Der USA Bären-Thread
Die Amis scheinen es z.Z. genau so handhaben: Inflation, Immobilien-Krise, faule Mortgage Securities und Commercial Papers, Kreditkrise ... - alles kein Problem: "Der Papa (die FED) wird´s schon richten" (nach einem Song von Peter Alexander).
http://forum.finanzen.net/forum/thread?thread_id=42948&page=0
Irgendwie konnte sich damals auch niemand richtig das Ausmaß der Kursblase vorstellen. Vor allem die gepostete Analyse Chef-Ökonom von Wells Fargo, Sung Won Sohn erinnert mich doch sehr an aussagen die ich in den letzten Tagen gelesen habe. Die USA hat zwar ein etwas geringeres Wachstum aber alles in allen im grünen Bereich... usw.
-----------
dpa-AFX-Nachricht
Montag, 02.10.2000, 11:55
AUSBLICK: US-Daten zeigen auf Wachstumskurs - Lohnkosten bleiben moderat
WASHINGTON (dpa-AFX) - Die für diese Woche erwarteten Arbeitsmarkt- und Konjunkturdaten aus den USA dürften nach Einschätzung von Volkswirten auf ein deutliches Wirtschaftswachstum in den USA hindeuten. Die Zahl der neuen Arbeitsplätze sollte im August um 250.000 angewachsen sein. Gleichzeitig bleibe der Anstieg der Lohnkosten mit 0,3% moderat. "Die Lohnkosten steigen bestimmt nicht dramatisch", sagte der Chef-Ökonom von Wells Fargo, Sung Won Sohn.
Der Preisdruck für die Unternehmen in Form von gestiegenen Arbeitskosten dürfte die US-Notenbank in jedem Fall dazu bewegen auf ihrer Sitzung am Dienstag den Ausblick für ihre Geldpolitik bei "tightening" zu lassen. Zu tatsächlichen Zinserhöhungen komme es aber frühestens in sechs, neun oder zwölf Monaten, sagte Sohn.
Insgesamt dürften die Daten sehr optimistisch stimmen, sagte Sung Won Sohn weiter. Die US-Wirtschaft wachse mit etwas geringeren Raten weiter und ihr dürfte eine "weiche Landung" gelingen. Das verarbeitende Gewerbe zeige weiter einen robusten Aufwärtstrend. Der als Frühindikator sehr wichtige Einkaufs-Manager-Index (NAPM) sollte sich erholen und von 49,5 auf 49,7 Punkte zulegen.
usw....
Nach einem guten Lauf über mehrere Jahre kam es in den vergangenen Wochen sowohl an den Börsen als auch an den Kreditmärkten zu zum Teil deutlichen Korrekturen. Die Aktienbörsen zeigen sich volatil, der Dollar ist so schwach wie nie und so erreicht der Euro am Donnerstag einmal mehr ein neues Rekordhoch zur amerikanischen Währung. Das macht einige Anleger recht nervös.
Das gilt nur bedingt für Investorenlegende Jim Rogers. Der ehemalige Partner von George Soros äußert im FAZ.NET-Interview die Überzeugung von einem langfristigen Vertrauensverlust in den Dollar, einer bevorstehenden Rezession in den Vereinigten Staaten und einem Bärenmarkt an den Börsen. Längerfristig baut er aber auf einen anhaltenden Boom im Rohstoffbereich. Kein Wunder, dass er hier auch entsprechend investiert.
Die Finanzmärkte sind in den vergangenen Wochen etwas zittrig geworden. Wie beurteilen Sie die Lage?
Die Börsen sind überreif für einen Bärenmarkt - und ich fürchte, wir werden einen sehen. Dafür gibt es viele Gründe. Unter anderem befinden sich die Vereinigten Staaten auf dem besten Weg in eine Rezession. Zudem haben sich viele Anleger finanziell übernommen.
Einen Bärenmarkt - glauben Sie wirklich?
Ja, ich bin ziemlich sicher, dass wir uns schon in einem befinden.
Was halten Sie von den so genannten „Abkoppelungstheorien“, nach denen sich die europäischen oder auch die asiatischen Märkte von einer Schwäche abkoppeln könnten?
Wenn wir von Aktieninvestments reden, so stimmt das. Es ist intelligenter, an den asiatischen Märkten zu investieren. Die Staaten der Region befinden sich in einer wirtschaftlich besseren Verfassung und dürften aus diesem Grund interessantere Anlagemöglichkeiten bieten. Die Börsen der Region dürften zwar auch fallen, wenn es richtig nach unten gehen sollte. Es ist allerdings besser, „long“ in Asien zu gehen und „short“ im Westen als umgekehrt.
Die asiatischen Staaten exportieren einen großen Teil ihrer Produkte in den Westen, vor allem in die Vereinigten Staaten. Wenn nun die amerikanische Konjunktur schwach werden sollte - wird es keine negativen Auswirkungen auf Asien geben?
Keine Frage, letztlich werden sich die Effekte überall bemerkbar machen. Aber bedenken Sie: Es gibt in Asien drei Milliarden Menschen, die riesige Beträge sparen und investieren. Sie schaffen auf diese Weise eine innere Wirtschaftsdynamik und sind aus diesem Grund nicht mehr so stark wie in der Vergangenheit von den externen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen abhängig. Wir befinden uns nicht mehr im Jahre 1977, sondern im Jahr 2007.
Das klingt gut. Nehmen wir jedoch China: Ist dort die Konjunktur inzwischen nicht längst deutlich überhitzt, hat das Land nicht ein ausgeprägtes Inflationsproblem und sollte es aus diesem Grund nicht endlich seine Währung deutlicher als bisher vom Dollar abkoppeln?
