Some China economic watchers are projecting China's economy to reach $7.5 trillion over the next decade, which would effectively double the size of the middle kingdom in that short period of time.
If this estimate is accurate, China's growth would be larger in GDP than the United States, combined with China's three BRIC counterparts.
There can be no doubt that China will be the economic story of the 21st century, and even with their measures to slow down their urban property markets, they will still grow at a solid pace, one that is much more healthy than it was before.
Now what is waited for is for China to successfully navigate from being primarily an export economy to one balanced with domestic growth and demand as well.
Assuming they do it correctly, they will be poised to extraordinary growth in the years ahead, which will continue to dominate the global economic growth other countries are increasingly relying on.
Showing posts with label China Economy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label China Economy. Show all posts
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Monday, June 14, 2010
Brazil Economy Smokin', Says Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS)
Morgan Stanley's (NYSE:MS) chief economist in Sao Paulo, Marcelo Carvalho, said the Brazilian economy is growing at a quicker pace than originally anticipated, and has changed the rate from 6.8 percent to a heftier 7.9 percent.
Now that China has started to cool off their economy, especially their urban property markets, the two countries will probably continue to grow at very similar rates, which in the case of China should be more sustainable and healthy for them.
Carvalho said, the Brazil "economy is booming."
For Brazil, this is probably a sign that some commodities are increasing in demand, although that wasn't specifically pointed out.
Now that China has started to cool off their economy, especially their urban property markets, the two countries will probably continue to grow at very similar rates, which in the case of China should be more sustainable and healthy for them.
Carvalho said, the Brazil "economy is booming."
For Brazil, this is probably a sign that some commodities are increasing in demand, although that wasn't specifically pointed out.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS) CEO Sees Fast Continuing BRIC Growth
Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS) CEO John Mack said he sees continual growth for BRIC countries in 2010, unsurprisingly, led by China and India.
Concerning the weakest link of the four countries, Russia, Mack said, "Russia still has a very strong balance sheet and low overall leverage, which remain key advantages for the country. However, it continues to lag in investment due to the volatile macro environment and weak property rights."
Even though growth around the world will probably slow down because of China's fight with inflation from their hot urban property market, no growth in the U.S., and the European sovereign debt crisis.
Regardless of what the growth rates end up being, Mack stated that "Our expectation is that the fastest rates of economic growth this year are expected to be in China, India, Brazil and Russia."
Concerning the weakest link of the four countries, Russia, Mack said, "Russia still has a very strong balance sheet and low overall leverage, which remain key advantages for the country. However, it continues to lag in investment due to the volatile macro environment and weak property rights."
Even though growth around the world will probably slow down because of China's fight with inflation from their hot urban property market, no growth in the U.S., and the European sovereign debt crisis.
Regardless of what the growth rates end up being, Mack stated that "Our expectation is that the fastest rates of economic growth this year are expected to be in China, India, Brazil and Russia."
Friday, May 28, 2010
Mark Mobius Continues Buying BRIC
Mark Mobius, manager of Templeton Asset Management Ltd., says he has continued buying stocks in Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) over the last 30 days, and considers the drop in the market a correction, in what he believes is an ongoing bull market.
Mobius said about BRICs, “Despite the fact that a lot of people think that we are entering into a bear market, we don’t believe so. This is a correction in an ongoing bull market.”
From its April 15 high, the MSCI Emerging Markets Index has plunged 14 percent, the reason many have been running from them.
The European sovereign debt crisis and the challenge China faces with inflation has driven down the emerging markets, and other markets as well, which has in turn cut demand for raw materials, which is what these countries have a huge exposure to.
Mobius said about BRICs, “Despite the fact that a lot of people think that we are entering into a bear market, we don’t believe so. This is a correction in an ongoing bull market.”
From its April 15 high, the MSCI Emerging Markets Index has plunged 14 percent, the reason many have been running from them.
The European sovereign debt crisis and the challenge China faces with inflation has driven down the emerging markets, and other markets as well, which has in turn cut demand for raw materials, which is what these countries have a huge exposure to.
Friday, August 21, 2009
BRIC Business | Rethink Them?
BRIC Business
An economic crisis will always bring out the best and worst, and the strenght and weakness of any economy, and the current economic crisis has provided fresh fuel to the debate over the feared decline of the West and rise of the East. The so-called BRICs – Brazil, Russia, India, and China – are often touted as the inevitable economic winners. But when you look behind the numbers, it suggests that the proclamation that these countries have won is far too premature.
The numbers at this time don't reinforce the assertions, and The World Bank’s dark forecasts see global GDP falling a record 2.9 percent in 2009, along with deteriorating current account balances, increased debt, soaring unemployment, gyrating stock markets and tumbling business confidence. Yes, there may be a few spots of recovery. China’s stimulus efforts – a quick expansion of fixed investment and credit to the state sector generated by huge foreign reserves – seem to have had a predictable positive, if likely short-term, effect. Perhaps broader, but still modest, recoveries in 2010 and 2011 are in the cards. And there is the looming risk of inflation to have to deal with, which could undermine China especially.
But the way to full recovery is not clear at this time. The global economy is at some kind of tipping or inflection point, a moment of paradigm shift. If the Anglo-American model of finance capital is yet another god that failed, so too the alternatives: Japanese networked capitalism, Euro-dirigisme, or various flavors of state capitalism (perhaps combined, as in China, with authoritarian politics) have not been widely embraced.
