Fake Diploma? Be Ecuador's Next CenBank Chief!

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in at 1/01/2013 07:06:00 AM
Ah, Ecuador...the archetypal banana republic. For a country that supposedly loathes the United States via its leader Rafael Correa and his assorted (dubious) leftist stylings, it is pitiful that Ecuador has no real monetary policy of its own since it has adopted the US dollar as its currency. Call me naive, but I think thundering about the evils of capitalism and Western imperialism falls flat when you choose to keep the United States' currency as your own. Dollarization is not compatible with anti-imperialism in my books. Towards the end of last year we received even more outlandish news about fraud and fakery in Ecuadorean monetary circles. True, there isn't much for you to do as the central bank governor of a dollarized economy alike being in charge of Marian devotion at a Protestant church.

So little is there to do that it turns out that Correa's cousin Pedro Delgado--I guess Ecuadorean socialism like the Cuban variant does away with Marxist abhorrence of patrimonialism--became central bank governor with a fake college degree:
It seems in every family there are secrets and lies. On Wednesday afternoon, Pedro Delgado, the cousin of Ecuador’s President Rafael Correa, and the Andean country’s central bank president, stepped down after confessing that he did not hold a university degree in economics. “I submit my irrevocable resignation as head of the central bank… and I do it because I made a grave mistake 22 years ago,” Delgado said.

He has been facing accusations in recent weeks in the local media, so he finally admitted that in order to be accepted at a business school to read for an MBA, he “presented a document with no value that certified that I had a degree that I did not hold. And I kept that in secret.”
Does anyone really care if you have a fake degree as the chief of a fake central bank while propounding fake socialism? The plasticity of it all is astounding. A grave injustice has been done to a truly representative man of modern-day Ecuador.

PS: Trivia buffs will appreciate that Delgado was ranked the world's worst central bank governor before resigning.

Islamic EconoFundamentalism: Egypt's FX Rationing

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 12/30/2012 08:01:00 AM
Is sound money management a normative activity? I would tend to think so since depreciation, inflation and so on tend to have widespread negative effects on the population's well-being. However, it comes as no real surprise that the Egyptian central bank has taken what are arguably steps on the road to a full-blown economic crisis, namely: (a) rapid currency devaluation and (b) foreign exchange rationing. For our dear Arabic readers, the press release is up on the Central Bank of Egypt website--an, er, exciting place to work in there ever was one.

Reuters has the pertinent details:
Egypt's central bank said it would start foreign currency auctions on Sunday to conserve reserves that have fallen to a critical level, pointing to a deepening economic crisis as President Mohamed Mursi tries to calm political turmoil. The announcement was posted on the bank's website on Saturday just two hours after Mursi used a major policy speech to declare the economy was showing signs of improvement [if this is an improvement...]

The central bank has spent more than $20 billion in foreign reserves to support the pound since a mass uprising against Hosni Mubarak in early 2011 chased away tourists and foreign investors...Violent street protests and political wrangling over the last month have prompted a rush by investors and ordinary citizens to switch their Egyptian pounds into foreign currency on concerns the government might devalue or bring in capital controls. The bank allowed the pound to weaken to an eight-year low of 6.188 to the U.S. dollar on Thursday. On Saturday it urged Egyptians to "rationalise their use" of foreign currency and not speculate against the pound.
I would like to wish our Egyptian friends a Happy New Year, but I am afraid that the conditions that have led to this state of affairs are only likely to worsen in 2013. The constitution ramrodded by the fundamentalist leadership is deeply divisive, causing many of the natives to go restless. In turn, widespread turmoil at home is hardly conducive to attracting much-needed FDI or tourists. While the new currency controls may partially be aimed at staunching capital flight, I don't think they will deter those who want to park their money in safer places alike the Dubai.

There is debate about the meaning of FX rationing so late in the game. It may mean that Egypt does not expect its purported $4.8B IMF bailout deal to be cemented by January, causing it to prepare for the worst. OTOH, it may be the Central Bank of Egypt--still de jure independent the last time I checked--signalling to the fundamentalist crew that things are getting really, really bad. Morsi mentions that Egypt's reserves have been buoyed in recent months, but that's largely down to Arab states lending it some money to tide it over until...the IMF lends it money too? One can only hope.

It's bad news all around...unless you're Morsi's spin doctor, that is.What a shining success, this Arab Spring. As I've said before, more pragmatic sorts will legitimately question if this parlous state of affairs is an improvement in any tangible sense over the Mubarak years.

