Mustiamen en los mercados tras el intento de “impeachment” para quitarse de en medio a Trump por sus conversaciones con los rusos… De coña ya que no sé si hay materia allí y tienen los republicanos las dos cámaras a su favor. Una cosa es que se le tenga ganas a Trump por parte de los medios, pero otra es que tiene mucho apoyo de sus votantes republicanos todavía. Y mientras, los rusos se frotan las manos…
JP Morgan argumenta:
Trump - impeachment very, very unlikely and regardless it wouldn't be positive. There is a lot of talk about Trump impeachment and how a President Pence could be a positive. It is way, way too early to begin having the impeachment conversation. Impeachment is much more a political (instead of a legal) process and w/the GOP controlling both chambers and Trump's popularity in the party being (relatively) healthy the political dynamics don't signal impeachment. That could change in Jan '19 assuming Republicans lose either the House or Senate in Nov ’18 but if that happens the whole pro-growth agenda would grind to a halt. The impeachment bar is very, very high (no president ever has been removed from office as a result of impeachment; two had articles of impeachment brought up in the House before being acquitted in the Senate; one resigned before going through the process). The daily scandals obviously don’t help Trump’s political capital but market expectations for legislative action are already very low.
El próximo miércoles declara el echado director del FBI, que algo dirá y no será muy bueno. Así que las turbulencias se quedarán unos días… Quizás Trump debería callarse algo más y dejar a Twitter en silencio.
Otra vez, otro motivo inesperado para hacer caja. El VIX, el medidor de riesgo que coqueteó con los mínimos demasiado tiempo, se dispara. El dólar hundido. ¿Se podrá echar tan fácilmente a un POTUS? Lo dudo…
El problema clave es que las valoraciones de las bolsas occidentales eran de locos. Ya te lo he contado por activa y por pasiva. Ahora el detonante es una mamaruchez total, pero le van a seguir dando candela a los mercados, hasta que alguien quiera volver a poner dinero, que será a otros niveles más bajos…
Y el segundo problema es que viven sus economías un estancamiento secular, del que no se ven medidas apropiadas para salir del mismo, con unos bancos centrales agotados, con un repunte inflacionista grave, y con un cierto descontrol de precios demasiado altos de todos los activos, desde acciones, a bonos e inmuebles…, y la FED subiendo tipos de nuevo en junio.
There's no Plan B for a state-corporate form of central-planning capitalism that is no longer functioning.
If there is one reality that is denied or obscured by the Status Quo, it is that the economy no longer works as it did in the past. This is the fundamental economic context of our current slide into political-social disintegration.
The Status Quo narrative is: the policies that worked for the past 70 years are still working today. Boiled down to its Keynesian state-corporate essence, the Status Quo economic narrative is simple:
All we need to do to escape a "soft patch" (recession) is for governments to borrow and spend more money to temporarily boost incomes and demand until the private sector gets back on its feet and starts borrowing and spending more.
To help the private sector, central banks lower interest rates so it's cheaper to borrow and spend.
As soon as the private-sector borrowing and spending rises, we can raise interest rates and trim state fiscal stimulus (i.e. governments borrowing and spending trillions more than they did before the recession).
But the inconvenient reality is these Keynesian policies no longer work. Fiscal stimulus (governments borrowing and spending trillions more than they did before the recession) has continued for a decade--or in Japan's case, almost three decades.
The Keynesian gods have failed, but the worshippers of these false idols have no other form of black magic to turn to.
Why is fiscal stimulus now a permanent policy? The answer is uncomfortable: if fiscal stimulus is withdrawn (or even trimmed), the economy immediately goes into a self-reinforcing contraction.
As for near-zero interest rates: after 10 years of supposed "recovery," central banks are terrified of pushing rates higher by quarter-point baby-steps, for the same reason that fiscal stimulus cannot be withdrawn: raising interest rates to historic norms would immediately send the economy into contraction.
So "emergency" temporary measures are now permanent life-support, lest the comatose patient expire once life support is removed. If unprecedented "emergency" measures are now permanent props required to keep stagnation from imploding into depression, then what policies are left to deal with the next (inevitable) downturn?
The problem with zero-interest rate policy (ZIRP) and fiscal stimulus is neither are remotely connected to real wealth creation, i.e. increased productivity.Printing /borrowing more money into existence does not create wealth; all the new money only increases future claims on existing productive assets.
Real wealth is generated by increasing the output of goods and services with fewer assets, less energy and less labor.
