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

Wednesday's Top 10 with NZ Mint: The Purple Palace of Ordos and the Too Big To Fail shadow banks; Why QE is not working; The austerians are wrong; Dilbert

Wednesday's Top 10 with NZ Mint: The Purple Palace of Ordos and the Too Big To Fail shadow banks; Why QE is not working; The austerians are wrong; Dilbert

Here's my Top 10 links from around the Internet at 1pm today in association with NZ Mint.

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 is #9 on why QE is not working.

1. The Purple Palace of Ordos - Bloomberg reports on what's going on inside China with its new investment trust sector.

They look awfully like our finance companies and we know how well that turned out.

Trusts promise Chinese savers 10% returns and then lend the money on to property developers.

They then flick on their apartments at a high short term profit and repay the interest only loans within a couple of years.

It all works fine until it doesn't.

Here's how it's going in Ordos, the ghost city in the West of China.

The developer, Ordos Jin’ao Property Development Co., owes a lot more than the 10,000 yuan ($1,604) Niu is trying to collect, and it isn’t only suppliers who are out of the money. Dozens of investors nationwide have put 445 million yuan of savings into funding Purple Palace’s construction.

The two-year investment vehicles they purchased, called trusts, promised an annual interest rate of at least 10 percent and return of principal in March 2013. With at least 1,000 similar projects having ground to a halt this year in Ordos, where over-investment has resulted in a building boom gone bust, tens of thousands of investors risk default.

“The risks are significant there, and something must be done by the government to stop potential defaults of property trusts from spreading nationwide,” said Lian Ping, an economist at Shanghai-based Bank of Communications Co. “Trusts have become too large to fail.”

2. A drastically hotter planet - SMH reports on a major new analysis of the effects of climate change.

The World Bank has warned the planet is on track to warm by four degrees Celsius this century - causing increasingly extreme heat waves, lower crop yields and rising sea levels - unless significant action is taken to cut greenhouse gas emissions. In a major report released ahead of the year-end United Nations climate summit in Qatar, the bank says changes associated with four degrees of warming would have dramatic and devastating effects on all parts of the world, including Australia, but that the poor would be most vulnerable. Scientists say global warming must be kept within two degrees of pre-industrial temperatures to give the world the best chance of avoiding the worst impacts of climate change.

3. A big money laundering issue - WSJ reports on the problems in China with illicit cashflows and money laundering.

4. China's bad debt headache -WSJ reports on a growing problem inside China's banking system.

5. I the people - Xi Jingping is trying to be as populist as a communist dictator can be, Evan Osnos from the New Yorker says.

6. A zero% population growth rate by 2030 - That's the prediction from Jeremy Grantham in this enlightening interview with Charlie Rose via Businessweek.

The world is underestimating the bite of a declining population. They think that growth is going to bounce back after this mess. And it just ain’t so. The growth rate in the global population—let’s say the peak was 1971, 2.1 percent global growth—is now 1.2. In 30 years it’s going to be zero.
 
Zero?
Yeah, the global population is generally reckoned to peak in about 2040, 2050, maybe 2060. In addition, people are working fewer hours. And the aging of our population is severe, starting about now. So per capita, you simply have fewer people in the 20-to-65 age group, population slowing, working less hours—it’s becoming a pretty decent-size drag on the economy.

7. Oh how wrong they were - Austerians at the OECD predicted governments in Europe and America could reduce their fiscal stimuli and still see economic growth.

Paul Krugman looks at what actually happened.

8. US corporate deleveraging? - Not so much, says Marc Prosser at Learnbonds.

9. Why QE is not working - Here's Economonitor with an excellent discussion on this.

A lot of people—including policy makers—exhort the banks to “lend out the reserves” on the notion that this would “get the economy going”. There are two problems with that. First, banks can lend reserves only to other banks—and all the other banks have exactly the same problem: too many reserves. A bank cannot lend reserves to your household or firm. You do not have an account at the Fed, so there is no operational maneuver that would allow you to borrow the reserves (when a bank lends reserves to another bank, the Fed debits the lending bank’s reserves and credits the borrowing bank’s reserves). Unless you are a bank, you cannot borrow them.

The second problem is that banks don’t need reserves in order to lend. What they need is good, willing, and credit-worthy borrowers. That is what is sadly lacking. Those who are credit-worthy are not willing; those who are willing are mostly not credit-worthy.

And we should be glad that banks are not currently lending to the uncredit-worthy. Here’s why: that’s what got us into this mess in the first place.

