This article first appeared on the Yahoo 7 Finance website at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-boosts-us-stocks-borrowed-government-money-011637215.html
Trump boosts US stocks with BORROWED government money
US stock prices continue to trade at near record highs and a lot of the recent rise has a lot to do with the policies of President Donald Trump.
The surge in the Dow Jones Industrial Average has been phenomenal. Since the November 2016 Presidential election, the Dow Jones is up around 50 per cent despite a few hiccups at the start of 2018 as the US Federal Reserve hiked interest rates and the threats of a US trade war turned into a reality.
The rise in US stocks, whilst impressive, is built on all the wrong things. ‘Wrong’, that is, in terms of sustainability.
As President, Donald Trump has delivered a range of tax cuts that have a total cost to the budget of around US$1.5 trillion. This one-off, impossible to replicate policy like any other policy that dumps cash into the economy has underpinned stronger economic growth and a temporary lift company profits. The tax changes has seen US companies engage in a record level of stock buy-backs which by design, has been a powerful driver behind rising share prices.
The problem with the Trump tax cuts is that every cent of the US$1.5 trillion has been funded with money borrowed by the government.
Such is the destruction to the US budget, that the US Congressional Budget Office is now estimating the US budget deficit to average a staggering 4.8 per cent of GDP in every year in the decade from 2018 to 2028. When Trump became President, the budget deficit had narrowed to just 2.5 per cent of GDP.
This article first appeared on the Business Insider website at this link: https://www.businessinsider.com.au/government-debt-stephen-koukoulas-2018-9
Everyone stopped talking about government debt, but here's why it still matters
Having been a headline issue for many years, government debt no longer gets the media or political focus that is used to.
At one level, this is odd, because the level of gross and net government debt have continued to rise unrelentingly in recent years, with gross debt at a record high and net debt touching a peace-time high.
The lack of focus on government debt probably reflects the fall from grace of the chief debt fear-mongers Tony Abbott, Joe Hockey and Barnaby Joyce who were vocal advocates of the “debt and deficit disaster” that Australia was allegedly confronting five years ago.
The fact that the Coalition government has demonstrably failed in its policy approach to the issue is also likely to be a factor why it has dropped off the list of popular political topics. It could also reflect the fact the belated realisation that Australia level of debt and deficit are, and always have been, low and manageable.
So low is Australia’s government debt, even today, that the three major sovereign credit ratings agencies have assigned a triple-A rating even though the path to a balanced budget and debt stabilisation has been slow and unconvincing.
This is not to say that the level of government debt is not an issue. It still is.
And just because it is not a constraint on the economy or a meaningful concern to markets, it doesn’t mean policy makers should take their eye off managing government debt, especially at the moment when the economy is growing and the global economy is giving Australia a helping hand.
Sensible and pragmatic economists are usually pragmatic about debt and deficit. Pragmatic in a sense that a move to debt and deficit are good policy when the economy is weak and debt reduction and surplus are good policy when the economy is growing strongly. Suffice to say it will be important to ensure that the path to small, but growing, budget surpluses over the next few years is kept, but only if the economy continues to grow at a reasonable pace.
The ABS residential price series confirmed further broadly based price falls in the June quarter.
It will no doubt get the hysterical house price forecasters very excited.
It also allows me to give an update on the offer I made to Martin North from DFA about his heroic forecast that house prices would drop by between 40 and 45 per cent over the next few years. The letter to Martin and the offer are reproduced below.
Suffice to day, house price falls are continuing. And from the peak level:
- Sydney: down 3.9 per cent (peak June qtr 2017)
- Melbourne: down 1.4 per cent (peak Dec qtr 2017)
- 8 cities: down 1.4 per cent (peak Dec qtr 2017)
We are, unsurprisingly to sober analysts, a long, long, long way from the 40-45 per cent Martin is forecasting a long way from the 35 per cent I offered to wager Martin at 6 to 1; and still a long way from the 22.5 per cent fall, in any of those markets, I offered Martin at 2 to 1.
The offer is still open to Martin for a couple of weeks, if he wishes to reconsider.
My open letter and offer to DFA’s Martin North – Skin in the game on house prices
I have sent this to Martin North, founding Principal, Digital Financial Analytics.
Congratulations on your cameo on the TV program 60 Minutes. It was gripping viewing and a quite fantastic story.
I note with a huge amount of interest your forecast for property prices to fall by “40 to 45 per cent”.
It is a big call and certainly grabbed the attention of many in the public.
I note also that on your blog, you suggest the quote which included that forecast was not given the context you attached to it, namely, you rated it “only a 20 per cent chance” and that the 40 to 45 per cent price fall would be “over 3 years or so”.
That context is important.
Over the many years I have been making forecasts for the economy and markets and seeing others do the same, I find that forecasts without any skin in the game are often compromised. It is easy to construct a headline grabbing forecast for a significant move in markets, including house prices for example, but when they fade into oblivion, there are no implications for the forecaster. Forecasts really only has validity if the forecaster has an interest in the forecast being correct.
In other words, would the forecaster really make that forecast if they put their money where their mouth is?
This article first appeared on The Wire website, for FIIG, at this link: https://thewire.fiig.com.au/article/commentary/opinion/2018/08/21/three-downside-risks-to-the-aud
Three downside risks to the AUD
A certain calm in currency markets, including for the Australian dollar, was briefly punctured in early August when the Turkish lira collapse spread to other emerging markets and sparked a jump in the US dollar.
