Categories
Economics

[1994] Of fiscal stimuli did not factor in Q1

Whatever the results may be for the gross domestic product growth rate for the first quarter of the year, let us be clear about one thing. The two fiscal stimulus packages have only insignificant impact, if not at all, to Malaysian economy in that period.

Any effort to paint the stimulus packages as having helped to cushion the impact economic slowdown we saw in the first quarter should be received with extreme skepticism.

One has to remember that, while the first fiscal stimulus package was announced by the Abdullah administration in November 2008, there was no real spending done even as February 2009 passed us by with the speed of a tortoise. The government at that time was still scrambling to distribute money to various ministries and not actually spending it.

This has been admitted by the Second Finance Minister himself. In early March, he was reported as saying that barely half a billion ringgit from a total of RM7 billion had been spent.

Two months later — by May 12 2009 — according to a website established by the Treasury to inform the public of the status of the two stimulus packages, only a further quarter billion ringgit was spent from the RM7 billion.

Given the horrifying demand gap caused by weakened external demand, actual spending derived from the first fiscal stimulus is very much irrelevant to the GDP growth figure for the first quarter of the year.

If one insists that the RM750 million did cushion the fall that certain Ministers claimed it would earlier in the year, perhaps I am obliged to share the following analogy: it is only akin to preparing a mattress on the ground with the intention of saving a person who has just jumped off from level 88.

One also has to remember that the second, much larger, stimulus package was only announced on March 10 2009, which was already close to the end of the first quarter. Furthermore, it is impossible to believe that the second stimulus package came into effect immediately, especially accounting for the kind of lag suffered by the first stimulus package.

How much of the second stimulus worth RM15 billion of government spending has been spent is unclear. The same website commissioned by the Treasury is coy about divulging the same information it shares when it comes to the RM7 billion stimulus package. Nevertheless, experience tells us to be rational and not to expect too much.

Consider this: if the government faces trouble in spending RM7 billion even after approximately 7 months have passed, how exactly does one expect the government to spend another RM15 billion within just over 2 months?

That skepticism should be strengthened further with the knowledge that the government only began to borrow massively in April. We know that the second fiscal stimulus needs to be financed through borrowings. And we know that April is not part of the first quarter.

The best hope of making the second stimulus relevant is the RM3 billion tax cuts as well as the loan guarantees attached to the second fiscal stimulus, or the mini-budget in the language of the government. Alas, information about that is not so forthcoming for us to move beyond mere speculation.

Hence, the effect of tax cuts and guarantees notwithstanding, the effect of the two government spending-based stimulus packages has to be largely discounted if we are interested in explaining the results of the first quarter for the year 2009.

What might make the two stimulus packages all the more irrelevant is the manner which the economy behaved in the first quarter. While the jury is no doubt still out there, early indications do not bode well for proponents of government spending as the heart of fiscal stimulus.

The reason is that the economy — as indicated by various indicators — is arguably performing better with each passing month since January, on the margin. It is better in a sense it has been less bad than before; to be precise, the change of sign of the second derivative.

This happens in spite of the lack of significant interference in the economic cycle as planned by the two fiscal stimuli. The significance of this is that it may prove to those who lack confidence in the market that the economy does not desperately need government spending. This also provides a damning evident that we do not need a third stimulus package at all.

So far, the best factor to explain possible turning of the economy may be the very factor that brought the economy to a tailspin in the first place: external demand.

It is hard to resist connecting the improved local condition with the health of the blessed Chinese economy. Even in the US — another major destination for Malaysian goods — talks of green shoots are aplenty.

If the trend continues, we may see a bottoming out soon enough even without additional government spending as allocated by the two fiscal stimuli. Indeed, the chances that the economy gets better before the full effect of the stimulus packages kick in are becoming brighter now than anytime before.

As it may turn out, the billions of ringgit of government spending may only increase our public debts. That will increase the cost of borrowing in the future and possibly later, the imposition of higher taxes for all, on average.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

First published in The Malaysian Insider on May 26 2009.

Categories
Economics

[1993] Of recession? What recession? It is a shopping spree!

Visiting the shopping malls of Kuala Lumpur can be a confusing experience. It is always full of happy people with friends and lovers. And probably businesspeople with their clients too.

As I patiently await my opportunity to take a break from this crazy country, I find myself with an employment that is physically located close to Midvalley Megamall, one of the largest shopping malls in Malaysia. This means I visit the mall on every working day.

I do not notice any let up on visitors to the malls. Amid talks of pessimism regarding the economy and ugly reports, the shopping does not seem to relent.

