Monday, February 20, 2017

Has Dijsselbloem become Danish?

Looking at the Italian press today I suddenly saw a curious subtitle of a photograph in Corriere della Sera. Has Dijsselbloem become Danish?


La linea di Padoan all’Europa:«Una manovra senza sconti»

Lo ha assicurato al vertice dell’Eurogruppo il ministro dell’Economia Pier Carlo Padoan, anche con una crescita oltre le previsioni. La Commissione Ue ha chiesto una correzione dei conti pubblici da 3,4 miliardi (0,2% del Pil). Il caso Italia discusso il 20 marzo

di Ivo Caizzi, inviato a Bruxelles

Il ministro dell’Economia, Pier Carlo Padoan (a sinistra) con il presidente dell’Eurogruppo, il ministro delle Finanze danese Jeroen Dijsselbloem, alla riunione dell’Eurogruppo del 20 febbraio 2017 (Epa) Il ministro dell’Economia, Pier Carlo Padoan (a sinistra) con il presidente dell’Eurogruppo, il ministro delle Finanze danese Jeroen Dijsselbloem, alla riunione dell’Eurogruppo del 20 febbraio 2017 (Epa)

Friday, February 17, 2017

Bad news about the Netherlands

Bad news, coming from Australia, International Business Times, and concerning the Netherlands, and Europe, and the world:

Geert Wilders
Dutch right-wing politician Geert Wilders of the Freedom Party listens in the courtroom in Amsterdam June 23, 2011. Wilders was acquitted of inciting hatred of Muslims in a court ruling on Thursday that may strengthen his political influence and exacerbate tensions over immigration policyREUTERS/POOL/Robin Utrecht

Geert Wilders floats election campaign on promise to 'de-Islamise' the Netherlands

The far-right leader's Freedom Party is already leading with 17% in the polls.

February 18, 2017The Netherlands is witnessing a rise in far-right populists gearing to take part in the country's elections. Of these contenders, Geert Wilders is already in the lead with his anti-Muslim stand and promise to remove the Netherlands from the European Union.
The Freedom Party (PVV) leader will launch his election campaign today, 18 February in which he promises to "de-Islamise" the nation by banning Muslim immigration, shutting down all mosques and banning the sale of the Quran in bookstores. According to the Central Bureau for Statistics, around 5% of the Dutch adult population is Muslim.
While lawyers have pointed out that these plans could be in violation of the constitution, Wilders hinted to AP that there was room for change.
"A constitution is not something that is (set) in stone and can never be changed," he told AP. "It's alive as a society is alive and we are now being threatened by mass immigration and Islamisization and what I see as the toxic combination of mass immigration from Islamic countries and at the same time a total lack of demanding for people to assimilate and to integrate."
The launch of his campaign is expected to be a heavily guarded event, considering the multiple threats made on his life for his anti-Islam stand.
"I want us in government," Wilders told the press earlier this week, as he explained his policies, which have found commonality with Donald Trump's own. He also celebrated the US president's election win back in November, calling it a "historic victory" and a "revolution" in which "the people are taking their country back".
Despite criticism of Wilder's far-right views, the Freedom Party is leading in polls with 17%, followed closely by Prime Minister Mark Rutte's People's Party for Freedom and Democracy.

Thursday, February 16, 2017

GDP grew by 17% and wages by less than 1%... contributing to Brexit, Trump and the rise of populism in Europe

The article below, published by Seeking Alpha, has staggering news for those who are not familiar with the data and the analysis it presents. Let me highlight a few paras:

- Over the past eight years, US economic growth and real wages have underperformed expectations, yet the stock market has tripled in value.

-  Since Q1 2009, nominal GDP has been up 31% (17% in real terms), real wages have picked up less than 1%,

-  One could argue that central bank policies are socially non-optimal in that they reward those who are well off (people who have the ability to buy stocks and/or real estate) at the expense of those who are savers (retirees, conservative investors) - who now make little to nothing off interest - and those unable to invest in risky assets due to a lack of disposable income. Widening income disparity can breed social conflict and could be at least be partially attributed to the surprising electoral outcomes of Brexit, Trump, and possibly additional unanticipated results in the upcoming European presidential elections in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and potentially Italy.


