sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Tuesday's Top 10 with NZ Mint: China getting old before it gets rich; Obama is the plutocrat's puppet; Algorithimic Space Odyssey 2001; Stephen Colbert on the debt ceiling; Cartoons galore; Dilbert

Tuesday's Top 10 with NZ Mint: China getting old before it gets rich; Obama is the plutocrat's puppet; Algorithimic Space Odyssey 2001; Stephen Colbert on the debt ceiling; Cartoons galore; Dilbert

Here's my Top 10 links from around the Internet at 9 am in association with NZ Mint.

I welcome your additions in the comments below or via email to bernard.hickey@interest.co.nz.

I'll pop the extras into the comment stream. See all previous Top 10s here.

This nation has a few too many productivity retardents....including this list...but it is fun...

1. China getting old before it gets rich - The Economist does a nice job here of attacking China's one child policy and explaining why it is a demographic and economic disaster in the making, as well as a social and political disaster.

Many people predicting Chinese growth forever forget about its ageing and unbalanced population with way too many men thanks to abortions of female babies.

I think it's risky to assume China's economy remains stable and growing at 9% plus ad infinitum.

Yet that's what our Prime Minister seems to assume in forecasting high commodity prices for a decade or two.

And it seems to be what many are betting will drag the developed world out of its deleveraging morass.

We'll see. Here's the Economist:

The policy has almost certainly reduced fertility below the level to which it would have fallen anyway. As a result, China has one of the world’s lowest “dependency ratios”, with roughly three economically active adults for each dependent child or old person. It has therefore enjoyed a larger “demographic dividend” (extra growth as a result of the high ratio of workers to dependents) than its neighbours.

But the dividend is near to being cashed out. Between 2000 and 2010, the share of the population under 14—future providers for their parents—slumped from 23% to 17%. China now has too few young people, not too many. It has around eight people of working age for every person over 65. By 2050 it will have only 2.2. Japan, the oldest country in the world now, has 2.6. China is getting old before it has got rich.

2. The Euro deal is far from done - The FT reports some banks are baulking at the deal cooked up for them last week by a bunch of politicians.

Several European banks with large exposures to Greek sovereign debt have yet to sign up to a plan for private-sector bondholders to contribute €37bn to a second Greek rescue package, the Financial Times has learned.

The UK’s Royal Bank of Scotland, Germany’s DZ Bank and LBBW and Austria’s Erste Bank, which between them hold about €3bn of Greek sovereign debt, are among the lenders that have not yet committed to take part in a programme that will see participants swap or roll over their Greek debt for bonds that mature in 30 years.

3. Why America is truly stuffed - The return on investment by American companies on lobbying Congress is 22,000% according to this academic study cited by Mark Perry at Carpe Diem.

We identify 93 firms engaged in lobbying for the rate reduction. Combined, they repatriated $208 billion (or 70% of the total). We estimate that the lobbying group spent $282.7 million on lobbying expenditures and received $62.5 billion in tax savings, or a 220:1 return on investment (22,000%).

Using a statistical regression, we estimate that lobbying activity is highly associated with amount repatriated even after controlling for firm industry, size, profitability, liquidity and growth prospects. Surprisingly, this tax provision was so lucrative that several firms borrowed funds to repatriate the cash as earnings.

4. China's bubble is about to pop - The Telegraph's Jeremy Warner reports China's real estate bubble is about to pop as local government borrowers realise they built too many bridges to nowhere that can't pay their way.

As noted in the IMF’s latest staff report on China, published this week, the property sector occupies a central position in the Chinese economy, directly making up some 12pc of GDP. It is also highly connected to the health of basic industries such as steel and cement, and to the success of downstream industries like domestic appliances and other consumer durables.

More worrying still, direct lending to real estate (developers and household mortgages) makes up around 18pc of all bank credit (see second graphic below). Again, even by UK standards, this is extreme. And for local authorities, which account for 82pc of public spending in China, property related revenues are an important consituent of the overall revenues used as collateral to back borrowing to fund property and infrastructure development. There’s an element of ponzi scheme here.

5. A deal may not matter - Even if the US politicians do manage to cobble together a debt ceiling deal at the last minute, it may not matter. America seems set to lose its AAA credit rating anyway.

Here's Reuters with its analysis on the credit rating issue.