Corporations have foregone investment in favor of stock buy-backs. Much of the borrowed money has gone into unproductive housing and other asset bubbles.
As Gail Tverberg has explained, there is a collar on oil prices: if they're too low, producers lose money and shut down higher-cost wells, crimping supply; if they're too high, low and moderate-income households can no longer support the consumption the economy needs to keep expanding: Why We Should Be Concerned About Low Oil Prices (Our Finite World).
Cheap, abundant energy is required for expansion of borrowing, consumption and payrolls; as energy costs notch up, wages and consumption stagnate.
In effect, the conventional state/central bank policies reduce down to one simple directive: borrow from the future until "organic" (i.e. not dependent on state stimulus, self-sustaining) growth of the private sector returns.
But since productivity and average wages have declined, self-sustaining expansion is no longer the norm. Instead, every sector is borrowing from the future just to maintain the illusion of solvency and expansion. Corporations, states, central banks and households are all living off money borrowed from future earnings and taxes, or spending the gains from unsustainable asset bubbles.
The economy no longer works, and the Status Quo has no Plan B. All the Status Quo has is policies that no longer work: lowering interest rates (10 years and counting), fiscal stimulus (10 years and counting) and monetary easing/stimulus (10 years and counting).
We sense the economy is no longer working as it did in the past, but we're too terrified to even admit this. Since there's no conventional fix, our "leadership" acts as if everything is just fine, and authorities "adjust" measures of stagnation to appear healthy to support the illusion of solvency and expansion.
Productivity: stagnating, declining:
Personal income: stagnating, declining:
Federal debt (borrow and spend from future taxpayers)--through the roof:
Private-sector bank credit--through the roof:
Wealth inequality--through the roof:
There's no Plan B for a state-corporate form of central-planning capitalism that is no longer functioning. The only policies available are the "emergency" ones that are now permanent life-support systems of our failed global economies.
Abrazos,
PD1: La subida acumulada del IBEX era de locos. Si cogemos el IBEX TR (IBEX Total Return, el que incluye dividendos) y lo comparamos con el DAX (que es lo que se puede comparar al hacerlos semejantes), tenemos que ambos mercados se habían movido al alimón, cuando lo que hay dentro del IBEX es mierdecilla si lo enfrentamos a los conglomerados alemanes, o si comparamos la situación macro de Alemania, con superávit presupuestario y una deuda del 60%, frente al desastre español, o los datos de comercio exterior de ambos países…, la deuda externa acumulada que tiene España, y el Target 2 o saldo acreedor/deudor con que se enfrenten ambos sistemas financieros… ¡Ridículo!
Esta es la evolución del IBEX TR (con dividendos) y el DAX alemán:
Tanto es así, que el spread entre ambos mercados se ha ido a mínimos… Somos cojonudos los españoles a la hora de hacer subir al IBEX, o ¿serán los bancos que manipulan las cotizaciones, como siempre?
Esas falsas tendencias de que pueden seguir subiendo hasta el infinito, encarriladas entre dos líneas paralelas, no funciona así…, ni para el DAX tampoco:
Ni para el IBEX que hace máximos, ajeno a sus miasmas:
Cuando la realidad es que en 2015, ambos mercados hicieron un techo y se están moviendo laterales desde entonces… ¿Volveremos a ver los 8700 del DAX alemán? Ni lo dudes.
PD2: Lo opuesto de una persona con fe es una persona sin fe, o atea. Pero quizás hay muchos matices por medio. Quizás no se creen lo que rezamos los cristianos en el Credo. Una cosa es creer y otra es confiar en Dios. Lo opuesto a la confianza es el temor. Los que confiamos en Dios, los que nos fiamos de Él, que nos provee, que nos ayuda y nos manda caricias, sabemos que nos espera un mundo mucho mejor cuando nos muramos. Los que no confían en el Señor y en su mensaje de amor, entonces tienen el temor a que la vida se acabe, que dure lo que nos aguante el cuerpo. Y esto es muy triste, que solo estemos aquí unos años.
Es penoso que se haya gastado tanta saliva y tinta para acercar la Buena Nueva y no haya llegado al personal… Tener algo de confianza en Dios es ya mucha parte de esa fe que se profesa no tener. Ese temor al vacío, a que no haya nada después, se puede llegar a solucionar, poniendo un poco de nuestra parte…, fiarse algo de Dios y quererle por habernos dado la vida, darle gracias por los dones que tenemos, por todo lo que nos da cada día.
