On Monday, I
wrote – Volley-Firing
– that the crisis in some emerging markets was a manifestation of a
process of financial crisis, whose cause is the blowing up of asset
price bubbles, during 30 years of money printing and credit creation.
The contradictions which that caused would ultimately have to be
resolved by a crisis, in which those bubbles burst, as interest rates
rise. The tapering of QE is not the cause of rising interest rates,
but a response to the fact that market rates were already rising.
Tapering is not the cause of the crisis, but is only the spark, as it
leads to a rise in the dollar, and a corresponding fall in other
currencies. Because, in such circumstances, contradictions never
unwind smoothly and gradually, the response has been the sharp sell
off of various currencies such as the Turkish Lira, Argentinian Peso,
Indian Rupee, South African Rand etc., sparking equally large rises
in their official interest rates in an attempt to defend the
currency. The response, in global stock and bond markets, shows that
this initial volley, is already sparking further volleys in the
process that Marx described as “volley-firing” as the
crisis moves from one country to another in turn, as its turn to pay
is encountered.
In my series
-
How High Can Stocks Go?
– I have been pointing out that these asset prices, in stocks,
bonds, and property, have been inflated over the last 30 years, as a
result of this money printing, and stand in no relation to the actual
economic development that has taken place during that period. I have
also pointed out previously -
The Bust Without A Boom
– that there is a 13 year cycle of stock market crashes, of which
2013 was the next year when one was due. The crash in global stock
markets began at the end of last year, continued through January, and
appears to be intensifying in February. Does this mean the answer to
the question, “How high Can Stocks Go?”, has been
answered? Possibly, but maybe not. US stock markets have fallen by
around 5%, but are still way above the level they began last year,
because last year they rose by around 30%. Asian stock markets have
fallen by more than 10%, meaning that they are in a technical
correction. The Japanese Stock Market fell more than 4% on Tuesday
alone. Yet, the Nikkei rose by a whopping 60% last year. These oversized increases in markets are themselves a reflection of the fact that markets are being distorted by this huge volume of money printing, and the massive upward moves will also result in at least equally massive crashes. But, as I pointed out recently, in relation to the massively
inflated UK property market -
When Falling Prices Still Signify A Bubble
– in conditions, where the capitalist state continues to print
massive amounts of money, and uses it to directly intervene in the
market, as George Osborne is doing in the property market, with “Help
To Buy”, the bursting of bubbles can be repeatedly delayed, but
with the consequence that when it does burst, the explosion is even
more cataclysmic. The current stock market crash could be the one
that signifies that point has been reached, but it may not.
To put it in
context, a reasonable level for the Dow Jones 30 Index is around
6,000 compared to its current level over 15,000. That implies a drop
of around 60%. That would be huge, but it is less than the fall that
occurred in the NASDAQ in 2000, which fell 75%. It is less than the
fall that occurred in Japan's Nikkei in the 1990's, which fell from
39,000 to 7,000. It is, in fact, only around the same kind of drop
as the 60% fall in US property prices, when that bubble was burst in
2008/9, or the similar falls in the property markets in Ireland and
Spain. But, when markets correct, they never simply revert to the
mean. By definition a reversion to the mean requires that when
prices have been above it, they must also correct by dropping below
it. It would not at all be surprising for the Dow to have to pass
through 3000, or 4000 on its way back from 16,000 to 6,000. But,
those kinds of correction are also required in other global stock
markets, as well as in those property markets such as the UK, which
have not yet passed through the corrections seen in the US, Ireland,
Spain etc. where similar bubbles were inflated.
Rising
interest rates are one means by which the bursting of such bubbles
will be effected. In that context, the fall in recent days in UK and
US interest rates might seem contradictory, but it is simply another
manifestation of this process of volley-firing described by Marx.
The process we are seeing goes something like this. Global interest
rates rise, because all of the conditions that led to a rising rate
and volume of profit over the last 30 years have started to reverse.
The rise in the global rate of profit at least slows down, and has
probably started to fall. The demand for money-capital rises –
because firms need to invest more in productive-capital to ensure
they retain market share, and capitalist states need to drain surplus value, to use it to spend on decaying infrastructure, to maintain the
competitiveness of their economies – at a time when the falling
rate of profit means the supply of money-capital relatively declines.
This rise in interest rates has been witnessed in rising yields on
sovereign and corporate bonds around the globe. The tapering of QE
was an attempt not to be left too far behind the curve by the Federal
Reserve, which might have resulted in a sudden bursting of the bond
bubble. (The UK stopped its QE programme last year, as UK inflation continued to be massively above the target 2% rate. It caused the £ to rise, which is part of the reason UK inflation has temporarily fallen.) Tapering causes the value of the dollar to rise relative to
other currencies, and particularly those emerging market currencies
that have benefited from attempts to weaken the dollar. The
weakening of those currencies arises as money flows out of their
bonds and other assets. It has to go somewhere, so the first place
it goes is to the relative safety of the bonds of the US, UK,
Germany, Japan etc. Even some of the peripheral Eurozone economies
are seen as safer bets, so long as the ECB stands behind their debt,
with its own printing press ready to be sent into action, and so long as the assumption holds that German fiscal power stands behind the ECB.
