2011 annus horribilis?

2011 annus horribilis?

1. European debt saga continues?

Bailout-Bingo will continue in Europe with Italy, France, and Belgium prime candidates for review.

2. Apple loses it's cool?

Being the biggest player on the block is going to cost them. Investigations, power abuse, shady subcontractors, patent disputes, lawsuits. Nonetheless the earnings powerhouse is sure to continue.

3. China Bubble?

State control and currency manipulation are undermining stability. With millions of smart youngsters unemployed, food prices sky-rocketing and cheap manufacturing spilling over the border, can China keep its cool?

4. U.S Recovery?

Politically and economically America will remain a lame duck. Although corporate profits are promising it has not yet translated in jobs and housing. Joe the plumber, ain't got no cash. If they don't fix the budget, they aint got no credit.

5. Commodity Value

The only commodity becoming worth-less is paper money. The rest is up.

Gold will continue it's upward climb as people try to hedge devaluation.

Oil has been cheap, but so is the dollar, so time for oil and other dollar indexed commodities to go up. BRIC currencies will continue to show strength.

6. Taking the R out of BRIC

Russia will continue to struggle to re-engineer its commodity driven industry. Not enough wealth trickling down and a stagnant population. If it can trickle down the wealth and dramatically improve rule of law and gaping infrastructure then there is promise.

7. Sony's last trick pony

Now that Sony's PS3 gaming and media platform is finally earning money perhaps it can turn around other parts of the business or launch a new one. Divestment or (hostile) take over will be on the minds of the executive board.

8. Real Estate

With bank balance sheets under pressure due to new regulation, lending growth to sectors such as real estate will not pickup in the developed world. This will translate into higher borrowing costs, bankruptcies and restructuring going forward. Deleveraging in banks will translate to deleveraging of both households and business. More equity, more risk, lower asset values.

More on real estate in 2011 friends,

All the best and Quaerere Verum

The Weekend Economist

#85 In hindsight we all need umbrellas

There is no better time than Christmas to look back and reflect. Given the spectacular market recovery, the gifts under the tree will no doubt have recovered. As has confidence on Wall Street, where "God's Work" is paying off profitably. In hindsight, not the wisest of comments by the CEO of Goldman Sachs (need I mention any names?).

Christmas is a time for humility and reflection, if not to ask forgiveness for those we have neglected inadvertently (tax payers anyone?). Obama was elected partially to give that message to the "fat cats" of Wall Street. Despite his television appearance, a generic hallmark Christmas card probably made more of an impression.

Instead of focusing on banker's bonuses, the real focus should be on the economy. Markets are supposed to reflect the barometer of the economy, with economic weather men telling the masses wether we are in for rain or sunshine. Whether it be sun or rain, umbrellas seem to be in short supply. But then again who needs an umbrella when you can rely on the weather forecast. After all, the representatives of God's work are always right in hindsight. And yet in hindsight we all needed umbrellas.

Many claim they saw storms coming. Why did we all go outside without an umbrella then? I've got one now, but I am tempted to trade it in for sunglasses with the market looking so upbeat. No need to stay indoors. Take a little gamble, the masters of the universe sell on NBC & Bloomberg; buy gold, time for value investing, just look at those juicy p/e ratios, etc, etc. One compliment to the financial weathermen; they sure know how to sell compared to those weight loss exercise gear that one sees advertised on television. I guess that is the real difference between no education and a Harvard education.

Lose 20 pounds in 2 weeks for sixty dollars, or balance your portfolio the right way and see it all evaporate in front of your eyes in a matter of months. "Results in the past are no guarantee for future expectations." If you want to sell dishonestly, turn off someone's common sense. You can fool anyone if you turn off their common sense. That's why you always have to Quaerere Verum: seek the truth. Instead of our human flaws, easily exploitable through suggestion, insecurity and plain old greed.

Truth is, all you need is common sense. When you're leaving the door, do you ask yourself if you have your keys, wallet, umbrella, etc? Consciously or subconsciously you do. That's common sesne. Now when checking the weather, do you have blind faith in the prediction of sunshine when you see clouds outside? Probably not 100%; not having blind faith is also common sense. So why do you let someone turn off your common sense when reading or watching the financial tell-sell on the TV, Internet or newspapers? I don't have an answer to that right now but let's not do it again. The rain makes you wet faster than the it takes the sun to dry you. That too is common sense.

So when cheap money pours in again to inflate asset prices beyond the sun., think about Icarus and your umbrella. You don't need an MBA for that.

And remember, better grumpy and prepared, than insanely unprepared.

#84 Wall Street Socialism

Who would have thought that the collapse of the American housing market would signal the end of an era for the world's most prestigious investment banks? The U.S is in-between a rock and hard place to rescue the financial sector of the world's largest, most important and most competitive economy. At what cost? We are, according to Nassim Taleb, the prolific black swan visionary, socializing losses and privatizing profit. That is the world of capitalism turned on its head.

The crisis goes fundamentally deeper than the interconnected failure of banks and other financial institutions in an increasingly interlinked and globalized world. We need a collective re-examination of leading economic, finance and management theory and practice in order to evaluate where and why it has gone wrong.

It is far too easy to blame greed on Wall Street. Greed is healthy; without it we do not have the Darwinian economic animal spirit of capitalism. Without greed we would not have banks, health insurance or even mortgages for that matter. Greed is a force for innovation, hard work and ambition. The blame lies in the sharing of risk and reward. Institutions have become too big to fail. Without economic Darwinism, the rotten survive, and with it bad practices and empty suit risk/reward models.

The problem is that greed and risk management do not mix well with current investment banking models. They are in fact creatures whose interests, even though they pretend to speak the same language, are juxtaposed. Risk management in itself is almost an impossible venture because:

a) Risk is too complex and interconnected in a globalized world for any human being to comprehend accurately and effectively, b) Unknown and unexpected events with previously unrecognized connectivity spring up from places where we never saw them coming (black swans), c) Risk managers are rarely appreciated or understood, and d) Assessing the correct value, impact and occurrence is almost pseudo-science.

Some so-called gurus claim that risk management (in hindsight) should have given investment banks the knowledge (foresight) to steer away from the iceberg of doom. Risk Management is always a science that relies on (biased/faulty) hindsight in order to attain foresight that we can never accurately interpret or understand. Furthermore, us mortal humans lack the objective internal stochastic instruments to judge the real-life world in terms of potential/real events/impacts.

Banking in the future will inevitably be increasingly socialized and/or nationalized at a higher cost, with potentially the same risks and (moral) hazards if we fail to learn from the past. I think it's time we start teaching students and practitioners the history of finance and financial economics. Let's start with Financial Meltdown Economics 101.

#83 Japan’s Prodigious Quest for Energy Independence

Dependant on foreign sources for 96% (87% when including nuclear power) of its primary energy needs and practically 100% of its oil and gas supply, Japan is in a unique position. Rising demand for energy resources and increasing volatility in their supply are contributing greatly to Japan’s concerns. Only natural, then, that Japan should seek to secure its own energy interests. But how realistic is this in today’s world?

A major target of Japan’s May 2006 New National Energy Strategy (NES) is to have the ratio of oil developed by Japanese upstream firms ("Hinomaru oil") increase to 40% of Japan’s oil imports by 2030, up from around 15% in 2005. Japanese oil companies are scrambling to meet this seemingly unobtainable target, coquetting potential partners in Africa, Russia, Central Asia and the Gulf. Just how difficult attaining this objective is can be seen in the failure of the Japanese-owned Arabian Oil Company to renew concessions in the Neutral Zone (also known as “Divided Zone”) between Kuwait and Saudi Arabia in 2000 and 2003. The Azadegan oil field in Iran, where Japanese oil company Inpex’s 75% stake was slashed to 10% by the Iranians in October 2006 and eventually frozen, is another case in point. Meanwhile, voices calling for a boycott of Sudanese oil are getting louder and Japan’s projects on the island of Sakhalin have been undergoing some serious turbulence. The news is not all bleak, however. One major success was scored in October 2005 when Japanese oil firms beat their international competitors in bidding for exploration and development rights in six Libyan oilfields; this was the first oil-exploration concession ever given to Japanese firms in Libya.