At this point, enter the BRICs. Before the severity of the looming economic storm was clear, the BRICs were the sweethearts of the investment sector. They were first lumped together in an influential Goldman Sachs research report in 2001. Goldman forecast that their ongoing GDP growth could outpace the rest of the world, with the GDPs of China and India surpassing those of the major Western economic powers before mid-century. To be sure, these “emerging markets” were not seen as risk free, but with their scale – continental powers with large populations and records of substantial economic growth – they looked attractive. Especially to punters playing the markets. If Goldman liked them, how could you go wrong?
But there’s more to economic prowess than GDP statistics and stock market indices. This is not to gainsay the BRICs’ – especially China and India’s – economic momentum and remarkable development. Visitors to China cannot be but wowed by what metropolitan colossi Beijing and Shanghai have become. India’s IT prowess dominates. But sustainable growth and economic leadership will ultimately have to be based on business environment fundamentals. International metrics that go beyond GDP suggest the BRICs have a long way to go.
Take, for beginners, corruption, the negative element that eats away at business confidence, rule of law and fair dealing. None of the BRICs rank very high in the 180-country survey published by Transparency International. Brazil and India come in at 80th and 85th place, roughly comparable to Burkina Faso, Saudi Arabia and Panama. Russia, unsurprisingly, is close to the bottom, ranking 147th – Kenya and Syria are neighbors. China does best, at 72nd place – right down there with Mexico. And if the current murky scandal involving China’s steel industry which has ensnared executives from Australia’s Rio Tinto shows anything, it’s that corruption of China’s legal system can eat business confidence away.
If there’s corruption, then it’s not so easy to do business there. The World Bank studies “the ease of doing business” in 181 countries. Brazil, Russia and India stand between 120 to 125 in those league tables. China comes in a little better, in 83rd place – a little higher than Belarus, a little lower than Kenya. The most difficult issues? Dealing with the local authorities in Russia and China; enforcing contracts in India’s clogged legal system, and, interestingly, taxes in Brazil.
None of the BRICs lead the World Economic Forum’s most recent “Global Competitiveness Report” (GCR). This sophisticated survey pulls together a large range of business environment variables, including social and political stability, economic concerns, technological sophistication and management quality. Of the 134 countries ranked, China comes in at 30th place (comparable to Spain); India and Russia land at 50th and 51st places respectively (about the same as Italy); and Brazil checks in at 64th place, close to Turkey and Kazakhstan. The GCR points out that all of these environments are plagued by bureaucracy, corruption, changeable business policies and problems with finance. (Not that the G-8 countries are 100% clean here either!).
And if social stability is a metric, then the fires that have fueled tragic communal violence in India and, more recently, China have to be a concern. You don’t push too hard against entrenched interests in Russia, where arbitrary arrest and even murder can be the outcome.
Should we really be surprised? From these perspectives, the BRICs don’t look that strong. These countries are all, in one way or another, still developing. Brazil and Russia rank in the middle of the United Nations’ Human Development Index; China is just a little below and India, is almost at the bottom. Russia and China face demographic challenges. China is growing older, while Russia has even more major population problems – it’s declining.
Their economic, social and political systems differ in a major way: Brazil’s economy is based on agriculture; India’s on services; Russia’s on price-sensitive energy resources, and China on manufactures for export. China and Russia have had problematic political relations; the disputed borders between China and India are still hot. What do they share? Growth potential. And a desire to take the U.S. dollar down a notch. Is that enough to assert that the answer to the world’s problems be found with the BRICs?
BRIC officials seem to think so. In the run up to the April 2009 G-20 meeting in London they pushed their own agenda, calling for new international finance rules, reform of the IMF and the World Bank, and resurrection of the Doha round. Overall, they are pushing for a multi-polar economic order, one less dominated by the US.
The Russians called for a new international currency backed by IMF SDRs (Special Drawing Rights) – an idea also picked up by Brazil and China. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said that the eyes of the world were on India in the “hope that India would be an engine of growth for the world economy.” Chinese officials touted their own “stimulus package” and quick action, noting the superiority of China’s command system “when it comes to making vital policy decisions.”
But at a “BRIC Summit” held in Yekaterinburg in July, there was less fire – a BRIC agenda did not surface. Still, the idea of a new international reserve currency hasn’t gone away.
We focus on these things not to criticize the BRICs individually but rather to put a little more reality into the important discussion of world economic recovery. First, they can hardly be considered a cohesive group. Second, sustainable leadership demands a sound business environment. On that score, the BRICs have a long way to go.
To be sure, their equity markets seem to be doing ok (China’s seems to be a bubble). But there’s more to the economy of any country than GDP projections and speculative bets about the future of a few leading companies.
But after all of this, we still have to remember that America had a lot of false starts and ups and downs in its early years or prosperity, so that shouldn't change for China or the other BRIC nations any time soon. Russia will struggle the most of all of them, while China and India will continue to lead them. Brazil, because it depends primarily on commodities, will do well when demand starts to increase again, and they could be right up there, and possibly surpass China and India as far as percentag of growth goes. Russia could do that too if it was in better position and strength, but it has a long way to go before that is a reality.
