1. "Now in Britain, we are saying, as you know, that inflation is low, interest rates are low and we expect there to be growth.” – Gordon Brown, 2008
2. "We have a strong economy, its momentum will carry us through." – Alistair Darling, 2007
3. "I think the choice is becoming pretty clear. Between a government that is determined at all times to maintain the stability and growth of the British economy. “ – Gordon Brown,2007
4. “...a weak currency arises from a weak economy which in turn is the result of a weak Government.” – Gordon Brown, 1992

So the UK today emerged from recession. What an excellent [sic] job the current government and the Bank of England has done managing the UK economy over the business cycle. Today we find that the UK economy (GDP) has grown by 0.1% in the final three months of 2009. To get these outstanding [sic] results they’ve only had to lower VAT to 15%, lower the Official Bank Rate to 0.5% (the lowest rate in the history of the Bank of England), quantitative ease to the tune of £200 billion and introduce a car scrappage scheme to name but four.

This has all resulted in:
- house prices that are within 13% of record peaks. Of course that’s great news if you’re a “hard working family”, sorry, hard working politician with multiple houses partly paid for by the tax payer.
- a heavily devalued (weak) pound.
- low returns from bank deposits / bonds for those people trying to live on savings or save for retirement.

To go with this we have the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increasing at a rate of 2.9% including the largest month on month in history and a Retail Prices Index (RPI) increasing at a rate of 2.4%.

Now I’m going to get my crystal ball out and predict how the Bank of England is going to respond. I’m betting that they will leave the Official Bank Rate on hold at 0.5%. This in turn will lead to the next big issue for UK PLC. Firstly inflation will take off, then salary inflation will start as the public sector unions negotiate first just before the election and then others join the band wagon. This will then lead to built in inflation which the Bank of England will struggle to get back in hand.

I have one word for where I think the UK economy is headed – stagflation.

To conclude I’m going to modify the four quotes above a little. “Inflation is not low”, “we do not have a strong economy”, “we do not have stability and growth” however we do have “a weak currency”.

Sunday, 17 January 2010

A History of Severe Real S&P 500 Stock Bear Markets


Looking at the first chart which shows the real (inflation adjusted) S&P 500 (or its predecessor) stock market I have identified three historic severe stock bear markets. These I am defining as stock markets where from the stock market reaching a new high, they then proceeded to lose in excess of 60% of their real (inflation adjusted) value. These are best demonstrated by the second chart which shows each of these stock bear markets and the fall in percentage terms from the peak. So what were these bear markets.

The first severe stock bear (marked in purple on the chart) market started with a new real high being reached in September 1906. This period incorporated the 1907 Bankers Panic which was caused by banks retracting market liquidity and depositors losing confidence in the banks. This occurred during an economic recession and there were a number of runs on banks and trust companies. Additionally many state and local banks were bankrupted. All sounds a bit familiar doesn’t it? So from the high it took until January 1920 for the stock market to reach a real loss of 60.9% and then until December 1920 to reach its real low of -70.0%. That’s a period of 14 years and 3 months.

The second severe stock bear (marked in blue on the chart) market started with a new real high being reached in September 1929. This is obviously the well known period of the Great Depression. I won’t go into the history here as I’m sure it’s well known by all readers. What is interesting however is that the markets passed through -60% on a number of occasions. So from the high it took until January 1931 for the stock market to reach a real loss of 62.0% and then until June 1932 to reach its real low of -80.6%. That’s only a relatively short period of time however it really wasn’t over then as the market never really recovered and kept dipping back below -60% in real terms. This occurred in January 1933, July 1934, April 1938, June 1940, February 1941 and was back at -73.1% in May 1942. That’s a period of 12 years and 8 months. Even 20 years later the market was still below the real -60% mark.

The third severe stock bear (marked in olive on the chart) market started with a new real high being reached in December 1968. This period incorporated the stock market crash of 1973 to 1974 which came after the collapse of the Bretton Woods system and also incorporated the 1973 Oil Crisis. So from the high it took until March 1982 for the stock market to reach a real loss of -60.9% and then until July 1982 to reach its real low of -62.6%. That’s a period of 13 years and 7 months.

So that brings me to the last line on the chart marked in red which shows the real bear market that we are currently in. This period began in August 2000 with the Dot Com Crash however we were unable to reach a new real high before the Global Financial Crisis took hold. In this real bear stock market we were unable to break through -60% ‘only’ reaching -58.6% in March 2009. That is a period of only 8 years and 7 months. Even today we are still -38.1% which is a period of 9 years and 5 months which is a relatively short period of time compared with the bears shown above.

My question is once the governments of the world are forced to stop stimulating the economies through borrowing (for example a bond market strike) or quantitative easing (for example excessive inflation) could we yet see that real -60% bear? History suggests there is still plenty of time for it to occur.

Assumptions include:
- Inflation data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. December ‘09 & January ‘10 inflation is extrapolated.
- Prices are month averages except January ‘10 which is the 11 January ’10 S&P 500 stock market close.
- Historic data provided from Professor Shiller website.

Wednesday, 13 January 2010

The Recession and Global Financial Crisis is Over. Back to the Boom in House Prices.

You’d be forgiven for thinking that it’s all over if you caught page 19 of the London Evening Standard which has the headline ‘London house prices surge past the pre-recession peak of 2007’. Apparently the suburbs of Mayfair, Knightsbridge, Belgravia, Pimlico, Chelsea, Kensington, Holland Park, Notting Hill and Regent’s Park have risen in price by 51% from their lowest point in March of 2009. As an added bonus they are now 3% above the previous high.

Can you spot a theme with the suburbs? It’s amazing what bailing out the banks, the Bank of England dropping the Official Bank Rate to 0.5% and around £200 billion of Quantitative Easing can achieve. It’s certainly helped some however I don’t think we’re out of the woods yet. Let me provide some further evidence.

I don’t have to look far. Firstly, page 31 leads with ‘More bank losses feared after SocGen writedown’. Society Generale have issued a surprise profit warning stating they have to write down a further EUR1.5 billion on is Collateralised Debt Obligations on residential Mortgage Backed Securities after deciding to take a “stricter assessment” on their value. Now where have I heard those words before?

Until banks face up to their losses and clear their balance how can we move onto the next business cycle. At this rate we’re going to end up just like Japan. A further sobering thought is that this is all still going on and the peak of the Alt-A resets in the US are just starting now.

Secondly, page 33 tells us that ‘Flat manufacturing triggers talk of recession’s return’. Manufacturing output has failed to grow for a second month in a row leaving manufacturing output 5.4% lower than a year earlier.

That doesn’t sound like a boom to me. To me it sounds like it’s going to get worse before it gets better.