I know what you're thinking: "Did he
fire six shots, or only five?" Well, to tell you
the truth, in all this excitement, I've kinda lost
track myself. But being as this is a .44 Magnum,
the most powerful handgun in the world, and would
blow your head clean off, you've got to ask
yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well do
ya? The emblematic dialogue from Dirty
Harry
Watching stocks skid even as
commodities ramp up to impossible levels as
political unrest rears its head across the globe
and bond markets start focusing increasingly on
credit risks of governments, the average investor
should go and ask the world's central banks the
key question - did they already fire all
the ammunition they had in
their pockets, or do they have any other bright
ideas left in their arsenals?
Anyone who
has seen the movie Dirty Harry (spoiler
alert) knows that Harry turns out to have fired
his six bullets but by just being the uber-cool
Clint Eastwood, he still makes his thug blink.
That happy set of circumstances, though, looks
impossibly far-fetched for the world's markets
from where things stand today.
A litany of
problems has plagued global financial markets ever
since the US residential mortgage mess broke into
our living rooms some four years ago. In an Asia
Times Online article titled Hobson's
Choice on March 10, 2007, I wrote the
following:
Readers looking at this week's mild
recovery in asset prices should be cognizant of
this risk. I expect further downturns for US
equity markets in coming weeks and months; it is
likely that the widely watched Dow Jones average
will close this year below the level of 10,000
from about 12,200 currently as investors adjust
downward their earnings expectations as well as
the multiple of earnings they are willing to pay
for owning shares. In turn, this would prompt
declines in other stock markets around the
world, particularly in South America, whose
economy, if not its politicians, depends almost
entirely on US economic growth.
There
is a trivial point of interest here - namely that
the current spike in global stocks reached the
same level of 12,200 on the Dow Jones Industrial
Average before starting to scale back. In any
event, the point of that particular article was
elsewhere, namely about the ability of the US
government to attract new buyers for its debt. On
that point, I noted:
In past crises, such as the 1987
stock-market crash or the recession in the early
1990s that sank the administration of president
George H W Bush, the US could depend on the
munificence of strangers. In particular, the
world's sole superpower attracted enough money
from risk-averse investors to refloat its
economy.
That time has, however, come
and gone as developing countries no longer
"need" to buy US government bonds. Indeed, as I
argued in a previous article ... they are better
served by investing in physical assets such as
commodities directly rather than diverting their
savings to the low-return US markets. In
addition to the economic rationale of protecting
their own growth, the world's investors are also
not interested in US assets for political
reasons. A quick look at the world's largest
repositories of savings shows the extent of the
problem: Middle Eastern investors will buy
anything as long as it is not American, while
Asian investors are likely to be scared off by
recent losses on mortgage holdings. Other
countries such as oil-rich Venezuela and Russia
explicitly use their reserves as diplomatic
tools.
Walk like an
Egyptian This has indeed come to pass,
leaving the US Federal Reserve as the world's
biggest purchaser of US government bonds
(Treasuries). This week, the Financial Times noted
that the world's largest bond fund manager, PIMCO,
had cut its holdings of US Treasuries to zero. On
March 9, the newspaper noted as follows:
The world's biggest bond fund has
cut its holdings of US government-related debt
to zero for the first time since early 2008 in
the latest sign of increasing investor
expectations of rising interest rates.
The move by the $237bn Pimco Total
Return fund follows warnings by its fund manager
Bill Gross of rising bond yields as the US
Federal Reserve nears the end of its massive
bond buying programme, known as quantitative
easing, or QE2. Such rises would hit the value
of holdings of bonds as their price move
inversely to their yields.
Mr Gross, one
of the most influential figures in bond markets,
said in his March investment outlook that Pimco
estimated the Fed has been buying 70 per cent of
annualized issuance of Treasuries since QE2
began - a programme he last year likened to a
Ponzi scheme.
Meanwhile, foreign
investors have been buying the remaining 30 per
cent. Mr Gross said as a result there was a risk
of a temporary void in demand once QE2 is
scheduled to end in June. "Yields may have to go
higher, maybe even much higher to attract buying
interest," he said.
Rising bond yields
spell further trouble for the stock markets as the
discounting rate of future cash flows will be
pushed back, thereby reducing the present value,
ie today's prices. Meanwhile, those who fear the
collapse of government credibility ("walk like an
Egyptian" in the parlance of bond-dealing rooms
these days, referring to the recent spate of riots
and disturbances in the country that unseated a
long-standing government) continue to purchase
physical commodities, and in particular, gold.
I am a certified gold buff with a
published history of support, therefore no further
explanation on that point is needed here.