BRIC Business
An economic crisis will always bring out the best and worst, and the strenght and weakness of any economy, and the current economic crisis has provided fresh fuel to the debate over the feared decline of the West and rise of the East. The so-called BRICs – Brazil, Russia, India, and China – are often touted as the inevitable economic winners. But when you look behind the numbers, it suggests that the proclamation that these countries have won is far too premature.
The numbers at this time don't reinforce the assertions, and The World Bank’s dark forecasts see global GDP falling a record 2.9 percent in 2009, along with deteriorating current account balances, increased debt, soaring unemployment, gyrating stock markets and tumbling business confidence. Yes, there may be a few spots of recovery. China’s stimulus efforts – a quick expansion of fixed investment and credit to the state sector generated by huge foreign reserves – seem to have had a predictable positive, if likely short-term, effect. Perhaps broader, but still modest, recoveries in 2010 and 2011 are in the cards. And there is the looming risk of inflation to have to deal with, which could undermine China especially.
But the way to full recovery is not clear at this time. The global economy is at some kind of tipping or inflection point, a moment of paradigm shift. If the Anglo-American model of finance capital is yet another god that failed, so too the alternatives: Japanese networked capitalism, Euro-dirigisme, or various flavors of state capitalism (perhaps combined, as in China, with authoritarian politics) have not been widely embraced.
At this point, enter the BRICs. Before the severity of the looming economic storm was clear, the BRICs were the sweethearts of the investment sector. They were first lumped together in an influential Goldman Sachs research report in 2001. Goldman forecast that their ongoing GDP growth could outpace the rest of the world, with the GDPs of China and India surpassing those of the major Western economic powers before mid-century. To be sure, these “emerging markets” were not seen as risk free, but with their scale – continental powers with large populations and records of substantial economic growth – they looked attractive. Especially to punters playing the markets. If Goldman liked them, how could you go wrong?
But there’s more to economic prowess than GDP statistics and stock market indices. This is not to gainsay the BRICs’ – especially China and India’s – economic momentum and remarkable development. Visitors to China cannot be but wowed by what metropolitan colossi Beijing and Shanghai have become. India’s IT prowess dominates. But sustainable growth and economic leadership will ultimately have to be based on business environment fundamentals. International metrics that go beyond GDP suggest the BRICs have a long way to go.
Take, for beginners, corruption, the negative element that eats away at business confidence, rule of law and fair dealing. None of the BRICs rank very high in the 180-country survey published by Transparency International. Brazil and India come in at 80th and 85th place, roughly comparable to Burkina Faso, Saudi Arabia and Panama. Russia, unsurprisingly, is close to the bottom, ranking 147th – Kenya and Syria are neighbors. China does best, at 72nd place – right down there with Mexico. And if the current murky scandal involving China’s steel industry which has ensnared executives from Australia’s Rio Tinto shows anything, it’s that corruption of China’s legal system can eat business confidence away.
If there’s corruption, then it’s not so easy to do business there. The World Bank studies “the ease of doing business” in 181 countries. Brazil, Russia and India stand between 120 to 125 in those league tables. China comes in a little better, in 83rd place – a little higher than Belarus, a little lower than Kenya. The most difficult issues? Dealing with the local authorities in Russia and China; enforcing contracts in India’s clogged legal system, and, interestingly, taxes in Brazil.
None of the BRICs lead the World Economic Forum’s most recent “Global Competitiveness Report” (GCR). This sophisticated survey pulls together a large range of business environment variables, including social and political stability, economic concerns, technological sophistication and management quality. Of the 134 countries ranked, China comes in at 30th place (comparable to Spain); India and Russia land at 50th and 51st places respectively (about the same as Italy); and Brazil checks in at 64th place, close to Turkey and Kazakhstan. The GCR points out that all of these environments are plagued by bureaucracy, corruption, changeable business policies and problems with finance. (Not that the G-8 countries are 100% clean here either!).
And if social stability is a metric, then the fires that have fueled tragic communal violence in India and, more recently, China have to be a concern. You don’t push too hard against entrenched interests in Russia, where arbitrary arrest and even murder can be the outcome.
Should we really be surprised? From these perspectives, the BRICs don’t look that strong. These countries are all, in one way or another, still developing. Brazil and Russia rank in the middle of the United Nations’ Human Development Index; China is just a little below and India, is almost at the bottom. Russia and China face demographic challenges. China is growing older, while Russia has even more major population problems – it’s declining.
Their economic, social and political systems differ in a major way: Brazil’s economy is based on agriculture; India’s on services; Russia’s on price-sensitive energy resources, and China on manufactures for export. China and Russia have had problematic political relations; the disputed borders between China and India are still hot. What do they share? Growth potential. And a desire to take the U.S. dollar down a notch. Is that enough to assert that the answer to the world’s problems be found with the BRICs?
BRIC officials seem to think so. In the run up to the April 2009 G-20 meeting in London they pushed their own agenda, calling for new international finance rules, reform of the IMF and the World Bank, and resurrection of the Doha round. Overall, they are pushing for a multi-polar economic order, one less dominated by the US.
The Russians called for a new international currency backed by IMF SDRs (Special Drawing Rights) – an idea also picked up by Brazil and China. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said that the eyes of the world were on India in the “hope that India would be an engine of growth for the world economy.” Chinese officials touted their own “stimulus package” and quick action, noting the superiority of China’s command system “when it comes to making vital policy decisions.”
