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

Friday's Top 10: Chinese credit oh so crunchy; Xi Jingping's crackdown on the 'four winds' of bureaucracy, formalism, hedonism and extravagance; How China's shadow banks might implode; Clarke and Dawe; Dilbert

Friday's Top 10: Chinese credit oh so crunchy; Xi Jingping's crackdown on the 'four winds' of bureaucracy, formalism, hedonism and extravagance; How China's shadow banks might implode; Clarke and Dawe; Dilbert
This daily collection of links and comment was previously sponsored by NZ Mint. We'd welcome a new sponsor.

Here's my Top 10 links from around the Internet at midday today.

As always, we welcome your additions in the comments below or via email to bernard.hickey@interest.co.nz.

See all previous Top 10s here.

My must read today is #5 on the connection between Xi Jingping's crackdown on hedonism and extravagance and the Chinese credit crunch.

1. The Chinese credit crunch - As David pointed out in today's 90 at 9, China's authorities appeared to back down somewhat on their hard line drive to slow down Chinese bank lending.

Bloomberg reports the People's Bank of China injected liquidity overnight, but the spike in borrowing costs yesterday to a decade high of over 12% freaked a whole lot of people, not to mention the Australian stock market. 

But it's clear now that the new leadership in Beijing are determined to take some of the heat out of China's shadow banking sector and some of the usual infrastucture-driven stimulus.

Beijing wants to make growth more sustainable, which means slower.

We'll see what that does to China's banking system and their shadows, which have expanded credit in China by more in the last 5 years than was built up by the US economy in decades of operation.

The pressure is on. The chart below shows the parallels between short term interest rate spikes ahead of the Lehman crisis and China's interbank rates in recent days.

Here's the Washington Post with its assessment of the Chinese Credit Crunch:

Thursday was a very bad day for China’s economy, the world’s second-largest and a crucial pillar of the global economy, with credit markets freezing up in an unnerving parallel to the first days of the U.S. financial collapse. The question of how bad depends on whom you talk to, how much faith you have in Chinese leaders and, unfortunately, several factors that are largely unknowable. But we do know two things. First, Chinese leaders appear to be causing this problem deliberately, likely to try to avert a much worse problem. And, second, if this continues and even it works, it could see China’s economy finally cool after years of breakneck growth, with serious repercussions for the rest of us.

Things got so bad that the Bank of China has been fighting rumors all day that it defaulted on its loans; if true, this would risk bank runs and more defaults, not unlike the first days of the U.S. financial collapse. There’s no indication that the rumors are true, and no one is running on China’s banks. But the fact that the trouble has even gotten to this point is a sign of how potentially serious this could be.

2. Has the PBOC really relented? - It seems the Bloomberg report that the PBOC had eased the pressure may not be true, the Washington Post reported.

Here’s where things get a little confusing. Bloomberg News reported Thursday evening Beijing time that, as panic moved through the Chinese financial system, the country’s central bank stepped in and offered $8.2 billion in “relief” to the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, which just happens to be both state-owned and the largest bank in the world. What does this mean? Maybe that Chinese leaders got cold feet and are trying to walk back the self-imposed crunch, maybe that China’s largest bank managed to negotiate some preferential treatment, maybe that leaders are worried their most important bank might actually be less healthy than they thought and want to protect it from default. Or maybe this is just part of the process of easing down the markets. But then the Chinese Web portal Sina announced that the reports were false(thanks to Bill Bishop for this link), adding some unnecessary confusion and uncertainty to an already volatile situation.

So what happens next? There are four categories of outcome. The first is that Chinese leaders back off on the credit crunch and nothing happens, in which case they’ll probably just try the strategy again later. The second is that they press on and it works miraculously, cleaning out the financial system without causing too much pain. The third is that this spirals out of control, maybe because Beijing underestimated the risk or acted too late, potentially sending the global economy lurching once more. The fourth, and probably most likely, is that this works but is painful, averting catastrophe but slowing the Chinese economy after 20 years of miraculous growth.

