GLOBAL ECONOMICS AND POLITICS

Leo Haviland provides clients with original, provocative, cutting-edge fundamental supply/demand and technical research on major financial marketplaces and trends. He also offers independent consulting and risk management advice.

Haviland’s expertise is macro. He focuses on the intertwining of equity, debt, currency, and commodity arenas, including the political players, regulatory approaches, social factors, and rhetoric that affect them. In a changing and dynamic global economy, Haviland’s mission remains constant – to give timely, value-added marketplace insights and foresights.

Leo Haviland has three decades of experience in the Wall Street trading environment. He has worked for Goldman Sachs, Sempra Energy Trading, and other institutions. In his research and sales career in stock, interest rate, foreign exchange, and commodity battlefields, he has dealt with numerous and diverse financial institutions and individuals. Haviland is a graduate of the University of Chicago (Phi Beta Kappa) and the Cornell Law School.

 

Subscribe to Leo Haviland’s BLOG to receive updates and new marketplace essays.

RSS View Leo Haviland's LinkedIn profile View Leo Haviland’s profile




US ELECTION 2020: POLITICS, PANDEMIC, AND MARKETPLACES © Leo Haviland June 3, 2020

CULTURAL OVERVIEW: A HOUSE DIVIDED

Competing aphorisms and advice abound regarding the uncertainties, unpredictability, probabilities, risks, opportunities, and appropriate viewpoints and methods in marketplaces such as stocks, interest rates, currencies, commodities, and real estate. Political stages also fill with diverse adages, slogans, perspectives, approaches, insights, foresights, predictions, and explanations.

The American cultural scenes (economic, political, and social) and opinions regarding them interrelate, and these entangle relatively closely with numerous foreign ones in a globalized world. This reflects and encourages wide ranges in outlook and recommendations for behavior.

****

American history reflects and describes a generally-shared culture, which the American Dream concept significantly reflects. However, over the span of about four centuries (and even in recent decades) that culture and interpretations of it have not been unchanging. The degree of consensus has varied. Moreover, not all groups have been equally able to participate in the economic, political, and social benefits (promises; valued “good” aspects) of the American Dream.

****

Thus America, even when united, always has had some internal differences in viewpoint (including opinions on the proper applications of a generally shared cultural theory) and thus assorted episodes and varying degrees of conflict. Let’s concentrate on today’s political panorama, which reflects (is permeated by) economic phenomena and interests. Admittedly, we’re not dwelling in the Civil War era of the mid-19th century. And the present-day United States political landscape (its ideological and structural parameters) is not anarchic. Nevertheless, the nation’s current political situation displays extensive divisions across numerous fields. The number and sharpness of these splits arguably have been increasing over the past few decades, as well as increasing (or at least becoming more evident) since President Trump’s 2016 election campaign and triumph.

A rapid survey of the United States unveils a country significantly divided across belief (doctrinal) dimensions as well as group membership categories. Subjective views occur on a continuum. For example, not all so-called “conservative” opinions are identical. Or, a given “liberal” (or progressive or globalist) may support some “nationalist” policies. Of course not all members of a given racial (ethnic), sex, or age category embrace the same opinion on a given policy or set of them. Consequently, beliefs, groups, and individuals do not necessarily or inevitably all end up on the same side of a ledger. Moreover, definitions and applications of political and other cultural labels can and do change. How should we define and measure liberty, freedom, and equality?

Anyway, numerous divisions apparently exist. These reflect values, visions for what is “good”, “bad”, and “neutral”. Cultural values inescapably involve emotions, not just reasoning; and emotions permeate the reasoning.

