- Your history
China haalt de VS in
Voor mij is dit dé grafiek van de maand !
Door de krimpende autoverkoop in de VS en de stimuli in China, is een - om in de beeldspraak te blijven - een inhaalbeweging gebeurd.
De autoverkopen in China zijn in de afgelopen maand in de slipstream van de Amerikaanse gekomen.
Meer van deze knappe grafieken,in het rapport van Pimco over emerging markets.
13 Comments
-
Verheyden Koenraad
On 20 Aug, 2009
Pimco vergeet natuurlijk het "gold" in - gold and forex reserves . :)))
Cfr. laatste grafiek onderaan bladzijde. -
Frank
On 20 Aug, 2009
Ik geloof niet in het China verhaal. China's produktie succes is afhankelijk van het Amerikaanse consumptie model. De siamese tweeling remember? De Amerikaan en zowat elke andere wetserling staat aan het begin van een serieuze deflatiepandoering. China heeft zijn produktie gedimensioneerd naar een steeds groter wordend winkelmandje van de westerling. Ik vraag me af hoe lang iedereen blind blijft voor de gevolgen van hun overcapaciteit gefinancierd met schuld. China kan wel een "Greenspanneke" doen maar zal uiteindelijk ook beseffen dat de oorzaak van deze crisis teveel "Greenspannekes" zijn. Het probleem van onze auto's is niet dat ze milieuonvriendelijk zijn, het probleem is dat we er teveel van hebben gefinancierd met krediet.
Wat de grafiek betreft valt er voor mij 2 dingen op:
1. De lijnen dreigen te kruisen omdat de bovenste lijn zeer snel zakt, niet omdat de onderste lijn zeer snel stijgt.
2. De onderste lijn heeft niet veel moeite gehad om te buigen naar beneden bij de -ook om in de beeldspraak te blijven-crash van okt 2008 -
Gert B
On 20 Aug, 2009
De belangrijkheid van China op toekomstig monetair-financieel gebied wordt hier prachtig geschetst door enkele niet onbelangerijke personages :
http://www.ecb.int/events/conferences/html/symposium_hs_vgd.en.html
Jean-Claude Trichet: Thank you very much indeed. Other questions?
Question: I have a question for Mr former President and Mr former Chancellor and also for President Trichet about the reform of the international monetary system. We talked about the reform of the regulation system. But how about the monetary system? Recently the Governor of the Central Bank of China proposed that there is need for discussion in the international community to promote the use of SDR as international reserve currency. This is in view of the shortcomings of the current system where one country’s currency and consequently the monetary and economic policies have an overwhelmingly consequences for the rest of the world. And we have seen a lot of negative consequences to the rest of the world. So there is a need to promote an officially agreed new international reserve currency and assets denominated in that currency to be promoted on the international market. And I would like to ask your view on that.
Helmut Schmidt: I would like to say first that I regard Mr Zhou, the central banker in Beijing, to be a first-class expert. Secondly, I think he is quite right about the slow decay of the hitherto dominant role of the American dollar. You don't need any prophecy to foresee that. Thirdly, I’m very hesitant about the idea to make SDR the one and only reserve currency all over the globe. I do foresee instead that we are developing slowly into a constellation in which three major currencies have to cooperate. This is the American dollar, this is the European euro and the Chinese renminbi. It’s necessary and difficult for the Americans to understand the coming importance of the Chinese renminbi. It may take 10 years, it may take 15 years, but it will happen.
Valéry Giscard d’Estaing: We must remember that the monetary world was always stable when there was more than one unit of reserve. At least two or three. When there is just one, it is dangerous. In the past we saw gold and a currency, gold and the sterling, gold and the dollar. Since 1917 there is in fact only the dollar. So it’s by nature an instable system and can not be based on one single currency.
And Helmut is right. But I would like to add something because of this anniversary. When we started to think about the European Monetary Union and its single currency, we had absolutely not the intention to create a reserve currency. Not at all. The Americans believed that we wanted to compete with the dollar. But that was not at all the idea. But in fact since we are the largest trader in the world, the second group concerning the GDP, our currency will play a major role. Of course we wish that the people who are in charge of the policies will not try to accelerate this. Because there are no benefits for us. And probably, like Helmut said, there will be another constellation of currencies in the future. At this moment it is the dollar, the euro and the yen. Probably in 10 or 20 years it will be the renminbi, the Chinese currency. But of course the Special Drawing Rights might be useful also, because they are linked to another function of the international monetary system, which is the lending to countries in deficit. It can be used. So it’s a mix that must compose the future monetary reserves. If it is well handled, it could be a stable system.
Geert, wat is Uw idee over Helmut Schmidt en VGE hun stellingen ? -
MarcVdB
On 20 Aug, 2009
Geert,
Toevallig schreef Michael Pettis, een amerikaanse professor in China die een blog bijhoudt over vnl Chinese economie, een ultra-lange blog post over VS/China, de vraag of de overconsumptie de savings glut veroorzaakte of de savings glut de overconsumptie en vooral, wat dit nu betekent voor de komende jaren. Ik vond het zelf één van de beste posts over de economische crisis en de vooruitzichten die ik gelezen heb. Hierbij de link:
http://mpettis.com/2009/08/yet-another-discussion-on-the-asian-savings-glut-hypothesis-and-why-it-matters/ -
Nick Doms
On 20 Aug, 2009
Now we are coming to the SDR discussion, which will prove to be very interesting for the future.
