Investing Curiouscatblog

Tag: Economics

  • If you Can’t Explain it, You Can’t Sell It

    Over the last few years Elizabeth Warren has become one of my favorite leaders. She is a leader in economic thought, ethical society and the law (she is a law professor at Harvard Law School). Far too many on Wall Street, Washington and in C-suites are leading us down a very bad path. She is a voice we need to heed.

    If you can’t explain it, you can’t sell it

    “We need a new model: If you can’t explain it, you can’t sell it,”
    …
    The 1966 high school debate champion of Oklahoma may get what she wants. The House of Representatives will vote in December on her idea. She suggested a Financial Product Safety Commission in a 2007 article in the magazine Democracy [Unsafe at Any Rate]. President Barack Obama proposed it to Congress in June as the Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

    Warren won’t discuss whether she may be a candidate to lead the authority, which would have the power to regulate $13.7 trillion of debt products. A Warren nomination would tell banks that Obama is determined to force reduced checking-account fees and limit lender claims in mortgage advertising, among other measures the industry opposes, said Thomas Cooley, dean of New York University’s Stern School of Business.
    …
    In her role overseeing the TARP, Warren has been critical of the administration, accusing the Treasury Department of undervaluing the stock warrants that were supposed to compensate taxpayers when banks repay their bailouts. A lack of transparency about how TARP functions “erodes the very confidence” it was to restore, her committee said in a report.

    I hope she can take her attempts to reduce political favors being granted huge financial institutions and those institution be forced to follow sensible rules to protect individuals and our economy. With a few more people like there we will have a much better chance of a positive economic future.

    Related: Bogle on the Retirement Crisis – Bankruptcies Among Seniors Soaring – Don’t Let the Credit Card Companies Play You for a Fool – http://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2009/04/08/the-best-way-to-rob-a-bank-is-as-an-executive-at-one/

  • Monkey Economics

    Scientist Monkeys Around With The Economy

    Sure enough, when they trained a low-ranking monkey to open the container, just as any technical college advertisement will tell you, the new skills translated into a higher income. Roughly an hour after she’d open the container for everyone, she was getting groomed a lot more, as much as a high-ranking monkey, and she no longer had to do hardly any grooming herself. But that was not the most spectacular finding.

    Dr. NOE: So what then did, is we got a second low-ranking female, trained her to open a second container with apples in it, and then we saw that the value of the first provider dropped, more or less, to the half of what she had before. So now we had a competition between two animals. Both of them could provide this good, these apples, and so the value of the first one dropped down again. And of the second one who was very low at the beginning of the experiment, she went up. And they ended up both in the middle, so to speak.

    BLUMBERG: So when there was a monkey monopoly on the skill, the monkeys paid one price. But when it became a duopoly, the price fell to an equilibrium point, about half of what it had been. And this all happened despite the fact that we’re talking about monkeys here. Monkeys can’t do math…

    Very cool.

    Related: Eric Schmidt on Google, Education and Economics – Too Big to Fail – Expectations

  • Roubini Doesn’t See Jobs Rebounding Until Late 2010

    The Worst is yet to Come: Unemployed Americans Should Hunker Down for More Job Losses by Nouriel Roubini

    Conditions in the U.S. labor markets are awful and worsening. While the official unemployment rate is already 10.2% and another 200,000 jobs were lost in October, when you include discouraged workers and partially employed workers the figure is a whopping 17.5%.

    While losing 200,000 jobs per month is better than the 700,000 jobs lost in January, current job losses still average more than the per month rate of 150,000 during the last recession.

    Also, remember: The last recession ended in November 2001, but job losses continued for more than a year and half until June of 2003; ditto for the 1990-91 recession.

    So we can expect that job losses will continue until the end of 2010 at the earliest.
    …
    There’s really just one hope for our leaders to turn things around: a bold prescription that increases the fiscal stimulus with another round of labor-intensive, shovel-ready infrastructure projects, helps fiscally strapped state and local governments and provides a temporary tax credit to the private sector to hire more workers.
    …
    Based on my best judgment, it is most likely that the unemployment rate will peak close to 11% and will remain at a very high level for two years or more.