The ratings agencies have said the top-notch U.S. rating will only be safe if they see a credible plan from Congress and President Barack Obama to address the country's growing debt burden.

S&P would likely be the first to remove the triple-A status -- a move that could raise borrowing costs for Americans for generations to come, with Moody's and Fitch expected to follow, though perhaps not immediately.

The ratings agencies have suggested that deficit-reduction measures of some $4 trillion over 10 years could allow the U.S. to retain its current rating, though that also depends on a healthy pace of economic growth.

6. Dumb debt - How is it New Zealanders can still afford (or are allowed) to spend NZ$856 million in the year to June 30 through 18,309 gaming machines in pubs and clubs (but not casinos).

Spending in the June quarter of NZ$219.9 million was up 4.8% on the same quarter a year ago, Department of Internal Affairs Stats show.

7. Both barrels - Jeffrey Sachs lets Obama have it with both barrels in this HuffPo column. Damn right too.

The Republicans also misrepresent the costs and benefits of closing the deficit through higher taxes on the rich. Americans wants the rich to pay more, and for good reason. Super-rich Americans have walked away with the prize in America. Our country is run by millionaires and billionaires, and for millionaires and billionaires, the rest of the country be damned. Yet the Republicans and their propaganda mouthpieces like Rupert Murdoch's media empire, claim with sheer audacity that taxing the rich would kill economic growth. This trickle-down, voodoo, supply-side economics is the fig leaf of uncontrolled greed among the right-wing rich.

The Democrats of the White House and much of Congress have been less crude, but no less insidious, in their duplicity. Obama's campaign promise to "change Washington" looks like pure bait and switch. There has been no change, but rather more of the same: the Wall-Street-owned Democratic Party as we have come to know it. The idea that the Republicans are for the billionaires and the Democrats are for the common man is quaint but outdated. It's more accurate to say that the Republicans are for Big Oil while the Democrats are for Big Banks. That has been the case since the modern Democratic Party was re-created by Bill Clinton and Robert Rubin.

Thus, at every crucial opportunity, Obama has failed to stand up for the poor and middle class. He refused to tax the banks and hedge funds properly on their outlandish profits; he refused to limit in a serious way the bankers' mega-bonuses even when the bonuses were financed by taxpayer bailouts; and he even refused to stand up against extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich last December, though 60 percent of the electorate repeatedly and consistently demanded that the Bush tax cuts at the top should be ended. It's not hard to understand why. Obama and Democratic Party politicians rely on Wall Street and the super-rich for campaign contributions the same way that the Republicans rely on oil and coal. In America today, only the rich have political power.

8. China's unsustainable building boom - Henry Sanderson and Michael Forsythe write at Businessweek about the crazy building going on in China.

Workers toil by night lights with hoes, carving the Olympic rings into the ground in front of an unfinished 30,000-seat stadium, a gymnasium, and a swimming complex in Loudi, a city of 4 million in Hunan province. Loudi is paying for the project with ¥1.2 billion ($185 million) in bonds, guaranteed by land that city officials value at $1.5 million an acre. That’s about the same as prices in Winnetka, a Chicago suburb where the average household earns more than $250,000 a year. People in Loudi take home $2,323 annually. And there are no Olympics scheduled to arrive here. Ever.

“The debt isn’t a problem as Loudi is not a developed place,” says Yang Haibo, an official with the city’s financing authority, as he sits with colleagues in a smoke-filled meeting room under a No Smoking sign. “It’s an emerging city.”

Loudi is just one of scores of cities across the country borrowing to build roads, commercial centers, and subways after the central government urged them to spend their way out of the 2009 global recession. Local governments have sold more than ¥400 billion of bonds since 2008—part of as much as ¥14.2 trillion in local borrowing. The governments have set up more than 10,000 financing vehicles in the past decade to get around laws prohibiting them from taking direct loans.

One third of those financing vehicles don’t have cash flow to service their loans, China’s banking regulator says. Loudi’s investment vehicle had a negative operating cash flow of ¥187.1 million in the first half of 2010, a period during which it borrowed ¥284 million. “China is playing with fire like we played with fire,” says Carl Walter, who retired this year as chief operating officer in China forJPMorgan Chase. (JPM) Yang, the Loudi official, isn’t worried. “When we get to the end of our loan,” he says, “we’ll just pay it back.”