Nicht nur China hat ein Inflationsproblem. Alle haben Inflationsprobleme, im Westen lügen wir uns lediglich in die Tasche. China versucht die überhitzte Wirtschaft mit aggressiven Zinserhöhungen zu dämpfen - und ich hoffe sie geht zurück. Denn ich rede nicht darüber, jetzt chinesische Aktien zu kaufen, sondern dann, wenn deren Kurse gefallen sind. Dann stellen sie eine gute Kaufgelegenheit dar.
Wenn man jetzt investieren möchte, so sollte man Rohstoffe und internationale Währungen kaufen. Das werden gute Märkte sein, was immer auch in den kommenden fünf bis zehn Jahren passieren mag.
Sind die Rohstoffmärkte inzwischen nicht ebenso überhitzt wie die chinesische Börse?
Kommt darauf an: Der Zuckerpreis befindet sich 85 Prozent unter seinem Allzeithoch, der Silberpreis 75 Prozent, der Preis für Baumwolle 60 Prozent unter dem höchsten jemals erreichten Stand - soll das überhitzt sein?
Nun, ich dachte in erster Linie an jene Märkte, die in den vergangenen Jahren zum Teil sehr gut gelaufen sind.
Ja, manche Rohstoffe sind aus verschiedenen Gründen sehr gut gelaufen. Sehr wahrscheinlich wird es zwischenzeitlich Korrekturen geben. Aber betrachten wir den Ölpreis: Der Preis für einen Barrel in Dollar liegt zwar nahe am Allzeithoch, berücksichtigt man jedoch die Inflation oder bewertet man es mit Gold, so müsste der Preis eigentlich über 100 Dollar liegen.
Ist das Ihre Positionierung?
Ja, ich setze auf Rohstoffe und internationale Währungen, dagegen bin ich bei Finanzwerten im Westen „short“ gegangen.
Haben Sie kein Vertrauen in die Bilanzen der Investmentbanken und Broker?
Nein, natürlich nicht. Sie sind voller schlechter Papiere, die in den kommenden Jahre sehr wahrscheinlich „sauer“ werden. Wenn wir von Exzessen reden, so fanden sie in den vergangenen Jahren im Finanzbereich der westlichen Welt statt. Sie haben dort 29 Jahre alte Kinder, die zehn bis 15 Millionen Euro pro Jahr verdienen. So etwas nenne ich einen Exzess. Das ist nicht normal, das muss sich ändern und das wird sich ändern.
Lassen Sie uns über die amerikanische Zentralbank reden. Werden die Zinssenkungen eine Rezession in den Vereinigten Staaten verhindern können?
Nein, sie werden die Rezession sogar noch verschlimmern. Da alle wissen, dass Zinssenkungen die Inflation beschleunigen werden, dürften und müssen die langfristigen Zinsen steigen. Gleichzeitig wird der Dollar fallen und die Rohstoffpreise weiter nach oben treiben.
Wird der Yen auch aufwerten?
Der Yen ist ein gutes Investment. Im Rahmen der sogenannten Carry Trades verkauften in der Vergangenheit viele den Yen und den Schweizer Franken. Sollten sie ihre Positionen auflösen, kann das zu einer Aufwertungsbewegung wie im Jahr 1998 führen. Generell stellen der chinesische Yuan und der Yen gegenwärtig sehr gute Investitionsmöglichkeiten dar.
Gehen sie davon aus, dass China den Wechselkurs des Yuan weiter lockern wird?
In den kommenden ein bis zwei Jahren werden wir den „free float“ der chinesischen Währung sehen. In diesem Rahmen wird sie gegen den Dollar deutlich aufwerten.
Es gibt jedoch Stimmen, die mit einem massiven Kapitalabfluss aus China rechnen, sofern das Land Kapitalkonten freigeben sollte. Könnte es nicht sein, dass aus diesem Grund der Yuan eher ab- statt aufwerten könnte?
Sicherlich würde es zu deutlichen Kapitalabflüssen kommen, da sich in China gegenwärtig Unmengen „heißen Gelder“ befinden. Sollte der Kurs des Yuan jedoch unter Druck geraten, wäre das gut. Denn ich könnte günstig mehr davon kaufen.
Sie sind „bärisch“ für den Dollar. Wo wird der Kurs ihrer Meinung nach hingehen?
Die amerikanische Währung wertet längst ab, wird jedoch noch deutlich weiter fallen. Als das britische Pfund seinen Status als Weltreservewährung verlor, ging es um 80 Prozent nach unten. Ähnliches dürfte auch dem Dollar blühen. Letztlich werden in den kommenden Jahren aufgrund der amerikanischen Geldpolitik viele das Vertrauen in den Dollar verlieren.
Quelle: http://www.faz.net/s/...71AD8DC7C93EE77AC6~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html
Wall Streeter
Jens Korte: Die Stadt, der Müll, der Dollar
von Jens Korte
Die Stadt New York greift seit dieser Woche hart durch. Wer Müll klaut, zahlt 2000 $ Strafe. Es geht dabei nicht um irgendeinen Müll, sondern um Papier, Glas und Metall.
Angesichts der hohen Rohstoffpreise lohnt sich Recycling finanziell für die Stadt wieder. Doch in den vergangenen Wochen wurden immer häufiger private Kleinlaster gesichtet, die an Recyclingtagen den Müll vor den städtischen Fahrzeugen eingesammelt haben. Die Stadt verliert Schätzungen zufolge jährlich über 150.000 $ durch den Müllklau. Von wegen keine Inflationstendenzen, wenn sich Stadt und Bürger jetzt schon um den Abfall streiten. Und durch die Zinssenkung der US-Notenbank vor gut einer Woche ist die Inflationsgefahr tendenziell gestiegen. Als Spätfolge der Zinssenkung und in Aussicht auf weitere Schritte hat der Dollar in dieser Woche mit 1,4162 $ pro Euro ein neues Rekordtief erreicht.