Look not only at (and within) the leading political parties, the Democrats (blue) and Republicans (red). The political spectrum reveals a range of opinions from left-wing to right-wing. Populists (which include left and right sides in orientation) battle against the “establishment” and associated elites (“the Man”; an entrenched political/economic/social power structure). Nationalists (“Make America Great Again!” is one mantra) fight against globalists (and multiculturalists); conservatives (or alleged reactionaries) combat liberals (perhaps some of these are progressives) and socialists (radicals; anarchists). Assorted political and economic “haves” fight in assorted ways with “have-nots”. Ardent debates rage about economic inequality and opportunity as well as social mobility. Allegiance to “capitalism” and the “free market” (however defined) varies in scope and intensity. Other contentious issues include abortion, the environment (including climate change), health care, immigration, race relations, gun control, and international trade. Such viewpoints incorporate values and result in propaganda battles to advance aims and defeat foes.

Within American political life and its communities, note the language (metaphors) of war, battle, and violence. Also examine wordplay of love and friendship. For example, people may love (or hate) a political candidate or party and its policies.

Rather lofty US government deficit spending has become entrenched. And sometimes, like nowadays in the coronavirus era (which involves a war against the disease), most Americans appreciate a generous helping hand and support a large (expensive) economic rescue package. However, significant disagreement remains regarding the role and extent of the federal government in our lives. Fervent quarrels burst into the open as to the appropriateness of, relative importance of, and actual expenditure on specific programs.

What generic cultural classifications to which individuals belong nowadays reflect (and offer opportunities for and encourage) partisanship and rhetorical conflict? These are numerous. The body politic is fractured. Noteworthy divides exist on the basis of race/ethnic, sex/gender and sexuality, age/generation, geographical location (region of the country; urban/suburban/rural), religion/faith, and level of wealth/income.

****

In politics, economics, and elsewhere in culture, although a subjective consensus sometimes develops and persists, participants also can and do disagree on what information (facts, evidence, factors, data, statistics) is relevant and on the relative importance of such variables, as well as on the proper means of organizing and evaluating such phenomena. Where widespread cultural divisions exist, as in America nowadays, such diverse debates (dissonance) relating to “the facts” at times can severely challenge the abilities of even knowledgeable and experienced forecasters to predict a particular outcome, such as the 2020 American Presidential election battle between Trump and Biden, with a high degree of confidence.

Moreover, to the extent that citizens have diminished faith in political institutions and leaders, this increases (encourages) the potential for cultural splits and wars. Arguments from authority may become less compelling to the “average citizen”; many disagreements tend to become harder to resolve. It’s often difficult for enemies to make peace. This situation can boost the amount and loudness of divisive rhetoric and thus make it significantly harder to predict some outcomes.

History shows that a willingness to compromise, listen closely to and respect opposing views and values, and practice substantial civility ebbs and flows on political stages, even when differences between rivals are substantial. However, the American political scene during the Trump regime generally manifests a weakening inclination to do so by many participants. This increases the rhetorical racket.

The information revolution obviously is a complex topic. Nevertheless, the voices unleashed nowadays in cultural domains via mass communication media create and sustain Towers of Babel. And the internet in particular enables a “democratic” explosion of voices seeking to achieve some form of power, to become or remain relevant and influential. The massive amount of allegedly relevant information potentially important to “appropriate” cultural decision-making and the proliferation of supposedly satisfactory gurus and guides (opinion-makers) thereby at times can exacerbate the difficulty of predicting political and economic outcomes.

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
US Election 2020- Politics, Pandemic, and Marketplaces (6-3-20)

AMERICAN CONSUMERS: THE SHAPE WE’RE IN © Leo Haviland May 4, 2020

The Band sings in “The Shape I’m In”:
“Out of nine lives, I spent seven
Now, how in the world do you get to Heaven?
Oh, you don’t know the shape I’m in”.

****

OVERVIEW AND CONCLUSION

 

Everyone knows that the coronavirus pandemic and political (medical) responses to it have wreaked widespread and deep economic destruction around the globe. The coronavirus, however, was not the only bearish phenomenon preceding and influencing the disastrous economic situation. The ultimate extent of the damage and the timing and extent of the international and American recovery remain conjectural.

America and its consumers obviously are not the only economic engines for the international economy. However, given substantial global economic interconnections, American economic conditions, trends, and policies significantly influence those elsewhere. US consumer spending represents about 68.0 percent of American GDP, a very sizable share (Federal Reserve Board; Z.1, “Financial Accounts of the United States”, Table F.2; 3/12/20). Consequently, regarding the prospects for United States economic growth, and thus output in other realms, much depends on the situation and attitudes of the American consumer.