3. Here's what the Chinese leadership are actually saying via the Chinese Securities Journal - As cited by Nomura via FTAlphaville.

“We cannot use as fast money supply growth as in the past, or even faster, to promote economic growth… This means that authorities must control the pace of money supply growth.”

And a speech from Premier Li on credit growth. From a different Nomura note: The State Council held a meeting on 19 June to discuss credit policies. Premier Li indicated that the government should provide more credit to high-end manufacturing industries and strategically important new industries and restrict further lending to industries that face severe overcapacity problems. He did not mention the liquidity problem at the meeting, but reiterated the importance of containing financial risks.

These messages reinforce our view that policy and liquidity will remain tight, at least before the Q2 data release on 15 July.

4. Greece and Cyprus on the boil again - Worries about Greece seemed so 2010. And we all thought Cyprus was fixed. Well, they're back. FT reports the IMF is about to suspend aid payments to Greece and Cyprus' bailout is already in trouble.

The latest gap emerged after national central banks, which were urged by eurozone leaders to roll over €3.7bn in Greek bond holdings, refused to do so when the first redemptions came due last month. That forced bailout lenders to speed up aid payments that were originally to go for other purposes later in the programme.

According to three senior eurozone officials, the problem was nearly compounded when some central banks balked at passing on the profits they made on their Greek bond holdings back to Athens, which is to contribute €2.1bn to Greece this year. But the holdouts, including France, have in recent days backed down, officials said.

Greece this month failed to sell off Depa, its state-owned natural gas company, and other government assets are running into similar challenges, officials said.

The troubles in the Greek programme come as eurozone finance ministers on Thursday night were forced to debate revising Cyprus’ €10bn bailout following a written request by the island’s president for major changes in how the programme restructured Cyprus’ two largest banks.

5. 'Echoes of Mao in China cash crunch' - The FT's Simon Rabinovitch also picks up on what looks like a deliberate attempt to slow down or stop the explosion in Chinese credit, particularly through the shadow banking system. Regular readers of the Top 10 over the last year will be aware of this shadow banking issue. 

Rabinovitch points out the link to Xi Jingping's crackdown on the 'four winds' of 'formalism, bureaucracy, hedonism and extravagance'. Explosive credit growth is certainly about the last two of those four winds.

Analysts have mostly viewed the squeeze in economic terms, as a warning to lenders that they must rein in dangerously fast credit growth. But in the midst of the extreme market stress, a statement issued late Wednesday by the central bank raised the possibility that politics are also playing an important role.

Bankers had been calling for the central bank to ease the pressure and a few investors had even predicted that it might cut interest rates. Instead, the People’s Bank of China ordered a thorough implementation of the new “mass line education” campaign launched this week by President Xi Jinping – a campaign that in its propaganda-style and potential scope carries echoes of the Mao era. The Communist party cadres that run the central bank were told to attack the “four winds” of “formalism, bureaucracy, hedonism and extravagance”, as demanded by Mr Xi.

“It is quite possible that the central bank’s policies have some connection to Xi’s campaign,” said Willy Lam, an expert on Chinese politics at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. “It seems to be much more serious than the short anti-corruption campaigns launched by Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin [Mr Xi’s predecessors over the past two decades].”

The title of your book flags that changes in China’s financial system might be sowing the seeds of the next subprime crisis. How might that crisis play out, and is shadow banking a cause or a symptom?

I find shadow banking assets are very safe in general. We manage our own money very carefully. Given the tough regulation, we are not able to take too much risk even if we want to. But the rapid growth of shadow banking reflects on the failure of the much bigger formal banking system. For six decades, financial repression in China takes the form of regulated interest rates being significantly below inflation. That leads to rapid credit growth. Banks are forced to increase loans rapidly year after year. But sensible lending opportunities are not growing that fast. Therefore, banks are forced to lower lending standards, leading to growth of their own subprime lending. Of course, low interest rates send false signals about the viability of loans.

