There are 3 main fears driving the current stock market
decline. I think each of them may materialize, but either the odds are against
them being serious impediments to future growth, or the impact of their
occurrence is exaggerated. This discussion therefore focuses on those reasons:
Risk 1. Europe The fear is that Greece will reject
the EU deal and drop out of the Eurozone, thereby triggering the same from
Portugal, Italy, Ireland and Spain. Any significant part of that avalanche
would destroy the euro and severely damage the entire European economy,
plunging Europe into a major depression.
I think that the new Greek government and the Germans will
not chase each other over this cliff, but rather the deal previously made will get
adjusted. Basically, the German and French banks are now eyeball to eyeball
with the Greek people, and I think I just saw Merkel and the German voters
blink. Moreover, an adjustment would be appropriate. The current deal is based
on a moralistic view of what happened in Greece and how Greek public employees,
tax avoidance, and corruption are to blame for the mess. Consequently, the
northerners felt justified in imposing economically senseless austerity
requirements. In reality, I think the bankers who made loans without evaluating
risks properly are just as blameworthy, and therefore the draconian
requirements of the Greek deal are severely unfair. That moves the issue from morality to politics, where fairness
is a major concern. And the political reality is that if the northerners want
to save the euro, which has been tremendously beneficial for them, they must
bow to political reality and make a fairer deal. They seem to be moving that
way, and since they have more to lose by refusing, I am pretty sure they will
do so.
Even if the Greeks do drop out, the direct impact on the
rest of Europe would be minor. So, that leads us to the contagion issue. The
other countries at risk are very different than Greece. They do not face the
same moral onus, and of course the risks to the northerners are much, much
greater should the defaults spread. Accordingly, especially in light of the
very substantial funds that have been allocated to protecting Europe from
further financial disaster, I think the possibility of continued demands for
austerity, and contagion, is quite low. There will, of course, be much shouting
and finger pointing, and the words could get ugly, but in the end I still think
the northerners will cut a deal that the southerners and Irish regard as fair.
Bottom line: I think there is only about a 15% chance that
Europe will swirl itself into a new depression.
Risk 2: China The risk here is that China’s growth
rate slows and, longer term, that China’s potential political, environmental,
and economic difficulties become unmanageable. In other words, that it ceases
to be a growth engine for the world.
Although China is huge, and manufactures an enormous amount
of what the world consumes, it is not as economically important to the world as
its population and manufacturing capability would indicate. It consumes far
less than its size, population, and manufacturing prowess might indicate.
Moreover, short of civil war, a most unlikely possibility, China’s slowing
growth rate would have little effect on the manufacturing sector as far as the
rest of the world is concerned. And if necessary, much of that manufacturing
could quickly shift to other countries, including the US, as it certainly will
anyway over the next couple of decades. China is a huge factor in world trade
because of its manufacturing sales abroad, and the shipment of materiel into
China to support that manufacturing. But as a market, China remains much
smaller.
The Chinese economy, slightly larger than Japan’s in GDP
($5.9 trillion to $5.5), depends much more heavily on trade. Specifically, its
imports total $1.587 trillion compared to $2.592 for the EU and $2.336 for the
US. Most of what it imports, however, goes back out in exports. As WTO data
notes, Trade is 55.2% of China’s GDP compared to 29.8% for the EU and 27.8% for
the US. By contrast the consumer
markets in the EU and the US are much larger, with GDPs of $16 and $15 trillion
compared to China’s $6 trillion. Back out the share of GDP represented by trade
and the differences are even greater: $11.23 trillion for the EU, $10.83
trillion for the US, and $2.69 trillion for China.[1]
So while a serious slowdown in
China seems 50% possible, and would have an impact, the impact would not prove
especially large or scary.
Risk 3: Congress The third, and in my estimation the
largest risk of all, is that US politics will prove
extremely destructive to the economy.
The risk comes basically from gridlock on two
matters. First, if Congress fails to decide on the debt ceiling in a timely way, it will create major uncertainties
for domestic and foreign firms, causing a serious decline in investment spending, perhaps private consumption, and public tax revenues and spending. Second, the draconian tax increases that
would take effect if the politicians cannot reach a budget agreement would
significantly reduce US purchasing power, a problem exacerbated by reductions
in public spending at both state and federal levels. The impact on perceptions
and the willingness of firms and consumers to spend (a failure of economic demand
that leads to depression) could be even greater. It is hard to estimate the severity of the economic decline
that these failures would trigger, or even the timing, but given the track
record of Congress, the positions the candidates and politicians are
announcing, and the ideological fervor that many are showing, the risk seems
quite large.
As with Europe, however, I cannot believe that the politicians will
pursue insanity to the ultimate degree of economic destructiveness. With a
Presidential election looming, I think their incentives cut both ways. That is,
the Republicans would like the economy to slump because it would hurt Obama’s
election chances. On the other hand, they don’t want the blame by appearing
intransigent. My best guess is that they will find compromises to “kick the can
down the road” and let the election and the next President handle the issues.
In other words, they will not let economic catastrophe overwhelm their
candidate’s chances at the end of 2012. Consequently, I rate the possibility of economic disaster
occurring in the near future because of Washington gridlock as no higher than 50-50. But this is the only one of the three main present risks that I find gravely troublesome.
[1]
Source: World Trade Organization, Country
Profiles. http://stat.wto.org/Home/WSDBHome.aspx?Language=E accessed 5/18/12.
Note: EU trade data excludes trade within the EU.
Good article, and I don't diagree sharply with anything Keith has said here, although at the end of the day, I feel quite a bit more pessimistic. See my own parallel post which also addresses the Greek situation.
ReplyDeleteI agree that moral issues cannot be disregarded in accessing the proper courses of action in Europe right now, although getting stuck on the moral dimension should not destract us from analyzing the likely course of future events. Whether reckless bankers, irresponsible politicans or voracious unions are mosly to blame is less important than the fact that they have all collaborated in bringing about the present morass, which appears so far out of control that no solution is even approximately in sight. Angela Merkel may indeed have just blinked for a moment, but the underlying conditions have not gotten any better. The longer the reckoning is posponed the worse the impact is going to be when it arrives. I can't see how that Germans and the Greeks can share a currency much longer.