Kurzfristig kommt der Dollar-Verfall amerikanischen Multis wie Nike, McDonald's oder Procter & Gamble zugute. Die Unternehmen erzielen rund die Hälfte ihrer Umsätze außerhalb der USA. Das dürfte sich auch in der anstehenden Ertragssaison widerspiegeln. Doch mittelfristig ist eine schwache Währung Gift für die Volkswirtschaft und verschärft zusätzlich den Inflationsdruck. Hinzu kommt im Falle der USA ein nach wie vor gigantisches Handelsbilanzdefizit. Als Gegengewicht müssen die USA täglich über 2 Mrd. $ an ausländischem Kapital anlocken, was im Umfeld des schwachen Greenback immer schwieriger wird. Das Weiße Haus muss aufpassen, dass sich der Sog nicht weiter verstärkt.
Reiselustige Amerikaner bekommen den starken Euro jetzt schon zu spüren. Auf Internetforen werden täglich Tipps ausgetauscht, wie sich bei der Italienreise Geld sparen lässt. Aber warum überhaupt in die Ferne schweifen? Wo Flugreisen doch ohnehin immer unangenehmer werden. Bereits im vergangenen Jahr war fast jeder vierte Flug an den US-Flughäfen verspätet. In den ersten sieben Monaten dieses Jahres wurde fast jeder dritte Flug verlegt, verzögert oder ganz abgesagt. Für Europäer wird ein Urlaub in New York hingegen immer billiger. Touristen seien aber gewarnt: Der Griff in die Recyclingtonne kann teuer werden.
Jens Korte schreibt als Wall-Street-Korrespondent für die FTD. www.ftd.de
Blood Sweat and Tears
[Text in eckigen Klammern von mir ergänzt, A.L.]
Lyric:
What goes up must come down
Spinning Wheel got to go 'round
Talkin' 'bout your troubles
it's a cryin sin [don't worry, Big Ben has put protection]
Ride a painted pony [if you can't afford a Ford]
let your spinning wheel spin
You got no money
and you got no home [foreclosure kick-out?]
Spinning Wheel
all alone
Talkin 'bout your troubles and you
never learn [Why? Stocks ALWAYS go up in the long run]
Ride a painted pony [Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz?]
let your spinning wheel turn.
Give your fine directing sign
on the straight and narrow highway
Would you mind a reflecting sign
Just let it shine within your mind
And show you the colors that are real [in Virtual Reality, all stuff shines!]
Someone is waiting just for you
Spinning Wheel spinning true
Drop all your troubles on the riverside [at least, there ARE troubles...]
Catch a painted pony [you OWNED it in the last refrain!]
let the spinning wheel fly
You got no money you got no home [repeat ad nauseam!]
Spinning Wheel all alone
Talkin 'bout your troubles and you
you never learn
Ride a painted pony
let your spinning wheel turn.
;0)
China ist das Land auf das die größten demografischen Probleme zukommen. Es ist nicht mehr lange hin, dann wird es total vergreist sein. Das wird den Chinesen langsam bewusst und deshalb Sparen sie für das Alter auf "Teufel komm raus". Es wird nicht nur wie wahnsinnig an der Börse spekuliert, nein es werden auch massenweise Lebens- und Rentenversicherungen abgeschlossen. Die müssen dann wieder an die Börse. Es herrscht dort ebenso wie bei uns das Vorurteil, dass man gesellschaftlich fürs Alter sparen könnte. Dabei wären die Alten nur zu ernähren wenn die Infrastruktur gut in Schuss und das Wirtschaftsleben hoch rationalisiert wäre. Zusätzlich brauch es noch sowas wie soziale Verantwortung um die Gesellschaft dementsprechend zu organisieren. All dieses fehlt in China und so bleibt die vergreisende Sippe auf sich selbst gestellt und glaubt sich mit aufgeblasenen Börsen retten zu können. Sie werden hungern müssen! Der Nachbar Indien entwickelt sich wesentlich nachhaltiger und wird dann eventuell Lebensmittelpakete rüber schicken.
http://www.treasure-coast.us/weeklyupdate09-23-07
Optionen
| Boardmail an "obgicou" |
Wertpapier: S&P 500 |
Date: 09.27.07
Time: 08:20pm
Market Shrugs Off Worst Housing News in Years
Greetings Shark Investors:
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, market players ignored another day of mixed economic news and closed the major indices with respectable gains during Thursday’s trading session. Despite a downward revision in second quarter GDP, weekly jobless claims fell to the lowest level since this past May, and as we headed towards the opening bell, index futures pointed towards a gap higher at the open.
Although the market did indeed open higher, the early strength was met with immediate selling, but it wasn’t long before the dip buyers stepped in to take the indices off their early lows, ignoring data that showed that new home sales dropped to their worst levels in about seven years in the process. The reminder of the day saw choppy action, but even though the gains on the day weren’t all that noteworthy, breadth was solid throughout the session and the only two major sectors to close in the red were utilities and consumer discretionary. Moreover, traders spent yet another day chasing recent momentum favorites including AAPL, BIDU, GRMN and RIMM as well as anything China-related.
As we pointed out in Wednesday’s newsletter, it seems as if we’re back to the point where investors take bad news as a sign that the Fed will cut interest rates further this year, but see positive news that any economic slowdown we may experience will not be all that bad. However, we have yet to hear any compelling bullish argument why this market is acting as well as it has been since the Fed cut interest rates last week.