1/1/2013 UPDATE: Government foreign exchange auctions have not prevented the Egyptian pound from sliding to all-time lows. Market participants can smell Egypt's desperation.

1/3/2013 UPDATE: Still sliding to a new record low of 6.42 to the US dollar.

Back in America: Is "Reshoring" Overblown?

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in at 12/30/2012 07:22:00 AM
There's an interesting feature over at The Atlantic on how more American manufacturers are moving back to the United States since expected savings from moving more production to the likes of China didn't materialize. To be sure, the world economy has also changed since the offshore fad peaked (see this earlier post on why offshoring and outsourcing are not synonymous--and why the article should have been entitled the "reshoring boom" instead of the "insourcing boom" to be more accurate). How has the world changed? They given the following bullet points:
  • Oil prices are three times what they were in 2000, making cargo-ship fuel much more expensive now than it was then.
  • The natural-gas boom in the U.S. has dramatically lowered the cost for running something as energy-intensive as a factory here at home. (Natural gas now costs four times as much in Asia as it does in the U.S.)
  • In dollars, wages in China are some five times what they were in 2000—and they are expected to keep rising 18 percent a year.
  • American unions are changing their priorities. Appliance Park’s union was so fractious in the ’70s and ’80s that the place was known as “Strike City.” That same union agreed to a two-tier wage scale in 2005—and today, 70 percent of the jobs there are on the lower tier, which starts at just over $13.50 an hour, almost $8 less than what the starting wage used to be.
  • U.S. labor productivity has continued its long march upward, meaning that labor costs have become a smaller and smaller proportion of the total cost of finished goods. You simply can’t save much money chasing wages anymore.
These are all to an extent true--especially the one about the excesses of American organized labour being reined in. Moreover, as the article does state, there isn't much logic in sending production half a world away if you're mainly just going to service the US market. (Mexico makes more sense for that, though the hardest core reshoring fanatic would consider going across the Southern border a step too far unless you are again using the land of El Tricolor for an entry to point to increasingly lucrative Latin American markets.)

At any rate, (American) firms thinking of moving to China at this point--you're kinda late, buddy--can play around with the "Total Cost of Ownership Estimator" provided by Harry Moser's Reshoring Initiative. While I would naturally suspect the output is skewed towards staying bank in the US of A, freight information and whatnot are readily obtainable for those actually making this kind of decision. You also have to factor in cultural, linguistic and time zone issues--although these kinds of transaction costs are not readily computable I believe. Anyway, Moser is mentioned in the article as one of the champions of this movement in the article, and the calculator provides...
Most companies make sourcing decisions based on price alone, resulting in a 20 to 30 percent miscalculation of actual offshoring costs. With the Total Cost of Ownership Estimator, users account for all relevant factors when determining their total cost of ownership including overhead, balance sheet, corporate strategy and other external and internal business costs.

Once your unique data is input into the calculator, you will receive your total cost of ownership analysis complete with:
  • Calculations of each source’s cost
  • An accumulation of all costs into cost categories
  • A grand total cost
  • Line charts showing each source’s current price, total cost of ownership and 5-year forecast
  • Line charts showing your cumulative cost by category
Have a look and see. Me? I am generally agnostic about location as a sometime consumer as long as the product is of good quality and is readily accessible when needed, so more power to those who "reshore" if improves either or both for American consumers. Still, the emphasis here is probably too Amerocentric for truly multinational firms that are neither American nor serve a largely continental US market.

South Korea as the Catholic Church's Asian Tiger

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 12/24/2012 08:46:00 AM
Long lay the world in sin and error pining...

The Roman Catholic Church is savvy enough to know that its game is for the most part up in Western Europe. Lip service to a "Catholic revival" in that part of the world aside, we all know a declining market when we see one. Its resources are not really being used to fight a rearguard motion for a European reconquista. While there are some holdouts alike Poland, it's obviously in Eastern Europe. Nosediving church attendance, skyrocketing rates of illegitimacy and all the rest of it tell the tale. I fear that a Catholic revival in Europe is as much a lost cause as a surplus-running United States. At this rate, it will not be long before Catholic voices will start wondering why their headquarters remain in such an unappreciative continent when there are many other places where the Church would receive a much better reception. That is, what is the cost-benefit calculation of losing the "Roman" bit?