But at a “BRIC Summit” held in Yekaterinburg in July, there was less fire – a BRIC agenda did not surface. Still, the idea of a new international reserve currency hasn’t gone away.
We focus on these things not to criticize the BRICs individually but rather to put a little more reality into the important discussion of world economic recovery. First, they can hardly be considered a cohesive group. Second, sustainable leadership demands a sound business environment. On that score, the BRICs have a long way to go.
To be sure, their equity markets seem to be doing ok (China’s seems to be a bubble). But there’s more to the economy of any country than GDP projections and speculative bets about the future of a few leading companies.
But after all of this, we still have to remember that America had a lot of false starts and ups and downs in its early years or prosperity, so that shouldn't change for China or the other BRIC nations any time soon. Russia will struggle the most of all of them, while China and India will continue to lead them. Brazil, because it depends primarily on commodities, will do well when demand starts to increase again, and they could be right up there, and possibly surpass China and India as far as percentag of growth goes. Russia could do that too if it was in better position and strength, but it has a long way to go before that is a reality.
BRIC Business
Saturday, August 1, 2009
China, India Still Growing
Brazil and Russia slowing
BRIC is an acronym referring to the fast-growing developing economies of Brazil, Russia, India, and China. The acronym was first named and prominently used by Goldman Sachs in 2001. Goldman Sachs asserted that since they are developing quickly, by 2050 the combined economies of the BRICs could pass the combined economies of the current richest countries of the world. The four countries, combined, currently account for more than a quarter of the world's land area and over 40% of the world's population.
Goldman Sachs did not attempt to say that the BRICs would organize themselves into an economic bloc, or a formal trading association, rather that their combined growth would be substantial.
Even so, there are strong indications that the four BRIC countries have been seeking to form an 'alliance', and thereby converting their growing economic power into greater geopolitical clout because during the 21st century, success in global economy is judged by internal relations within like-minded groups for gains by collective bargaining. This has been easier said than done though.
On June 16, 2009, the leaders of the BRIC countries took part in their first summit in Yekaterinburg, in Russia and issued a declaration calling for the establishment of a multi-polar world order. The Foreign Ministers of the BRIC countries had met previously on May 16, 2008 also in Yekaterinburg. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, President Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, and President Hu Jintao, the respective leaders of Brazil, Russia, India and China, attended the summit.
The key focus of the summit was connected to improving the current global economic situation and discussing how the four countries can better work together in the future, as well as a more general push to reform financial institutions.
Remember that in last April in London, the G-20 leaders met in a summit. One of the decisions was the revamping of IMF and World Bank to ensure other nations are given greater influence and senior positions of IMF and World Bank will be open to candidates from the developing world.
There was also discussion surrounding how developing nations, such as those members of BRIC, could be better involved in global affairs in the future. In the aftermath of the summit the BRIC nations suggested that there was a need for a new global reserve currency that is 'diversified, stable and predictable,' although it would be a huge burden, gamble and risk for any country to do that in the near future.
The statement that was released stopped short of making a direct attack on the perceived 'dominance' of the US dollar, something which the Russians have been critical of. However, it still led to a fall in the value of the dollar against other major currencies.
One week prior to the summit, Brazil offered $10 billion to the International Monetary Fund. It was the first time that the country had ever made such a loan.
Brazil had previously received loans from the IMF and this announcement was treated as a significant demonstration of how Brazil's economic position has changed. China also announced plans to invest a total of $50 billion and Russia planned to invest $10 billion.
BRIC countries are future growth engines of the world. These countries are emerging more quickly than most nations from the global economic crisis.
A criticism is that the BRIC projections are based on the assumptions that resources are limitless and endlessly available when needed. In reality, many important resources currently necessary to sustain economic growth, such as oil, natural gas, coal, other fossil fuels, and uranium might soon experience a peak in production before enough renewable energy can be developed and commercialized, which might result in slower economic growth than anticipated, thus throwing off the projections and their dates.
Though the BRIC countries have their differences, there are some who believe that this new bloc can play a major role in international arena. The importance of this should be perceived because of the reality that the world's largest growing economies got together on the same platform and discussed their respective concerns.
An interesting reality is that the world is neither dominated by a uni-polar power nor multi-polar powers. Currently we live in a non-polar world and the balance of power is going through a time of change.
The fact is the world itself is in transition. The world has changed since 1945, when Big-2 (US and UK) used to decide the fate of the free world. By the end of 20th century, Big -2 became G-7, then-G-8 only to be replaced by G-20 by the 21st century.
Things are going to be a lot different even 10 years from now with the emerging BRIC economies moving forward.
Brazil and Russia slowing
BRIC is an acronym referring to the fast-growing developing economies of Brazil, Russia, India, and China. The acronym was first named and prominently used by Goldman Sachs in 2001. Goldman Sachs asserted that since they are developing quickly, by 2050 the combined economies of the BRICs could pass the combined economies of the current richest countries of the world. The four countries, combined, currently account for more than a quarter of the world's land area and over 40% of the world's population.
Goldman Sachs did not attempt to say that the BRICs would organize themselves into an economic bloc, or a formal trading association, rather that their combined growth would be substantial.
Even so, there are strong indications that the four BRIC countries have been seeking to form an 'alliance', and thereby converting their growing economic power into greater geopolitical clout because during the 21st century, success in global economy is judged by internal relations within like-minded groups for gains by collective bargaining. This has been easier said than done though.
