OUTSIDE THE BOX
The world is entering the most dangerous and potentially devastating phase of the global economic crisis.
The US began an economic recession in 2007 as oil prices spiked and the debt bubble was beginning to burst. That debt bubble exploded in full force in 2008, destroying a trillion or so of dollars of assets and bringing to light the terrible financial condition of many so-called first-world governments and first-world financial institutions.
In 2008 and 2009, governments printed trillions of dollars of new money in a failed attempt to stimulate their economies. The plan was that economic activity would increase enough to absorb this new money. Economic activity did not rebound, and the result has been stagnant economies flooded with new money that was not creating wealth but, in fact, was creating a superinflationary global economic environment.
Governments are run by politicians who do not have the capability to think in terms of years but only in terms of quick political expediency. The problems were created by years of short-term policy decisions, and these same incompetent politicians believed that the problems could be solved with more short-term policy decisions. Instead of building economic superhighways to growth, they filled the potholes, hoping that the people would be fooled that everything was just fine. They were wrong as usual
Sound economies must create real wealth, based on people making real goods and providing real services. You just cannot fake it. You cannot put lipstick on a pig and call it a beauty queen. After creating nearly $2 trillions of fake money without any wealth-creating economic results, the US Federal Reserve decided to try that failed policy one more time. Last week the Fed announced it would print nearly another trillion dollars more between now and June 2011.
The first time they printed the trillions was to provide funds to stimulate domestic economic activity. That did not work. This time the purpose is to lower the value of the dollar to increase US exports to increase economic activity. Why are these so-called first-world countries so intent on devaluing their currencies? It is because national governments do not go bankrupt. Currencies go bankrupt. It is the only way to get out of their debt problem. This Fed initiative will also be an economic failure but this policy will most definitely create inflation.
The broadest measure of global commodity prices, denominated in dollars, is the Continuous Commodity Index (CCI). That index reached 600 in July 2008. It is now at 597. But in 2008, oil was priced at $140 per barrel. Now oil is $88. The increase in the CCI is due to dollar devaluation. The CCI is a leading indicator of future global price inflation as it presents raw material costs that will show up in consumer prices.
Inflation in the Philippines is running at 2.8 percent. Compare with the US. In the last 18 months, US prices for gasoline up 30 percent, wheat up 60 percent, corn up 75 percent, cattle up 20 percent, and lumber up 40 percent. And these are the numbers for a nation with little economic growth and where personal income and personal spending is going down. This is the currency-induced cost-push inflation I wrote about last month and it will become a global condition.
Further compounding the inflation problem is that the Fed policy will force Europe to expand its money-printing activities to devalue the euro. As that happens, it is inevitable that currencies like the Philippine peso will rise in value. The peso not only will rise, but must go up in value to protect this economy. We will see 40 to the dollar, then 38, 36, and on and on as the dollar devalues.
Countries like the Philippines have two choices: devalue the currency along with the dollar and be subject to high inflationary pressure or appreciate the currency and adjust to international capital flows.
Look, the Philippines is not like Brazil, which is dependent on exports to the US and, therefore, needs to stay pegged to the dollar. Brazil is also being hurt by “currency carry trade.” That is where financial institutions borrow in dollars at near-zero interest rates and then move the money into Brazil to take advantage of deposit rates as high as 11 percent. Money is moving to the Philippines and others for investment-profit opportunities and currency appreciation, not for high interest rates as such.
The downsides for peso appreciation are supposedly three. I say supposedly because I do not believe that these offset the harm that high inflation will bring.
Exporters are vigorously calling for a weakened peso because they cry that they cannot compete in a peso-appreciating environment. If the exporters are dependent on a third-world depreciated currency, then they do not have any business being in business with that poor a financial model. Also, other nations that compete with the Philippines are experiencing currency appreciation. Finally, the nation must balance the economic contribution of the export sector to the total economy.
Overseas workers will receive less for their remitted dollars. Common sense says that if inflation comes from a depreciated peso, there will be a net loss, as remitted money will get more pesos that have lower purchasing power due to inflation. What do you want? More paper money that buys less or less paper money that buys more.
Outsourcing will be impacted by an appreciating peso. However, other outsourcing destinations face the same situation. Further, the cost differential between home-country service costs and outsourcing is great enough to cover currency appreciation. Do not forget. During the course of our outsourcing boom, the peso has appreciated from over 50 to just over 40 and business continues. And the argument that outsourcing companies will not continue to build in the Philippines is misleading. If these companies can make a profit from their overseas clients, they will build facilities here. Globally, the outsourcing industry has had flat growth for two years. Despite an appreciating peso, business in the Philippines is up more than 20 percent.