A thrill of hope the weary world rejoices
For yonder breaks a new and glorious morn...

But, the Good News is that the Church still manages to gain adherents in developing parts of the world alike Africa and Asia, with the number of priests increasing to meet new demand. Just like any old business, the Catholic Church appreciates that this is a game of numbers--albeit its concern is saving the most souls as opposed to more temporal concerns alike ROI. Moreover, its "investment" in the developing world is more likely to pay dividends given the more promising demographics there of followers yet unborn. That said, Asia is a funky place to promote religion. Just as China is famous for its intellectual property, er, lapses, so is it known for its habit of ordaining fake bishops. Since the Communist Party regards all other possible sources of authority with suspicion, it is hard to imagine the world's most populous nation gaining many more converts.

South Korea, meanwhile, is highly atypical in many respects. It is an OECD member and thus considered by most as a developed country. Its population is comparatively small as well at under 50 million. Alike other Asian tigers, it has among the world's lowest fertility rates. You would think increasing affluence would render more Koreans less religious and its demographic profile less attractive to the Church, but surprise, surprise: In South Korea, Roman Catholicism has spread like wildfire in recent years. Unlike Europe that could certainly use an opiate for the masses given its less-than-stellar economic fortunes, the still-rising Koreans have turned to the Gospel. Fr. Pierro Gheddo of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions lays out the landscape:
There may be no other country in the world that over the past half century has seen growth as sustained as that of South Korea, including conversions to Christ. From 1960 to 2010, the number of inhabitants went from 23 to 48 million; per capita income from 1,300 to 19,500 dollars; Christians from 2 to 30 percent, of which about 10-11 percent, 5.5 million, are Catholic; there were 250 Korean priests, today there are 5,000.

I first went to South Korea in 1986 with Fr. Pino Cazzaniga, a missionary of the Pontifical Institute for Foreign Missions in Japan, who speaks Korean. Even back then it was a Church with many conversions, and it is still so today. Every parish has from 200 to 400 baptisms of converts from Buddhism each year. Most of the converts are city dwellers. Each year there are 130-150 new priests, one for every 1,110 baptized. In 2008, the proportion of Catholics exceeded 10 percent of South Koreans, and grows by about 3 percent each year. In 2009, the number of baptized reached 157,000, and 149 priests were ordained, 21 more than in 2008. More than two thirds of the priests are under the age of 40. "Over the past ten years, the Catholic Church in Korea has gone from three to five million faithful; in Seoul we are 14 percent," Cardinal Nicholas Cheong Jin-suk, archbishop of Seoul, has said in an interview.
It is certainly contentious to relate Europe's economic decline with its spiritual one so I won't even go there, but in South Korea's case you can make the opposite argument that secularization does not necessarily accompany economic progress. It appears increasingly prosperous Koreans have sought to find meaning beyond material well-being. As long as the Roman Catholic Church provides answers that are meaningful to them, it's a win-win proposition. Even for a centuries-old institution, it appreciates like pretty much everyone else that the future belongs to Asia.

And that is your religious political economy instalment for New Year's Eve 2012. A Merry Christmas to one and all from the IPE Zone...

...O night, O Holy Night, O night divine!

The Argentine Isolationist Grinch Who Stole Xmas

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 12/24/2012 06:20:00 AM
In addition to cooking the books, Argentina appears stuck in an import substitution industrialization [ISI] time warp. I sure would love to sell bell-bottom pants there for the full retro flavour, but they are of course throwing impediments to all sorts of imports. As the blog's subtitle goes, I affected an attitude of elegant desperation at an Associated Press article that discussed the growing unavailability of bicycles in Argentina despite its self-styled populist government promoting their use.

Now Americans are known for their mind-boggling levels of mega-obesity and hyperpollution. Rightly identifying more with progressive Europeans than Americans, Argentinians have taken up the cause of bicycling in urban centres. Doing so doubly makes sense: not only do you get much-needed exercise, but you also cut down on carbon emissions getting stuck in interminable traffic. Or so the reasoning would go since the government's neo-ISI policies have created [surprise!] a shortage of bicycles together with a burgeoning grey market for them:
Civic leaders have tried to make Buenos Aires a bicycle-friendly city, but that's been stymied by another government initiative — protectionist import bans designed to spur domestic production that have instead strangled supplies of everything from bananas to prescription drugs...