American consumer spending and other “Main Street” variables intertwine with those around the globe, as well as with “business” (both big and small) and other economic, political, and social phenomena. For example, Federal Reserve and other central bank actions, government spending levels and trends, United States (and other) stock marketplace levels, American government and other interest rates, the dollar and other currencies, commodities, real estate, and assorted other economic, political, and social variables influence American consumer spending in a variety of fashions. These relationships and phenomena encouraging them can and do change, sometimes slowly, sometimes rapidly. Convergence and divergence (lead/lag) patterns between economic indicators as well as marketplaces likewise can shift or transform.

****

Wall Street (and its financial media friends), politicians, and Main Street pray that the monumental monetary interventions by central banks such as the Federal Reserve and its allies (massive money printing and so forth) and dramatic fiscal deficit spending boosts not only will rescue the international economy from its current monumental troubles (reduce the magnitude of a recession), but also will restore acceptable economic growth relatively quickly, perhaps even before the end of the third quarter of 2020. Prior success in dealing with the dreadful worldwide economic disaster of 2007-09 encourages widespread faith that these (and perhaps further) efforts and a warlike “whatever it takes” monetary and governmental policy attitude ultimately will succeed.

Many economic high priests such as the International Monetary Fund predict a relatively strong and quick global recovery. In its World Economic Outlook (Table 1.1; April 2020), the IMF forecast a gloomy three percent drop in world output in 2020. However, global real GDP ascends sharply in 2021 by 5.8 percent. GDP retreats in advanced economies by -6.1pc year-on-year in 2020, but climbs 4.5pc in 2021. According to the IMF, US GDP collapses -5.9pc in 2020 but jumps 4.7pc in 2021. Emerging/developing marketplaces allegedly will suffer only a one percent fall in calendar 2020, with GDP growing a rapid 6.6pc in 2021 (compare 2019’s modest 3.7pc expansion). China supposedly will manage to grow 9.2 percent in 2021 (1.2pc in 2020), although its GDP fell -6.8pc year-on-year in 1Q20.

US corporate earnings depend on many phenomena, and of course not all corporations depend (directly) on consumer purchasing (whether by Americans or others) to the same extent. Yet US corporate earnings estimates from Wall Street pulpits, like the IMF’s vision, generally display optimism for calendar 2021 despite the sharp year-on-year falls expected for calendar 2020.

****

However, a survey of several key US variables closely linked to the situation of the American consumer nevertheless suggest that the injury to the American consumer “in general” and thus the country’s overall economy has been and will continue to be severe. A very substantial portion of the general public is in rough shape. Numerous other consumers are fearful regarding their future. Between the terrifying unemployment situation (and at least the near term outlook for it) and a relatively high arithmetical household debt level prior to the coronavirus devastation, most American consumers probably will be cautious spenders for quite some time. Even if the coronavirus pandemic significantly subsides relatively soon, how rapidly will the shattered consumer sector race to resume its prior buying habits and thus boost GDP substantially? Moreover, the planned reopening of America’s economy probably will be gradual. And how quickly will firms, whether large or small, rehire a large number of laid-off workers? In addition, widespread worries about the ongoing and future coronavirus waves likely will persist, and people await the development of a proven vaccine and adequate testing.

Thus America’s economic recovery probably will be slow rather than fast (or even fairly quick on a sustained basis). Optimism heralded by the IMF and many other leading institutions, enthusiastic gospels from US “investment” gurus regarding magnificent corporate earnings in calendar 2021, and similar propaganda likely will be disappointed.