Still, the fact remains that traders have been falling over themselves to chase momentum, and even though we are having some real problems understanding how the major indices can be so close to recent highs when there are so many negatives out there, there’s no rule saying that we can’t jump in and join the fray. However, that doesn’t mean that we have to blindly accept the notion that this market will never go down again.
A major point that market gurus never seem to appreciate is the fact that successful investing has nothing to do with having strong opinions about where the market is headed. The key is to keep an open mind and be ready to act as conditions change. Right now, the bulls are in control of this action, and they deserve our respect. Still, that by no means requires us to ignore the negatives and be mentally prepared to act when they begin to matter.
Let’s go to the charts.
The Nasdaq edged higher during today’s session on light volume. We saw a big open once again, but were unable to build upon that strength as the day progressed. We limped into the close, and the index is beginning to look tired. Technology names saw a mixed bag of action, with a slightly positive bias to the upside. The action continues to be strong, but the index has become extended. Prudent entry points are drying up, and will be watching to see how the index responds on a dip.
The S&P 500 inched higher during today’s trade on light volume. The index saw a big open, but wasn’t really able to catch the momentum as the day progressed. Technically, the index remains in great shape, as it’s holding the majority of its recent gains and is trying to inch its way higher. That said, many charts are in need of some consolidation to allow better entry points. We took some profits today, and will be watching closely how the market responds to a pullback.
The Russell 2000 meandered higher today, as the index continues to stabilize after seeing some pressure earlier this week. The index is basing out nicely, and is setting up for further upside. Small-CapVille continues to offer up some short-term trades, and the action remains solid for now. We will be watching for the bulls to turn the index up through the 825 level on the RUT for further upside.
Angehängte Grafik:
9.jpg (verkleinert auf 77%)
9.jpg (verkleinert auf 77%)
Die weltweite Finanzkrise hat die deutsche Investmentbranche erreicht: Publikumsfonds verzeichneten im August einen erheblichen Mittelabfluss von 8,5 Milliarden Euro. Betroffen sind vor allem Geldmarktfonds, aber auch Aktien- und Rentenfonds.
ANZEIGE
Frankfurt am Main - Insgesamt sind aus der deutschen Investmentbranche im August per Saldo 8,1 Milliarden Euro abgeflossen. Dabei verbuchten Publikumsfonds einen Netto-Abfluss von 8,5 Milliarden Euro, teilte der Bundesverband Investment und Asset Management (BVI) mit. Spezialfonds verzeichneten dagegen Mittelzuflüsse von 363,1 Millionen Euro.
Merkliche Mittelabflüsse sind den Angaben zufolge vor allem bei Geldmarktfonds, aber auch bei Aktien- und Rentenfonds aufgetreten. Geldmarktfonds verloren demnach 4,2 Milliarden Euro an Mitteln, während Aktienfonds 3,6 Milliarden Euro und Rentenfonds 3,0 Milliarden Euro einbüßten. Hedge-Fonds verloren 127,4 Millionen Euro. Als Grund nannte der BVI unter anderem die weltweite Finanzkrise und die damit verbundene Verunsicherung der Anleger.
Besser entwickelten sich dagegen Mischfonds. Sie kamen auf Zuflüsse von 1,7 Milliarden Euro. Sonstige Wertpapierfonds legten um 644,9 Millionen Euro zu und Wertgesicherte Fonds um 245,1 Millionen Euro.
Insgesamt stehen die Fondsgesellschaften immer noch besser da als vor einem Jahr. Ende August hatten sie 1,424 Billionen Euro in Deutschland verwaltet. Zum Vorjahr erhöhte sich der Gesamtvermögen damit um rund neun Prozent.
wal/dpa-AFX
aus dem wöchentlichen MBA--Bericht vom Mittwoch:
The seasonally adjusted Refinance Index increased 3.3 percent to 2026.5 from 1962.0 the previous week and the seasonally adjusted Purchase Index decreased 7.3 percent to 418.8 from 452.0 one week earlier. On an unadjusted basis, the Purchase Index decreased 8.3 percent to 402.3 from 438.9 the previous week. The seasonally adjusted Conventional Index decreased 3.2 percent to 937.2 from 968.2 the previous week, and the seasonally adjusted Government Index increased 0.6 percent to 182.3 from 181.2 the previous week.
http://www.mortgagebankers.org/NewsandMedia/PressCenter/57128.htm
Kaum noch Hauskäufe, aber immer mehr Refinanzierungen.
Zwangsversteigerungen werden weiter zunehmen.
Optionen
| Boardmail an "obgicou" |
Wertpapier: S&P 500 |
Optionen
| Boardmail an "NavigatorC" |
Wertpapier: S&P 500 |
Angehängte Grafik:
image_fmbg_0_40-1188740376.jpg
image_fmbg_0_40-1188740376.jpg
Stock futures slip, Greenspan more pessimistic on economy
LONDON (MarketWatch) -- U.S. stock futures lost ground Friday ahead of a raft of data and speeches from Federal Reserve members, and after former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan warned the chances of a U.S. recession have increased.
Greenspan said in an interview with the BBC's Today radio program that the chance of a recession is still less than 50-50, though he's becoming increasingly pessimistic over the world economy.
S&P 500 futures fell 3.60 points at 1,541.00 and Nasdaq 100 futures lost 8.25 points at 2,113.50. Dow industrial futures slipped 36 points.
U.S. stocks closed higher Thursday as investors shrugged off weak data on the housing market and focused on better-than-expected jobless figures. The Dow Industrial Average advanced 34.8 points and the S&P 500 climbed 5.96 points.
There's a slew of economic data due out Friday, including readings on personal income, consumer spending, the Chicago purchasing managers' index and a poll on consumer sentiment.
Economists polled by MarketWatch expect August consumer spending growth to hold steady at 0.4% with personal income growth seen at 0.4% from 0.5%.