Perhaps, Midvalley Megamall is an aberration, filled with those belonging to a certain class that is by and large not affected by the economic pain even as experts are predicting that the economy could suffer as much as 4% contraction for the first quarter of 2009. After all, the main victims of the ongoing economic slowdown are those from the manufacturing sector. Most frequenting the mall do not seem to belong to the manufacturing sector.

But I can never be sure without data. It could be that I am looking for pattern that I want to see, even if it is not there.

The Department of Statistics today confirms that the trend in Midvalley Megamall is neither aberration nor isolated. I am not dreaming. Based on year-on-year comparison, the retail trade sector actually grew by almost 8%, in defiance of other sectors.

RETAIL TRADE

1. Sales Value

The retail trade sub-sector posted an increase of 7.8 per cent from the comparative quarter of the previous year. The main catalyst was the group of non-specialised retail trade in stores (such as department stores and supermarket including hypermarket) which registered a double-digit growth of 44.4 per cent and retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialized stores of 16.2 per cent. On a quarterly basis, this sub-sector contracted 1.3 per cent.

2. Employment and Salaries & Wages

The number of persons engaged rose 8.4 per cent from a year ago followed by a 9.9 per cent expansion in salaries & wages paid out. A marginal increase of 0.7 per cent in the number of persons engaged and a 3.3 per cent in the salaries & wages was recorded quarter-on-quarter. [Distribution Trades First Quarter 2009. Department of Statistics. May 26 2009]

I think the growth is likely caused by MNC hypermarket retailers’ aggressive expansion nationwide. As a person once employed in the supply chain industry, I can say with certainty that that expansion is true. The expansion of TESCO for instance and especially, was amazing. Their latest expansion plan includes a superlarge distribution center in Bukit Beruntung.

Indeed, the retail sector has been the most impressive and resilient sector so far. In the fourth quarter of 2008, it grew by over 15% based on year-on-year comparison.

It is true that based on quarter-on-quarter comparison, there is a decline but I think that is mostly due to seasonal effect.

It might have been likely that if there was no expansion, there might be a contract in the retail sector. Expansion in a way opens new market. This expansion may have overwhelm any reduction of sales faced by pre-existing outlets. In any case, this raises two questions: if the expansion factor is controlled for, would the retail sector suffer a decline in line with other sectors? Given the expansion, how good is the retail sector — which typically a good barometer of the real economy — in being an indicator of the real economy?

Regardless, that however does not explain Midvalley Megamall still. Perhaps, like I have mentioned above, class of profession plays a large factor as far as Midvalley Megamall is concerned, thus helping the sector to continue to grow in spite of the environment.

Categories
Economics

[1965] Of Malaysian recovery began in February?

Some concrete evidence that the economy may have recovered faster than expected:

The Coincident Index (CI) rose by 0.5% in February 2009. The increase of the index was mainly contributed by real sales in manufacturing sector (0.5%), real salaries & wages in manufacturing sector (0.2%) and real contributions in EPF (0.2%). The six-month smoothed growth rate of CI showed a slight improvement to -9.8% from -11.9% recorded in the previous month.

The Leading Index (LI) which monitor the economic performance in advance also increased in February 2009. The index grew by 1.1% to 158.2 points in the current month. These were attributed by real total trade of eight major trading partners (0.5%), number of new companies registered (0.5%), Bursa Malaysia industrial index (0.1%) and number of housing permits approved (0.1%). The six-month smoothed growth rate of LI improved -0.7% in February 2009.

The six-month smoothed growth rate of Leading Index (LI) and Coincident Index (CI) showed a slight improvement in February 2009. However, it is too early to conclude that the improvement of these index provide signal of the slow economic growth to be over in the near term. [Malaysia Economic Indicators – Leading, Coincident And Lagging Indices February 2009. Department of Statistics. April 29 2009]

If indeed the economy began its recovery in February, it would provide a damning evidence proving the worthlessness of fiscal stimuli announced earlier. Why?

By February, there was no real spending with respect to the first fiscal stimulus and money only beginning to be distributed among various ministries. That is of course with the exception of the RM5 billion given to ValueCap but we can safely discount that RM5 billion because throwing money in the equity market is like hoping to raise the sea level by throwing is a pabble.

Furthermore, the second stimulus was yet to be announced.

In other words, the economy might be recovering even without the stimulus packages so celebrated by Malaysian Keynesians. But as mentioned by the Department of Statistics, it is still too earlier to confirm the worthlessness of economic stimuli. Let us wait for March first.

In the meantime, I am taking bets that March data is going to confirm February’s trend!