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
American Consumers- the Shape We're In (5-4-20)

WALL STREET TALKING, YIELD HUNTING, AND RUNNING FOR COVER © Leo Haviland May 14, 2019

“‘Curiouser and curiouser!’ cried Alice (she was so much surprised, that for the moment she quite forgot how to speak good English).” “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland”, by Lewis Carroll (Chapter II, “The Pool of Tears”)

CONCLUSION: GOLDILOCKS ERA, REVISITED

Historians should wonder if the Federal Reserve Board and its friends in central banking (and assorted comrades parading in some political corridors and media circles) nowadays are aiming to manufacture an updated version of the joyous last stage (ending in 2007) of the magnificent Goldilocks Era.

Lower United States Treasury yields and the sunny prospect of continued benevolent Federal Reserve policy reappeared around end December 2018/early January 2019. The rapid bull climb in the S+P 500 from then until the beginning of May 2019 to some extent reflected hopes of further (adequate) American and global economic expansion.

However, the frantic price rally in several key marketplace benchmarks commencing around end year 2018 also probably reflected an ardent quest for “yield” (“return”) by “investors” and other asset purchasers. In addition to buying the S+P 500, yield hunters searched for sufficient return in territories such as other advanced nation stocks, emerging marketplace stocks, lower-grade United States corporate debt, emerging marketplace sovereign debt securities denominated in US dollars, and the petroleum complex.

Of course cultural history does not necessarily repeat itself, either entirely or even partly. Marketplace phenomena (conditions; variables), including relationships between them and perspectives on them, can and do change, sometimes dramatically. Rhetoric (stories) relating to economic and related playgrounds seek not only to explain viewpoints and situations, but also to guide behavior.

Later stages of economic expansions (so-called cycles) often are distinguished by what many players, including leading and widely-respected economic guardians and policymakers, decide to overlook or minimize.

This ardent quest for yield probably manifested that America is in the waning period of the epic economic expansion that followed the dreadful economic disaster of 2007-09. Even if a recession does not occur in the United States (or in other advanced nations), a noteworthy slowdown in global real GDP growth (including China and other emerging realms) likely is or soon will be underway.

“Economic Growth Fears: Stock and Interest Rate Adventures” (4/2/19) stated in regard to the S+P 500: “The September/October 2018 elevation [2941 (9/21/18)/2940 (10/3/18)] probably will not be broken by much, if at all.” The recent price declines in the S+P 500 (5/1/19 high 2954) and other advanced nation stocks, emerging marketplace stocks, emerging marketplace dollar-denominated sovereign debt, and the petroleum complex probably signal that many dutiful profit hunters (and probably some other investors/owners) have started running for cover (begun to liquidate their long positions).

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
Wall Street Talking, Yield Hunting, and Running for Cover (5-14-19)

ECONOMIC GROWTH FEARS: STOCK AND INTEREST RATE ADVENTURES © Leo Haviland April 2, 2019

In “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland”, Lewis Carroll declares: “For, you see, so many out-of-the-way things had happened lately, that Alice had begun to think that very few things indeed were really impossible.” (Chapter I, “Down the Rabbit-Hole”)

****

OVERVIEW AND CONCLUSIONS

History reveals that sustained rises in United State government interest rates generally (eventually) are bearish for the US stock marketplace. The United States Treasury 10 year note yield made a major bottom on 7/6/16 at 1.32 percent, an important interim low on 9/8/17 at 2.01pc, and a critical high in early October 2018 at 3.26pc. Japan’s 10 year government note yield peaked around then, on 10/4/18 at .17 percent. Germany’s 10 year government note rate established an interim high at .58pc on 10/10/18 (having built an earlier top at .81pc on 2/8/18). China’s 10 year central government note’s yield high occurred earlier (4.04pc on 11/22/17), but its lower yield high at 3.71pc on 9/21/18 connected with those in America, Japan, and Germany.

The S+P 500 attained its summit around the same time as the yield highs in the UST 10 year note, constructing a double top on 9/21/18 at 2941 and 10/3/08 at 2940.