Another goal of the NES is to lessen Japan’s dependency on Middle Eastern oil. Here too some progress is being booked, with 84.3% of oil imports originating from the Middle East in November 2007, compared to 90.3% in September 2006. However, the figure has been edging back up in the past few months to 86.7% in February 2008.

One way in which Japan is seeking to realize the goals of the NES is by increasing government involvement in the acquisition of energy resources. To offset the advantages enjoyed by state-sponsored Chinese oil firms, the Japanese government is now seeking to increase subsidies (raising the upper limit of its funding to 75% from the previous 50%) to Japanese oil firms such as JOGMEC – which is slowly becoming a carbon copy of the old Japan National Oil Company. Additional assistance is to come in the form of more favorable loans and investment guarantees. In other words, there is little to be left of the free market policies and non interference from the government that former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi’s liberalization policies set out to engraft.

Despite being the world’s second largest net importer of oil, the third largest consumer of oil, and the largest importer of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), Japan’s demand will continue to decline relative to that of emerging markets such as India and China. With the relative decline of Japanese demand come decreases in Japan’s purchasing power, further undermining its position in the international energy market.

This leaves Japan with two options, namely seeking alternative sources of energy and improving energy efficiency. It is in both of these areas that Japan has booked its most impressive results. Energy conservation and environmental protection have improved significantly, leaving Japan with one of the lowest energy intensity levels among the advanced OECD economies. Similarly, Japan has been able to move considerably in the direction of nuclear and LNG derived power, reducing its dependency on oil. The price, of course, has been increasing dependency on gas.

#77 The Perils of 'Risk Free' Debt

The recent (ongoing) crisis in the so-called subprime market has highlighted the immense difficulties of managing an economy that relies heavily on borrowing in order to create spending. The US and, perhaps even more so, the global economy is seemingly in fine shape. In the States, however, this is in great part due to increased spending made possible through the use of debt. People have had easy access to borrowed money thanks to the historically low interest rate of the past few years.

As the interest rate gradually began to rise, however, paying back these loans has become increasingly difficult. The subprime mortgage crisis is not a sub - as the name might suggest - but rather a prime example of this. Since a subprime loan is a loan that is given to people with a bad credit record, who therefore don't qualify for market interest rates and must pay a much higher rate, it is naturally mostly the poorer people who make use of it. The large number of people with subprime mortgages suddenly found that with the decreasing value of their houses, they were unable to pay the mortgage. And if you can't even pay your mortgage, you surely won't be able to spend on much else, which would cause a problem for the economy.

This poses a dilemma, as the economy must continue to be boosted through spending, but not at all costs. People need to understand that borrowed money needs to be paid back; it is not free money. This should serve as a wake up call to American consumers that relying too heavily on debt is too great of a risk. Sadly, there are always - including now - strong voices advocating debt forgiveness. Surely it cannot be so that consumers are taught that accumulating debt to the point of being unable to repay it comes without consequences? The message that big trouble will arise with too much debt must be hit home hard, once and for all. Better now, while the economy is reasonably stable, than later, when debt will only accumulate further, causing a potentially cataclysmic economic downfall of unknown proportions if China's possible bubble were to collapse.

There is some good news on the horizon, however, in the Fed's failure to take serious steps (i.e. have the central bank lower its benchmark federal funds rate from 5.25 percent) to help those affected by the crisis. It appears that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is trying to "teach investors a lesson," namely that the Fed will not bail out their poor decisions. This is not to say that there is no help whatsoever. The Fed has already injected tens of billions of dollars into the banking system and lowered its discount rate (the charge on its loans to commercial banks). Furthermore, President George Bush announced a plan to help struggling subprime mortgage borrowers to keep their homes via changes to the tax code.

Let's hope that a fair balance is found between the honest need to help those hardest hit and teaching a very wrong and dangerous lesson. Sometimes it is best to set an example to future potential defaulters by acting very harshly (though some would say justly as well) towards those involved now.

#75 Japan Forced to Rethink Its Energy Policy

The red hot Indian and particularly Chinese economies are unquestionably having a major impact on the world. While discussions often rage about whether or not this is a good thing (e.g. with environmentalists pointing out the devastating effect this is having on the environment and business leaders arguing it provides for opportunities not seen in decades), there are a myriad of micro areas where the effect of their growth is clear for all to see. One such interesting area is in Japan's energy policy.

For centuries Japan has been the largest economy in Asia, as well as the dominant political player (this has more to do with their financial muscle than with actual influence exerted). Subsequently, the country experienced a hunger for natural energy resources such as gas and oil that far surpassed that of any of its neighbors. With the rapid growth of India and China, this is beginning to change. While, according to the CIA World Factbook, Japan is still the world's second largest (after the USA) importer of oil with 5.43 million barrels of oil per day, China follows closely with 3.18 million and India with 2.01 million. More interestingly, China already consumes more oil than Japan, with China's consumption standing at 6.53 million barrels per day, Japan's at 5.6 million and India's at 2.5 million (the USA is still the world's largest consumer of oil). This means an increasingly larger portion of China's oil has to come from abroad, which directly and adversely affects Japan's supply. Given the fact that Japan's demand for oil has remained and, according to projections, will continue to remain steady for the coming years, the country is justifiably worried that it is no longer as interesting a market as the rapidly growing Chinese and Indian ones are for petroleum exporting countries.

Japan imports a whopping 90% of its oil from the Middle East (Saudi Arabia is Japan's largest oil supplier, shipping 458 million barrels, or 30% of Japan’s total import; UAE second with 387 million, or 25.4%; Iran third with 176 million, or 11.5%; and Qatar fourth with 156 million, or 10.2%). Japan - the world's largest importer of liquefied natural gas (LNG) - is similarly dependent on one geographical location for its gas imports (three quarters of Japan's imports come from Australasia: Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam and Australia. Qatar is Japan's fourth largest supplier after Indonesia, Malaysia and Australia).

In the meanwhile, China and India have been scavenging the world - particularly Africa - for new areas from which to secure their oil supply. China has been so successful in Africa that it has even managed to create a very balanced oil importing picture (in 2006, the Middle East accounted for 45% of China's crude oil imports, Africa for 32%, the EU and the Americas for 18.3% and Asia Pacific for 4%, according to the Chinese General Administration of Customs). All the while the oil prices have been skyrocketing, allowing for countries like Russia and Venezuela to play their oil cards and flex their muscles.

Given all these worrisome facts, the Japanese government decided it was time to prioritize the securing of the country's energy supply. In May 2006, the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) published a revealing document entitled "The New Energy Strategy." In it (and in later documents and high level speeches even more so), we find some key shifts away from their old policy. As Jan-Hein Chrisstoffels, a Japan specialist at the Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael, points out, the formerly abundant references to liberalization, globalization and the free market are nowhere to be found. The new pillars are: Strengthening of bilateral relations with oil and gas producing countries; Increasing imports from oil and gas projects that are led by Japanese firms abroad; Decreasing the use of oil in the transport sector; Using more nuclear energy; And cooperation with China in the field of energy.