9. 2,000 physicists work on Wall St - This Ted Talks video from Kevin Slavin talks about how algorithms are used to undersand markets and what's wrong with that...

When the algorithims fight with each other humans lose...and nature is reshaped.

It's well worth watching the 15 minutes. Fans of 2001 A Space Odyssey will appreciate it.

Don't touch that button Dave....

HT Yves at Naked Capitalism.

10. Totally Stephen Colbert on the Debt Ceiling debate.

 

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

44 Comments

"This nation has a few too many productivity retardents."

No it doesn't.

It ran 2% productivity gains (whatever that means) from about '78.

That's a doubling. How much you want?

But in reality, 'productivity'. is a stupid measure. It doesn't take into account resource draw-down, resultant pollution - in other words, anything real. You migh as well be measuring how many more people sat on the deckchairs, per replacement-time. 

When reality says you'd be better building a liferaft out of them.

Now, efficiencies.......... that's another thing entirely.....

 

Up
0

pdk

I was sort of kidding. Doing my best to reduce productivity...

But Stats NZ shows various measures of productivity have been poor for the last decade or so

http://www.interest.co.nz/charts/economy/productivity

cheers

Bernard

Up
0

#5. Apparantly somebody betting that downgrade will happen - insider information?

 http://moneymorning.com/2011/07/25/the-1-billion-armageddon-trade-placed-against-the-united-states/

Up
0

 

Isn't being able to short the markets awful? I know some will argue, what a great corrector it is of the free market, but lets get real guys... Is this a free market?

Not to be too cynical, but wouldn't be a surprise if it was someone/something attached to the Republican party. That way you could buy your votes in the upper and lower house and keep a tidy profit, plus keep the learjet tax free. That or Goldman Sach is looking to profit from disaster again, nothing like hedging your bets at taxpayer expense. Regards the ongoing American drama, I suspect Obama is the target of this powerplay on a grand scale, he'll get his extension until next year, then be toast for the elections. Can't wait to see the Republicans get control....

Should be an interesting week, lets hope America's elected representatives aren't completely insane, for once kicking the can a little further might be in order.

Up
0

I agree Talislide.  

Shorting shares is fundementally selling something you don't own. Shorting of the other even-less tangible financial instruments is the kinds of betting that belongs in a TAB, not in a bank with a public guarantee.

What gets right up my goat is that free-markets are supposed to allocate resources the best, but many of our finest minds are getting sidetracked into counterproductive idiocy like the Armageddon shorts. Those markets are also supposed to allocate risk, which they clearly have a scratchy record of as well.......

Up
0

There is shorting and naked shorting.....

Ppl are in effect betting that markets are going to drop so they can buy the shares later at a lower cost.....now if that bet is based on sound research why is this a problem?  If they get it right, they make money, if they get it wrong they have to buythe shares at taht higher price and suffer a loss....to me provided there is no insider trading its actually pretty honest....so I wouldnt want to see it stopped.....I think its actually a positive thing it catche sout Pollies lying.

regards

Up
0

Exactly. Also, short sellers have a profit incentive to buy the shares back. This can help prevent a necessary correction from turning into an unnecessary crash.

Up
0

"Yet that's what our Prime Minister seems to assume in forecasting high commodity prices for a decade or two."

BH,  do the math, doubling time is roughly 70/9.....or 8 years.....so within the decade JK sees China will have doubled it economy/output....that means a huge demand for resources and oil, and somewhere to sell them to.......in 16 years the chinese economy will be 4 times as big as it is today....can so few ppl see that isnt possible? I can see JK doesnt.....either that or he's lying.....Im going for the latter, he isnt a stupid person...so therefore if you want to divvy out a shrinking pie and ensure you and your mates get the same or bigger %, you have to be in power....

regards

Up
0

Aljazeera on Peakoil:

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/07/201172081613634207.html

"I tell people to go to their favourite travel website like Expedia, and pick your destination and dates, and hit the fare selector for first class, because that's the price it will be in the future for travelling. And ask yourself if you will make the trip. Flying cheap will no longer exist as an option. 

I wonder whether that has dawned on the bloke in charge of our tourist industry.

Oh wait. That's John Key isn't it?

Up
0

Its worse, we own a dodo by the name of Air NewZealand

regards

Up
0

You mean the Greens arent the only dodos ?!

