The Great Fall of China
By David Scott | Monday 23 May 2016
There is a growing fear in financial and monetary circles that there is something deeply wrong with the global economy. Publicly, officials and professional investors alike have become confused by policy failures, and privately, occasionally even downright pessimistic, at a loss to see an easy solution.
It is hardly exaggerating to say there is a growing feeling of impending doom. The reason this has happened is due to today’s Central Bankers and their very failure on the one subject about which they profess to be experts: economics.
Their policy recommendations have become the opposite from what sound economic theory shows is the true path to economic progress. The adaptability of humans in their actions has allowed progress to continue through the ages with commercialism, despite all attempts to discredit markets, by politicians and central bankers and their beliefs in the magic of unsound money. But this is being shattered because it has only generated a legacy of unsustainable debt. Those of us aware of a gathering financial crisis know that governments have tamed important statistics over recent decades so they reinforce their view of things.
After making over $1 billion in one day last August, and warning that "the markets are overvalued to the tune of 50%," Mark Spitznagel knows a thing or two about managing tail risk. "This is the greatest monetary experiment in history. Why wouldn’t it lead to the biggest collapse? My strategy doesn’t require that I’m right about the likelihood of that scenario. Logic dictates to me that it’s inevitable." The outspoken practitioner of Austrian economic philosophy told The FT in the week, "Markets don't have a purpose any more - they just reflect whatever central planners want them to," confirming his fund-management partner, Nassim Taleb's perspective that "being protected from fragility in the financial system is a necessity rather than an option."
BlackRock Inc.’s Larry Fink, who oversees the world’s largest money manager with $4.7 trillion of client assets, said in the week “we all have to be worried” about China’s mounting debt amid slowing growth, even as he remains bullish on the economy in the long run. “You can’t grow at 6 percent and have your balance sheets grow faster,” Fink said in a Bloomberg Television interview on the sidelines of a forum in Hong Kong on Tuesday. “In the future, I would prefer seeing the economy growing 6 percent with some form of deleveraging,” he said.New credit in China increased by a record 4.6 trillion yuan ($706 billion) in the first quarter, surpassing the level of 2009 during the depths of the global financial crisis. Total debt from companies, governments and households was 247 percent of gross domestic product last year, up from 164 percent in 2008, according to Bloomberg.
Some investors are betting that the credit bubble will implode, devastating the economy. Kyle Bass, one of the world’s most successful Fund managers and the founder of Hayman Capital Management, a Dallas-based hedge fund firm, told investors earlier this year that China’s banking system may see losses more than four times those suffered by U.S. banks in the financial crisis. Goldman Sachs has downgraded its stance on global equities to 'neutral' over 12 months, citing growth and valuation concerns. "Until we see sustained earnings growth, equities do not look attractive, especially on a risk-adjusted basis. We expect particularly poor returns in dollar terms, with our forecast of a stronger dollar and the prospect of less negative equity/FX correlations," the bank said.Goldman remained 'overweight' cash on a three-month basis, saying there was potential for higher cross-asset volatility. "We believe the market's dovish pricing of the Fed increases rate shock risk, in which case both equity and bonds could sell off." It upgraded commodities to 'overweight', noting it now expects less downside to oil over the three months, given supply disruptions.
The bank pointed out that commodities have rallied on the back of the dovish Fed, China data and supply disruptions.On a 12-month horizon, however, Goldman remained 'neutral', saying the physical rebalancing in oil was incomplete and spot prices should weaken as inventories start to build again in the first quarter of next year."We think continued fundamental adjustments in both the physical and capital markets are needed, and now see oil prices reaching $60/bl in 4Q2017 versus mid-2017 previously." GS's key 'overweight' remains credit on both a three- and 12-month horizon, where valuations and fundamentals appear supportive. The bank kept its 'underweight' view on bonds.
One of the more closely watched US quarterly regulatory reports last week, in addition to that of Warren Buffett, was that of Soros Fund Management, the family office of George Soros, which revealed that the 85 year old billionaire Has turned decidedly sour on overall equity exposure. As shown in his 13F return, Soros dramatically cut his overall long equity holdings by over 25% to just $4.5 billion as of March 31, which was the lowest such position since 2013. Soros has warned of the risks coming from China’s economy, arguing its debt-fuelled economy resembles the U.S. in 2007-08, before credit markets seized up and started a global recession.