Categories
Economics

[1937] Of Brown, Obama and permanent interest

Libertarians typically have no reason to protest the typical annual meeting of Group 20 (G20). G20 is of course the grouping of the richest and most influential countries in the world. This year’s meet up in London however is not a typical gathering. It is extraordinary because of the global economic turbulence we are witnessing at this very moment. In trying to address the problem, both the Obama and the Brown administrations are advocating large spending and they will likely call for others to do the same at the G20. This call — probably made for the first time in recent memory — gives libertarians a reason to join the protest against the G20, particularly, against the US and the UK.

Both administrations have been building the spending momentum for weeks, if not months now. Indeed, both countries are leading the way in economic stimulus with government spending as a major pillar. Much has been spent but both English-speaking countries — especially the Obama administration — content that too many are not spending enough. The idea is that the problem is not spending too much. Rather, it is about doing too little.[1]

In Malaysia, the Finance Minister Najib Abdul Razak has unfortunately embraced that idea. With as much as RM67 billion worth of stimulus plan with another RM5 billion injected into the equity market with much opacity by the Malaysian government, the credential of the expected next administration of Malaysia — the expected Najib administration — as a big spender is not in question. This is by no mean that Malaysia is following the footstep of the US and UK. Indeed, the current administrator of Malaysia is gloating by the fact that they did it first during the Asian Financial Crisis when the US was dead against it. The Malaysia’s administration takes the current trend as a justification of their past action.

Momentum or not, both Obama and Brown administrations’ effort to lobby for more spending from other countries is meeting resistance, especially from Europe and Latin America. For regions not known for their love for free market, this is certainly refreshing when the traditional advocates of free market are taking steps in the wrong direction.

Germany called United Kingdom Prime Minister Brown’s method as crass Keynesianism.[2] Although eventually capitulating by increasing its spending but still short from what the Brown and the Obama administration had hoped for, Germany was unhappy at what they saw as them bailing out imprudent others. Germany had worked hard to keep its accounts in order and it despised the idea of spending their money to correct others’ mistakes, while undoing Germany’s successes.[3]

Czech Premier who also holds the presidency of the European Union went as far as calling Obama’s call for greater spending as the road to hell. He has been reproached by other European leaders for the harsh words but nevertheless, it exhibits the sentiment of the member states of the European Union.[4]

In Latin America where Brown and later the Vice President of the United States Joe Biden flew down earlier, both faced similar but more politely put opposition. The hero of the moment was Chile, as President Michelle Bachelet, an economic left, practically rehashed argument forwarded by the Conservative Party led by David Cameron in the United Kingdom to Brown.[5]

Judging from the results of these meetings, both Obama and Brown are likely to meet heavy resistance at the table of G20 when it comes to how to address the global economic crisis.

In all likelihood, the reversal of roles probably has little to do with philosophical difference and much to do with the fact that the economic crisis has unequal effect across the world. In Europe unlike the United States, far more comprehensive social safety nets are in place. The automatic pervasive mechanism as advocated by economist John Taylor is already in place.

Germany meanwhile had saved enough in good times that they believed that the country was able to ride on the wave safely. The same argument is applied by Chile when Bachelet effectively said no to Brown’s call for support for greater spending, which he is expected to repeat at the table of G20.

For Asian countries especially for the export-driven economies, while the pain is undeniable, it is unlikely to go as bad as in the US. And indeed, the different nature of economic crisis in Asia demands different solutions. What the US and the UK are asking is but only a one-size fit-all policy.

Also, there is a sense of the often used German word which has found its way to mainstream English language: schadenfreude. Schadenfreude means pleasure derived from watching others’ misfortune. The latest prominent leader seemingly to enjoy the scenario is the Brazilian President when Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. He reminded all that this crisis was caused by “white people with blue eyes.”[6] This schadenfreude however has become excessive lately and risks of becoming masochism.

For libertarians, the opposition mounted against the US and the UK is something to be supported of, even when the causes of opposition differ. As it goes, there are no permanent allies and no permanent enemies. There are only permanent interests.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — In this crisis, doing too little poses a greater threat than doing too much. Any sound economic strategy in the current context must be directed at both creating the jobs that Americans need and doing the work that our economy requires. Any plan geared toward only one of these objectives would be dangerously deficient. Failure to create enough jobs in the short term would put the prospect of recovery at risk. Failure to start undertaking necessary long-term investments would endanger the foundation of our recovery and, ultimately, our children’s prosperity. [Obama’s Down Payment: A Stimulus Must Aim for Long-Term Results. Lawrence Summers. Washington Post. December 8 2008]

[2] — Mr Steinbruck questioned why Britain was “tossing around billions” and closely following the high public spending model put forward by 20th Century economist John Maynard Keynes.