****

Subsequent yield declines in the UST 10 year note and the 10 year government debt of other key global realms such as Germany, Japan, and China accompanied a slump in the S+P 500 and many other benchmark stock indices. The Federal Reserve, European Central Bank, and other central bank engineers initially were fairly complacent. However, around mid-December 2018, the rate for the UST 10 year decisively retreated beneath about 2.80 percent. Also around then, the S+P 500, after tumbling from 2800’s temporary high (12/3/18), cratered beneath 2650 (a ten percent fall from the autumn 2018 high). Note the subsequent change in direction for Fed policy orations and actions.

****

These fearful events (and other variables) portended weaker real GDP growth (and maybe even a recession) in America and other advanced nations, and an undesirable slowdown in China and other key emerging marketplaces. Stock owners (especially investors) and their investment banking and media allies in the United States and elsewhere screamed, troubled by the prospect of a twenty percent or more decline (satisfying a classic definition of a bear trend) in the S+P 500. Many politicians around the globe screeched, expressing concerns about economic dangers (more quietly, some worried about potential for increased populist pressures).

This unsettling scenario sparked the trusty Federal Reserve to halt its Federal Funds rate-raising policy (part of its normalization scheme), to underline that it would maintain a hefty balance sheet laden with debt securities, and to preach a much-welcomed sermon that for the near term it will be “patient”. The European Central Bank and other devoted central banking comrades promised continued easy money programs.

Some might wonder if the Fed and its friends in central banking (and in some political corridors) nowadays are aiming to produce an updated version of the joyous days (“irrational exuberance”, perhaps) of 2006-07 during the Goldilocks Era.

In any case, the central bank easing rhetoric and policy shift helped to rally equities and boosted confidence in growth prospects. The S+P 500 hit a floor on 12/26/18 at 2347 (20 percent fall from the autumn high equals 2353) and thereafter rose sharply. Many other global stock marketplaces established troughs around then, rallying dramatically in first quarter 2019. The UST 10 year yield touched 2.54 percent on 1/4/19. It thereafter climbed to 2.80pc on 1/18/19 (2.77pc high 3/14/19).

Given the reappearance of lower UST rates and the sunny prospect of continued benevolent Federal Reserve policy, arguably some of the feverish rally in the S+P 500 and other international stocks since around end December 2018/early January 2019 has reflected not only hopes of further (adequate) economic expansion, but also a frantic hunt for suitable returns (“yield”) outside of the interest rate securities field. The time of the broad S&P Goldman Sachs Commodity Index (“GSCI”)’s bottom neighbored that in the S+P 500, 12/26/18 at 366. Note also the price rally in US dollar-denominated emerging marketplace sovereign debt securities.

The broad real trade-weighted US dollar’s rally from its January 2018 bottom at 94.6 (Federal Reserve, H.10; goods only; monthly average, March 1973=100) established a high in December 2018 at 103.2 (recall the major top of 103.4 (December 2016)/103.2 (January 2017). The dollar’s stop in its bull charge and its slight decline thereafter (about 1.4 percent) probably has helped to inspire the stock marketplace rally and related quests for returns in other landscapes. The combination of the drop in US government yields and the cessation of the US dollar’s upward march probably (especially) encouraged the recent price climbs in the stocks and government notes of many emerging marketplaces.

****

For the S+P 500, the lower tax rates legislated via America’s end-2017 corporate tax “reform” spiked US corporate earnings and encouraged massive share buybacks. Although the tax reform will continue to support earnings to some extent, substantial year-on-year growth for (at least most of) 2019 earnings currently looks unlikely. Suppose marketplace enthusiasm generates a forceful challenge to the S+P 500’s autumn 2018 high occurs. The September/October 2018 elevation probably will not be broken by much, if at all. A one percent breach of 2941 gives 2970, a five percent advance over it equals 3088.

If further notable share buybacks and determined digging around for yields (“good returns”) are playing critical roles in the recent S+P 500 (and other stock) rallies, perhaps the S+P 500’s recent strength does not reflect the darkening vista for the American economy. US and other stock marketplace climbs from current levels do not preclude increasing economic feebleness in America and elsewhere.

****

FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW to download this article as a PDF file.
Economic Growth Fears- Stock and Interest Rate Adventures (4-2-19) (1)