There is no choice in this matter. US government policy has put the world on an inflationary path that will cause great economic harm. There is absolutely no reason for the Philippines to get caught in this terrible situation unless we start trying to manipulate the peso to serve narrow, special interests.
E-mail comments to firstname.lastname@example.org. PSE stock-market information and technical analysis tools provided by CitisecOnline.com Inc.
Wednesday, 10 November 2010
TUESDAY, 09 NOVEMBER 2010 13:38 CAI U. ORDINARIO
WITH millions of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) in various parts of the world and thousands being deployed abroad every day, the World Bank (WB) expects OFW remittances to reach $21.3 billion by the end of the year; and the country to be the fourth-largest recipient of remittances in 2010.
In the World Bank’s Migration and Remittances Factbook 2011, remittances in the Philippines are expected to increase by 7.8 percent in 2010, the highest increase expected by the WB among large remittance recipients in East Asia and the Pacific region.
The bank said remittance flows to China, the largest recipient in the region, are estimated to have grown by 4.7 percent to reach $51 billion in 2010. The Philippines is the second-largest remittance recipient in the region.
“The diversified destinations of Filipino [and Chinese] migrants contributed to steady growth in remittances in 2010 despite the crisis. Similarly, flows to Vietnam are estimated to have grown by 9 percent in 2010 to return to the precrisis level of $7.2 billion in 2010. With a recovery in global demand, remittance flows to the East Asia and Pacific region are expected to grow at 7.2 percent and 8.5 percent in 2011 and 2012, respectively, to reach $106 billion in 2012,” the report stated.
With this, the Philippines will retain its position as one of the largest remittance recipients in the world. Based on the global rankings, with this outlook, the Philippines will be the fourth-largest recipient, with India, China and Mexico ranked on top 3 with remittances worth $55 billion, $51 billion and $22.6 billion, respectively.
However, the report showed the Philippines is also included in the top 10 emigration countries in the world. The country ranked 9th in the top 10 emigration countries in the world with a stock of emigrants reaching 4.275 million or 4.6 percent of the population.
“Remittances are a vital source of financial support that directly increases the income of migrants’ families. Remittances lead to more investments in health, education and small business. With better tracking of migration and remittance trends, policymakers can make informed decisions to protect and leverage this massive capital inflow which is triple the size of official aid flows,” Hans Timmer, WB development prospects director, said in a statement.
Overall, the WB expects remittance flows to developing countries to increase by 6 percent to $325 billion in 2010. This marks a healthy recovery from a 5.5-percent decline registered in 2009. Remittance flows are expected to increase by 6.2 percent in 2011 and 8.1 percent in 2012, to reach $374 billion by 2012.
These projections are based on three major trends. These trends are a high level of unemployment in the migrant-receiving countries has prompted restrictions on new immigration; the application of mobile-phone technology for domestic remittances has failed to spread to cross-border remittances; and developing countries are becoming more aware of the potential for leveraging remittances and diaspora wealth for raising development finance.
“This outlook for remittance flows, however, is subject to the risks of a fragile global economic recovery, volatile currency and commodity price movements, and rising anti-immigration sentiment in many destination countries,” the report stated.
The top remittance-sending countries in 2009 were the United States, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Russia and Germany.
Worldwide, the top recipient countries in 2010 are India, China, Mexico, the Philippines and France. As a share of gross domestic product, however, remittances are more significant for smaller countries—more than 25 percent in some countries.
While high-income countries remain the main source of remittances, migration between developing countries is larger than that from developing countries to high-income countries belonging to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Regionally, there is significant variation across developing regions, with larger-than-expected falls in remittances to Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, the Middle East and North Africa, and Sub-Saharan Africa regions in 2009. Remittance flows to South Asia in 2009 grew more than expected, and those to East Asia and Pacific rose modestly.
According to the Factbook 2011, the top migrant destination country is the United States, followed by Russia, Germany, Saudi Arabia and Canada.
The top immigration countries relative to population are Qatar (87 percent), Monaco (72 percent), the United Arab Emirates (70 percent), Kuwait (69 percent) and Andorra (64 percent).
Mexico-United States is expected to be the largest migration corridor in the world this year, followed by Russia-Ukraine, Ukraine-Russia, and Bangladesh-India.