Another major shift in policy is the increased role that the Japanese government seeks to play. Japan feels Chinese oil firms have an unfair advantage given a government that pumps money into seemingly economically unprofitable extraction projects simply in order to secure supply. Therefore, the Japanese government has now set out to increase subsidies to Japanese oil firms and provide more favorable loans and investment guarantees. In other words, there is to be little left of the free market policies and non interference from the government that took the overtone until now. Much like China - which woos potential oil suppliers by promising preferential loans, the building of large infrastructure projects and a policy of non-interference in internal affairs - Japan has embarked upon a quest of securing her energy supply through tit-for-tat policies. One success story can already be found in former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visit to Kazakhstan in August 2006, followed by Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Amari Akira's visit this year. They ensured that Kazakhstan's (which has the world's second-largest uranium reserves after Australia) current supplies of only 1% of Japan's uranium imports will jump to 30-40% in the near future, in exchange for Japanese expertise in uranium enrichment.

It appears India and especially China are having a major impact on the policies of other nations such as Japan, which in this case can be considered as a blow to proponents of the free market. It is even likely to extend beyond the oil and gas sectors, as this year China - the world's largest consumer of coal - for the first time became a net importer thereof. The country imported 4.7 million metric tons of coal in January, a rise of 81.1% from a year ago, according to figures from the customs bureau. Although Japan is not at all a major consumer of coal, it might very well affect other formerly free market adhering countries.

#73 The Food Squeeze

The "Food Squeeze" is a global phenomenon. It doesn't matter whether you like pasta, tortillas or rice: prices are up and are set to go even further. Basic food commodity prices have been moving up steadily for quite some time now. In France alone, grain stockpiles are down to the levels of the early 1970's. Those were record lows by their own standards and therefore we are witnessing an unprecedented food squeeze. So far in Europe the effect has been dampened somewhat by the strong Euro and its relative trading strength.

There's also another, albeit temporary cushion that lies in the use of commodity based instruments and derivatives such as futures and forwards. Major food firms such as ADM, Cargil, General Mills, Kellog and Phillip Morris employ these hedging instruments to protect themselves against cyclical spikes associated with the volatility of commodity markets. For consumers it creates a delaying effect, which means that in many cases you don't feel the immediate hike in food prices - at least not as fast as energy prices.

However, bioflation is going to end up on everybody's plate at some point. Part of the food squeeze is coming as a direct result of the rapid industrialization of India and China. When agricultural laborers move into the city, their production output is lost from farms. Industrialization could theoretically mitigate these effects by further mechanization, fertilization, economies of scale and other capital intensive processes to ramp-up output. But that takes time and money. For now at least, laborers are choosing to go to the city rather than ramp up their own agricultural output. One would expect higher food commodity prices to be an incentive for higher production. But this is not expected to happen overnight, and things are further complicated by the bioflationary effect of a growing biofuel economy that links food prices with energy prices.

Given the sheer size of the Chinese economy and its impressive growth rate, China consumes a significant and growing slice of world wide food production. This is expected to increase in tandem with slowing food production. Net food output in China can no longer keep up with demand. As China grows and develops, its citizens will have more income to dispose on food. This increased spending power is now resonating on world markets for grains, meats and fish.

Food prices also have a stronger impact on developing countries than on developed countries. In China, on average, 34% of disposable income may be spent on food. In the U.S. this figure is less than half. Nonetheless, food prices are amongst the highest risers in core inflation figures for the USA. On a macro scale, for now this only slightly affects demand for other goods. In developing countries it remains to be seen how adversely these price hikes will affect overall economic growth. For the worlds poorest, the news could be rather bad, as the UN recently announced it could no longer afford to feed the world.

The production of food is really part of a larger structural problem, as you may or may not know/remember from your typical Economics 101 course. Food is an inelastic good: everybody has to eat and substitution is really not an option. Given the trend of industrialization, lagging production, climatic challenges and other side effects of bioflation, food prices are expected to stay in a strong upward trend. The chain is deeply inter-connected (i.e. grain is not only used in domestic consumption for bread, but also to feed pigs, poultry and other animals). This means that as prices for grain go up, so do the costs of producing meat and other related products.

With production not keeping up and inventories at record lows, the pain that occurs when China buys food "en masse" on the world market will be felt by everyone. Indirectly, this bioflation is going to add to global inflation and possibly hamper growth and development. Additionally, with higher future inflation expected, the inflation targets of central banks world wide will most likely come under renewed pressure. This ultimately means higher interest rates, and thus more expensive capital. Just last week we saw what credit repricing did to world markets. It sent shock waves throughout the financial world. If last week's "correction" was just a speed bump on the road to further economic growth (as predicted by most economists) then it would be wise to investigate what further bioflation will do to the world economy.

#72 Bioflation and the Global Eco-Hypocracy

Markets are moving, volatility is up, Forex markets are once again the focus of a broader public. However, instead of being swamped by a myriad of different analyst reports and outlooks, it could be beneficial to look beyond the complex parade, rank and file of charts in order to grasp what is happening under the bonnet of the world economy. Markets are essentially economic battlefields, continuously pulsing and pushing. The force majeure of the world economy - the dollar - has taken a severe beating. With it, volatility has come back into the market and subsequently also some repricing, so far psychologically more than in absolute yield spreads and valuation. All these things are nothing but distractions when put in perspective of the "real" hurricane out there, and that hurricane is a global one: Bioflation.

Bluntly put: Bioflation is what happens when food (that what we put on our dinner plates) ends up as fuel in our gas tanks. When the appetites of automobiles start competing for those of humanity as a result of ethanol/biodiesel mania, we have a problem called bioflation. When food crops such as corn, rapeseed, sunflower, sugarcane as ethanol or biodiesel have to compete with oil on global fuel markets we essentially interlink them on an unprecedented global scale. This has been instrumental in the increase in food commodities worldwide.

In the end the consumer pays the bill in the form of substantially higher prices for tortillas, cornflakes, cola, hamburgers and pizza. Bioflation may be good news for farmers, but not for regular consumers and the world's poor. As a result of bioflation, Mexicans have been rioting due to corn prices going through the roof. The culprit: corn being used as a source of ethanol rather than food. The result: the price of corn and other food substitutes on their way to record heights. The bad news: this is only the beginning.

When food crops become interchangeable as fuel, they have to compete with fuels such as oil. Simpleton economists would say that this is just a cyclical phenomenon and argue that, with food as a substitute, this creates more supply in a market that has very little cushion. But this extra fuel supply comes at a price: bioflation. Opec and other large exporters have enough flexibility to keep prices high. Furthermore, there is more than enough (and still growing) demand from rapidly developing countries such as China and India. So biofuels as substitutes and alternatives to the global petroeconomy are just farts in the wind. Biofuels such only be considered as a steam valve, as part of a transition completely away from a carbon based fuel economy.

Making biofuel from corn is really not very efficient and is turning the US (previously a net exporter of corn) into an importer. The price hike and volatility of corn on global commodity markets is affecting other crops and substitutes as well. The global hike in food commodities shows just why bioflation is not a welcome trend, unless you are a large scale corn farmer or an ethanol refiner. There are other non competitive, non food crops that should be considered if one really desires to shift towards a biofuel economy. Unless we are willing and capable to rise to that challenge, we will live in an inflationary and unstable world of food and energy substitution.

Several UN organizations have already signaled that they are unable to feed the world with the current trends in food prices (as if they were able to feed the world before). However, food prices are not expected to go down as long as they remain connected to the world's energy economy. As global oil output declines and the prospect of food for oil substitution remains an alternative, high food prices are here to stay, and with it hunger on a unprecedented scale.

The cycle is more vicious and cynical than you think: besides high gasoline prices at the pump, fuel for heating and cooking also becomes more expensive. In developing countries this results in increased wood and shrub poaching and increased deforestation. Higher food prices are also going to encourage increased encroachment on existing forests as villagers look to cultivate more land. As peasants cut down local shrubs and trees for fuel, they are also destabilizing the fertile top soils in the surrounding land. Indirectly, high energy prices will lead to increased soil erosion, drastically affecting the fertility and agricultural output of the land.