A record 1.8 million bicycles were sold in Argentina in 2011, and the industry had predicted sales would surpass 2 million bikes in 2012, producing an estimated $510 million in revenue. Now, the Argentine Bicycle Chamber of Commerce and Industry [!] estimates some 1.6 million bikes will be sold in 2012. And that number would have been lower but for a Buenos Aires city program that offered loans of up to $600 per bike purchase, the group says. In its first week, the financing program drew 4,000 requests at the 21 bike shops taking part. 
As with most of these retro-protectionist measures, the ultimate loser is the consumer:
If anything, Argentines have learned how to be creative, as President Cristina Fernandez imposes tight currency controls and other economic measures designed to fight high inflation and stop the flight of dollars...

Argentina's bike sector, however, wasn't prepared to export or otherwise meet local demand, which meant the price of bikes and bike parts has shot up and stock is dwindling, says the bicycle chamber's president, Claudio Canaglia. At Nodari, a Mongoose bicycle that retails for $150 in the United States now costs the equivalent of $700 in Argentina.
Once again, all this demonstrates that economic mismanagement tends to compound elsewhere since it is so difficult to sort out all the cascading effects of ill-though policies. Meanwhile, it's no-go for Shimano as cyclists must make do without during this "festive" season. 

History Repeats Itself: Greek Crises 1832-1897

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in ,, at 12/22/2012 02:28:00 PM
Just as some folks spell T-R-O-U-B-L-E, certain nations have the reputation for it going a looooong way back. For a blog purporting to be the IPE Zone, you may have noticed that I have had very few posts on the EU project as of late and the myriad crises on its periphery. Honestly, I tired of this story a very long time ago and have as much interest in it now as the details of a root canal operation. While I found it amusing when the Greek finance minister responsible for hiding the true extent of his nation's debts came to the LSE and faced a very hostile audience, it's been blah ever since. Essentially the Greek story is one of Hellas repeatedly failing to meet economic targets set by the EU; the EU demanding more concessions from Greece, and Greek leaders giving in to EU demands after some posturing. The cycle repeats itself with the Greeks arguing that belt-tightening measures are responsible for insufficient "escape velocity" from now-chronic recession. And on and on it goes...

Interestingly though, Greece has had recurrent crises stretching back many, many decades. What's more, other Europeans alike the--wait for it--French and Germans have been forced to marshall their resources to bail out an ungrateful, perpetually hard-up nation. This from Stephen Krasner on seeming violations of Greek sovereignty from its creditors during earlier episodes of financial crises (pp. 12-13):
When Greece was recognized as an independent state in 1832, it received a 60 m franc loan from Britain, France, and Russia, but only by signing an agreement pledging that the ‘actual receipts of the Greek treasury shall be devoted, first of all, to the payment of the said interest and sinking fund, and shall not be employed for any other purpose, until those payments on account of the installments of the loan raised under the guarantee of the three Courts, shall have been completely secured for the current year’. In 1838 the entire finances of Greece were placed under a French administrator.

Greece could not secure new loans during the middle of the nineteenth century in part because it was in default on its 1832 obligations. After 1878 its borrowing increased substantially, but to secure these funds Greece committed specific revenues, including the customs at Athens, Piraeus, Patras, and Zante and the revenues from the state monopolies on salt, petroleum, matches, playing cards, and cigarette paper. The loan of 1887 gave the lenders the right to organize a company that would supervise the revenues that were assigned for the loan.

In 1897, after a disastrous war with Turkey over Crete, Greece’s finances collapsed. It was unable to service its foreign debt or to pay the war indemnity that was demanded by Turkey. Germany and France, along with private debtors, pressed for an international commission of control. Greece acceded when it became clear that this was the only way to secure new funding, and Britain, which had been more sympathetic to preserving Greek autonomy, then accepted the Control Commission. The Commission, which consisted of one representative appointed by each major power, had absolute control over the sources of revenue needed to fund the war indemnity and foreign debt. The Commission chose the revenue sources that it would control. They included state monopolies on salt, petroleum, matches, playing cards, cigarette paper, tobacco duties, and the customs-revenues of Piraeus. Disputes that might arise between the Commission and agencies of the Greek government were to be settled by binding arbitration. The members of the Commission were given the same standing as diplomats. One member of the Greek parliament argued that the establishment of the Control Commission suspended the independence of Greece.
Bottom line: if the EU were wise, then they would have taken Greece's history of repeated financial debacles as a warning for the future. Some argue that the EU's German paymasters were too naive in expecting EMU members to actually follow rules alike the Stability and Growth Pact to avoid undermining the entire project. It's the same old, same old over a century and a half later with these same folks whingeing about their loss of sovereignty and so forth when, of course, they wouldn't be in this place if they actually bothered sorting out their finances for good. Heaven knows, they've had, what, 180+ years to sort themselves out so there's really no excuse even if European powers have continually meddled in its affairs since the Treaty of Constantinople. Set against its history as a nation-state, Greece's current troubles are exceptionally unexceptional.