It's also set to be a busy day for Federal Reserve speakers, with speeches from Atlanta Federal Reserve President Dennis Lockhart and St. Louis Federal Reserve President William Poole among the highlights.
The dollar held close to Thursday's low of $1.4188 against the euro, changing hands at $1.4179 in European trading.
Crude oil dipped slightly, but remained comfortably above $82 a barrel. The November light crude contract lost 22 cents at $82.66 a barrel.
Among companies in focus, consulting firm Accenture (ACN) said its fourth-quarter profit fell 8.6% to $316.8 million, or 50 cents a share, but still came in ahead of analyst forecasts for earnings of 48 cents a share.
Shares in Alcatel-Lucent (ALU) added 6.4% in European trading after a report that its board has given CEO Patricia Russo one month to devise an emergency restructuring plan after the telecommunications-equipment giant issued its third profit warning under her leadership earlier this month. See full story.
In broker news, Deutsche Bank upgraded Luminent Mortgage (LUM) to hold from sell, saying it believes the company's portfolio is beginning to stabilize.
European shares slipped, with the U.K.'s FTSE 100 index the biggest decliner, losing 0.5% after amid sharp falls for sugar producer Tate & Lyle after a profit warning. Asian indexes continued their rally; Hong Kong, Singapore, Shanghai all traded sharply higher. See global markets page.
Optionen
| Boardmail an "skunk.works" |
Wertpapier: S&P 500 |
Die Logik: Amerika schwächelt zwar, ist aber immer noch der Nabel der Welt. Daran ändern auch Zeitungsartikel nichts, die London als wichtigste Finanzmetropole der Welt sehen. Aber möglicherweise zeigt sich bald, dass die Hoffnungen auf US-Notenbankchef Ben Bernanke übertrieben sind. Denn erstens sind schlechte Nachrichten schlechte Nachrichten. Bernanke reagiert ja nur, wenn er sich um die US-Konjunktur sorgt. Und auf Dauer wird sich die Börse nicht von der Konjunktur lösen können. Eigentlich läuft sie ihr, klassischerweise, sogar voraus. Davon ist noch nicht viel zu spüren. Man kann das als gutes Zeichen für die Konjunktur sehen - oder eher als vorübergehende Kursblase am Aktienmarkt, die irgendwann rasch die Luft verliert, bis die Kurse eher mit der Richtung der US-Wirtschaft zusammenpassen.
Ein anderer Punkt: Für Bernanke werden die Handlungsspielräume enger. Je weiter er mit den Zinsen heruntergeht, desto größer werden die Inflationsängste, und damit steigen die langfristigen Zinsen statt zu sinken. Bernanke ist also an einem Punkt, wo er sich fragen muss, ob seine Politik nicht kontraproduktiv wird. Eine Zinssenkung wird es wahrscheinlich trotzdem noch geben in den USA. Aber insgesamt sollten Anleger nicht allzu blind darauf vertrauen, dass Ben ihnen den .... nun ihnen den Depotstand rettet.
Quelle: http://www.handelsblatt.com/News/Boerse/...hoffnung-auf-bernanke.html
*LOCKHART SAYS FED CAN'T SUBORDINATE 'GENERAL WELFARE' TO RISK OF MORAL HAZARD
Optionen
| Boardmail an "obgicou" |
Wertpapier: S&P 500 |
Sep 27th 2007
From The Economist print edition
Was the script for the recent turmoil written in 1998, 1990, or is it new?
LIKE generals condemned to fight the last war, investors seem fated to hark back to the last financial crisis. When markets plunged on “Black Monday” in October 1987, people feared a repeat of the Wall Street crash of 1929. Central banks cut interest rates in part because they wanted to avoid a re-run of the 1930s' depression.
But the world has suffered a lot of financial crises and it is not always clear which one to use as a benchmark. Take the central banks' responses to the recent problems in the credit markets. Do they suggest that we are looking at a repeat of 1998, when Long-Term Capital Management, a hedge fund, wobbled, or at 1990, when there was a financial crisis at savings-and-loans banks, then the main providers of American mortgages?
As David Bowers of Absolute Strategy Research points out, it makes an enormous difference which crisis (if either) is being replayed. In 1998 rate cuts quickly restored the animal spirits of investors and the dotcom bubble followed. If that pattern is to be repeated, investors should be piling into growth-sensitive sectors like emerging markets and commodities.
But in 1990 several rate cuts failed to stop the American economy from sliding into recession. That may be what happens once again now, especially as most observers believe it takes 12-18 months for changes in interest rates to have much economic effect. Figures released on September 25th showed that the inventory of unsold American homes is at its highest level since 1989. If we are following the 1990 script, then investors should be opting for the safety of Treasury bonds.
The strength of the world's stockmarkets since the Federal Reserve cut rates on September 18th indicates that most investors are, to misquote Prince, “partying like it's 1998”.
[ Interessant in diesem Zusammenhang der Originaltext...
They say two thousand zero, zero, party over,
Oops, out of time!
So tonight I'm gonna party like it's 1999! w.]
The MSCI emerging-markets index reached a record high on September 24th, and the best-performing industries in share-price terms over the past month have been economically sensitive ones, such as mining and chemicals.
Ajay Kapur of the hedge fund First Horse Capital says that America's stockmarket normally returns 7.2% over the six months after the first rate cut in the cycle, even in periods when the economy is slipping into recession. When a downturn is avoided, the average six-monthly gain is 20.1%. Mr Kapur says the world is dominated by “fiat currency democracies” in which governments and central banks tend to give in to popular pressure and “print money” to avoid hard times. He believes the recent actions of the Fed, the European Central Bank and the Bank of England endorse his view.