    Roubini has predicted negative economic results and been right for the last few years. I am uncertain about with the short term economic outlook. I can certainly imagine the slow job recovery he predicts will happen. I am hopeful we will see jobs increasing before that but the news in the last few months has not made that prospect seem more likely. And the long term outlook is getting worse with the huge government debt being added as a burden for the future economy.

    Related: Nouriel Roubini Believes Stock Market has Risen too Far, too Fast – Unemployment Rate Reached 10.2% – Why the Dollar is Falling

  • Financial Transactions Tax to Pay Off Wall Street Welfare Debt

    Is it cynical to think that politicians want to provide payments from the treasury to those that paid the politicians? More cynical to think the politicians that created huge Wall Street Welfare payments won’t actually do anything except talk about how they think it is bad that those they paid billions to are buying new mansions and yachts? More cynical to think they will continue to provide huge amounts of nearly free cash for those that paid them to speculate with? More cynical to think if any of those speculators lose money they will give them more welfare? More cynical to think those bought and paid for politicians won’t actually take any steps to tax or curtail speculation? I think maybe I am cynical about Washington doing anything other than talk about how they don’t want to provide huge amounts of cash to Wall Street all the while giving their Wall Street friends huge amounts of cash that will be paid back by our grandchildren.

    Wouldn’t it be nice if the politicians actually took actions to fund a partial payback of the hundreds of billions (or maybe trillions) of bailout dollars by taxing financial speculation? I doubt it will happen. But maybe I am too cynical. Maybe politicians will not just do what they have been paid to do. But it seems the best predictor of what congress will do is based on what they are paid to do, based on their past and current behavior. Now what congress will say is very different. those paying Congressmen might not love it if the congressmen call them names but through a few billion more and they are happy to be called names while given the cash to buy new jets and sports teams and parties for their daughters.

    Making Wall Street pay by Dean Baker

    We can raise large amounts of money by taxing the speculation of the Wall Street high-flyers while barely affecting the sort of financial dealings that most of us do in our daily lives.

    The logic of a financial transactions tax is simple. It would impose a modest fee on trades of stocks, futures, credit default swaps and other financial instruments. For example, the UK puts a 0.25% tax on the sale or purchase of shares of stock. This has very little impact on people who buy stock with the intent of holding it for a long period of time.
    …
    We can raise more than $140bn a year taxing financial transactions, an amount equal to 1% of GDP.
    …
    Since the financial sector is the source of the country’s current economic and budget problems it also makes sense to have this sector bear the brunt of any new taxes that may be needed. The economic collapse caused by Wall Street’s irrational exuberance has led to a huge increase in the country debt burden. It seems only fair that Wall Street bear the brunt of the clean-up costs. A financial transactions tax is the way to make sure that this happens.

    (more…)

  • Economic Measurement Issues Arising from Globalization

    One challenge of understanding the state of the economy is we don’t have clear measures. We attempt to gather accurate data but there is quite a bit of inaccuracy in the data (both from preliminary estimates – before all the data is in, which can take months, or longer – and just plain items we have to estimate no matter how long we have).

    Related: Manufacturing Data – Accuracy Questions – Why China’s Economic Data is Questionable – What Do Unemployment Statistics Mean? – Manufacturing Jobs Data: USA and China – The Long-Term USA Federal Budget Outlook – Is China’s Recovery for Real?

    Economists Seek to Fix a Defect in Data That Overstates the Nation’s Vigor

    The federal agencies that compile the nation’s statistics increasingly acknowledge that they lack the detailed data needed to calculate the impact of imported goods and services as imports rise from an insignificant 5 percent of all economic activity 35 years ago to more than 12 percent today, not counting petroleum. As a result, many imports are valued as if they were made in the United States and therefore higher in price than their imported counterparts.