There is the normal refuge of those who do
not wish to own the bonds of a major government
issuer - to simply purchase those of another. That
option though has been rather dented by what
happened recently in Europe: a. Downgrades of
countries such as Greece and Spain. b. Change
of government in Ireland that would likely lead to
significant efforts to change or restructure the
debt load, with predictable side effects on the
rest of the sectors. c. Weakening economic
performance in the continent, which accentuates
credit worries. d. Inflationary fears raised by
the European Central Bank that may cause a rise in
rates as early as next month.
The markets
have already "walked like an Egyptian" in the case
of European government bonds; the US is merely the
next on the list.
Military Keynesianism
The followers of John Maynard Keynes in
today's public policy debates have extolled the
virtues of governments intervening in the economy
over and over again in order to "kick-start"
growth, whatever that means. This policy has
failed, as I noted in October 2009 (see Double
or quits, Asia Times Online, October 6, 2009),
so the Keynesians have merely redoubled efforts to
have more spending. With the idea backfiring
spectacularly, as noted in the previous section,
the interesting question is - what next?
Governments are unlikely to pull back on
their spending habits especially as economic data
gets worse and regime change beckons ever so
seductively (or not, if you actually happen to be
in government).
Some countries, like Saudi
Arabia, are attempting a bit of Keynesianism at
home by expanding state subsidies. Bloomberg
reported on February 23, 2011:
Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah boosted
spending on housing by 40 billion riyals ($10.7
billion), and earmarked more funds for education
and social welfare amid popular uprisings
sweeping the Arab world. The social security
budget was raised by 1 billion riyals, according
to a statement read on state-run television.
King Abdullah also ordered the creation of 1,200
jobs in supervision programs and made permanent
a 15 percent cost-of-living allowance for
government employees, according to the
statement.
Saudi Arabia, the world's
largest oil supplier, is spending more on social
programs as political unrest roils the region.
Governments in Bahrain, Yemen and Libya have
cracked down on activists calling for greater
job opportunities and political openness after
uprisings toppled leaders in Tunisia and
Egypt.
Unfortunately, opening the
financial purse-strings doesn't appear to have
worked. News of a violent crackdown in Saudi
Arabia on March 10 sent oil prices soaring on the
day. As the Financial Times reported:
Eyewitnesses in Qatif said that
police tried to disperse about 300 protesters in
the city late Thursday afternoon. When the
demonstrators refused to leave eyewitnesses said
the police fired on them with rubber bullets and
percussion bombs.
Three demonstrators
were injured and were later taken to Qatif
general hospital, according to a protesters.
There have been a smattering of protests
in Saudi Arabia's Eastern province, where most
of the kingdom's Shi'ites live, since February
17. Protesters have been calling for the release
of nine prisoners that they said have been held
without trial since 1996. A delegation from
Qatif held a meeting with King Abdullah on
Wednesday to ask for their release but the
outcome of the meeting was unclear.
However, Thursday's demonstrations are
thought to have been calling for their release.
A "Day of Rage" has been called for across Saudi
Arabia on Friday.
On Tuesday the
government sought to ease tensions by releasing
25 Shi'ites arrested during recent
demonstrations. Sheikh Tawfiq al-Amir, a
prominent Shi'ite cleric detained after a sermon
in which he called for reforms, was also
released earlier this week.
As seen in
the case of Bahrain earlier, and Libya in a much
more bloody fashion, the Saudi establishment has
resorted to a combination of welfare and
militarism to stay in power. This is an internal
version of the "military Keynesianism" that many
(Keynesian) economists credit with saving the
world from the Great Depression after 1929. Other
historians count the millions killed in World War
II.
The arguments though aren't purely
being staged on matters involving (national)
domestic security. Chillingly, there are an
increasing number of arguments being made in
Europe and the US for greater military
intervention – witness the French activism on
Libya declared on March 10 that effectively puts
Europe on a collision/intervention course in
Libya. As the Financial Times reported:
France is talking to its allies
about targeted air strikes on Libyan airfields
and has recognized a leading opposition group in
a bid to rally the international community
against Muammar Gaddafi's regime.
In an
attempt to stiffen the resolve of other European
Union leaders ahead of a summit on the Libyan
crisis in Brussels on Friday, the French
government on Wednesday suggested its
international partners should consider more
flexible and rapid military responses to the
escalating violence.
Being a natural
cynic, I cannot help but feel that much of the
new-found activism is rooted in nothing more than
a cold calculation of economic benefits that arise
from greater government spending on the military.
This is the likely new form of Keynesianism as
governments attempt to keep their spending habits
intact while operating under a veneer of moral
respectability.
The question is - is this
the fifth or the sixth bullet that's being fired?
(Copyright 2011 Asia Times Online
(Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110