Those bears who believe the drama is more likely to resemble 1990 than 1998 base their case on what they think are excessive levels of consumer debt. Clearly, many of them were far too early in predicting a debt-driven crisis; Peter Warburton's jeremiad “Debt and Delusion”, for example, was published back in 1999.
But they have a point now. As economies become more sophisticated, it may make sense for consumers to take on more debt as a means of smoothing their consumption over their lifetimes. Indeed, this should add to economic stability. Ironically, however, greater stability only encourages consumers to take on more debt since they are less fearful of losing their jobs in recessions.
Consumer debt cannot keep growing faster than income forever. That evil day has been delayed, over the past 20 years, by the downward trend in interest rates. But the bears think the crunch has now arrived, as it did in Japan in the 1990s.
The world may not have to wait too long to see whether they are right. As David Rosenberg, an economist at Merrill Lynch, recalls, the stockmarket rallied in response to a half-percentage-point rate cut in early January 2001. But by the time the Fed lowered rates again at the end of that month, its move was seen by investors as a sign of desperation.
Three months ago Buttonwood pointed to three portents that would suggest investors should prepare for the worst. One of those, higher credit spreads, has indeed appeared. Another was a resurgence of inflation. Although that looks unlikely in the short term, especially if economies weaken, the long-term chances of higher inflation must surely have gone up. Gold is at its highest level since it last peaked in 1980.
The final sign was a burst of yen strength (which would indicate an unwinding of speculative bets). The yen has risen against the dollar since June but there has been no sharp lurch higher; perhaps because the Japanese economy is itself weak. But if the gloomsters are to be proven right, we must surely see some turmoil in the currency markets first.
NO COUNTRY in history has sustained such a blistering rate of growth over three decades as China. Its economy grew by a staggering 11.9% in the year to the second quarter. Since 1978 it has grown by an average of almost 10% a year—more than Japan or the Asian tigers achieved over similar periods when their economies took off. But eventually every sprinter trips. Japan's growth averaged 9.5% in the two decades to 1970, but slowed to 4.7% in the 1970s and to only 1% by the 1990s.
As China has grown, it has come to matter much more to the rest of the world. For the first time it is now contributing more to global GDP growth (measured at market exchange rates) than the United States is. Yet, even as growth forecasts for China are being revised upwards, America is looking at a downturn caused by falling house prices, which threaten to clobber consumer spending. The fate of the world economy now hinges not just on America, but also on China's economic fitness continuing over at least the next two years. So what immediate threats does China face? The biggest worry is that the economy is overheating and inflation surging out of control. In August consumer-price inflation jumped to 6.5%, up from 1.3% a year earlier and its highest for more than a decade. If China slams on the brakes, its economy could suffer a hard landing, as happened after past episodes of inflation.
But inflation is nowhere near previous danger levels in 1988 and 1994, when it soared above 25% (see chart 1).
Moreover, the leap in inflation does not seem to be a symptom of overheating caused by excess demand, as it was in the past. It is due entirely to the rise in food prices caused by supply-side problems. Excluding food, inflation is only 0.9%. This does not mean that food is unimportant: it accounts for one-third of the inflation basket, and rising prices could trigger social unrest. But it is not something that China's central bank can easily fix by raising interest rates. The bank has raised interest rates five times this year, but they still remain low relative to the country's growth rate.Growing public concerns over inflation recently prompted Beijing to introduce a freeze until the end of 2007 on a wide range of government-controlled prices, such as oil, electricity and water. A more effective way to curb inflation would be to allow the Chinese currency to rise faster. This would reduce import prices of food and raw materials and also curb the build-up of liquidity as a result of rising foreign-exchange inflows.
Unless checked, excessive monetary growth combined with over-rapid GDP growth could eventually lead to more general inflationary pressures. In its latest “China Quarterly Update”, the World Bank says that in the first half of 2007 China grew faster than its potential growth rate (currently estimated at around 10.5%) for the first time in a decade (see chart 2).
However, excess demand is tiny compared with previous phases of overheating so the risk of soaring inflation causing a hard landing in the near future is remote.Bubble trouble
A second much-talked-about threat is the bursting of China's stockmarket bubble. Share prices have risen by 400% in just over two years, and average price-earnings ratios based on historic profits are around 50 (based on forecast 2008 profits they are a still-racy 30). Even though almost everyone reckons this is a bubble, history suggests that a bust is not imminent and that share prices could continue to rise for a lot longer: both Japan's Nikkei and America's NASDAQ saw p-e ratios well above 100 at their peaks.
Even if share prices did tumble this year, the impact on the economy would probably be relatively modest. The total value of tradable shares—that is, excluding those held by the government—is only 35% of GDP compared with 180% in America at its peak in 2000. Equities account for less than 20% of Chinese households' total financial assets, compared with half in America, so price swings have less impact on spending. When Chinese share prices collapsed by 55% from 2001 to 2005, GDP growth remained robust. Over the past year there has been little sign that people are saving less and spending their capital gains, so a slump in share prices should not have much impact either.
Share prices can also affect the cost of capital. But only a small proportion of Chinese companies are listed on the stock exchange and those that are rely mainly on internal finance. Only 10% of total financing for investment this year has come from equities. A more serious problem is that because firms have invested in other companies' stocks, a slump in share prices could directly hurt their profits and hence their investment. According to a study by Morgan Stanley, one-third of listed companies' profits in the first half of 2007 came from share-price gains and other investment income. If share prices sink, so will profits, which would make shares look even more overvalued.