On June 16, 2009, the leaders of the BRIC countries took part in their first summit in Yekaterinburg, in Russia and issued a declaration calling for the establishment of a multi-polar world order. The Foreign Ministers of the BRIC countries had met previously on May 16, 2008 also in Yekaterinburg. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, President Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, and President Hu Jintao, the respective leaders of Brazil, Russia, India and China, attended the summit.
The key focus of the summit was connected to improving the current global economic situation and discussing how the four countries can better work together in the future, as well as a more general push to reform financial institutions.
Remember that in last April in London, the G-20 leaders met in a summit. One of the decisions was the revamping of IMF and World Bank to ensure other nations are given greater influence and senior positions of IMF and World Bank will be open to candidates from the developing world.
There was also discussion surrounding how developing nations, such as those members of BRIC, could be better involved in global affairs in the future. In the aftermath of the summit the BRIC nations suggested that there was a need for a new global reserve currency that is 'diversified, stable and predictable,' although it would be a huge burden, gamble and risk for any country to do that in the near future.
The statement that was released stopped short of making a direct attack on the perceived 'dominance' of the US dollar, something which the Russians have been critical of. However, it still led to a fall in the value of the dollar against other major currencies.
One week prior to the summit, Brazil offered $10 billion to the International Monetary Fund. It was the first time that the country had ever made such a loan.
Brazil had previously received loans from the IMF and this announcement was treated as a significant demonstration of how Brazil's economic position has changed. China also announced plans to invest a total of $50 billion and Russia planned to invest $10 billion.
BRIC countries are future growth engines of the world. These countries are emerging more quickly than most nations from the global economic crisis.
A criticism is that the BRIC projections are based on the assumptions that resources are limitless and endlessly available when needed. In reality, many important resources currently necessary to sustain economic growth, such as oil, natural gas, coal, other fossil fuels, and uranium might soon experience a peak in production before enough renewable energy can be developed and commercialized, which might result in slower economic growth than anticipated, thus throwing off the projections and their dates.
Though the BRIC countries have their differences, there are some who believe that this new bloc can play a major role in international arena. The importance of this should be perceived because of the reality that the world's largest growing economies got together on the same platform and discussed their respective concerns.
An interesting reality is that the world is neither dominated by a uni-polar power nor multi-polar powers. Currently we live in a non-polar world and the balance of power is going through a time of change.
The fact is the world itself is in transition. The world has changed since 1945, when Big-2 (US and UK) used to decide the fate of the free world. By the end of 20th century, Big -2 became G-7, then-G-8 only to be replaced by G-20 by the 21st century.
Things are going to be a lot different even 10 years from now with the emerging BRIC economies moving forward.
Brazil and Russia slowing
Thursday, July 16, 2009
China 2nd in Market Value
China second largest in market value - soars past Japan
China has swept past Japan as the world’s second-largest stock market according to value for the first time in 18 months, after government stimulus spending and record bank lending boosted share prices this year.
The Shanghai Composite Index rose 1.4 percent yesterday, sending the value of China’s domestic stock market to $3.21 trillion, compared with Japan’s $3.20 trillion. The Shanghai index has gained 75 percent this year, the best-performing major market, against a 5.5 percent advance in the Nikkei 225 Stock Average. The U.S. has the biggest equities market worth $10.8 trillion.
“China is just entering its stride and is still very much in a growth phase, while Japan is already a developed economy,” said Daphne Roth, Singapore-based head of Asian equity research at ABN Amro Private Banking.
China last passed Japan in stock-market capitalization from Jan. 4 to Jan. 24, 2008. The Shanghai Composite tripled in the two years leading to its record on Oct. 16, 2007, before tumbling 72 percent to its trough the following November.
Stimulus
A 4 trillion yuan ($585 billion) stimulus package and record bank lending has shielded the Chinese economy against a plunge in exports. Foreign-exchange reserves topped $2 trillion for the first time, while money supply rose a record 28.5 percent in June, the central bank said July 15. The economy expanded 7.9 percent in the second quarter, the statistics bureau said in Beijing today, more than the 7.8 percent median estimate of 20 economists.
New loans increased by five times in June year over year by 1.53 trillion yuan, increasing concern that attempts to revive the world’s third-largest economy will lead to bad debts and asset bubbles. Rapid credit growth poses risks for lenders and the financial system, Wang Huaqing, the disciplinary secretary of the China Banking Regulatory Commission.
BNP Paribas Securities (Asia) Ltd. last month cut its rating on China to “neutral” from “overweight,” citing valuations. Stocks on the benchmark index are trading at 33.2 times earnings, almost triple the 12.9 multiple on Nov. 4, when the measure dropped to its lowest since the financial crisis. Earnings per share declined 7 percent last year and will probably remain “flat” this year, the brokerage said.
“We share concerns that the corporate earnings recovery is not going to be very strong,” Erwin Sanft, head of China and Hong Kong equities research at BNP Paribas said. Some Chinese shares have soared by “1,000 percent from the bottom, so they’re pricing in a very strong rebound in earnings,” he said.
In Japan, continuing deflation and an aging population have sapped strength from what was once the world’s largest market by capitalization. During the 1990s, Japan spent 135 trillion yen on 10 economic stimulus plans and lowered interest rates to zero, none of which succeeded in promoting sustainable growth.