If China does face the risk of having its own subprime crisis, where do you think the weakest points in China’s financial system are?

I see the real estate bubble as the most likely starting point of the crisis, followed by local government fund-raising platforms.

You note that China’s money supply has expanded significantly more in recent years than that of the U.S. Is this something we need to worry about? Given that China’s monthly consumer price index numbers remain so low, why hasn’t it fed into inflation?

In itself, China’s money supply growth being much faster than those in other countries is not a worry. But at 16-17% year after year, monetary policy in China is very accommodative and inflationary. Credit growth and inflation reinforce each other, becoming a vicious circle. That is a pattern for three decades now. We have reached a point where the public has become very sick of it.

"A giant suction pump had by 1929-1930 drawn into a few hands an increasing portion of currently produced wealth. In consequence, as in a poker game where the chips were concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, the other fellows could stay in the game only by borrowing. When the credit ran out, the game stopped." Marine Eccles Chairman of US Federal Reserve 1934-1948 explaining how rising inequality caused the Great Depression

Back in the American car industry's tail-finned Fifties, Henry Ford II took Walter Reuther, the leader of the auto workers union to see his latest plant in Detroit. It was just after the UAW had gained another big rise in pay and benefits for its members so Ford may have wanted to make a point. The plant contained the first primitive prerobots replacing workers in some jobs and Ford asked Reuther a question. Pointing at the machines he said: "Tell me Walter, how are you going to get them to join your union?" "I don't know, Henry", Reuther replied. "How are you going to get them to buy your cars?"

That exchange illustrated the basic bargain at the heart of the post-war economic consensus. Workers in factories and offices were well paid and they needed to be for the economic system's health. For without demand supply is useless and in a mass production economy that means the demand has to come from the mass of the population. And for the mass of the population to buy things they have to have the lion's share of the countries income. That was truer in the 1950's than ever before in history and US consumers responded by buying everything America could make and becoming the consumer of last resort for the rest of the world as well.

 
8. Globalisation and macroeconomics - Paul Krugman wonders if globalisation has changed the nature of macroeconomics. He thinks not. The chart is a cracker.
 
 
 

10. Totally Clarke and Dawe - Evan Essence talks about Australia's political system. Apparently Australia's government is elected using the Duckworth Lewis method.

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.

13 Comments

Links of interest, BH:

 

Syria and Egypt - they're both pukaru'ed (indigenous swearing is protected by Te Tiriti, shurely, modder 8'ers?)

 

AEP with more on the German question:  perhaps heading for the 'at yer feet' state?  Also, note the demographics - Germany, Italy, Russia, Japan, China - not bothering to reproduce oneself has certain consequences....but a graceful depopulation it is prolly not gonna be....

 

 

Up
0

#1 - no graph which trends to the vertical, continues.

 

Doesn't really matter what it is - if it's the least bit based on reality, it peaks and crashes. Perhaps the hardest lesson to learn.

Up
0

The problem with the thought process in number seven is that it ignores why the super-wealthy were receiving a larger portion of the income during these periods.  It is clear to anyone who understands Austrian economics that credit-induced bubbles cause damaging misallocation of capital that causes eventual recession.

 

These bubbles disproportionately benefit the wealthy who hold most of the paper assets, causing increased inequality.  Unfortunately it seems to be the inequality, rather than the massive expansion of the money supply that caused it, that is being blamed for the Great Depression and the current financial mess.  

 

The problem with focusing on inequality is that it leads people towards socialist policies that will backfire on the people at the bottom of the heap.

Up
0

You know the more extremist a person's point of view, the less empathy they display and inability to change an opinion when the information improves/changes.