Up
0

What do you reckon we got here, Steven?

That last one was easy - ain't many 'pollies 'attended' LSE.

What do you make of this one?

Reeks of Straterra to me.

Up
0

Should have been sold off years ago. Here in HK they are talking of a third runway requiring nearly 700 hectares of reclamation

facepalm

Up
0

Oh and air freight?  right now our fishing ppl are shipping out all the good stuff.....I wonder how they will do that when rates skyrocket......or us for that matter, many things these days are air-freighted in.....no one wants to wait for sea...oh whole big change all on its own.

regards

Up
0

Hopefully I'm back in NZ by then and developing a garden on a small block a friend will sell to me.

HK survives on imported foodstuff etc. Fortunately the population has stabilised - in fact China's population is expected to decline slightly by the end of the century with a very high percentage over 65 - about one quarter.

http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/SRD/ChinaFood/data/anim/pop_ani.htm

With global oil production declining I reckon many in HK will move back, if they can, to ancestral villages/towns. The modernisation which is going on will make that more palatable.

 

Up
0

Have a look at Boeings latest 20 year  sales projections before you throw away the passport.

Massive increases in aircraft production underway as we speak.

Just in the ~ 150 seat market we have Sukoi, Mitsubishi, Bombardier, Comac, Embraer and Irkusk  all announcing new aircraft going into production.

I think they plan on having hydrocarbons to run them !

Up
0

So?

We're not getting intyo deep-water, fracking, sands and shale, and  - so help us - soggy lignite, because we're on the upside of the curve.

They just have no option but to do more of what they do. That's the joint-and-several effect of a fiscal system requiring growth. The last doubling catches a lot of folk out.

Up
0

Some interesting thoughts from Geoff Simmons at Informetrics:

Time to unsheath RB's secret weapon

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10740804&ref=rss

"That is why the time is nigh to use this new tool as an alternative to traditional interest rate rises. If the Reserve Bank signalled a higher Core Funding Ratio, it would force banks to rely more on domestic customer deposits - so deposit rates should rise, and loan rates should rise to match them. As a result more of our borrowing would be financed by domestic savings rather than international borrowing. This would remove the incentive for foreign lenders to flood the country with their "hot money", which normally happens when interest rates rise." 

However if 12-month+ funding is cheaper offshore than onshore, then what? The policy does not robustly specify the ratio of wholesale to retail funding, in any timeframe; it just deals with duration of funding. So what needs to change to make this ratio a "weapon" to help NZ savers? To name but one group of Kiwis suffering because RBNZ and government are sitting on their hands.

Cheers, Les.

www.nzmea.org.nz

Up
0

If the funding ratio goes up....and say so does interest, wont that effect business lending as well as mortgagees?  (making it harder) Will it really cause more money to become available? if so where does that money come from?  ie if you have a saver or OAP they are probably saving as much as they can or living off their savings, sure they get more but does it help NZ? does it really mean more money is saved? I cant see it myself....not significantly anyway.

Savers are suffering, debtors  ie ppl with mortgages are also suffering, so you propose to punish one set and reward another...?  is this a good idea overall?   So we could have savers who are BBs and saving for thier retirement, so we choose to help them while punishing young families with a big mortgage that they were forced to pay because of the BBs? I kind of have a moral problem with that, if that is the case.

regards

Up
0

Drop OCR and change the nature of monetary policy, over the medium to long term.

Up
0

Steven, I don't know what you're on, how can you say mortgage holders have it hard at the moment? it's the lowest interest rates in decades, come on how easy do you want it?


While savers are having their cash burned by inflation of 6% then taxed after that for the final kick in the guts.

While key sits there smiling and waving, but doing nothing but making it worse, and you are trying to say things aren't fair for borrowers?

Up
0

When you look at the number of mortgagee sales and the younger ppl struggling with increased costs hsuch as fuel and food, yes they are struggling....

It isnt 6%, its 5.3% and 3.3% when you take out the one off of GST and its CPI not core inflation....so you have a some months of a blip.....you odnt set medium and long term policy on a blip.

"fair for borrowers", simple everyone is suffering....not just savers/OAPs.

regards

Up
0

Did you find the 'Golden Rivet'?

How about you, 'Jolly Jack Tar' Wolly?