Since early 2015, the AUD has traded over 90% of the time in a 71-78 cent range against the US dollar. The moves outside this range have been marginal and short lived. It was and still is rare for the AUD to be so steady, for so long. A bevy of factors that normally impact its value have had minimal lasting impact or have been offset by news elsewhere. Even the Turkey and emerging markets disruptions appear short lived with the Aussie dollar bouncing back in recent days.
That said, for reasons other than the global turmoil, we are probably starting to see the early stages of a realignment of the AUD which will have important implications for other markets and investors. In recent months, the AUD has been trading in an even narrower range around 72 to 76 cents, with the data flow and run of events having little lasting impact.
Any upbeat news is offset by downbeat news, meaning the net effect is inconsequential. Think of the following events: US interest rate hikes, commodity price falls, clear weakness unfolding in the Chinese economy, the emerging markets ructions and the changing outlook for Australian interest rates are all big news, but have not been enough to see the AUD break out of its range.
This article first appeared on the Yahoo 7 Finance web page at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/political-fallout-new-morrison-government-232153917.html
The political fallout of a new Morrison government
The revamping of the government’s leadership team and the elevation of Scott Morrison to Prime Minister and Josh Frydenberg to Treasurer opens the door for some much needed revamping of the economic policy agenda. Ironically, Morrison has left Frydenberg a number of awkward policy issues that will need to be addressed.
One that is clearly having a political effect and hurting the government is the health, or lack thereof, of the labour market. Wages growth is hovering around a record low, barely keeping up with inflation. This weakness in wages is a major constraint on consumer spending, which is also being impact by a sharp fall in the growth of savings and record household debt.
The fact that the unemployment rate has been entrenched well above 5 per cent right through the Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison period of government is a policy failure. The economy is simply not strong enough to generate the number of jobs needed to deliver a material lowering in unemployment and with that, a lift in wages.
If Frydenberg can deliver policies that help engineer a stronger economy and a lowering in the unemployment rate, he will have done something Treasurers Hockey and Morrison could not. This is where some meaningful fiscal policy changes and reforms to labour laws (industrial relations) would be welcome.
This article first appeared on the Yahoo 7 Finance web site at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/heres-need-get-ready-early-2019-budget-010743625.html
Get ready for a February budget
An early budget is the likely scenario given the Federal election is set to be held in May 2019. The budget, which in modern times is usually delivered by the government on the second Tuesday in May, cannot be handed down during the election campaign which will be running hot if Prime Minister Turnbull sticks to his word and holds the election in May.
To allow the government to deliver its budget before the election is called, the most likely time for it will be in the period from mid-February through to early March.
With the constraint of the election timing, this timeframe for the budget would allow the government to ramp up its economic rhetoric and no doubt engage in a bit of a voter friendly strategy in an effort to gain some political momentum into the election campaign. This timing also means that soon after voters return to work and the real world after the summer holidays, they will be bombarded with budget news which, if the government is smart, will be portrayed as ‘good news’ and ‘vote for us’ as it struggles to remain competitive with the Labor Party.
This article first appeared on the Yahoo 7 website at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/way-pay-stuff-fixing-budget-024912997.html
How the way you pay for stuff is fixing the budget
Over the past few weeks, I have tried a little experiment with a few on my favourite small business retailers who, for what will be obvious reasons, will remain nameless.
For a range of smallish transactions of say $10 to $20, I deliberately made a bit of a fuss about paying with cash, rather than tapping with my card. Almost without exception, the proprietor, with a wink and nod, appreciated the use of cash, and passed a quick comment to the effect that “unfortunately, cash is rare these days”. I also noticed on a number of occasions the transaction was not rung up on the cash register, with the notes tucked into the cash drawer with no one other than me and the shop keeper aware of the transaction.
This got me thinking about an issue which has had me a little puzzled – the sharp improvement in the government’s budget position on the back of unexpectedly strong tax receipts. This extra tax revenue for the government appears to be an odd development given the sluggishness in the economy and consumer spending, and the ongoing weakness in inflation and wages, which over many decades have proven to be the driver of tax collections.
Rather than an unexpected pick-up in economic activity driving the revenue surge, it appears that technology, the decline in the use of cash and the greater use of cards accounts for the extra tax take.
Tonightly with Tom Ballard
I was delighted to be a guest on the Tonightly program, discussing, dare I say it, baby boomers and millennials. With a shirt like that, I am surprised Tom was so critical.
Here is the clip of the show:
The avocado house at the end was a bit of fun.
This article first appeared on the FIIG website at this link: https://thewire.fiig.com.au/article/commentary/opinion/2018/07/31/we-have-an-inflation-problem
We have an inflation problem
Australia continues to have an inflation problem, with the official consumer price index for the June quarter confirming annual underlying inflation at 1.9%.
This means that underlying inflation has effectively been outside the Reserve Bank’s 2 to 3% target for three years and based on recent quarterly results, seems unlikely to pop back into the target range for quite some time. Any hope of inflation getting into the middle or top half of the target band seems fanciful with current policy settings.
Even the RBA know this despite its forecasts which are based on the increasingly unrealistic premise of accelerating wages growth and two more years of 3% or more GDP growth. Put another way, if there is any downside to the RBA view for the economy, inflation will be even lower over the next two years. Which begs the question, why is the inflation targeting RBA so reluctant to trim interest rates to help drive economic growth? It makes little sense when higher economic growth, and lower unemployment would help to ensure a lift in wages growth and inflation.
Is low inflation a bad thing?
The short answer is usually “yes” and it is particularly so now when the low inflation result is driven by sustained sluggishness in the economy. With the unemployment rate being too high and wages growth weak, inflation will not pick up. It is important to note, the RBA acknowledge this.