One sidenote: i don't see the Pound Sterling mentioned anywhere.
Why?
Sincerely, -
Kevin
On 20 Aug, 2009
I don't think SDR's are going to take off. It's an idea that's floating around but really, how realistic is it? When we changed to the dollar as reserve currency in 1946, the USA held two thirds of all the gold in the world. The dollar was "as good as gold". Of course we know that the USA hollowed out the value of their dollar, but even now the dollar is backed by more value than the SDR. The IMF literally owns nothing that wasn't donated to it by another nation (like its much talked-about gold reserves).
The Chinese are worried about the safety of the dollar: a currency which 300 million people accept as a means of payment, and that's only counting American citizens. Does anyone realistically see the Chinese settle for the "safety" of a currency that is issued by an organisation with no population, no assets, and no guarantee of existence other than at the whim of its sponsor states? They'd be completely stupid. And one can say a lot about the Chinese, but stupid they are not. -
frederic
On 20 Aug, 2009
-Al van ongeveer het begin van de crisis was mijn idee dat een meer internationale munt een deel van de oplossing was.
Over de Chinezen en hun auto's, ik geloof wel in de Chineese motor, vergeet niet dat een groot deel van het "bubble" geld , welke de amerkikanen nu aan het afschrijven zijn als verliezen nu in China zit.
Ze hebben geld, en beginnen het te verteren (al enkele jaren trouwens) maar de rijkdom komt toch losser en losser.
China heeft een bijzonder sterke inlandse economie, en het is nu niet dat hun export gestopt is, de Amerikaan verteerd misschien minder maar is niet gestopt.
Deflatie ? zoals ik ook al stelde van in het begin, misschien een korte deflatieperiode gevolgd door heel sterke inflatie (of staflatie) . Immers overal is het spaargeld aan het groeien, de rentes staan nog steeds laag, overheden hebben massaal geld gepompt in de economie en niet alles is verdwenen in de schuldenput, een groot deel van het bubblegeld zit in China die het op een bepaald moment zal lossen.
Bovendien komen er de laatste tijd een pak positieve signalen, minstens evenveel als negatieve (echter, op een bepaald moment is deze Blog overgeschakeld op pessimisme en worden positive signalen verketterd) . De consument pikt het op en op vele plaatsen is het consumentenvertrouwen terug aan het stijgen, en de absolute basis is nu eenmaal de consument , zonder die, geen economie. Ook het ondernemersvertrouwen stijgt weer.
Vanuit persoonlijke werkervaring, de volumes olie voor schepen is terug aan het stijgen, dus er wordt meer gevaren.
Er zal wel nog een daling komen door nog een onslagronde, maar het uitklimmen is mijn inziens begonnen (traag en met schokken) , als de Chinezen maar dat gespaarde bubblegeld verteren en investeren !! -
Theo
On 22 Aug, 2009
@ Marcvdb
Very interesting blog indeed.
This discussion is actually a non-issue in China though.
The chicken or the egg argument is only relevant in the US economic and political context.
The US has since April been trying to convince China that if they doubled their domestic consumption, it would solve all the world's problems.
All of the sudden gone were all those environmental and sustainability concerns which had been so dominant in previous public outbursts about China!
The the mind of the US the math is very simple (as usual!):
export accounts for 40% of China's GDP
private consumption accounts for 36% of China's GDP... in the US that double
Hence some cowboy with a PhD in Economics from the Ivy League (as usual!) who probably never owned a passport in his 25 years of existence, must have thought to himself "If only we can replace Chinese exports with domestic consumption I can save the US and put on my Superman costume."
And off went Geithner, Mr. Treasure Chest extraordinair himself, to China to remind them not to forget to keep on buying US treasuries while they are also doubling domestic consumption. Just for good measure, in case the real message had gone a runner or been lost in translation!
We live in a post-modern world. One ruled by those brought up with the cult of moderne wiskunde!!! -
On 24 Aug, 2009
@ Theo
I linked the chicken & the egg blog post not because I find it interesting to point fingers at who is to blame for the current economic crisis, but because it points out very well that the chimerica model is becoming unsustainable for China. At present China is trying to make up a collapse in exports by boosting domestic investment, boosting domestic consumption and flooding the economy with credit.
Investment is very good if it serves an economic need, rash investments often don't. The jury is out on this one.
An increaese in consumption can easily be achieved by providing state-subsidized grants (see car sales graph above). But how can we be sure this consumption has not been borrowed from future consumption rather than having created extra demand? Also on this one, the jury is still out.
The effects of flooding an economy with credit have been well documented. I don't have to spell that out to you. Excessive credit will lead to boom & bust. Only the timing is variable. -
VimaxBr
On 5 Jan, 2012
Wonderful day for you, before I apologize This information may not be useful for some people, and maybe for some people is very rewarding. This information about the product of Vimax, purchased .
-
digitals6
On 25 Apr, 2012
I toward absolutely obligated to suffer with against your ambuscade pages and look moving onward to tons of more prodigious minutes reading here. Thanks a an infinity at the same position again on all the details.
-
Kenney
On 30 Apr, 2012
I definitely wanted to construct a quick message in order to appreciate you for all of the fabulous at this website.