Up
0

be gentle... I'm still trying to find it :)

Up
0

I like the look of this:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=107…

"The low interest rates we have at the moment only seem to be helping the Auckland housing market, not the places that need it like Christchurch. And if inflation gets embedded in the economy, then it becomes much harder to get rid of. Looking at the demands of 8.9 per cent wage increases from firefighters, and the price gouging that the service sector is engaging in during the lead up to the Rugby World Cup, this is a real possibility. So the Reserve Bank is between a rock and a hard place."

"That is why the time is nigh to use this new tool as an alternative to traditional interest rate rises. If the Reserve Bank signalled a higher Core Funding Ratio, it would force banks to rely more on domestic customer deposits - so deposit rates should rise, and loan rates should rise to match them. As a result more of our borrowing would be financed by domestic savings rather than international borrowing. This would remove the incentive for foreign lenders to flood the country with their "hot money", which normally happens when interest rates rise."

cheers

Bernard

Up
0

"The relapse is a bitter disappointment for the Government ."

Well there is a surprise, well I mean there shouldnt be a surprise, Paul Krugman for one commented that austerity in the face of zero bound would produce a negative effect...and here it seems it is.....or do we wait for the boom the Austrians  see coming?   Maybe instead we'll get whats expected, a Depression and deflation....no one who pays attention should be surprised when voodoo economics fails....

regards

Up
0

I am not aware the Austrians are predicting another boom?

All I hear from their side, is that we have to allow the downturn to occur.  A lot of de-leveraging needs to take place, and bankcrupcies before any genuine recovery can take place.

Up
0

" A lot of de-leveraging needs to take place, and bankcrupcies" and yet corporations are generally cash rich and de-staffed....so yes a depression would clear that....if its deep enough...

recovery == boom.....

Hmm I guess Im reading things differently, from what I can see the Austrian position seems to be saying that austerity is necessary to see um growth, recovery .....maybe its double speak for but first you get a massive depression like no other....they just are not mentioning the 10 to 30 years of a depression.

regards

 

Up
0

From Glenn Stevens this arvo ". As everyone in this room would know, there is only one source of ongoing higher rates of growth of real per capita incomes, and that is higher rates of growth of productivity. Everyone here also knows that it is now just about impossible to avoid the conclusion that productivity growth performance has been quite poor since at least the mid 2000s..... To the extent that that income growth has been a result of the increase in the terms of trade, however, it probably won’t be sustained at the same pace...So everything comes back to productivity. It always does. It has been observed before that past periods of apparently easy affluence, conferred by favourable international conditions, probably lessened the sharpness of our focus on productivity...."

Up
0

NA

Productivity of?

Up
0

Productivity is about making good use of our individual and collective resources. ...... it's official!  My own take is that it will be about 'efficiency'. 

Up
0

everything comes back to energy...

regards

Up
0

Totally agree with Geoff Simmons.

We have a government that won't do anything in the slightest to control inflation, while at the same times is making it worse, by heavily pressuring the RBNZ to keep interest rates way lower than they should be.


We have no other option as far as I see it, bring up the core funding ratio sooner and higher.


You have the much added bonus of a much safer banking system, where there is much less chance of the taxpayer being on the hook to bail out failing banks.
It's just a win/win.

Up
0

What you mean is its a win for you, honesty please.

regards

Up
0

Here's Ambrose:

British household finances have deteriorated to the lowest point since the depths of the recession, heightening concerns that the economy may be slipping back into a double-dip downturn.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/8658476/UK-household-squee…

Up
0

http://kunstler.com/blog/2011/07/the-amazing-dissolving-nation.html

Here in the pitiful tweet-sphere that contains the atomized remnants of USA governance, there is no such clarity. We don't know if that's spaghetti hitting a wall or the shit hitting the fan. But due to the amazing obduracy of the parties involved, the next sound you hear may just be the wall itself tumbling down, perhaps even the famous wall with the famous street attached.
Up
0

Personally I think the tea party wants a default, they seem to be simpltons who have no concept of the disaster they will unleash. Seems many believe in hyper-inflation and have been buying gold...deflation and depression doesnt seem to be  a factor for them?.....1) If wall street falls, well its spent the last decade shafting main street americans, so who in the grass roots  really cares about wall street? can we blame them? (no) The fallout will ensure a depression like no other, but by then it will be too late 2) It would force an immediate book balancing I assume?....no more deficit?, amercian troops come home? crashing of federal organisations? medicare etc? social security?  this leads to what?  well after the riots.....Depression....but I somply dont think they see this as a possibility...

oh dear

regards

Up
0

I guess the tea partyers feel your above senario is assured or worse, if the debt is allowed to increase any further.  Dealing with the debt now rather than dealing with a bigger debt later makes more sense to them.