In January, the former hedge fund manager said a hard landing in China was “practically unavoidable,” adding that such a slump would worsen global deflationary pressures, drag down stocks and boost U.S. government bonds.So Soros has also more than doubled his Shorts on the American market to 2.1 million shares, or a value of $431M, up from $205M in the previous quarter. Of greater significance was Soros' significant return to gold, after he acquired 1.7% of Barrick, making it the firm’s biggest U.S.-listed holding. This marks a prominent return to gold for Soros, who had sold his stake in Barrick in the third quarter of last year. Soros also disclosed owning call options on 1.05 million shares in the SPDR Gold Trust, an exchange-traded fund that tracks the price of gold.
There is evidence that central bank intervention began to irrevocably distort markets from 1987, when Greenspan cut US rates and flooded markets with liquidity. It was at that point the free market relationship between the price level and the cost of borrowing changed, this was the point when central banks wrested control of prices from the markets.
In 2008 the world’s central banks embraced the idea that easy money that is, low interest rates and high levels of government spending would produce sustainable growth with modest but positive inflation and for a while it seemed to work. But that was an illusion. What actually happened was the vast misallocation of capital in which individuals, companies and governments were fooled into thinking that adding new factories, stores and infrastructure at a rate several times that of population and demand growth would somehow work out well. China, was the epicentre of this delusion.
In response to the 2008-2009 financial crisis it borrowed more money than any other country ever, and spent most of the proceeds on infrastructure and basic industry. It’s steel-making capacity, already huge by 2008, kept growing right through the Great Recession, and now dwarfs that of any other country.The immediate result was higher prices for iron ore and finished steel up front, But this was soon followed by falling prices as the rest of the world’s steel makers fought for survival.Miners that produced the raw materials for the infrastructure/industrial plans started projects based on these inflated price projections and now have no choice but to keep producing to cover variable costs and avoid bankruptcy. Prices of virtually every commodity have as a result plunged.retailers built new stores at a rate that vastly exceeded population growth, apparently on the assumption that consumers would keep borrowing in order to buy ever-greater amounts of semi-useless stuff. These deflationary forces will not abate quickly quietly but they will leave significant political wreckage in their wake.
China’s currency will devalue… and beaten down commodity prices (like coal and uranium) will recover. It might not happentomorrow. But it will happen… because in the end, markets win. That’s the messages of legendary investor Jim Rogers. In the early 1970s, Rogers co-founded the Quantum Fund, one of the world’s most successful hedge funds. After generating returns of 4,200 percent over ten years, he quit full-time investing in 1980. He then went on to travel the world a few times, and wrote a few books about what he saw and learned. His investment tourism books –Investment Biker and Adventure Capitalist– are still must-reads for anyone interested in understanding how global markets work and there are a few lessons very relevant to investing today: - Why central banks will always fail to control prices (fromInvestment Biker, 1994) “In all my years in investing, there’s one rule I’ve prized beyond every other: Always bet against central banks and with the real world…
Central banks and governments always try to maintain artificial levels, high or low, whether of a currency, a metal, wool, whatever. Usually these prices are absurd, and the market knows they’re absurd. When a central bank is defending something – whether it’s gold at thirty-five dollars [when the U.S. dollar was backed by gold] or the lira [Italy’s currency before it joined the euro] at eight hundred to the dollar – the smart investor always goes the other way. It may take a while, but I promise you you’ll come out ahead. It’s a golden rule of investing.” The best example of this today is in China, where the central bank controls the exchange rate of the renminbi and it’s just a matter of time before the Peoples Bank of China (China’s central bank) is forced to allow the currency to depreciate. In recent decades, nearly all the central banks that controlled their currencies were eventually forced to surrender to market forces. In January, a lot of investors were concerned that China’s currency was going to depreciate sharply. It didn’t, and the issue faded from the headlines. That doesn’t mean that it’s gone away, though currency wars are going to cause trouble and significant volatility.
Markets were worried last week after the Fed minutes, which put a June rate hike back on the agenda. But With the UK Referendum a week after the next US FOMC rate setting meeting I can’t see much logic to a June hike. Hiking a week before the UK vote seems like a totally unnecessary risk that this extremely risk-averse Fed would never take. But July makes perfect sense if they want to get a hike out of the way before US election mania really gets going.
- See more at:
http://www.shareprophets.com/views/20962/the-great-fall-of-china#sthash.9XEC2j1p.dpuf