Japan’s economy shrank at a 14.2 percent annual rate in the first quarter, the most since data began in 1955. The country’s gross domestic output will shrink 3.4 percent in the year ending March 2010, the central bank predicted. The contraction coincided with a drop to a more-than 25-year low by the Topix index.
Japan’s Challenges
“Japan has two main problems; the enormous public debt handicaps the government’s ability to spend additional money to boost the economy and we are too reliant on exports,” said Takashi Kamiya, chief economist at T&D Asset Management Co. in Tokyo, which helps oversee some $16 billion. “There’s no way to expect the emergence of a domestic growth driver that can propel us out of this funk.”
Chinese companies account for four of the 10 biggest companies when measured by market value, according to Bloomberg data. Toyota Motor Corp. is the top-ranked Japanese company, at 25th, worth about one third the capitalization of PetroChina Co., the world No. 1.
Japan is a good example of not using stimulus packages to attempt to generate sustainable growth, only the business sector can do that.
China second largest in market value
China has swept past Japan as the world’s second-largest stock market according to value for the first time in 18 months, after government stimulus spending and record bank lending boosted share prices this year.
The Shanghai Composite Index rose 1.4 percent yesterday, sending the value of China’s domestic stock market to $3.21 trillion, compared with Japan’s $3.20 trillion. The Shanghai index has gained 75 percent this year, the best-performing major market, against a 5.5 percent advance in the Nikkei 225 Stock Average. The U.S. has the biggest equities market worth $10.8 trillion.
“China is just entering its stride and is still very much in a growth phase, while Japan is already a developed economy,” said Daphne Roth, Singapore-based head of Asian equity research at ABN Amro Private Banking.
China last passed Japan in stock-market capitalization from Jan. 4 to Jan. 24, 2008. The Shanghai Composite tripled in the two years leading to its record on Oct. 16, 2007, before tumbling 72 percent to its trough the following November.
Stimulus
A 4 trillion yuan ($585 billion) stimulus package and record bank lending has shielded the Chinese economy against a plunge in exports. Foreign-exchange reserves topped $2 trillion for the first time, while money supply rose a record 28.5 percent in June, the central bank said July 15. The economy expanded 7.9 percent in the second quarter, the statistics bureau said in Beijing today, more than the 7.8 percent median estimate of 20 economists.
New loans increased by five times in June year over year by 1.53 trillion yuan, increasing concern that attempts to revive the world’s third-largest economy will lead to bad debts and asset bubbles. Rapid credit growth poses risks for lenders and the financial system, Wang Huaqing, the disciplinary secretary of the China Banking Regulatory Commission.
BNP Paribas Securities (Asia) Ltd. last month cut its rating on China to “neutral” from “overweight,” citing valuations. Stocks on the benchmark index are trading at 33.2 times earnings, almost triple the 12.9 multiple on Nov. 4, when the measure dropped to its lowest since the financial crisis. Earnings per share declined 7 percent last year and will probably remain “flat” this year, the brokerage said.
“We share concerns that the corporate earnings recovery is not going to be very strong,” Erwin Sanft, head of China and Hong Kong equities research at BNP Paribas said. Some Chinese shares have soared by “1,000 percent from the bottom, so they’re pricing in a very strong rebound in earnings,” he said.
In Japan, continuing deflation and an aging population have sapped strength from what was once the world’s largest market by capitalization. During the 1990s, Japan spent 135 trillion yen on 10 economic stimulus plans and lowered interest rates to zero, none of which succeeded in promoting sustainable growth.
Japan’s economy shrank at a 14.2 percent annual rate in the first quarter, the most since data began in 1955. The country’s gross domestic output will shrink 3.4 percent in the year ending March 2010, the central bank predicted. The contraction coincided with a drop to a more-than 25-year low by the Topix index.
Japan’s Challenges
“Japan has two main problems; the enormous public debt handicaps the government’s ability to spend additional money to boost the economy and we are too reliant on exports,” said Takashi Kamiya, chief economist at T&D Asset Management Co. in Tokyo, which helps oversee some $16 billion. “There’s no way to expect the emergence of a domestic growth driver that can propel us out of this funk.”
Chinese companies account for four of the 10 biggest companies when measured by market value, according to Bloomberg data. Toyota Motor Corp. is the top-ranked Japanese company, at 25th, worth about one third the capitalization of PetroChina Co., the world No. 1.
Japan is a good example of not using stimulus packages to attempt to generate sustainable growth, only the business sector can do that.
China second largest in market value
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Only China and India Expected to Grow
BRIC Business
Of the 15 largest economies in the world, only China and India are expected to enjoy growth in 2009.
Brazil's government still thinks it can just make positive growth for the year too, although outside forecasters don't agree with it. In mid-June, leaders of the BRICs even held their first summit meeting. But Russia, a resource-rich land with an otherwise weak economy and a declining population, is in a different situation from its BRIC brethren. It's having a terrible year, with the World Bank predicting that its GDP will contract 7.9%, far worse than that of any other top-15 economy.
Before the financial panic of last fall, many business and government leaders in the BRIC countries spoke confidently of "decoupling" from their economic reliance on the U.S. Such talk faded as a subsequent collapse in global trade left no nation untouched. Yet with their big populations and growing middle classes, the BRICs now seem to have suffered only a glancing blow. The word redecoupling is beginning to appear in the media. Nandan Nilekani, who is about to leave the chairmanship of Indian tech company Infosys for a government post, speaks of "tactical coupling" and "strategic decoupling." That is, nobody could escape the short-term effects of a global crisis, but the basic BRIC growth story still holds.