Some analysts also worry that a sharp plunge in equity prices could seriously hurt banks' balance sheets, causing them to squeeze their lending. Chinese banks are officially not allowed to lend to investors to buy shares, but anecdotal evidence suggests that households and firms have taken out loans disguised as mortgages to buy shares. If so, the effect of the bubble bursting could be larger than the direct impact on consumers' wealth—especially if, as seems more likely, the bubble continues to swell for another couple of years before it finally bursts.
In many ways China today looks ominously similar to Japan before its bubble burst at the start of the 1990s, resulting in a decade of stagnation. Like Japan, China has high rates of saving and investment, low real interest rates, soaring asset prices, a big current-account surplus and upward pressure on its currency. After the Plaza accord between the big industrial countries in 1985, the Japanese yen rose by 80% against the dollar in three years.
Many in China have concluded that the blame for Japan's economic malaise in the 1990s lay largely with the appreciation of the yen. Beijing has therefore allowed the yuan to rise by only 10% since July 2005. But Japan's real mistake was its loose monetary policy to offset the impact of the rising yen—which further inflated the bubble—and then its failure to ease policy once the bust had happened. By holding down the value of the yuan and allowing a consequent build-up of excess liquidity, China risks repeating the same error.
However, Paul Cavey, a China economist at Macquarie Securities, suggests that China may have more in common with Taiwan in the 1980s than with Japan. Taiwan's bubble was even bigger, with share prices rocketing by 1,800% between 1985 and 1990. In Japan, reserve accumulation did not play a big role in the bubble. By contrast, the foreign-exchange inflows into Taiwan were greater in relation to its GDP than those seen recently in China. Taiwan, like Japan, saw a big rise in its exchange rate, by 60% in the four years to 1989.
In 1990-91 the Taipei stockmarket slumped by 75%, even more than the Tokyo market did. But Taiwan's growth remained fairly strong because policy was eased much sooner than it was in Japan. In other words, contrary to Beijing's fears, a big exchange-rate rise does not inevitably lead to economic depression.
The other big difference between China and Japan in the late 1980s is that Japan had a serious property bubble against which banks had lent heavily. Although a house-price crash would have much nastier consequences for China's economy than a share-price crash, because 80% of China's urban households now own their home, there is no evidence of a nationwide housing bubble. Average house prices across China are rising at an annual rate of 8%, with double-digit gains in some cities, such as Shenzhen and Beijing.
In a developed economy such increases might seem a little bubbly, but not in one in which nominal GDP is growing at an annual pace of 15%. The ratio of house prices to average income has fallen by 25% in China since 1999. In contrast, at their peak last year American house prices had risen by 45% relative to incomes. A collapse in house prices therefore seems unlikely in China.
If America sneezes
If neither a surge in inflation nor a bust in asset prices seem likely to derail China's economy over the next year or two, what about a recession in America? Exports account for over 40% of China's GDP, so some economists predict that a fall in exports as a result of a downturn in America would create massive excess capacity and a sharp fall in profits and investment—the making of a nasty hard landing. But the popular notion that China is dependent on export-led growth is a myth; domestic demand is much more important. This year the increase in China's net exports (ie, less imports) is likely to account for about one quarter of its growth—a record amount. But even without this external boost, GDP growth would still have been a respectable 9%.
During America's 2001 recession, China's export growth fell by 25 percentage points, but imports also slowed sharply, so GDP growth (as officially reported) remained strong. Since then, the share of its exports to America has shrunk; the European Union and other emerging economies are now more important markets. In the three months to August, Chinese exports to America increased by 14% compared with a year earlier, whereas those to the EU grew by 40%.
America's slowdown so far largely reflects a collapse in house-building, but if consumers cut their spending, the impact on Chinese exports would be harsher. The World Bank estimates that if American consumption falls by the equivalent of 1% of GDP, this could knock 0.2-0.5 percentage points off China's GDP growth, depending on how much the Federal Reserve does to cushion the downturn.
A recession in America would reduce China's growth, but since Beijing's policy-makers are fretting that the economy is starting to overheat, weaker exports and hence slower GDP growth might be a good thing. Not only would it reduce the risk of inflation, but it would also help to trim China's embarrassing trade surplus.
If a fall in exports threatens to slow growth by more than desired, the government's strong fiscal position means that it has plenty of room to boost domestic demand by spending more on infrastructure, education or health. The budget was in small deficit in 2006, but may now be in surplus—even excluding the large surpluses of state-owned enterprises. China's public-sector debt is only 18% of GDP, much lower than the 75% average in developed economies, giving the government ample room for a fiscal stimulus.
In the short term, therefore, an American downturn is more likely to cause sniffles in China than a heavy cold. Indeed, an American recession might be a blessing in disguise to China: if weaker exports forced the government to do more to boost domestic demand it would help to rebalance the economy and make growth more sustainable in the long run.
The bigger danger is that an American recession would inflame America's increasingly protectionist mood and make trade sanctions against China more likely. In an election year, politicians will need a scapegoat. But import barriers would do more harm to America's economy than China's. If China was forced to depend less on exports and more on consumption it would gain in the long run.
Running out of fuel?
In recent months there has been much talk about a new threat. China, it is claimed, is running short of cheap labour—the main source of its extraordinary growth. This is nonsense. It is true that average wages have risen by around 15% over the past year, but labour productivity in manufacturing has risen even faster. Indeed, wages have been rising at double-digit rates for a decade with no harmful impact on growth, because higher labour productivity has actually reduced wage costs (see chart 3).
There are localised skill shortages, but it is hard to believe that China's labour surplus is exhausted when almost 60% of the population still lives in rural areas. The wide income gap between rural and urban areas will continue to attract workers from farms to factories.In any case, it is not true that China's growth has been based primarily on cheap labour. Over the past decade, the increase in the labour force has contributed an average of only 1% a year, or one-tenth of its GDP growth. It is true that the population of working age will peak by 2015 and then start to shrink. But an analysis by the World Bank argues that China is unlikely to face a labour shortage for many years. The decline in the working-age population can be offset by making it easier for surplus labour to migrate into cities.