But no; I guess some people never learn and carry over bad habits for decades and decades.

Park Geun-hye's Lump of Coal for Chaebol Haters

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 12/20/2012 09:14:00 AM
When it comes to showing the West how things differ in Asian nations, I suppose nothing quite beats electing a military dictator's daughter to power via freely contested polls. But that of course is just what has transpired in prosperous South Korea. And General Park is a rather revered figure for spearheading their nation's rise to the top tier (OECD) of the global pecking order culminating with the hosting of the 1988 Seoul Olympics. Park Chung-hee has set off lots of debate about the merits of authoritarian development that continue to this day. For more on the specifics from an obviously supportive POV, I refer you to my current reference on the subject matter of Korean economic policymaking during the Park era by Kim Chung-yum.

Anyway, back to the subject matter at hand. Public debate in Korea has concerned continued favouritism shown towards large Korean conglomerates known as chaebol. These were of course modelled with a few modifications on Japanese zaibatsu. Despite differences here and there, the criticisms are remarkably similar, too. Because credit and whatnot have been preferentially allocated to these mega-firms, there has not been sufficient development of young, innovative firms. Insofar as alternative SMEs would be more geared towards meeting local tastes and customs, these countries also fail to become less dependent on export markets at a time when the West is, well, kaput. Lee Byong-chul notes how, in the run up to the elections, even mighty Samsung--vanquisher of Sony, highest-rising global brand, and the only real Apple rival--came under sustained criticism:
When asked to identify Samsung’s fiercest enemy, most people would name Apple, given ongoing patent lawsuits in various countries. But Samsung, the largest of South Korea’s chaebol (vast, politically connected, family-run conglomerates), has bigger problems at home. In the run-up to the December presidential election, the chaebol have become a target of growing popular anger...

But the conglomerates’ gluttonous business practices have suffocated small and medium-size firms, stifled innovation, undermined job creation, and left much of South Korea’s population in relative poverty, while catapulting their founding families to extreme wealth. As a result, what had once been a fount of pride for South Koreans has become a source of contention.

Chaebol reform is a defining issue in this year’s presidential campaign, epitomized in popular bumper stickers reading, “It’s the chaebol, stupid.” Past presidential candidates pledged to reform the chaebol – from cracking down on corruption to restructuring corporate governance – but delivered little, instead favoring short-term political gain from maintaining the status quo. Nevertheless, many anticipate that this year’s election will catalyze change, and that the cycle of greed and corruption that is weakening South Korea’s economy will finally be broken.
For all the huffing and puffing from the presidential contenders, though, Park's reforms are expected to be more cosmetic than a real change to Korea's political economy:
[G[iven that the Saenuri Party is traditionally pro-business, Park limits her reform pledges to harsher sentences for convicted chaebol executives and new restrictions on circular equity investment through chaebol affiliates.
Not pardoning convicted executives and cutting down on cross-shareholding doesn't count as a revolution in corporate governance in my books. While you can certainly have a debate on the merits of these practices, they are ultimately not very major efforts to begin with. Timing-wise, this election was doubly critical for reformers since a new generation of chaebol leaders--drawn from their families, naturally--are coming into power. From Reuters:
The election came at a sensitive time for Samsung and Hyundai as both are in the process of passing power to a third generation of their family owners, a process that left-wing candidate Moon Jae-in could have complicated with an attack on their shareholdings, had he won. "She doesn't have any plans to alter the structures of the chaebol ownership and their concentration of economic power," said Kim Sang-jo, an economist at Hansung University and executive director of a group urging reform of South Korea's economy...
Park Geun-hye is not likely to be as irascible as her father and her policies remain sketchy. She has promised to share wealth more widely but said no new taxes on individuals or companies, and no attack on the chaebol. "It is not my aim to dismantle or bash the chaebol," Park said in July. "The main aim is to fix negative parts such as abuse of economic power and to save the positive part the chaebol have such as job creation..." 
The chaebol themselves appeared to be happy with Wednesday's outcome and the prospect of being left alone. "We want (the president-elect) to undertake lots of economic policies that help investments and job creation so that our companies can focus on reviving the economy," chaebol lobby group the Federation of Korean Industries said in a congratulatory message.
I am not entirely sure if the chaebol inevitably "crowd out" SMEs. Anyone not hiding in a cave somewhere will have noticed Korea's newfound dominance in pop culture via the "Korean Wave." Its dominance is not an accident as the state once again has a strong hand in developing entertainment talent. Importantly for this discussion, it is not chaebol who are leading the charge here but smaller outfits alike Psy's YG Entertainment and a whole host of other acronym-heavy entertainment groups.