#7 states that for the "system" to work workers need a job with a fair wage. This creates in turn demand, and we have a robst economy. Just how it backfires on the ppl at the bottom compared to the last 30 years of austrian style mis-management is pretty much dis-proven, twice. 

The massive expansion in money supply is after the event, ie its not the cause its a symptom. Guess who was the principle money pumper? The ever lowering of the OCR ie money pumped into the system was by Greenspan an arch-libertarian. Just to make it clear, when the system didnt work the "answer" was to throw more money at it....allowing those who could get access to speculate cheaply at the expense of others less well off....ie form bubbles.

Funny how austrians see it backwards, but then its not economics its politics, "I have my viewpoint lets find a school of economics that proves it"...hence the answer is "known" its just how to explain it....makes it easy to spot someone with an austrian and in turn libertarian viewpoint, makes you stand out like a sore thumb.

regards

 

 

Up
0

I tend to think of money as just being the tool and a large part of economics is just an instruction manual for that tool. There are just different instruction manuals but none of those that wrote the manual really understood what the tool was for. The tool has then been misused, intentionally or not, to permit the redistribution of wealth. The unearned income is those that take an inequitable share of wealth. There appears to be even less understanding of what underwrites wealth than there is about the tool.

Up
0

Greenspan's personal politics may well have been arch libertarian but in his professional capacity he was anything but.

Up
0

Steven, it is incredibly wrong to say the current monetary system is Austrian.  It's hard to imagine it being any more different to what the Austrian school actually advocates, which is sound money, market-determined interest rates and the abolition of central banks.  As I have corrected you on this before I am starting to suspect you are being dishonest rather than simply ignorant.

Up
0

The policy or economics model for the last 30 ~ 40 years I would for myself class as a mix of austrian and friedman, maybe thats more quasi-austrian than true austrian. Seems pollies have a habit of taking the "best bits" or cherry picking when in fact you need to take all of an economics model warts as well. Though I'd argue you pick the model for the economic problem you face, picking the wrong one is disasterious which with austerity we are seeing.

"Sound money" I'd suggest all real economics schools aim for sound money, can we say true Austrian is more sound than say true Keynesian? no I dont think so.  Can we say quasi-Austrian is more sound than quasi-keynesian, no, both have I think failed...

When we start to look at "market determined rates" then this starts to lean more to libertarian politics IMHO than economics.  Is there any evidence that market determined rates work better? Im not aware of any.

CBs were brought in for good reason, to try and stabilise the financial systems and stop runs and collapses by setting rates. By and large that seems to be far better than pre-1900s which by abolition of the CBs is pretty condeming of the Austrian model as a failure in this instance.

regards

 

Up
0

Nomura - China will not experience a credit crisis because the banking system is fully controlled by the government which has the resources to bail out the banks if necessary.

Up
0

Well I think you are wrong.

regards

Up
0

Yes, centrally-controlled economies have certain advantages concerning such things. However, China's economy does not exist in isolation, and public perception (both international and within China) is very powerful (i.e. the smell of crisis has contagious effects).

 

Anyway, no economy that I can think of (I may be wrong) has that much power to break the fundamental rules of economics, or to simply wipe off all debts without some kind of consequence.

 

Additionally, the shadow banking sector, which is partly responsible for this state of affairs, is decided not controlled by government (although there are probably many govt officials involved in it).

Up
0

Faber  said, "If you say that if he means what he says, then you believe in Father Christmas… As I said already three years ago, we are going to go with the Fed to QE99."
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/#5GAX8VdXWLb3d7vG.99

I think our property bubble economy is here to stay...that the RBNZ will never pull the plug....that the govt, regardless of which poison they are, will never end the game.

So, the best option is to 'bank on' that situation...no change...

Property prices are set to climb and keep climbing and the more they climb the greater the pressure to let them climb even higher..

The multi million dollar price of an average box of shite, on a stamp size plot, is set to become the norm.

What will change are the lies they tell and the excuses they give.

Up
0