I am with then on the possible hyperinflation senario.  I can not see how deflation can occur when the FED has unlimited ability to print any value of money supply contraction.

Its proven they will just print the difference, just look at what they did in 08 pretty much doubled the ammount of base money in existence!

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/AMBNS 

Up
0

The debt isnt yet un-managable....but I agree the trajectory is bad...taxes have to rise quite a bit, or drastic cuts. Ive not seen much signs of economic sense from them....in fact zilch.

Hyper-inflation, Ok after massive printing where is the inflation? core is still around 2% and we are 3 years on and in fact its showing signs of dis-inflation, 2008 they doubed the base and the effect was? oh zilch.....real un-employment is close to 20%, US housing is nose diving. The printing and the stimulus are fractions of the black hole that is consumers and corporations not spending, plus the money is in the banks and not high street spenders....there is simply no significabnt signs of hyper-inflation in the US and none in Europe either....

So Im firmly in the opposite camp....charts here.....

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/16/the-political-economy-of-th…

and this

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/inflation-and-the-right-the…

US employment,

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/21/welcome-to-the-recovery-2/

 

regards

 

Up
0

If it looks wrong & it smells wrong , then it is wrong.

Up
0

Those wern't authentic numbers, they were government figures, here are the real numbers .

http://abnormalreturns.com/thursday-links-that-austerity-thing/

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts 

We wont know if hyperinflation is coming until it his here, minor price deflation before the main event is totally consistent with the onset, as history shows.

Up
0

"Its proven they will just print the difference, just look at what they did in 08 pretty much doubled the ammount of base money in existence!"

So what? Problem is, perception is as powerful as reality.

Actually as it happens, the cause and effect sequence is the inverse. Its become a consensus amongst banking authorities that banks extend credit which becomes deposits in the banking system and the Central Banks provide base money to ensure the desired interest rates prevail.

"One of the reasons money is endogenous is because banks create credit[3][4] rather than lending existing money. Therefore if the central bank in turn has a policy of supplying money on demand at a price, then the broad money supply can keep rising. However, the creation of central bank money actually happened after money creation by the commercial banks."  (King 1994 Page 264)"

Bank for International Settlements. "there has been a decisive shift towards the use of short-term interest rates as the policy instrument [in industrialised countries]. In this framework, cash reserves supplied to the banking system are whatever they have to be to ensure that the desired policy rate is in fact achieved."Bernanke thought he could stimulate economic activity through forcing banks to invest their reserves  in Treasuries instead of their typical portfolios, increasing Treasury bond prices and reducing yields in an effort to push banks to invest in economic activity rather than just sitting on their reserves and not lending. 

^ "White, W. Changing views on how best to conduct monetary policy: the last fifty years" Bank of International Settlements

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Andrewedwardjudd#Alternative_views_2

A mistaken policy, because banks loan on the basis of the likelihood of their debtors remaining solvent long enough to generate a return on their borrowing. If banks determine that there are a shortage of potential borrowers who are solvent or likely to remain so, they aren't going to lend. The problem is that this crisis is one of solvency where the excesses of the early 2000s have blown up and the consequences will drag out until there are sufficient numbers of people or organisations with good credit records to provide banks reason to lend. There are too many people with millstones of debt still hanging around their necks or worse are bankrupts. 

Up
0

Here's the WSJ on how China could force the feuding politicians into a debt ceiling deal and why it won't (China is too scared of destroying the US Treasuries market by hinting it's not happy)

http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2011/07/25/china-could-break-the-debt-ceiling-impasse-but-it-wont/

cheers

Bernard

Up
0

 "How is it New Zealanders can still afford (or are allowed) to spend NZ$856 million in the year to June 30 through 18,309 gaming machines in pubs and clubs?"

No worries...most of the loot is coming from winz and heading straight to the clubs and pub owners.

Up
0