|
Captive over-reliance on the United States means that international
markets are hesitant to accurately discount the future costs of war, natural
resource shortfall, lost manufacturing base, and terror. The value of dollar
denominated assets are much too high to be realistic to risk and reality. Adjustments
have not occurred because a large dependency on US GDP means that US markets
and assets have artificial staying power.

Department of Energy
Graph Editor: Energy and Wealth as Centers of Gravity
We know that on worldwide basis common political interests have broken
down. Economic ties, interdependence, and interrelationships are a bit
more sticky. However, the global economy has no choice but to follow the
political tone that has been set to conclusion. To date, the magnitude of
global dependency means that orderly exit out of US dominated institutions
and US denominated assets may be impossible.
For now, the ranchers governing the global economy know they cannot afford
to have the cattle stampede out of the dollar and the DOW. News must not be
allowed to tarnish the safety of a peace time facade. Eventually private large
money will exit, it may have done so already.
In a fit of fantasy, preserving the status quo means, that everything has
to stay the same even though people notice that individual purchasing power
for food and energy has visibly eroded through the effects of wartime. Economic
and security risks are issues and costs without mention.
As part of a society in denial, the Federal Reserve, and CIA (footnotes),
have intentionally misanalysed the war by limiting the definition and scope
of this conflict. The events unfolding are global, they are not localized in
Iraq, nor can they be contained.
Denial means that the US has limited social, financial, and political commitments
to war. This does not mean that global war has not been occurring. Many wars
begin unilaterally, with a single aggressor aligned against an unprepared or
unwilling enemy.
Because of denial, ultimately more civilians will be adversely effected than
direct combatants. Again, beyond 9-11 and Iraq, the first domestic casualty
of war has been the recent declination of the US standard of living.
War tends to arbitrate issues between groups of people contending for resources,
accessing freedom, and seeking greater allocations of scarce global purchasing
power. Ironically standards of living may go down whether or not the war is
ever funded.
At least the Federal Reserve realizes in terms of Iraq that "increases in
war risk caused a rise in oil prices, a fall in Treasury yields and equity
prices, a widening of corporate yield spreads, and a decline in the dollar." By
contrast war risk did not have "a significant impact on the price of gold or
on the liquidity premium on the ten-year Treasury note." The cattle ranchers
have a strong hold on the livestock.
What happens when the scope of this war has been adequately defined? What
will the USD be worth? How will gold be priced? What interest rate could provide
adequate reward to risk? How will the US cope with its energy needs? Will global
transportation and free trade prevail? What are the fundamentals of US purchasing
power and living standards? These are some of the questions the arbiter of
war will attempt to answer.
The primary objective in the developed world may be continued economic prosperity
and stability through the status quo. Politically the stasis of steady state
has been abused and broken.
The objective of the lesser franchised may be regional unification, political
religion, self determination, and domestic betterment. China Russia and India
are better positioned than emerging Pan-Islam, or "Old-Europe."
In a zero sum game, the people who have most to lose will lose the most. This
may be especially true because the war and its implications have been poorly
defined to kowtow to the economic expectations of the developed world.
Notes:
Many of the traders I speak to point to rallies which occur in the DOW between
1 and 2pm. Do you see these rallies?
Are you aware that Japan can earn 2% in arbitrage with a steady or falling
exchange rate?
CIA Fact book regarding Dow 10000
......A major short-term problem in first half 2002 was a sharp decline in
the stock market, fueled in part by the exposure of dubious accounting practices
in some major corporations. The war in March/April 2003 between a US-led
coalition and Iraq shifted resources to the military. In 2003, growth in
output and productivity and the recovery of the stock market to above 10,000
for the Dow Jones Industrial Average were promising signs. Unemployment stayed
at the 6% level, however, and began to decline only at the end of the year.
Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure,
rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable
trade and budget deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic
groups.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2003/200318/200318pap.pdf
The Effects of War Risk on U.S. Financial Markets*
Roberto Rigobon MIT Sloan School of Management and NBER and Brian Sack
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System April 23, 2003
|