    The problem is particularly acute in manufacturing. Imported components constitute an ever greater share of the computers, autos, appliances and other finished merchandise that roll off assembly lines in the United States – and an ever greater share of all of the nation’s imports.
    …
    The stated goal, among those at the conference, is to repair the statistics, but that requires several years, lots of money (from Congress) to gather more information about what companies are doing, and whole new procedures for measuring imports. Much of the conference was devoted to an analysis of the gap between existing data and reality, and ways to close that gap.

    The Measurement Issues Arising from the Growth of Globalization conference has thankfully provided open access to papers from the conference including:
    Offshoring Bias: The Effect of Import Price Mismeasurement on Manufacturing Productivity (more…)

  • Curious Cat Investing and Economics Carnival #5

    Welcome to the Curious Cat Investing and Economics Carnival: we highlight recent blog posts we found interesting.

    • Dividend stocks that beat the market by Jim Jubak – “A hefty dividend isn’t enough to prevent major capital damage when a sector takes that kind of punishment. Another lesson is that a dividend income portfolio needs more frequent care and feeding than I gave this one.”
    • Get Real On The Economic Recovery And Stock Market Rally – “Another rapid slump in global economy is far from impossible. Double dip recession could arise from sky-high public debts or another financial crisis sparked by delinquency in prime mortgage loans, risky commercial sector or derivatives.”
    • Don’t Miss Out on a Good Investment Today Because You Missed a Better Investment Earlier by John Hunter – Instead of just missing out because I made a mistake and didn’t buy a stock at a lower price earlier, I have learned to accept that buying at the higher price available today can be the best option…
    • How much should be in your emergency fund? by Patrick – “Some people recommend at least 3-6 months living expenses, some recommend 6 months to a year, and some recommend a few thousand dollars. In my opinion, this is a very personal decision and should be based on your individual circumstances.”
    • Weakon 238: Stock Beta by Philip – ” If the beta comes back 1 or higher then you are relying on the market for your returns and are not protected against a down market. That isn’t a bad thing if you’re tolerant to risk, the beta on my 401(k) is 1.3.”
    • Government Debt Around the World as Percentage of GDP 1990-2007 by John Hunter – The overall OECD debt to GDP ratio decreased from 77% in 2005 to 75% in 2007. The USA moved in the opposite direction increasing from 62% to 63%

      • (more…)

  • USA Heath Care System Needs Reform

    There are several factors that need to be addressed relating to the broken health care system in the USA.

    1) It is bankrupting the government
    2) It is severely handicapping business that must pay for the expensive and poorly performing system
    3) It is bankrupting individuals (Employees Face Soaring Health Insurance Costs)
    4) It is hampering economic freedom due to the model that ties health care to employment. If I want to go start my own small business, I not only have to worry about all the risks of running a business I have to risk my heath coverage (coverage is expensive and if you get sick you can be dropped, or rates increased so dramatically that they are not affordable – hardly insurance when you are dropped when you need it).
    5) social inequity – no other rich country denies basic health care to everyone
    6) the results are poor to mediocre (at by far the highest cost of any country)

    The idea that a system that is far more expensive than any in the world and performs, at best, in the middle of the pack of rich countries while creating huge economic and human hardships should not be reformed is crazy. Unless you believe the USA is just incapable of performing even at a mediocre level in health care, for some reason, you have to believe they current performance needs to be dramatically improved.

    Now there may well be disagreement about which failures are most important. Some may not care about the huge competitive disadvantage companies are put in by the current broken system. Others may not care that millions don’t have basic coverage. Others may not care that sick people go bankrupt. Others may not care that the heath results are mediocre at best – that tens of millions have much less healthy lives than they would. Others may like that they make a great deal of money from the current system. Others may like that they personally get good health care. So in what ways the broken system in place now needs to be fixed is open for debate.