Bioflation thus leads to a vicious cycle of higher food prices, inflation and lower "real" economic growth. Furthermore, the collusion of the above factors also inherently exacerbates poverty. Therefore, by understanding the dynamics of bioflation, we need to consider the trade off between "biofueling" the economy and empty stomachs world wide. As such, by "biofueling" our mobility, we drive the most vulnerable participants of the world economy into deeper poverty and hunger.

The "inconvenient truth" is that we are heading towards a world where food prices will be held hostage by both higher energy prices as well as global warming. Additionally, in a very perverse way, the Saudis, Putin and Chavez are more capable of determining the price of a big mac than McDonalds itself. Biofuels as the corner stone for energy independence is a green myth that will lead us down to a greater state of (inter)dependence that we cannot even begin to comprehend.

Furthermore, the effects of "bioflation" are not experienced in homogeneously. The effects, although generally detrimental to all, will be different for low income families as opposed to higher income families across different economies and geographical regions. For example, a Mexican laborer just above the poverty line may find him or herself quickly below the poverty line as wage rises don't stay in check with food prices. Bioflation will impact developed economies and families in a higher socio-economic strata as well. On a macro level this will imply lower spending on durable goods which in the long term can shift the global economy itself. For that reason the quest for cheap alternative energy is the most direct challenge of the 21st century, for it determines the fate and prosperity of mankind.

note
* non-food commodity based plants such as jatropha do offer a viable solution as biofuels because they do not directly compete as foodbased output or as food substitutes
* the author is NOT an anti-environmentalist nor a climate change denier

#71 Europe’s Unequal Siblings: Monetary Economics in Central Europe

The great experiment that is Europe still needs to overcome a number of obstacles until it truly becomes an economic entity. Especially when looking at the integration of new member states to the economic, political and cultural entity that Europe seeks to be. Central Europe can be seen as a collection of younger siblings in the family of European states. In many ways states such as Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic are like restless teenagers on their way to adulthood.

Current president of the Czech Republic, Mr. Václav Klaus, is known to be a vivid enthusiast of Milton Friedman and his dogmatic free markets. You might therefore think it would only be natural for this liberal economic fervor to wash over to the lower political echelons. But this is not the case, because these badly needed fiscal reforms hurt those people in the economy who need government protection the most. Leftist and Populist parties make good use of this and find great support from the disadvantaged, disenfranchised and elderly sections of the electoral masses. In "old" Europe these type of factions do not enjoy the same level of support because the West has already gone through many of these transitions over the last several decades, albeit one small step at a time.

Europe’s Central European siblings want to take larger steps on the road to economic prosperity and future European economic integration. Fiscal discipline is an important prerequisite, but Central Europe's budget deficits are not heading in the direction of 2-3% of GDP. In fact, they are actually showing a widening trend. This, coupled with inflation, is not going to strengthen currencies and reduce the purchasing power parity gap. Yet, there are some unique forces at work. Skilled labor is much more mobile in Europe than unskilled labor. Wages of highly skilled laborers are even on a road to parity, while if they work abroad they are often already in parity. But for the majority of laborers in Central European countries such as Hungary, the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia, the question remains how long it will take until there is a true convergence of per capita income.

The good news is that there is actually downward wage pressure in countries such as Germany and Austria as a result of this imbalance between per capita income differentials. This is inherently a good thing because it makes the rest of Europe more competitive.

When visiting the capitals of Central Europe such as Budapest and Prague, one can definitely observe a boom. Low interest rates, economic vitality, wage growth and speculation are driving new real estate development and pushing property prices up. This boom is to a large extent a local driven phenomenon, at least when looking at the residential market. Most of residential housing stems from large Communist residential development; giant, dated and somewhat drab apartment complexes still form the mainstay of housing of Central European residents. But with a growing segment of the population being upwardly mobile and flush with cash, they are driving a residential building boom. People want to move out of their dated Socialist housing arrangements into new housing and apartments. An increase in interest rates could bring some much needed revaluation into the property market and blow off some steam.

This seems unlikely to happen in the short term as central banks are keen to keep the economy going. Inflation doesn’t appear to be at the forefront of their worries. Economists and central bankers should keep their eyes on the horizon because there are some worrisome circumstances. Some of the currencies such as the Hungarian Fórint have been quite volatile compared to the relative stability of the Euro and the Swiss Frank. Additionally, many Central European Economies have fallen behind in their fiscal reforms and will find pushing painful reforms through in the various parliaments a difficult task to say the least. Sure, bumps on the road to maturity are imminent and even unavoidable for the Central European teenagers. Some central bankers also argue that the type of inflation we are witnessing is completely natural and to a certain extent outside of their influence.

EU taxes on regulated goods such as alcohol and tobacco is an important inflationary presence, especially is Central Europe, where alcohol and tobacco consumption tends to be larger. My final worry lies in the close correlation between Central European currencies, which tend to move fairly together, even though political and economic circumstances are rather different between Poland, Hungary and Slovakia. There is the fear that we could be oversimplifying those dynamics, assuming too much and questioning far too little. Undeniably the dissimilarity of growth is as much an opportunity as it is a threat to the economic entity of Europe as a whole. Nonetheless, if Central European governments do manage to get their fiscal responsibilities together, there is little to fear besides a few bubble bumps on the road. Projected rate increases in Euroland should inspire the central banks in Central Europe to do the same.

#68 China Playing in America's Backyard

China has managed to use its increasing economic muscle - and thereby global clout - to persuade yet another country to recognize it over Taiwan. Costa Rican President Oscar Arias announced on June 6 that his country has broken diplomatic ties with Taiwan and established relations with China, pointing out that Costa Rica needed to strengthen ties with China in order to attract foreign investment. This follows a string of successes for China, who refuse to have diplomatic ties with nations that recognize Taiwan, regarding it as a breakaway republic. During the late 1960s, Taiwan had full relations with 67 countries, but Chinese pressure has led to this figure dropping almost threefold to just 24 states today.

China's success does not really come as a huge surprise, given the fact that China is now the Central American nation's top trading partner, buying more than $1 billion worth of Costa Rican exports in 2006. The fear is that after Costa Rica's decision, other nations such as Nicaragua, Panama and Paraguay will follow suit, leaving Taiwan practically abandoned in Latin America. After the Dominican Republic, Haiti, St. Kitts and Nevis and St. Vincent and the Grenadines switched diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China in 2004 and Costa Rica did the same on Wednesday, today only Paraguay, Panama, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala officially recognize Taiwan.

In the last couple of years, China has been particularly active in Latin America, not only to shore up its political influence, but also to secure natural resources that are crucial to sustain the country's red hot economy. Venezuela is particularly keen to court the Chinese with oil, seeing the country as the perfect escape from the grip of the "evil American empire." Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina, Chile, Peru and even Mexico are also seeing large increases in trade and deals (particularly in oil and gas exploration) with China. According to the Inter-American Dialogue, Chinese imports from Latin America have grown more than sixfold, at a pace of some 60% per year, to an estimated $50 billion in 2005. What's more, Chinese investment in Latin America represents half of the country's foreign investment overseas, promising to increase it from $6.5 billion in 2004 to $100 billion by 2014.

US trade with Latin America is still almost 10 times larger, but given the growth of Chinese trade with the region and the severe hostility the Americans encounter in a number of Latin American countries, this is certainly an issue that the need to monitor closely. China is rapidly encroaching upon America's backyard. China's dealings in the region are not limited to securing energy needs, other natural resources and isolating Taiwan. The business of selling of arms and technology to the region (with Venezuela being a key buyer) is also flourishing, while cooperative aerospace deals are being forged with Brazil and possibly key intelligence-gathering facilities in Cuba are being used by the Chinese to intercept U.S. communications.