Summary

Over the past eight years, US economic growth and real wages have underperformed expectations, yet the stock market has tripled in value.
Main influences include an initially oversold market in 2009, central bank policies, and heavy credit expansion at the corporate and government level.
The market’s current price point suggests an overbought market with risk skewed to the downside.
However, a continuation of negative real rates and additional credit expansion may continue to provide for a bullish short-/medium-term outlook.
Argument: The past eight years have provided one of the best bull markets in history despite one of the weakest expansions out of a recession in history. It's my belief that the US equities market, taken as a whole, should be avoided from a value perspective, although I recognize that a continuation of low rates, further credit expansion, and earnings growth from upcoming fiscal measures could continue to support higher valuations.
Overview
Since Q1 2009, nominal GDP has been up 31% (17% in real terms), real wages have picked up less than 1%, yet the S&P 500 (NYSEARCA:SPY) has tripled. If this article were to be delayed until the second week in March, and the S&P 500 stays at its current valuation, the rise over the past eight years will come to a factor of 3.4x - 240%, or 16.5% annualized. This compares to 3.4% annualized in nominal GDP appreciation, or a spread of about 13%.
This is a massive discrepancy that shows that the rise in the US equity markets has been a product of far more than basic economic growth. Some contributing factors:
1. The S&P was oversold when running below 700 in March 2009
Markets tend to oversell in times of panic. Fear is a stronger emotion than greed, and losses tend to hurt far more than gains from a psychological perspective. Investors pulled their money out of funds in record quantities and were far undercapitalized when there was a grand opportunity to snap up many highly underpriced assets. Even though the crisis was mostly cleaned up by the end of 2008, the market continued to sell off for another 10-11 weeks after before starting to reverse course.
The same type of lagging phenomenon is seen with unemployment, where companies don't begin rehiring until they're absolutely certain the economy is continuing on an upward trajectory. Consequently, unemployment always spikes after a recession rather than during. This explains why U-3 unemployment peaked in October 2009 at 10%, and didn't fall below 8% until September 2012, a full four years after the worst of the recession, when unemployment in the fall of 2008 was only 6.1%.
(Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics; modeled by fred.stlouisfed.org)
2. Low interest rates
This is a no-brainer with its effect in calculating the value of a business, which is the amount of cash that can be taken from it over its life discounted back to the present. The cost of capital is used as the discount rate. The cost of debt (a portion of the cost of capital) is lower with lower rates, and is tax deductible assuming the business is profitable and pays taxes. This compresses discount rates and boosts corporate valuations even if the numerator term - cash flows, of which a large portion is earnings - stays constant.
Each 100-bp reduction in the cost of debt projects to increase corporate valuations by 5%-6%, based on the current financial and capital profile of the overall US equities market. If cheaper debt also creates the incentive to take on more debt as a portion of the overall capital structure, the valuation increase could be even higher assuming the accretive effects of the relative cheapness of the capital source offset the additional insolvency risk.
3. Quantitative easing ("QE")
Another no-brainer, but fundamentally important. Quantitative easing works through a mechanism by which cash is printed and a central bank uses that cash to buy a bond or other form of security. This bids down yields in those assets by reducing their supply in the market and forces market participants out over the risk curve into riskier assets, such as stocks and real estate, in order to chase the higher returns of these assets. This bids up their prices and expects to create a windfall of wealth that will in turn be spent in the economy in order to drive growth.
The US Federal Reserve expanded its balance sheet from $910 billion as of August 2008 (before the fall of Lehman) to $4.5 trillion as of December 2014, a factor of 5x, where it's mostly stayed since.
(Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; modeled by fred.stlouisfed.org)
A lot of this QE money fed itself into the stock market. The S&P 500 alone recently zoomed past the $20 trillion market capitalization threshold.
One could argue that central bank policies are socially non-optimal in that they reward those who are well off (people who have the ability to buy stocks and/or real estate) at the expense of those who are savers (retirees, conservative investors) - who now make little to nothing off interest - and those unable to invest in risky assets due to a lack of disposable income. Widening income disparity can breed social conflict and could be at least be partially attributed to the surprising electoral outcomes of Brexit, Trump, and possibly additional unanticipated results in the upcoming European presidential elections in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and potentially Italy.
(...)

Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Europe - France left the initiative to Germany...

For those interested in a critical account of the French government of Hollande's European politics, below is an article that may interest you. I do not know of a similar account of the Dutch government of Rutte's coalition government with the Partij van de Arbeid (the Dutch labour party), which might indicate the lack of critical analysis in the Dutch media on Netherlands' European policy (which would be a serious shortcoming) or it may demonstrate my lack of knowledge about it, partly because I read better the foreign media than the Dutch media.
However, if one of you has seen a similar critical article about the Dutch government's record in European policymaking, please let me know (j.j.teunissen@planet.nl).

Here is the French account of Hollande's European policy, published by Sauvons l'Europe.

L’Europe : un point noir du bilan de Hollande

François Hollande a peu fait pour infléchir la politique de l’Union européenne
L’Europe fait partie des points faibles du bilan de François Hollande. En 2012, celui-ci avait commencé par la ratification du traité sur la stabilité, la coordination et la gouvernance (TSCG), un texte voulu par Angela Merkel pour renforcer et pérenniser l’austérité budgétaire en Europe. Durant sa campagne électorale, le futur président avait pourtant promis de renégocier ce traité. Finalement, il n’en fut rien.
En échange de ce renoncement, l’Union était censée investir 120 milliards d’euros supplémentaires pour relancer l’activité, mais cet argent est resté largement fictif. Au contraire, le nouveau président fit le choix, dès 2013, de chercher à revenir sous la barre des 3 % du PIB de déficit public. Un choix funeste car il freina l’activité, empêchant au final à la fois de réduire les déficits et d’inverser la courbe du chômage, tout en entraînant l’explosion du débat sur le « matraquage fiscal ».
François Hollande a certes joué un rôle important par la suite pour empêcher que la Grèce soit éjectée de la zone euro lors de la crise de l’été 2015, mais il n’avait pas réellement tenté auparavant d’engager une médiation entre le gouvernement Tsipras et les instances européennes pour éviter d’en arriver à cette crise ouverte.
La France a aussi laissé l’Allemagne en première ligne sur la question des réfugiés syriens, sans prendre sa part du fardeau, en refusant d’en recevoir un nombre significatif sur son territoire. Elle n’a pas mis non plus réellement son poids dans la balance pour aboutir à une solution européenne coordonnée. Manuel Valls s’est au contraire désolidarisé bruyamment de nos partenaires allemands à Munich en février 2016. Quant au projet de taxe européenne sur les transactions financières (TTF), théoriquement porté en particulier par la France, le gouvernement a en réalité cherché constamment à le vider de sa substance sur l’insistance du lobby bancaire hexagonal.
Pas de propositions pour l’avenir
Mais ce qui a surtout péché dans le quinquennat en la matière, c’est ce qui n’a pas été fait : Paris s’est fait remarquer par sa discrétion remarquable sur les grands dossiers européens de l’avenir. La France n’a fait aucune proposition significative à ses partenaires pour régler la question des dettes, relancer l’activité économique en Europe, accélérer la transition énergétique, lutter davantage contre le dumping fiscal ou encore réorienter la construction européenne dans un sens plus social, comme on aurait pu (ou plutôt dû) s’y attendre de la part d’un disciple de Jacques Delors.
Guillaume Duval
Alternatives Economiques n°364 – 01/2017 

Monday, February 13, 2017

Popular revolt in the Netherlands?

In the United States they have Trump and we in the Netherlands have Wilders. In both cases one should look at what they say, and what they do. In the case of Trump, he is now in a position he can do things, as president of the United States. In the case of Wilders, it is unlikely that he will be in that position by becoming the prime or deputy prime minister of the Netherlands, even when he would get more votes than any other party. But he is already criticizing, warning and threatening the other political leaders that if they exclude him from government power, they are not taking seriously the votes of 2,5 million Dutch who are likely to vote for him, and then they will be in for trouble. In a recent television interview he said that neglecting his party will create a popular revolt.