    The long term result is very simple to see. The current system is very broken and will not work. Different people suffer differently depending on what solution is adopted. My desire would be to reduce spending on hugely expensive miracle cures (especially for terminal ill patients) and increase spending dramatically on preventative and healthy living (versus spending on managing sickness) but I can see that such a solution is not at all popular. So we are not going to adopt that part of what I would like to see.

    But I have no doubt the system will be dramatically reformed. Because if not the economic costs will destroy the economic future of the country. I don’t believe tens of millions without health care will drive action – we have seen that we are perfectly willing to allow that to continue. If the economic costs (say reducing the economic benefit to every person in the USA by $5,000 a year) just stayed at that level, it seems those that are benefiting from the current system are able to hold off improvement. But that figure is increasing each and every year. Eventually the costs grow too large and too many people will demand the broken system be improved.

  • Why the Dollar is Falling

    Why the dollar is falling

    On Tuesday October 20th, for example, the dollar index had slipped to 75.24, its lowest point in more than a year.

    This hardly constitutes an outright collapse, nor is it necessarily cause for concern. American exporters, whose goods have become more competitive abroad, are happy with their weaker currency. Similarly domestic producers may be cheered that rival, imported goods are more expensive. And European tourists, who can buy more for their euros during weekend shopping excursions to America, may cheer too. However, the continued decline of the dollar does come against a backdrop of ominous murmurs from the likes of China and Russia, who hold much of their reserves in dollars, about the need to shift their reserves out of the greenback. Brazil’s imposition of a 2% levy on portfolio inflows is also a sign that other countries are getting nervous about seeing their currencies rise against the dollar.
    …
    But it is hard, also, to think of a parallel in history. A country heavily in debt to foreigners, with a government deficit it is making little headway at controlling, is creating vast amounts of additional currency. Yet it is allowed to get away with very low interest rates. Eventually such an arrangement must surely break down, bringing a new currency system into being, just as Bretton Woods emerged in the 1940s.

    The absence of a credible alternative to the dollar means that, despite its declining value, its status as the world’s reserve currency is not seriously under threat. But the system could change in other ways. A world where currencies traded within bands, or where foreign creditors insist on America issuing some debt in other currencies, are all real possibilities as the world adjusts to a declining dollar.

    The issuance of USA government debt of any significant size in other currencies would be an amazing event, to me. However, that does not mean it won’t happen. In my opinion it is hard to justify the non-collapse of the dollar, and has been for quite some time.

    The huge future tax liability imposed over the last few decades along with the failure to save by those in the country creates a hollow economy. Granted the USA had a huge surplus of wealth built up since the end of World War II. The USA has to a great extent sold off that wealth to finance living beyond the productive capacity of the country the last 20-30 years. But that can only go on so long.

    The only thing saving the dollar is that other countries do not want the dollar to decline because they don’t want the competition of American goods (either being sold to their country or for the goods they hope to export). So they intervene to stop the fall of the dollar (and buy USA government debt). That can serve to artificially inflate the dollar for some time. However, eventually I think that will collapse. And when it does it will likely be very quick. The idea of the USA issuing debt in other currencies seems crazy now. It could then go from possibility to necessity within months.

    You cannot print money forever to live beyond your means and have people accept it as valuable. The government can runs deficits if the citizen’s finance that debt with savings: and still maintain a sound currency. But the recent period, given the macro-economic conditions, don’t justify the value of the dollar. It should have fallen much further a long time ago. The other saving grace for the dollar is few large economies have untarnished economies. The Euro has strengths but is hardly perfect. The Chinese Renminbi is possibly the strongest contender but the economy is still very controlled, financial data is untrustworthy, political freedom is not sufficient… The Japanese Yen does have some strengths but really their long term macro-economic conditions is far from sound.

    In the current economic environment investing in currencies is one way to look for higher returns and even to diversify and hedge your portfolio using forex trading strategies.