#66 Vietnam Positions Herself as a Global Oil Player

As does any other rapid growth country not blessed (or cursed; depends on who you ask) with oil, Vietnam needs to find her black gold elsewhere. While China and India have been roaming the world - particularly Africa - for oil contracts for a while now, it is now Vietnam's time to follow suit. Vietnam Oil and Gas Corp., or PetroVietnam, pledged to expand its overseas oil exploration venture with two contracts this year, one in Cuba and the other in Nigeria. Oil agreements in Libya and Sudan are also on the cards, but rank lower in priority due to difficulties encountered such as lack of regulatory structure.

During a recent visit to Cuba by Vietnamese Communist Party chief Nong Duc Manh, the first of the two promises has now been honoured. Cuban and Vietnamese officials signed an agreement last Friday, 1 June, between state oil companies Cuba Petroleos and Petrovietnam calling for a partnership for exploration and drilling both in the Gulf of Mexico and on shore (photo courtesy of AP). PetroVietnam follows in the footsteps of other international oil companies such as Spain’s Repsol YPF S.A., Norway’s Norsk Hydro ASA and India’s Oil & Natural Gas Corp. Cuba divided its offshore area into 59 exploration blocks in 2000, of which just over 20 blocks have been leased to international companies.

The drilling in Cuba is not without financial risk, as it is not certain that they will find anything near the amount they might have access to in their other target partner country, Nigeria. Cuba currently produces about 80,000 barrels of crude oil a day, compared to Nigeria's whopping 2.2 million barrels per day in 2001. Nevertheless, oil exploration in Cuba is bound to be a safer bet for Vietnam, given that just 1 day after the agreement signed in Cuba, the umpteenth abduction occurred overnight at the U.S.-based oil-services firm Schlumberger Ltd. in Port Harcourt, Nigeria. One Dutch, one British and one Pakistani citizen, as well as another captive were taken hostage according to Rivers State Police Commissioner Felix Ogbaudu.

In other news, for the first time in ten months (when emergency surgery forced him to hand over power to his brother Raul Castro), Cuban leader Fidel Castro was shown standing and talking in video footage that aired on state-run Cuban TV. Castro was seen on Sunday, 3 June in a meeting with Vietnamese Communist Party chief Nong Duc Manh (picture on the right courtesy of Cuba's Juventud Rebelde newspaper).

#64 The Non-Genocidal Face of Sudan

Sudan, Africa's largest country, is best known for the crisis (others would call it genocide) in Darfur. But there is another story to Sudan as well. A much more positive one. Sudan happens to be one of Africa's fastest growing economies and, ironically, one of the more stable as of late. What's more, Sudan is currently also one of the world's fastest growing economies.

Sudan's President Omar Al-Bashir announced recently that the country's economic growth rate reached 8% in 2006, adding that the growth rate is expected to increase to between 9-13% in the next year. In fact, according to IMF figures, real GDP growth has reported an average of 6.7% over the past seven years: 8.4% in 2000, 6.2% in 2001, 6.4% in 2002, 4.9% in 2003, 5.2% in 2004, 7.9% in 2005 and 8% in 2006. Other sources put the GDP figure even higher at an average annual growth rate of slightly more than 7% over the past seven years. GDP in 2005 stood at US$ 6,747,748, compared to a mere US$4,950 in 1980. This is remarkable given the grave situation in Darfur and the economic blockade imposed by a large number of nations, as well as the long North-South Civil War that ended with the official signing by both sides of the Nairobi Comprehensive Peace Agreement on 9 January 2005, granting Southern Sudan autonomy for six years, to be followed by a referendum about independence.

Not surprisingly, two major factors in the growth equation are China and oil. Oil revenues have become a major part of GDP, contributing to 49% of the total GDP in 2004, compared to 5.9% in 1999. China imported 81% of Sudan's entire oil exports to the world, while oil accounted for 98.8% of Sudan's exports to China. Of Sudan's total exports to the world in 2003, 40.9% went to China. China is indeed by far Sudan's most valuable trading partner, as, according to the OECD, Sudan's main partners 2004 were China (64.3%), Japan (13.8%) and Saudi Arabia (3.7%). In terms of Sudan's importance for China's economy, Sudanese oil accounted for no more than 5.5% of China's total imports of oil in 2004. Sudanese activist Ali Askouri has gone so far as to proclaim Sudan "The first country to become a Chinese colony."

Another interesting fact that is very much worth noting is that Arab investments in Sudan surged by more than 15 times from US$657 million in 2004 to US$2,341 in 2005. Despite all this, however, we should hope that the crisis in Darfur is not permitted to fade any more into obscurity than it already is. If the figures provided by the United Nations are correct, more than 200,000 people have been killed and two million displaced in the fighting. This should not be worth an economic boom. Khartoum says only 9,000 people have died, but this is not taken seriously by many. In any case, China, for one, does not seem inclined to budge even one inch from their principle of non-interference in the affairs of other countries (a policy that was established more than 50 years ago by then foreign minister Zhou Enlai). Without China, little can be done in Darfur. Without China, little economic growth would be witnessed in Sudan. China reigns supreme.

#63 The Energy Champion

Every time we hear about Russia in the news in reference to oil and gas, it seems to be about Russian muscle flexing. In the past few years alone, Russia has used her vast energy reserves as a weapon in times of disagreement against not only the European Union, but also Georgia, Ukraine, her ally Belarus and, most recently, Estonia. But credit must be given where credit is due: Moscow is in a league of its own when it comes to securing her energy interests.

The proof? Just today (May 12, 2007) Russia announced an agreement with Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to build a new natural gas pipeline north from the Caspian Sea, carrying gas from Turkmenistan through Kazakhstan to Russia. This is a major smack in the face of the EU, which had hoped to lessen their dependence on Russian gas by finding an alternative supplier in the form of Turkmenistan. This was to be done by creating a new pipeline under the Caspian Sea that would go through Turkey to Europe, thereby bypassing Russia. The gas routes as they stand today can be seen in the picture above (source: the Economist).

Even if the idea proposed by the EU were to take hold, some analysts doubt whether it would make a significant difference. ICG energy analyst Charles Esser pointed out that the EU could count on at most 20bn cubic metres of gas per year from a Caspian pipeline, which amounts to no more than 4% of EU consumption in 2004. Nevertheless, given the fact that the exact amount of gas present in Turkmenistan is unclear, a significantly high number could lead to the expansion of current plans and seriously reduce EU dependency on Russian gas in the long term. In any case, the deal announced today is a clear victory for Russia, as it effectively means that Turkmen and Kazakh gas will only be exported to Europe via Russia, putting the Europeans at the mercy of Russian caprice more than ever before.

China will no doubt see this deal as a loss as well, since they too were vying for direct control of Turkmen gas in their global quest to secure their energy needs in the most far-flung of places. In April 2005, deceased Turkmen President Saparmurat Niyazov had blessed the construction of a pipeline to China that would send 30 billion cubic meters of gas to China starting in 2009. Whether this deal will now go through is uncertain, though it seems unlikely that the Russian-Turkmen agreement will affect it. It does, however, give Gazprom and Russia a powerful bargaining tool in any future discussion, negotiation or conflict with China.

Say what you will of the Russian mafia-like monopolizing tactics, but effective they most certainly are.

#62 Economic Darwinism in the Market Place through Hedge Funds and Private Equity

The notion of "survival of the fittest" is not only something attributable to the development of species, but, in a more contemporary sense, to world markets as well. The defragmentation process of regional markets that has been set in motion by the followers of those who advocate closer integration of global markets is a force to be reckoned with.

In the past regulation created barriers that protected regional and national firms from the more efficient and competitive adversaries that operate in more capital efficient and less regulated environments, where capital is allocated to the most productive parts of the economy. This is increasingly changing today, with hedge funds and private equity groups jumping at the new found opportunity to take advantage. Hedge funds and private equity are in fact the aquarium algae eating fish that take out the dirt and keep the water clean for the other fish. This is not to say that firms targeted by private equity directly equate to fish guano. No, these firms are simply more able to asses the true value of a firm, albeit like a skeleton being sold off bone by bone to piecemeal investors.