The best strategy to stop Wilders from becoming even more popular after an electoral victory and exclusion from government power (something that once happened to the Dutch labour party before) is to discuss his main electoral points in a serious way, including his criticism of the European Union and political elites and his untenable stance on islam. I hope Dutch politicians will do that and I hope Dutch media will pay attention to a more serious debate than just the rivalry between political leaders. However, I am afraid that the low level of debate and information of what is at stake will continue in the Netherlands.

The low level of political debate and the low level of information is a serious problem and undermines our democracy, not only in the Netherlands but in many countries around the globe.

In the meantime, as a person who likes to read information about what's going on in the world, I am forced to see Wilders' face popping up around every corner and read his propagandistic warnings which serve to increase his popularity. Below is the latest I saw and read.

Pays-Bas : Geert Wilders se présente comme un incontournable du prochain gouvernement

Pays-Bas : Geert Wilders se présente comme un incontournable du prochain gouvernement© Emmanuel Dunand Source: AFP
Le leader du PVV, Geert Wilders
Favoris des sondages à quelques semaines des élections législatives, les nationalistes du PVV pourraient être tenus à l'écart du gouvernement. Tout en détaillant son programme, Geert Wilders a mis en garde contre l'exclusion de millions d'électeurs.
«Vous ne pouvez pas ignorer 2,5 millions d'électeurs après des élections démocratiques. Cela serait une très mauvaise idée», a déclaré avec force le leader du Parti pour la Liberté (PVV) néerlandais, Geert Wilders, au cours d'une interview accordée le 12 février à la chaîne de télévision néerlandaise WNL.
Geert Wilders a également affirmé qu'une coalition gouvernementale sans le PVV conduirait à «une assemblée politique instable... qui s'effondrera en moins d'un an». Celui qui est déjà surnommé le «Donald Trump néerlandais» a par ailleurs réaffirmé, au cours de l'interview, qu'une mise à l'écart de sa formation politique provoquerait une révolte populaire.
Le dirigeant du parti nationaliste a également précisé les propositions du PVV lors de cet entretien télévisé. Il a notamment indiqué vouloir retirer les «licences» des mosquées plutôt que de les faire fermer par la force. Il a par ailleurs fait un parallèle entre l'interdiction du Coran, qu'il souhaite mettre en place, et l'interdiction déjà en vigueur aux Pays-Bas de Mein Kampf, l’autobiographie d'Adolf Hitler.
Des mesures qui permettront, d'après le PVV, de «dés-islamiser» les Pays-Bas, que le parti veut faire sortir de l'Union européenne pour mieux fermer les frontières aux immigrants.
(...)

Friday, February 10, 2017

The neverending Greek debt crisis

Two key players in the Greek debt saga, Dijsselbloem and Lagarde.
In the recent series of thought-provoking articles on this blog, here is a fourth one, on the lingering Greek debt crisis, written by Larry Elliot, "Greek debt crisis: an existentialist drama with no good end in sight".

The article begins as follows:

Put three people in a room who can’t get on with each other. Condemn them to stay there for all eternity while they torture each other. Sit and watch as the gruesome story plays out. And what do you have?
One answer is the 1944 existentialist play by Jean-Paul Sartre, Huis Clos. Another is the story of the neverending Greek debt crisis in which the three main characters are Alexis Tsipras, Wolfgang Schäuble and Christine Lagarde.
The plot is as follows. Greece has been through a terrible slump. Its economy has shrunk by more than a quarter, equivalent to the Great Depression in the US. Its financial position has become so parlous and its credit-rating so poor that it needs financial help to get by. It is currently on its third bailout.
Up until now the money has been provided by Europe and the International Monetary Fund and it has come with strings attached. The money for Athens is disbursed in tranches and can be stopped if Greece fails to go ahead with promised reforms. Athens is balking at inflicting further pain on its population, which has led to the threat that no more assistance will be forthcoming. To complicate matters, the Europeans and the IMF have fallen out.
Put simply, the Greeks say the conditions on them are too severe. They want debt relief but are resisting demands at pension reform and for “hire and fire” labour market reform.
The IMF agrees that Greece’s debt burden is far too high and the stipulation that the country should run an underlying budget surplus of 3.5% a year is unrealistic. The Fund is warning that the debt could become “highly explosive” and will not financially back the latest rescue attempt without meaningful debt relief. But it is also insisting that Greece sticks to a reform programme that the Fund believes will improve growth prospects.
(...)