    Related: The USA Economy Needs to Reduce Personal and Government Debt – Let the Good Times Roll (using Credit) – Federal Reserve to Buy $1.2T in Bonds, Mortgage-Backed Securities – Who Will Buy All the USA’s Debt?

  • Micro-credit Research

    I really like micro-credit as a tool to improve the lives of those willing to put in the effort to build a successful business. I do worry however, that the actual success is less than what is hoped. The idea is so appealing but objective results are not as obvious (for one thing the results, do not seem to be available). I want to find research that indicates what will make micro-credit most effective at improving the economic well being of people. Small change by Drake Bennett

    two new research papers suggest that microcredit is not nearly the powerful tool it has been made out to be. The papers, by leading development economists affiliated with MIT’s Jameel Poverty Action Lab, have not yet been published, but they are already being called the most thorough, careful studies yet done on the topic. What they find is that, by most measures, microcredit does not offer a way out of poverty. It helps a few of the more entrepreneurial poor to start up businesses, and at the margins it may boost the profits of existing microenterprises, but that doesn’t translate into gains for the borrowers, as measured by indicators like income, spending, health, or education.
    …
    They created their controlled experiment by altering the algorithm the bank used to evaluate creditworthiness so that some borderline applicants were randomly denied loans while other otherwise identical applicants had loans approved.
    …
    Working with a microcredit bank in India that was looking to expand in the city of Hyderabad, the researchers did find some small positive effects. Borrowers who already had a business did see some increase in profit. Households without businesses that the researchers judged more predisposed to start one were found to cut back on spending, suggesting they were saving to augment their loan for a capital business expense like a pushcart or a sewing machine.

    Overall the article suggests that the data is hard to get. The time of the studies may be too short to see improvement. And the gains seen are small. I do believe we are in danger of creating problems with the rapid expansion of micro-credit. I can understand why, the situation is desperate for billions of people still. And we do not have many good methods for improving economic conditions for the world’s poor. I still strongly support micro-credit but I worry, especially if interest rates are high, that it may not help. We need to study what is working and adopt methods that will bring about improved results.

    Related: Creating a World Without Poverty – Capitalism from the Ground Up – MicroFinance Currency Risk – 2006 Nobel Peace Prize to Grameen Bank Founder

  • 2009 Nobel Prize for Economics

    The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences awarded The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel for 2009 to Elinor Ostrom, Indiana University, USA, “for her analysis of economic governance, especially the commons” and Oliver E. Williamson, University of California, Berkeley, USA, “for his analysis of economic governance, especially the boundaries of the firm.”

    Elinor Ostrom has challenged the conventional wisdom that common property is poorly managed and should be either regulated by central authorities or privatized. Based on numerous studies of user-managed fish stocks, pastures, woods, lakes, and groundwater basins, Ostrom concludes that the outcomes are, more often than not, better than predicted by standard theories. She observes that resource users frequently develop sophisticated mechanisms for decision-making and rule enforcement to handle conflicts of interest, and she characterizes the rules that promote successful outcomes.

    Oliver Williamson has argued that markets and hierarchical organizations, such as firms, represent alternative governance structures which differ in their approaches to resolving conflicts of interest. The drawback of markets is that they often entail haggling and disagreement. The drawback of firms is that authority, which mitigates contention, can be abused. Competitive markets work relatively well because buyers and sellers can turn to other trading partners in case of dissent. But when market competition is limited, firms are better suited for conflict resolution than markets. A key prediction of Williamson’s theory, which has also been supported empirically, is therefore that the propensity of economic agents to conduct their transactions inside the boundaries of a firm increases along with the relationship-specific features of their assets.

    Related: 2006 Nobel Peace Prize to Economist –
    Failure to Regulate Financial Markets Leads to Predictable Consequences – Myths About Adam Smith Ideas v. His Ideas – Is Productivity Growth Bad?

    Elinor Ostrom starts talking at the 9 minute mark.