When firms perform less than optimal, the question amongst shareholders - which can include private equity groups or hedgefunds - is whether management resources have been utilized optimally to achieve maximum utility in comparison to capital market benchmarks. As hedge funds often operate with long-short positions, performance or under-performance is crucial. It is no surprise, therefore, that hedge funds are perhaps the most shortsighted investors in terms of their investment horizons. They often propagate and support the shedding of assets, business, or other holdings if it contributes to short term operational results.

With hedgefunds as shareholders, it becomes essential for the firm to not only "know thy self" but also "know thy shareholders." Shareholders are not a homogeneous group; a pension fund, for instance, may have a longer term perspective and subsequently influences firm management in that direction. Hedgefunds have a different investment and return horizon. By their very nature they are required to give high returns in a relatively short time period. This can create a conflict of interest with regards to the strategy and horizon between firm management and a disparate group of shareholders.

This makes the concept of value difficult to grasp for the management of firms, as they have to deal with a heterogeneous group of investors with different time horizons. This destroys any homogeneous expectations of value and allows for arbitrage based on different views on time, value and strategy. The key word, really, is arbitrage: a key pricing component in the pricing of assets. By means of shareholder activism, buyouts, long-short strategies and others, hedgefunds and private equity improve market efficiency through re-pricing. Hedgefunds reprice through long-short strategies and private equity reprice via financial engineering and other management strategies. Technically hedgefunds can do the same by pressuring management. Either way, the end result is the same.

The power of shareholders in efficient, unconstrained capital markets is a key component in the arsenal of hedgefunds and private equity groups alike. Without transparency and various takeover and management defense mechanisms, shareholders would not be entitled to the influence they deserve as owners of a firm. Yet for years many firms in the Netherlands enjoyed the benefit of various defense constructions against hostile takeovers. This in the end suppressed the value of firms so notably that the phenomenon became known as the Dutch discount.

What empowers private equity and hedgefunds even more is the world of cheap capital that we live in. Low interest rates and low spreads on many forms of debt (excluding subprime market) is stocking the weapons arsenal of hedge funds and private equity alike. The bitter reality of this low interest world in which we live in consequentially empowers the lashes of capital and market efficiency through the empowerment of hedge funds and private equity. In terms of the functioning of markets, I would argue that it is a good thing.

Unfortunately, hedge funds and private equity do not spend much time on press relations, and whenever there is talk of hedge fund activity or private equity, it is equated with some evil power bent on selling off assets and mass firings. The truth is that if management of firms under question such as ABN-Amro had performed more adequately, the scenario we are seeing today would have been less likely. In the end the question is often whether a company is worth more as a whole than the sum of its parts. If the sum of its parts is more valuable than the whole, then management must have failed its shareholders in creating significant value.

Furthermore, management could be accused of empire building and not shedding assets that would be to the benefit of its shareholders. Management has the same tools available as private equity; the difference is the perspective on value. The time window for performance delivery has also narrowed in recent decades, in part due to increased accounting transparency that enables more financial performance benchmarking. This, in tandem with increased integration with global markets, has helped to create enormous "peer" pressure to perform.

This should by no means induce us to feel sorry for management, as performance is more than handsomely rewarded. It is the common employee of the firm who stands to lose the most in this hyper-competitive world. Employees bear the burden of under-performance and often gain, relatively speaking, little when performance is good. Except perhaps for the continuation of job security and perhaps performance. This is not a picture that top management would adhere to. It is a bitter reality. I can imagine ABN-Amro employees being more than a little disgruntled if the management leaves with a nice big bonus due to a hostile take over and all they are left with is uncertainty. ABN is in that regard comparable to the titanic: the only rescue vessels available are for the captain, the shareholders and a select group of officers. The bulk of the crew are left behind in an ocean of uncertainty. This is not entirely fair, as a good captain should go down with his ship, instead of being rewarded for steering the ship into an ocean of icebergs.

#61 A Beleaguered Ethiopia

Ethiopia has had a busy year so far and it's starting to shape up to be a rough one. After invading Somalia back in July 2006 in order to crush the Islamic insurgency, the Ethiopian troops swiftly proceeded to defeat the enemy and reach Mogadishu by the end of December. Victory was clear and it was time to leave and let the African Union (AU) or the United Nations send the necessary peace keepers. But this did not happen. Instead, the AU did not make good on its pledge to send 8,000 troops (only 1,200 have been deployed), leaving the much reviled Ethiopians to face an increasingly resurgent enemy that can bank on local support when it comes to opposing what many Somalis see as invading Ethiopian forces.

While contending with the troubles in Somalia, tension with another neighbor is starting to flare up. Ethiopia has consistently accused the Eritrean government of supporting and sponsoring various terrorist groups and elements such as Al-Qaeda backed Al-Shabat, operating in Somalia. Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi said recently that one of the main goals was to defeat Eritrean-backed groups in order to "make it difficult for Eritrea to take the option it has taken thusfar - destabilizing through sending elements to Ethiopia and the horn." He said putting Eritrea's accomplices "out of the game" will leave Eritrea with one option: aggressing Ethiopia on its border - a step deemed unlikely, given the result of the 2000 border war with Ethiopia and the likely backlash from the international community (perhaps most importantly from China).

Eritrea, on it's part, released eight Ethiopian citizens who were kidnapped in the northern Afar region in March. Five Europeans had also been kidnapped, but were released 12 days after their capture. Despite this gesture of apparent goodwill, it appears most east African states support Ethiopia and the transitional government of Somalia, while Eritrea openly supports the Islamists. This, in part, has led to Eritrea leaving the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD), signaling increased instability in the region. Eritrea released a document explaining their decision to suspend their membership of IGAD, accusing Ethiopia and the U.S. of intentionally causing havoc in the Horn of Africa in order to restore U.S. dominance in the region.

Besides the escalating conflict in Somalia that is starting to entrap the Ethiopians and has caused a massive refugee problem, Ethiopia was rudely awakened by a massive shooting rampage in Abole, a small town about 120km (75 miles) from the regional capital, Jijiga, in the Somali (not to be confused with the country, Somalia) region. Gunmen from the Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF) killed at least 74 people in an attack on an exploratory drilling site run by a subsidiary of the Chinese government-owned giant oil company, Sinopec. Sixty-five of the dead were Ethiopians and nine were Chinese oil workers. Seven Chinese were also taken captive. Ethiopia has launched a rescue operation to try and secure the release of the Chinese, accusing Eritrea of backing the ONLF in the process. The safety of Chinese interests in Ethiopia is crucial for the African nation, since China is Ethiopia's largest trading partner, with trade worth $450 million in 2006.

China is sure to learn lessons from this attack as well, as the killing of 9 Chinese and the abduction of 7 others comes on the backdrop of 16 Chinese oil workers being kidnapped in Nigeria and a Chinese engineer being killed and another injured in Kenya this year alone. This poses a major dilemma for China, that swears on her policy of non-interference. Until the recent murders and kidnappings of Chinese civilians, this policy has worked very much in China's favor, allowing it to gain access to resources in far flung regions where unsavory types run the show. But once the Chinese themselves become targets, the feasibility of such a policy is brought into question. Perhaps the recent stunning discovery of 2.2 billion barrels of oil in Bohai Bay (northeastern China) will temporarily quench China's thirst for foreign oil and gas, though this is highly unlikely.

#60 A Warrior Pur Sang

Do you remember the Watergate scandal? Or the Missile Crisis pitting US President John F. Kennedy and Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev? What about the Vietnam War or the recent Iraq invasion? I'm sure all our readers know Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, U.S. President George Bush Sr., Jr. and Iranian President Mahmood Ahmadinejad. Do they also know the leaders of a time long passed, such as Chile's Salvador Allende, China's Mao Zedong and America's Dwight D. Eisenhower? Most probably you do. So what is it that all these events and people have in common?