Botttom line: Korea is the envy of all Asia and perhaps the world for its economic dynamism and exceedingly popular entertainment. Why mess with a good thing? Economies of scale matter especially in export industries, hence the continuing relevance of chaebol. During the Asian financial crisis, Kia was bankrupted. In less than fifteen years, it is one of the world's top 100 global brands. As for the SMEs, I certainly think they can apply the lessons of the "Korean Wave" in extending the state-led model of development to smaller firms. Why should it not work for them as well?
Ultimately, Park Geun-hye gives lip service to reining in the chabeol. But honestly, they seem to be doing well enough to be left alone. As with many things, you can't argue with results. In a down world economy, you cannot ask for more.

PS: You may be wondering about the title. There is the oddly routine celebration of Christmas in any number of predominantly non-Christian nations that befuddles Westerners. Go to the lobby of any major international hotel and there will be the inevitably humongous Christmas tree. While their materialistic interpretation centred on gift-giving and a festive atmosphere kind of loses out on the core irony that the saviour of the world was born in a horse's stable, I just wanted to point out that a "lump of coal" is not an entirely foreign idiom. South Korea is rapidly gaining Catholic adherents as well, but I'll keep that idea for another post which will appear near December 25.

There's No Power Shift (or Western Decline Either)

♠ Posted by Emmanuel at 12/20/2012 06:33:00 AM
...or so says our LSE IDEAS head honcho Michael Cox. To say I disagree with him is an understatement, but he of course deserves to be heard as one of it not the best-recognized scholars of US foreign policy in Britain. We have no "shop" opinions at LSE IDEAS, and I believe such diversity is welcome as it isn't usually seen at other thinktanks. Head here


The Yen Also Falls: To Negative Nominal Rates?

♠ Posted by Emmanuel in , at 12/17/2012 07:17:00 AM
Everything is less than zero - Elvis Costello

I am constantly befuddled by foreign exchange markets since they tend to display even more "irrational" behaviour than stock markets. Witness Japan and its currency. Beginning 1999 or so, Japan has conducted aggressive monetary easing via its zero-interest rate policy (ZIRP) that entails [duh] near-zero nominal interest rates. However, this and quantitative easing (QE) have done little to pull Japan out of its funk since the bubble burst in 1990. I of course think there are lessons to be learned here for Westerners who do the same Stupid Monetary Tricks, but others would say that their situations are different.