The fall in
the yields on the US and UK Bonds, is merely the other side of this
trade. Another part of it is the fall in stock markets. That fall
is being presented as due to the potential for reduced global growth
as a result of the emerging market crisis. But, that view is false.
Any slow down in global growth is marginal. Slower growth in some economies is being compensated by higher growth in others, for example, the continued industrialisation of a series of developing sub-Saharan African economies. However, stock markets
frequently move in the opposite direction to the real economy for the
reasons I have set out previously, for example in the posts above -
“How High Can Stocks Go?”. It is why market commentators
frequently talk about bad news being good news. Stock prices are not
determined by growth, by how much the economy is expanding, but by
how much profits are expanding. It is not slowing growth that threatens asset prices, but rising growth in current conditions, because rising growth, means rising demand for money-capital, which means rising interest rates. Under current conditions, higher growth will be the assassin of the stock, bond and property markets.
Economies
frequently experience conditions of boom, whilst the rate of profit
within them falls. In fact, as Marx sets out, particularly in
Capital III, Chapter 6, it is precisely the boom which causes
the rate of profit to be falling, in such cases, because it pushes up
the price of inputs such as materials, which cannot be passed on to
end product prices, squeezing realised profit, and it pushes up wages, which directly reduces
surplus value. Similarly, it is frequently the case that a period of
stagnation and low growth coincides with a period of rising rates of
profit, as happened in the 1930's and 1980's. Moreover, the lower
the rate of profit, the greater the percentage of that profit, firms
have to devote to investment in productive-capital so as to remain
competitive, and to retain market share. The less of it, they have
to be given away as dividends, or to be used for speculation by
buying back their own shares and so on. In fact, they may have to
issue additional shares and bonds, in order to obtain the
money-capital they require for such productive investment. That
means the demand for shares and bonds drops as the supply of them
rises, sending share and bond prices lower. As the potential for speculative capital gains disappears, so money-capital has more incentive to be used for real productive activity.
Over recent
months, the falls in global bond prices have prompted talk of a
“Great Rotation” from bonds to stocks, as money sought to
obtain higher returns. But, with global stock markets themselves
already in massively inflated territory that failed to happen. In
fact, with the current sell-off in stock markets, money has flowed
the other way, into the relative safety of those bonds, again causing
the fall in yields witnessed over the last few weeks. But, as the
process of “volley-firing” proceeds, that is not likely to
last. In the first exchange of volleys, the participants will be the
emerging markets themselves. Turkey has raised its official interest
rates by huge amounts, but its currency has continued to slide
against the dollar. Yet further interest rate hikes are likely to be
necessary. But, at a certain point, its currency will have fallen to
such a level and its interest rate will be at such a height, that
further attacks on it will not be profitable for the currency
speculators. Their attention will turn to the next victim. It is a
target rich environment. The speculators may turn their attention to
some other emerging economy whose currency has risen significantly,
for example Singapore. It will then be Singapore's turn to increase
its interest rates sharply, to defend its currency. As stated
recently,
Is Singapore The Next Iceland?
such an event would be highly damaging for Singapore or for Hong
Kong, both of whom have seen astronomical rises in their property
markets as part of this process of asset price inflation and
speculation. A sharp rise in interest rates, and a fall in their
currency, possibly accompanied by sharp rises in inflation, would
send their property markets crashing around their ears, taking a
large chunk of their banking system, that has lent into this rising
property market, with it.
As money
streamed then out of Singapore, it might even flow back into Turkey,
as the next exchange of volleys. When the Singapore Dollar falls to
a much lower level, and its interest rates rise to a much higher
level, attention will then pass to the next target and so on. At
some point, and possibly one not too distant, dependent upon the pace
of the “volley-firing”, attention will then turn to the
next economies in line in Europe. To the extent that these weaker
European economies use the Euro, any attack on their currency is at
the same time an attack on the currency of Germany! The attack is
then not manifest as an attack on the currency itself, but on the
sovereign bonds of the country, as happened with the last Eurozone
crisis. As money streams out of Luxemburg, Malta, Slovenia, and so
on, causing an even bigger banking crisis than happened with Cyprus, because the banks in these countries comprise an even bigger proportion of GDP than they did in Cyprus, and because in the case of Luxembourg, it represents a much bigger proportion of EU GDP - After Cyprus, Who's next? - so it becomes necessary for the ECB to put its money where its
mouth is, and to begin printing money to buy up these bonds. So far,
Mario Monti has not had to act on his promise to “do whatever is
necessary”, but that moment is approaching. The questions then
will be, “Can the political paralysis in Europe be overcome to take
the necessary measures to establish fiscal and political union, and
can the ECB do enough to prevent a crash of European Bonds, and
simultaneously, the value of the Euro." I doubt it.
No comments:
Post a Comment