If the BRICs can keep growing even as the U.S. and Europe flounder, it would spell an end to America's long reign as the driving force in the global economy. Goldman's O'Neill has said it's "conceivable" that China's economy will be bigger than that of the U.S. in less than 20 years and that the BRIC countries as a group will carry as much economic weight as the G-7 group of Western powers plus Japan. This sounds like bad news for the U.S. — and it will certainly bring all sorts of new complications to the global political scene. From a purely economic standpoint, though, the rise of the BICs is great in that it offers the only remotely attractive path out of our current conundrum.
Discussions of the U.S. losing its spot as global leader often get mired in predictions of doom and comparisons to the Roman Empire. When Rome fell, technological advances were lost for centuries, and Europe descended into the Dark Ages. The rise and fall of economic powers since the dawn of modern capitalism in the 17th century has been a different story. There have been shifts in relative power, and some have led to violent conflict, but living standards have continued to improve over time, even in lands that lost the crown of most powerful — Britain being the most recent example.
And so while U.S. economic dominance appears to be giving way to something more mirky, this doesn't imply absolute decline. The U.S. retains a lot of strong points — great universities, millions of ambitious immigrants, a culture that celebrates risk-taking — that are hard for any other nation to match. Just because the U.S. is no longer all-important doesn't mean it will no longer be competitive.
In fact, the U.S. might turn out to be more competitive. American dominance has in recent years been a mixed blessing. Many countries got addicted to selling to American consumers and poured capital into the U.S. to keep the buying going. These inflows kept the dollar strong, making life tough for U.S. exporters; they also saddled Americans with the unsustainable debt loads that led to the financial crisis. Now no one abroad is willing to lend to deadbeat American households, and the U.S. government has temporarily taken over as the world's chief borrower and spender. But as we've just learned from the example of the American consumer, one can't borrow and spend forever.
Sometime in the near future, then, the U.S. will have to start living within its means — or at least a lot closer to them than it currently does. To keep this new American frugality from battering the global economy even more than it's been battered, somebody has to pick up the resulting slack in demand. Europe and Japan have been hit harder by the downturn than the U.S. has, and they have aging, slow-growing populations unlikely to ignite consumer booms. That leaves the BRICs as pretty much the only remaining candidates. These economies are still too small to take up all the slack: together their GDP amounts to less than half that of the U.S. But they are expanding rapidly. Yes, their ascent spells relative economic decline for the U.S. The faster it happens, though, the sooner a durable global economic recovery will get under way.
There's no doubt BRIC economies are the key to future economic growth.
BRIC business
Of the 15 largest economies in the world, only China and India are expected to enjoy growth in 2009.
Brazil's government still thinks it can just make positive growth for the year too, although outside forecasters don't agree with it. In mid-June, leaders of the BRICs even held their first summit meeting. But Russia, a resource-rich land with an otherwise weak economy and a declining population, is in a different situation from its BRIC brethren. It's having a terrible year, with the World Bank predicting that its GDP will contract 7.9%, far worse than that of any other top-15 economy.
Before the financial panic of last fall, many business and government leaders in the BRIC countries spoke confidently of "decoupling" from their economic reliance on the U.S. Such talk faded as a subsequent collapse in global trade left no nation untouched. Yet with their big populations and growing middle classes, the BRICs now seem to have suffered only a glancing blow. The word redecoupling is beginning to appear in the media. Nandan Nilekani, who is about to leave the chairmanship of Indian tech company Infosys for a government post, speaks of "tactical coupling" and "strategic decoupling." That is, nobody could escape the short-term effects of a global crisis, but the basic BRIC growth story still holds.
If the BRICs can keep growing even as the U.S. and Europe flounder, it would spell an end to America's long reign as the driving force in the global economy. Goldman's O'Neill has said it's "conceivable" that China's economy will be bigger than that of the U.S. in less than 20 years and that the BRIC countries as a group will carry as much economic weight as the G-7 group of Western powers plus Japan. This sounds like bad news for the U.S. — and it will certainly bring all sorts of new complications to the global political scene. From a purely economic standpoint, though, the rise of the BICs is great in that it offers the only remotely attractive path out of our current conundrum.
Discussions of the U.S. losing its spot as global leader often get mired in predictions of doom and comparisons to the Roman Empire. When Rome fell, technological advances were lost for centuries, and Europe descended into the Dark Ages. The rise and fall of economic powers since the dawn of modern capitalism in the 17th century has been a different story. There have been shifts in relative power, and some have led to violent conflict, but living standards have continued to improve over time, even in lands that lost the crown of most powerful — Britain being the most recent example.
And so while U.S. economic dominance appears to be giving way to something more mirky, this doesn't imply absolute decline. The U.S. retains a lot of strong points — great universities, millions of ambitious immigrants, a culture that celebrates risk-taking — that are hard for any other nation to match. Just because the U.S. is no longer all-important doesn't mean it will no longer be competitive.
In fact, the U.S. might turn out to be more competitive. American dominance has in recent years been a mixed blessing. Many countries got addicted to selling to American consumers and poured capital into the U.S. to keep the buying going. These inflows kept the dollar strong, making life tough for U.S. exporters; they also saddled Americans with the unsustainable debt loads that led to the financial crisis. Now no one abroad is willing to lend to deadbeat American households, and the U.S. government has temporarily taken over as the world's chief borrower and spender. But as we've just learned from the example of the American consumer, one can't borrow and spend forever.