And the article ends this way:

Another key player, Schaeuble.
The Europeans have said they would like Greece to be sorted at the meeting of finance ministers planned for 20 February. This could still happen if Tsipras decides that the only alternative to liberalising redundancy rules and pension reform would be to hold a “who runs Greece?” election that he would almost certainly lose.
The situation could also be resolved if Germany decided to support the IMF’s call for much more generous debt relief for Greece, or if Berlin bowed to pressure from Trump and boosted domestic spending.
But the ingredients are there for the neverending crisis to rumble on into the summer, when Greece will eventually run out of money and will not be able to pay its creditors. If there is no swift resolution, bond yields will rise and talk of Grexit will resurface.
Huis Clos is known in English as No Exit. For Greece, if life becomes even more intolerable, there is one way out.

If you want to read the recent view of the IMF on the Greek debt crisis, you will find interesting information in this IMF Press Briefing of February 9, 2017: Transcript IMF Press Briefing.

Wednesday, February 8, 2017

Trump plays chicken game with the Eurozone

Lukas Daalder
Trump plays chicken game, said Dutch columnist Lukas Daalder in an opinion piece hosted by Het Financieele Dagblad of January 6, 2017, under the title "Trump speelt chicken game". You may like the metaphor or not, you may find it realistic or not, but it gives food for thought and that is what I aim at with this series of articles. Below is an account of the article by Lukas Daalder published by Cyprus News Agency; the translation into English of Daalder's words is by Wayne Hall.

"As explained by Lukas Daalder, the American president has adopted as his navigational guide the well-known game where two drivers race towards each other to see who will chicken out first and turn the wheel to avoid a fatal head-on collision. Trump’s objective goal, according to the article writer is to clear the oncoming  traffic lane from potential competitors or other obstacles that impede his drive for hegemony.
According to Lukas Daalder, Trump himself circulates in a heavily armoured  vehicle, so that the choice is very simple for those driving in the opposite lane: either proceed to a head-on collision or swerve to escape the fatal crash. But the swerving will take the driver out of the game, to the side of the road, and the damage he will have sustained will be irreparable. Note that Trump set off on this course by choosing an easy target, i.e. Mexico, which on account of its objective weakness is doomed to end up at the side of the road, wrecked.
The point is made that the next victim will be Germany, which Trump has elevated to the status of number one opponent and for that reason seeks to neutralize. At first sight such a stance does not appear logical, Lukas Daalder observes, given that the automobile that conveys the German chancellor on her rounds is also an armour-plated Mercedes, so that in the event of a collision Trump himself will not escape unscathed.
At this point Lukas Daalder brings into the game the Eurozone, which he likens to a “beaten-up and clapped-out vehicle (a trailer, let’s say) being towed behind the Mercedes.
As Lukas Daalder puts it: “Trump wouldn’t be Trump if he hadn’t succeeded spotting the weak link, i.e. the Eurozone.
So why should the American president risk a collision with the Mercedes when he has the option of trapping the lead vehicle by sabotaging the trailer in that way forcing the vehicle in front (i.e. Germany) off the road, in that was accomplishing his strategic goal.
Trump doesn’t have to do much, Daalder makes clear. Today  (6th February)  the Executive Council of the IMF is convening to make its decisions on the provision of new economic assistance to Greece. Trump may admittedly not be the boss of the IMF,  but he is the chief shareholder.
So what will the INF do, given that it has reservations about continuing the program, seeing Trump in his armoured vehicle descending on the hapless trailer? Reasonability  may be sidelined. But in that case, the article writer asks, who honestly believes that the Eurozone will of its own accord make the necessary contribution  to Greece, on the eve – indeed – of crucial elections in many European countries? Lukas Daalder’s conclusion is that if this scenario materializes, the run-down trailer (i.e. the Eurozone) will start wobbling dangerously and heading for ruin."