The answer is: Cuban President Fidel Castro has been in power to witness and deal with each and every one of these episodes and leaders, as well as scores of others. And despite the vast reports claiming his time has now finally come, it seems he might be around for a while longer.

It is unclear which illness (he suffered from intestinal bleeding and is believed to suffer from diverticular disease) the Cuban President is battling exactly, but there is little disputing his resolve and ability to deal with whatever challenge is thrown at his entity. Castro has survived numerous attempts on his life, prompting the British newspaper The Guardian to write an article about the matter and Channel 4 to make a documentary. They came to the conclusion that 638 ways have been devised by various parties - most notably the CIA - to assassinate him (for an interesting read on the 638 ways attempted to kill Fidel Castro, have a look at the Guardian's article on the subject). These include an exploding cigar, a poisonous ballpoint pen and a jar of cold cream containing poison pills. Castro fittingly responded to these numerous attempts by making what has become a legendary comment; "If surviving assassination attempts were an Olympic event, I would win the gold medal."

Attempts on his life haven't managed to kill him, old age doesn't seem to damage him too much and now it appears disease has failed as well. After what was considered to be a series of life threatening operations, rumours of Castro's death spread like wildfire. But little by little, pictures and videos emerged of a recovering Castro at the side of his main ally, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Last week Castro even published an article denouncing U.S. plans to turn corn into ethanol as a means to create an alternative energy supply to oil. The most recent and puissant proof that Castro is on his way back to leading his country is the meeting he held with Wu Guanzheng, a member of the Chinese Communist Party's Politiburo.

The meeting with Wu is all the more substantial given that Castro received a letter from Chinese President Hu Jintao that delved, amongst other things, into economic issues. According to Chinese officials in Cuba, trade between the two countries has blossomed in recent years, growing to $1.8 billion last year, double that of 2005. Most of this trade is accounted for by Cuban imports of Chinese buses, locomotives and farm equipment and supplies. Cuba would very much like to capitalize on China's booming economy and overall growth, providing it with a golden opportunity to get the Cuban revolutionary engine back on steam.

Castro's Cuban revolutionary movement has survived many catastrophes - the most notable being the collapse of the Soviet Union - but survived them all. This is very much due to the unique leadership abilities of El Commandante. When it comes to Fidel Castro, never say die.

#52 "Google is Your Friend"

The information age has put us adrift on an infinite ocean of information. Yet, without an able navigator, we either fail to leave the shore or we become consumed by its infinite nature. Fortunately, a number of navigation (search) tools have been developed to help us filter and find our way: Google Search and Yahoo Search to name the most prominent ones.

Search is all about finding knowledge, ranking disseminating and distributing that knowledge to the inquiring parties. Whereas in ancient times such tools and skills came at a hefty price, we are led to believe that these services are provided to us by search clients for free. But this is not the case. There is a price being paid and there is an implicit, almost invisible contract in place that relatively few people seem to acknowledge or realize.

What we are perhaps forgetting is that by making what we search known to enterprising parties, albeit in aggregate, it says an awful lot about who we are and what our interests are. The key is that the sum of that information is in fact more valuable than what we are searching for. There is no philanthropy in search. In fact it is big business. The value of Google alone as of the 31st of March 2007 was 127 billion US dollars and counting. Just to put that into perspective; 127 billion is larger than the GDP of countries such as Egypt, New Zealand, Israel or Colombia.

Companies like Google make these billions today because people believe that they are making use of a "free" service. Sure it is free in a financial sense in that one is not paying cash to do a search. But one is paying with privacy and knowledge. The difference between you and Google is that they have turned the collective of knowledge and privacy into a hundred billion dollar asset and you find whatever you were "googling" for. In fact, thinking that using Google search (or any other search provider for that matter) is "free" is just plain misleading yourself. You are inadvertently paying for that search by selling pieces of your life.

The action of search companies equate to that eavesdropping train passenger, gently leaning over, so he/she can hear your conversation, quietly taking notes. Even if the curious passenger doesn't know your name he will know a lot about you after listening in. Even if caught in the act, the eavesdropping passenger can easily claim that since he doesn't know who you are it doesn't matter what you said specifically. In actuality, the eaves dropping passenger is only interested in the words you've used, not your name.

Looking at Google’s privacy and cookie policy, you can ask yourself the question “if Google doesn't need to know who I am, then why does it collect the address of my computer, the system I use and the internet browser I use, on top of what I am searching and clicking.” The eavesdropping passenger by now is starting to look a lot more than the Gestapo than those brightly colored and friendly shaped letters that make up the Google logo.

Search companies like Google are taking advantage of a society that is changing faster than people realize. Knowledge remains an important commodity today. However, what has changed is the scope of what we consider knowledge. The public just hasn't realized this yet and smart companies such as Google are quick to take advantage of something we don't consider a commodity: our privacy.

From the perspective of a Google shareholder, one would like to see Google doing even more to optimize the use of their information. The problem is that what can and could be done with specific information or even the aggregate of such information would be on the boundary of what is morally and legally right. Technology moves a lot faster than our legal system, so it is possible that there are enough loopholes that can be exploited in which "googlified" information could be used against our interests. This would call for interesting legal cases, but, even those would be difficult to beat. Who can beat the legal team of a 120 billion dollar company? Due to the low level of my budget, the only defense council I would be able to afford would probably have to rely on Google search to build my case!

It must be said that the intent of this article was not to bear any hostility towards search enterprises such as Google. It is merely a rhetorical reply to a professor who stated that if all else fails "Google is your friend." At first it did seem that way; the friendly web page, ready with thousands upon thousands of search results just a click away. However, as an economist trained to believe that the only thing free in life is sunlight and the air we breathe (for now at least), I did have my hesitation with the definition of Google as a friend.

At the end of the day you as a user just have to keep in mind the implicit nature of the seemingly invisible contract you are colluding with Google as you make use of their services. Even if most people won't be bothered to think about this, do measure what you are giving and what you are receiving for it in return. Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so is information. And yes, knowledge IS power.

#51 Modernization, Myanmar Style

Today's most famous examples of reclusive states with hard handed dictators are most probably Zimbabwe and North Korea, while others would add Cuba to the list (personally I think Cuba and Castro in no way compare to the brutality found in Mugabe and Kim Jong Il's respective nations). Less famous garrison states include Turkmenistan and Myanmar. It is Myanmar that beckons attention in this article.

Few people know more about Myanmar than that it is ruled by the military, it used to be called Burma, and Democracy activist Aung San Suu Kyi is held in house arrest. As with every country, there is a lot more to it than first meets the eye, but Myanmar's recent decision to abruptly move their capital to a city that didn't even exist two years ago, particularly merits special attention. To be sure, the country has undergone a tremendous amount of changes in her long history.

On 4 January 1948, Myanmar gained independence and was named the Union of Burma, with Sao Shwe Thaik as its first President and U Nu as its first Prime Minister. After a period of relative stability, the country found itself unable to remain Democratic and experienced repeated name changes. In 1962 Democratic rule was ended with a military coup d'état, followed by a name change to the “Socialist Republic of the Union of Burma” in 1974, another coup d'état in 1988 by General Saw Maung, a name change back to the "Union of Burma" the same year and it was finally renamed the "Union of Myanmar" in 1989.

Free elections were held the following year, in 1990 and were decidedly won by Aung San Suu Kyi's political party, the National League for Democracy (NLD). The military junta (known as the "State Law and Order Restoration Council," or SLORC) refused to accept the result, however, nullifying it and seizing power. They later changed their official name official name to the "State Peace and Development Council" (SPDC) in 1992, remaining in power until today. The country has known two rulers since the military junta seized power by force in 1990: General Saw Maung and current leader, Senior General Than Shwe.