No matter; after being the almighty yen for the past several years, we get news that the yen is (slightly) weakening due to the (actually quite conservative and traditionally dominant) Liberal Democratic Party beating the (once upstart but now quite entrenched and equally staid) Democratic Party of Japan in parliamentary elections. News of an LDP victory has sent the yen tumbling--or at least what passes for it in this day and age of mild rather than wild forex swings in Japan:
The yen slumped to its lowest in over a year-and-a-half against the U.S. dollar on Monday as part of a broad skid after Japan's conservative Liberal Democratic Party, which is committed to aggressive monetary easing, won a landslide victory. The LDP surged back to power in Sunday's election, giving ex-Prime Minister Shinzo Abe another chance to take the helm. The LDP and its ally the New Komeito party secured the two thirds majority needed to overrule parliament's upper house, meaning the new government has a greater chance of pushing though its policies.
The LDP being a traditional practitioner of patronage politics, their priorities lie in American-style "shovel ready" projects. It's somewhat ironic; they taught the Yanks all this ZIRP and QE tomfoolery which they are continuing with anyway, and in turn they are imbibing construction-as-stimulus:
The Bank of Japan meets later this week and most analysts expect the central bank will ease policy further. It will most likely increase its asset-buying and lending programme, currently at 91 trillion yen, by another 5-10 trillion yen, sources have said. Abe, who quit as premier in 2007 citing ill health, has called for "unlimited" monetary easing and big spending on public works to rescue the economy from its fourth recession since 2000.
I have always been a connoisseur of sorts of Japanese economic policy. Accustomed to being meek and mild worker ants in the postwar period, they still display their banzai and kamikaze streaks in a few areas alike macroeconomics. How did they manage to run up a public debt that is 200% of GDP which is set to rise even more sharply with the LDP that's responsible for a lot of it? Honestly, I think that the fiscal levers are well and truly overdone. What's there left? Consider once more the "zero-bound" problem:
In spring 1999, ZIRP was introduced but it was constrained by the so-called zero bound problem. Therefore, worsening deflation meant the real interest rate would rise, aggravating recession and hence deflation.   
What the heck else can Japan do? Having "pioneered" the modern implementation of ZIRP, maybe they can try NIRP--negative interest rate policy. That's right; they should target rates at which they punish you for keeping money in a bank. Certainly even such a palliative won't work--those thin tatami mats they roll away during the day won't hold as many squillion yen as king-sized beds those portly Yanks have--but it may be worth a try as implied by yen weakening as of late. At the very least there will be amusing stories of folks hoarding cash.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Bring on the NIRP! It's the ultimate weapon--unthinkable, even--in international currency war (and more specifically Japan's two-decade-long battle with deflation).

Screw M2, if you know what I mean.

Harming Schoolkids: US & China are Rather Alike

♠ Posted by Emmanuel at 12/16/2012 09:43:00 AM
There is an adage about people hating those who are so much like them because they cannot stand being reminded of their own failings. Think of a rooster that sees a mirror image of itself, raises its hackles and wants to fight it. Being the world's largest carbon emitters aside, nowhere is this adage tragically truer than with the US and China in the matter of harming schoolchildren. While assorted American crazies like that Batman fanboy have topped global attention for years and years, unbeknownst to many, China has been giving the US a run for its money.

As it so happens, a Chinese nutter also tried to harm schoolchildren a few hours before the Newtown incident. However, he was fortunately not armed with a gun. The fact remains though that the frequency of attacks on kids is on the rise in China. "Asian values" notwithstanding; perhaps there's been a rise instead in "American values"?
The children of Chengping were still filtering into the local elementary school on Friday morning, China time, when a deranged thirty-six-year-old man named Min Yingjun entered the campus. He carried a knife. (China bans private gun ownership.) By the time the security guards got to him, he had wounded twenty-two children and one adult. All survived. China, like most places, had seen this kind of madness before: one especially heavy string of school attacks in 2010 killed nearly twenty people and wounded more than fifty. The killers are as hard to recall in their particulars as they deserve.
My initial suspicion is that while school attacks in China may be even more frequent than those in the US--there are impediments to knowing their number--those in America are invariably more lethal given the ready availability of firearms Stateside. There must be a lesson in here somewhere for the gun lobby, whose logic is even more obscure than that of the no new taxes forevermore crowd. There are reasons to believe that limiting access to weaponry does curb gun violence, but many Americans would rather stick their heads in the ground and pretend everything's OK just like they do when they hear about climate change.

We then get to the broader implications of US and Chinese societies' ill treatment of children. Unfortunately, crazies shooting schoolkids is but the tip of the iceberg for either nation. Emotional outpourings at tragic events like these aside, the reality is that older American generations consume public resources in such a way as to leave future generations decidedly worse off (despite certain objections that fail to ignore spiraling health care costs of all things). It is no accident that ever-diminishing US standards of living have a momentum that is difficult to arrest as the number of seniors giving themselves cushy retirements at their children's expense increases. China? Oddly technocratic ploys represented by the one-child policy spell trouble on the demographic front as the world's most populous nation eventually suffers from...too few kids.

Bottom line: In certain respects, the US and China share characteristics indicative of very sick societies. That is, mental pathologies that lead to these incidences are more likely to emerge in certain nations than others. Of course they claim to be different, but actions speak louder than words. As for the rest of the world, why should we blindly accept either one's political-economic model? Just as developing nations once fought to be non-aligned during the Cold War--including China if I remember correctly--I think the rest of us should search for alternatives lest our societies end up harming schoolchildren with such sickening regularity.

Mind you; we are not fated for the barbarism routinely displayed there.