Sometime in the near future, then, the U.S. will have to start living within its means — or at least a lot closer to them than it currently does. To keep this new American frugality from battering the global economy even more than it's been battered, somebody has to pick up the resulting slack in demand. Europe and Japan have been hit harder by the downturn than the U.S. has, and they have aging, slow-growing populations unlikely to ignite consumer booms. That leaves the BRICs as pretty much the only remaining candidates. These economies are still too small to take up all the slack: together their GDP amounts to less than half that of the U.S. But they are expanding rapidly. Yes, their ascent spells relative economic decline for the U.S. The faster it happens, though, the sooner a durable global economic recovery will get under way.
There's no doubt BRIC economies are the key to future economic growth.
BRIC business
Monday, June 8, 2009
OECD Projects More Slowing of Indian Economy
BRIC Business India
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) predicted further slowing down of the Indian economy, even while indicating that China has hit the bottom and is likely to show improvement in the next six months.
With regard to other BRIC nations, the Composite Leading Indicators (CLI) prepared by the OECD suggests that economies of Brazil and Russia would continue to perform on the down side.
The CLI designed to provide early signals of turning points in business cycles, rose by 0.4 per cent for India in April 2009.
According to the OECD -- a grouping of rich nations -- business cycles refer to fluctuations of economic activity around its long-term potential level.
"The CLI for China increased 0.9 point in April 2009 but was 8.3 points lower than a year ago. The CLI for India increased by 0.4 point in April 2009 but was 7.9 points lower than in April 2008," OECD said in a statement today.
Along with India, the OECD has forecast "slowdown" of the economy for the US, Japan and Germany, among others.
Having recorded a growth rate of 9 per cent for consecutive three years ending 2007-08, the Indian economy slipped to 6.7 per cent during 2008-09, mainly on account of the results of the global financial meltdown.
According to the Reserve Bank of India's recent projections, the growth rate could slip to 6 per cent in the current fiscal year.
Even President Pratibha Patil in her address to the joint session of Parliament last week said, "The current financial year is expected to see a slowing down of growth on account of the global recession."
The grouping has projected "strong slowdown" for the Russian and Brazilian economies.
Among the BRIC nations, Russia and Brazil saw the CLI decline in April. While the indicators for Russia dropped by 0.3 point, that of Brazil decreased by 0.7 point.
Meanwhile, the OECD has noted that some major economies are witnessing an "easing pace of deterioration".
"While it is still too early to assess whether it is a temporary or a more durable turning point, OECD composite leading indicators (CLIs) for April 2009 point to a reduced pace of deterioration in most of the OECD economies with stronger signals of a possible trough in Canada, France, Italy and the United Kingdom," the statement noted.
For the G-7 nations -- Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the US -- the grouping has forecast a "slowdown".
BRIC Business India
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) predicted further slowing down of the Indian economy, even while indicating that China has hit the bottom and is likely to show improvement in the next six months.
With regard to other BRIC nations, the Composite Leading Indicators (CLI) prepared by the OECD suggests that economies of Brazil and Russia would continue to perform on the down side.
The CLI designed to provide early signals of turning points in business cycles, rose by 0.4 per cent for India in April 2009.
According to the OECD -- a grouping of rich nations -- business cycles refer to fluctuations of economic activity around its long-term potential level.
"The CLI for China increased 0.9 point in April 2009 but was 8.3 points lower than a year ago. The CLI for India increased by 0.4 point in April 2009 but was 7.9 points lower than in April 2008," OECD said in a statement today.
Along with India, the OECD has forecast "slowdown" of the economy for the US, Japan and Germany, among others.
Having recorded a growth rate of 9 per cent for consecutive three years ending 2007-08, the Indian economy slipped to 6.7 per cent during 2008-09, mainly on account of the results of the global financial meltdown.
According to the Reserve Bank of India's recent projections, the growth rate could slip to 6 per cent in the current fiscal year.
Even President Pratibha Patil in her address to the joint session of Parliament last week said, "The current financial year is expected to see a slowing down of growth on account of the global recession."
The grouping has projected "strong slowdown" for the Russian and Brazilian economies.
Among the BRIC nations, Russia and Brazil saw the CLI decline in April. While the indicators for Russia dropped by 0.3 point, that of Brazil decreased by 0.7 point.
Meanwhile, the OECD has noted that some major economies are witnessing an "easing pace of deterioration".
"While it is still too early to assess whether it is a temporary or a more durable turning point, OECD composite leading indicators (CLIs) for April 2009 point to a reduced pace of deterioration in most of the OECD economies with stronger signals of a possible trough in Canada, France, Italy and the United Kingdom," the statement noted.
For the G-7 nations -- Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the US -- the grouping has forecast a "slowdown".
BRIC Business India
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![[Most Recent Exchange Rate from www.kitco.com]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_v22Xm-sOdEgzaszGd1Jsp8PVrxW8Bs_AUIT9ZOQDyOVfMDNL-ByxWb0vhXKIvQcSnFjPHv2_HgBsafVG8DkpiV501qvVrvHyh0phI-aw4tdwpnORt9cu8=s0-d)