Until March 27 of this year, the capital of Myanmar was Yangon. As can be expected based on the country's history, Yangon was not always known by that name. The old name, Rangoon, was officially changed in 1989 to Yangon. Officially, the new administrative capital, Naypyidaw, was proclaimed on 6 November, 2005, but it was not named or shown to the outside world until March 27 of this year. Naypyidaw lies 3 kilometers west of Pyinmana and approximately 460 kilometers north of Yangon. It translates to the "abode/city of the kings" and, judging by the first pictures of the city, it certainly appears to befit kings.

According to Information Minister Kyaw Hsan, 924,608 people now live in the 7,000 square kilometres that has become Naypyidaw, in central Myanmar. The city is expected to be competed in a year, with all the buildings constructed, the green flourishing and road and rail links improved. The city is divided into three zones; one for the military, one for government administration, and one for residences.

While the reason for moving the capital remains unclear (perhaps it is nothing more than following an old tradition where ancient Burmese rulers used to dismantle the capital of their predecessor and build a new one meant to outshine all those that came before), it appears certain that it will be an economic failure. For one, all government employees were forced to move to Naypyidaw a year and a half ago. The countless apartments are being developed for these workers, who now find themselves with reliable water and electricity supply and newly paved roads - all rarities in the impoverished nation. Furthermore, government officials have seen a major increase in their salaries, with some top-ranked officials seeing their salary soar more than 1,000%, according to the BBC. This might sound nice, but seeing that there is no real economic shift or progress in the country and thus no solid basis for funding this project, it will surely lead to disillusionment among the people and possible economic disaster. Resentment might also increase among the populace, as those who are not government officials will be left with no benefit and increased inequality. The luxury cars and uniformed men on motorcycles in the "Military Zone" of the new capital, where a fortress-like complex houses Myanmar's leader, won't help either.

Talk from the military remains highly anti-Western, with blame for most everything being laid on imperial powers on a daily basis. Simultaneously, however, talk of Democracy surfaces occasionally, as it did in the speech of Senior General Than Shwe at the Armed Forces Day parade. Than Shwe said "The people, together with the military must also strive hard to build a modern, developed state where disciplined democracy flourishes." So far, this kind of talk has been little more than empty words. Unless the government truly changes its ways and allows space for proper business initiatives and investment, not only is Naypyidaw doomed, but the country as a whole stands little chance of rebounding.

For pictures of the new capital, Naypyidaw, have a look at the following link:

http://svaradarajan.blogspot.com/2007/01/naypyitaw-photo-album.html

#49 The Social Science of Economics Part 2

Be sure to read The Social Science of Economics Part 1 first!

Entering the twilight zone…

In part one I hinted at the idea of computers and complex quantitative models taking over from humans as active market makers. We are definitely going to see rapid further growth of quantitative financial modeling, computer run portfolios and computer market management based systems. Before you feel completely obsolete, however, keep in mind that there are still a number of factors involved that should, at least for a while, guarantee jobs for those beings with emotions and mortality.

There remain limiting factors to quantitative perfections, as computers and models require data. And there are many different types of data, such as trading volumes, stock prices, volatility, interest rates, Gross Domestic Product, consumer spending, job growth, inflation, etc. The problem with data is that some of it may not be a true reflection of the economy. Think again about our definition of the economy as a common denominator of human interaction.

Traditional economic approaches fail to capture the true scale and complexity of the global economy and therefore so do our data. In fact, there is a shadow economy, be it a twilight zone, completely untouched by the bias of our standard quantitative approaches to economics. For example, to what extent does GDP truly reflect the sum of economic behavior of a country? GDP only contains that what we measure and unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your profession) not everything is measured. Why not? Because the real world contains aspects that cannot be measured. In development economics this is partly captured by the notion of the "informal economy." The informal economy contains activity that is neither taxed nor monitored by a government and is subsequently not included in that government's Gross National Product.

The informal economy can encompasses everything from money laundering, drug trade, prostitution and bartering of goods and services, to mowing the lawn for grandpa, writing a blog and downloading or uploading content from the internet. With that in mind, the informal economy probably says much more about human behavior than does the formal economy. Although the informal economy is notoriously unquantifiable, it is probably a grossly understated element driving GDP.

Coming back to the idea that economics is a social science: exchange does not have to be monetary. In fact, most exchanges between people do not directly involve money. Inherently it means that value is actually arbitrary and, analogously, the value of money is arbitrary as well. Just as purchasing power parity can explain why an American middle class salary lets you live like a king in Vietnam, the arbitrary value of money explains how people value an X amount of money irrespective of the differences in their environment.

So now the twilight zone is complete: there is a world with arbitrary value, one where there are different modes of transaction – monetary and non-monetary. Monetary exchanges include informal monetary transactions (think about prostitution, micro finance (e.g. mini loans, transactions within families or farm cooperatives) and mafia practices). In terms of non-monetary alternative exchange based transactions, think of media exchange on the internet, bartering goods and services, etc. This twilight zone should encompass economics. But it doesn’t, because it presents a nightmare scenario of elements that are by their nature difficult to quantify and analyze in a traditional economic sense.

A common thread and constant within this twilight zone is human behavioral aspects. This is not saying that human behavior is constant (in fact it is probably highly variable and scenario driven), but it saying that, although the basis of exchange and circumstances is variable, there is perhaps a common thread (keeping in mind bounded rationality) that can accurately describe human economic behavior more accurately than traditional restricted economic models. So conclusively, if we accept that economics is a social, behavioral science, it needs to extend the breadth of analysis by drawing from disciplines it criticizes as soft or irrelevant. Finally, if we are to use economics to accurately model the aggregate of human behavior and exchange, it is imperative that we explore closer integration with fields such as behavioral finance, psychology and, in the future, neuroeconomics.

#48 The Social Science of Economics Part 1

When you think of economics, traditional concepts such as of supply demand, interest rates, inflation and GDP all come to mind. These are relatively abstract notions that do not seem very important on a gloomy, cold and rainy morning in March. Nor do they provide a natural gust of excitement in your body the way tabloid pop culture news might. Arguably, the problem with economics is that we have lost sight of what it really is: A common denominator of human interaction.

You might say that my definition appears far removed from economics. Well, the opposite is actually true. It's nothing more than common sense re-rationalized. Economics is really about human interaction; more specifically about exchange and the conditions of exchange. Human interaction, be it on a micro or macro level, is really a behavioral science. So, in fact, when we are studying markets we are really studying aggregate psychological behavior: the sum of all interactions.

Currently mathematics is used to study economics and finance by constraining the "human" elements prevalent in the exchange. Common assumptions such as “risk neutral”, “risk averse”, “homogenous expectations” and “rational actors” are all foundations upon which many economic and financial models are based. To give credit where credit is due, it has to be said that by constraining human behavior, we are able to examine how perfect markets would work and this has contributed greatly to our understanding of economics and financial markets.

However, humans are far more than merely rational, utility maximizing robots. We have feelings, emotions, memories, a conscience, and are often absorbed by greed. So, in fact, human rationality is a biased rationality, if not a flawed rationality. Human rationality is different from the machine-like rationality upon which clever mathematicians and econometrists build their assumptions models. This begs the question of what this means for markets?

Behavioral finance is a relatively new field that draws on heuristics, cognitive biases and bounded rationality. The basic premise is that behavioral biases play an important role in markets. Even more interesting is the study of neuroeconomics, which studies how the brain makes choices in combination with psychology, economics and neuroscience.

Imagine modeling the neuroeconomic behavior of macro market movers such as hedge fund managers. A computer model with A.I. (artificial intelligence) capabilities would be able to predict and model the market scenarios and move against them accordingly. Since economics as a social science destroys the concept of ‘perfectly perfect’ markets anyways, the neuroeconomic models could create tremendous arbitrage opportunities. There are some limitations that lie at the core of not only this idea, but general economic modeling that need to be considered first.

Read The Social Science of Economics Part 2 as we enter the twilight zone of economics!