Indeed, the mountain of debt that US households are buried under makes the whole Bernanke notion that we need to get banks lending again just plain ludicrous. I don’t want banks to lend. I don’t want households to borrow. What we need is to work off the private debt—pay it down or default on it.

10. Totally Jon Stewart on the political implications of married vs single women.

 

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.

17 Comments

Commrade Hickey - I listened to the National Radio discussion on 'Greed' and want to congratulate you on a most thought provoking contribution.

Perhaps you have a book or 2 in you - I won't judge them by their red covers.

 

Up
0

Many thanks Comrade SK

Come the revolution...

cheers ;)

Bernard

Up
0

#6 Yah, this was also the subject of a typical jeremiad from Grantham on ZH too.  Hard to argue with demographics:  the future belongs to those who show up for it, in Glenn Reynolds' words.

 

Cue solemn PDK pronouncements.....and welcome to a World Made by Hand.

Up
0

 

Thebian

Today 05:08 PM

 

The investment bank I work for can no longer buy French debt, or infact the debt of the entire Eurozone as this downgrading affects the ECB too.

This affects all investment banks, pension funds etc worldwide, including China, due to safe investment rules created in the wake of the financial crisis.

This means the only option left to France to make money is either tax, or printing currency, which they can't do.

France and the Eurozone is over. People forget that France is the main creditor nation to the likes of Greece, Spain and Italy, all their governments and banks rely on France to keep coming up with the cheap money, and now it can't!!

So actually the loss of the AAA credit rating is highly relevant.

Cameron you better screw those debt binged Europhiles big time this week at the EU budget conference, or don't bother coming home!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9691816/France-deplo…

 

Up
0

hey

Up
0

re: #9 - Which right-thinking person apart from Central Bankers and Paul Krugman would believe that Quanitaive Easing would solve a debt crisis?  

Up
0
Up
0

News out of China ... not good

Up
0

re #2

You'd be pretty naive to think the climate is not changing.

You'd also be pretty naive to believe you can stop the climate changing with taxes etc.

Up
0

Fact is the climate is always changing - weekly, monthly, annually, decades, centuries millineums in and out of iceages etc, etc with humans and without them.

To think that in a matter of decades we mortals can "stop the world going around" (puffery) is as rc says naive.

But to think you can do it by taxation is straight out misleading. However it will! help the Governments coffers.

Up
0

It just means you have no idea on scale and maths....we as 7billion release huge amounts of co2 in our activities....we have and continue to let the bad genie out of the bottle.

Taxing had the idea that you steer ppls behavior away from co2 intensive actions to less, whether its working IS quastionable, I think not. That leaves draconian regulation, Im sure we'll like that even less.

 

regards

Up
0

Yet the NZ "score" in the OECD for low taxes is pretty good...one of the lowest? so not not thanks to HC....

Now I would suggest or agree (think DavidC and I discussed that?) that the rest are un-sustainable so no its no reason to increase NZ's to match them.

Also tax cuts show no real benefit to the economy...though that does depend on who gets them.  I'd also suggest tax cuts for the better paid leads to more money being put into housing...so actually maybe its counter-productive.

regards

Up
0

It's a common misconception that the US Govt spending is a relatively low percent of GDP, people forget the state and local spend - much of which would be a central govt. spend in our country.

41% of GDP in the US central, state & local versus ours at under 40% - central and local. Mind you we don't have an out of control military and an empire to maintain but we do have a pretty good public health and education system.

Up
0

On QE not working in the US, the UK and elsewhere, the simple dilemma noted is valid. I suspect that Bernanke and Mervyn King are more than savvy enough to work that dilemma out, and yet they keep doing it. I wonder therefore whether the following motivations are deep down more important to them.

The FED, or BOE, loan printed money to the banks at modest interest; the banks then buy government bonds at I believe slightly lower modest interest. So the government deficit is paid for with printed money, where they even make a small profit on printing the money. The banks play along, as the process helps fix their capital requirements.

The process keeps their exchange rates down, thereby making them more competitive in world markets, and helping their various import/export competing businesses do better than they otherwise would.

All of this helps deflation not set in.

Happy to have part or all of this process debunked; but assuming it is valid, I do think it is a process certainly for government debt, that we should consider- to the point where the exchange rate was competitive, or stable, or not a plaything of international traders, whichever was more important. I would actually disintermediate the banks from the process, but that is a small issue.

Up
0

Great story in the FT for all you accounting industry Fans

 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6d2dd40e-3311-11e2-aabc-00144feabdc0.html#axz…

Go KPMG Go Deloitte

Up
0

7 is fairly moot when you're locked inside the Euro prison.

Up
0