One thing China does not seem short of is capital investment. Indeed, some economists have long predicted that overinvestment as a result of an artificially cheap cost of capital will lead to China's downfall. Sooner or later, it is argued, overcapacity will lead to a plunge in capital spending, bringing the economy crashing to earth.
According to government figures, China's investment amounts to over 45% of GDP and is growing at 25% a year. But many economists reckon that is grossly overstated. For example, land purchases are wrongly counted as new investment when they are really just a transfer of ownership. If China were massively overinvesting, one would expect the return on capital to be falling. Instead, corporate profit margins have been rising. Mr Cavey estimates that average capacity utilisation, measured by the ratio of sales to assets, has been rising not falling—in strong contrast to Japan during its 1980s bubble.
Worries about rising excess capacity feed another long-standing concern that China's banks, groaning under the weight of non-performing loans, are heading for a crisis. Official figures show that non-performing loans had fallen to 7% of all loans early this year from almost 30% in 2001. But independent analysts suggest the true figure may be closer to 20% (down from over 50% at its peak). The fear is that an economic downturn and falling profits could lead to a surge in new bad loans.
China's fragile and inefficient banking system is certainly a drag on its economy, but the risk that a banking crisis could bring down the economy seems small. China has huge foreign-exchange reserves available to protect its banking system. Capital controls limit capital flight. And the government, unlike Japan's in the 1990s, has plenty of money if necessary to write off bad loans.
The list of potential threats to China's economy is long and some might shave a couple of percentage points off its growth rate (leaving it close to 10%). But none seems likely by itself to cause the economy to collapse in the next two years—ie, during the time when America's economy is likely to stumble. But what if several blows land at the same time? For example, an American recession breeds greater protectionism, global financial turmoil unnerves Chinese stockmarket investors, share prices collapse and a downturn creates social unrest. The overall impact on the economy would then be more painful.
China's best insurance against this is that its budget finances are in better shape than those of any other big economy. China's leaders are acutely aware of the risks of social unrest and they will be willing and able to try to spend their way out of trouble. That makes a sharp downturn in China less likely in the near future. But what about farther ahead?
China's economic success has been based on the essential ingredients of growth: high savings, openness to trade, good education and strong productivity growth. This means its long-term prospects remain strong, although its trend growth rate will inevitably slow as its economy matures and its labour force starts to shrink.
Tao Wang, Bank of America's economist in Beijing, says she is optimistic about China's economy in the short term and the long term, but thinks the medium term looks risky. There is a high chance of a sharp slowdown sometime within the next ten years. The problem with years of rapid growth is that it hides problems that are then painfully exposed when times are hard. But for the time being, the chances are that China can keep sprinting even if America takes to its sick bed. That is good news for the world.
Es sieht jedenfalls so aus, als würde Bernanke die Greenspan'sche "inflationäre Blasen-Wirtschaft" bruchlos weiterführen wollen. Vielleicht bleibt auch gar keine andere Wahl mehr, als die Blase bis zum Platzen aufzupumpen, da eine "geordnete Rückabwicklung" schon nicht mehr möglich ist. Der "Point of no return" ist bereits überschritten. Dabei gelingt den US-Statistikern zugleich das Kunststück, die "Kern-Inflation" auf unter 2 % schönzurechnen (unten).
Is Goldilocks Back?
By Tony Crescenzi
Street.com Contributor
9/28/2007 9:57 AM EDT
A bit of Goldilocks gleans in today's economic news, with growth indicators strong and inflation low. The problem is that bears returned to their cottage in August and Goldilocks received a bit of a shock.
Today's data were very favorable, with personal income growth posting a strong 6.6% year-over-year gain, personal spending advancing at its fastest inflation-adjusted pace since July 2005, and the personal consumption deflator advancing just 0.1% and holding within the Federal Reserve's comfort zone on a year-over-year basis. Figures such as these are consistent with conditions that tend to produce lasting economic expansion, but whether the situation has changed is the question of the day.
To understand how consumers have held up against headwinds from increased energy costs and the weak housing market, look no further than to data on personal income. The 6.6% year-over-year income gain amounts to $750 billion, a tally more than large enough to handle both the rise in energy costs and mortgage resets. The fact that personal spending was resilient during the period is proof enough, but here's some of the math.
In the GDP data, personal spending on gasoline, fuel oil, and other energy costs increased only about $10 billion over the year ended June, and personal spending on electricity and gas increased $17 billion. These are paltry sums when put against the increase in energy costs.
As for mortgage resets, $1 trillion of resets amounts to about $20 billion to $25 billion in increased interest expenditures (before consideration of the impact of taxes, which lowers the net expense), also a small sum relative to income growth. There are other issues to consider when we discuss housing, of course, but some of these, such as the contraction in construction jobs, are captured in the income data. Wealth effects will not be captured, of course.
As for the inflation data, the small 0.1% monthly gain in the PCE core deflator brought its year-over-year gain to just 1.8% from 1.9% in July, its lowest level since February 2004 and within the Fed's comfort zone for an inflation rate of no higher than 2%. It is difficult to reconcile the inflation news with what many of us see as a different inflation picture, but the market is not yet at a point of tossing these data for their inaccuracies.
Whether the Goldilocks mix of strong growth and low inflation lasts is more debatable than normal, as there are factors pulling both growth and inflation in two directions. It is a situation in flux, and we, like the Fed, need to focus on the "timeliest indicators" for clues.
Hab meine SP-500 Shorts von gestern (auf SPY) vor einer Stunde mit Gewinn gecovert.