“The switch from decades of supply-side politics all the way to a crass Keynesianism is breathtaking,” he said. [Germany questions UK rescue plan. BBC News. December 11 2008]

[3] — German Chancellor Angela Merkel said in a speech to Germany’s parliament on Thursday that her government was doing more than most to support the world economy through higher spending and lower taxes. Germany’s stance could come under pressure from financially weaker countries within Europe as their economies sink deeper into trouble, economists say.

Struggling EU countries range from Ireland and Spain, where housing-market bubbles have burst, to Hungary and Latvia in the continent’s post-communist East, where capital flight has forced governments to seek IMF aid.

Although Germany is in its worst recession in 60 years, Europe’s biggest economy has relatively strong public finances and enjoys the trust of capital markets.

That means Germany could be doing more to raise its domestic demand through higher government borrowing, say critics. Germany’s reluctance to do so means its neighbors’ recessions will be worse than necessary, says Julian Callow, European economist at Barclays Capital. [EU Rebuffs Calls to Increase Fiscal Stimulus, Aid. Marcus Walker. Adam Cohen. Wall Street Journal. March 20 2009]

[4] — BERLIN, March 25 — The president of the European Union on Wednesday ripped the Obama administration’s economic policies, calling its deficit spending and bank bailouts “a road to hell.”

The comments by Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek of the Czech Republic, which holds the E.U.’s rotating presidency, startled some U.S. and European officials, who are preparing for President Obama’s visit next month to several European cities, including Prague, the Czech capital. [E.U. President Blasts U.S. Spending. Craig Whitlock. Washington Post. March 26 2009]

[5] — Gordon Brown suffered another setback over his diplomatic offensive yesterday, as the Chilean president inadvertently echoed Conservative attacks on the prime minister’s handling of the economy. [E.U. President Blasts U.S. Spending. Craig Whitlock. Financial Times. March 26 2009]

[6] — Mr Brown’s decision to use the South American leg of his trip to call for a G20 $100bn (£70bn) deal to support world trade was overshadowed when Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the Brazilian president, blamed the financial crisis on “white people with blue eyes”. [E.U. President Blasts U.S. Spending. Craig Whitlock. Financial Times. March 26 2009]

Categories
Economics

[1914] Of the naive are shocked

A number of individuals are surprised at the slow rate of distribution of the RM7 billion government spending announced in November 2008. Not even a billion of it has been spent. The Second Finance Minister Nor Mohamed Yakcop divulged that information in the Dewan Rakyat earlier this week while answering a question from MP Jeff Ooi.[1]

Am I surprised?

I am shocked. I am shocked not because only a tiny weenie fraction of the stimulus has been spent. I am shocked that there are individuals who are shocked that is so.

Gasp!

How can that be?

But seriously, the lag exhibits is inherently part the nature of government spending. It is its weakness. Those with libertarian sympathies have always known this. Those outside of libertarian circle acknowledged this.

The libertarian argument against government spending can be divided into two categories: philosophy and practicality. Philosophical argument relates to the size of government. Practicality argument relates to the usefulness of such spending due to its temporal issues.

Philosophical argument is debatable but the argument about usefulness is backed with empiric. Usually, it is hard to argue against hard data.

Libertarians have been proven right yet again about the usefulness of government spending. While it is enjoyable being right, the damage has been done, all for flawed thinking aligned with government spending advocates which I now call lemmings. It is becoming increasingly clear to me that a lot of people are advocating government spending simply because other countries are doing it, without proper economic rationale.

Again, being right is enjoyable but the damage is done. The role of government has been enlarged and as history has shown, resizing the government is a Herculean if not an impossible task.

Yet, to a lot of people, they are still oblivious to this fact. A statement from MIER — Malaysian Institute of Economic Research — is most telling.

Mohamed Ariff said that allocations under the second stimulus package must be spent very fast to provide a quick positive impact on the economy.

According to him, there is also a need for transparency in implementing the package in order to gain the confidence of consumers and investors.

“If transparency is not there, credibility will be a question and it will have an impact on consumers and investors’ confidence. Without confidence, nothing will happen,” he said. [MIER unfazed about financing budget deficit. Bernama via The Malaysian Insider. March 3 2009]

As written earlier, there is a trade-off between the two demands transparency and speed. You cannot have your cake and eat it. To demand for both is too Obama-like. Enough of yes-we-can mantra. Put your feet on the ground.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — A while ago, Second Finance Minister Nor Mohamed Yakcop told the Dewan Rakyat that of the RM7 billion pledged for the economic stimulus plan announced in November, only RM567.9 million had been spent thus far — after four months had gone by.

That works out to roughly 9% of the pledged money that had gone into the system for pump-priming. [Long fore-play to a stimulus. Screenshots. March 2 2009.