Categories
Economics Society

[2632] The worthlessness and the vestige of gold

In the olden days when four-legged beasts were the best mode of land transportation, gold was money. Everyday transactions involved gold and other precious metals as the medium of exchange then, just as paper money now dominates transactions in the modern economy. Gold had a very special position in human culture then due to its fundamental functions. It is still special today, but only because of vestigial reasons.

During the European Age of Exploration, Portuguese and Spanish explorers crossed the seas under the guises of God, Gold and Glory. The truth is that it was never really about god and religion. It was about the gold more than anything else. When Hernán Cortés and Francisco Pizarro first set for the heart of Aztec and Inca separately, they were dreaming of the glittering yellow metal for themselves.

As other European powers rose to take their place in history, the search for gold became less explicit. The new explorers, traders and later colonialists did not go out in search of El Dorado but it was still about amassing wealth through commerce. It was less explicitly about gold but yet, wealth was very much denominated in gold still.

Sometime during the industrial era, gold and other precious metals lost their function as the medium of exchange. They were no longer circulated as widely as they were during pre-industrial period. It was all papers and coins by the time motorcars, trains and steamboats were crisscrossing the world. By the 20th century, the dominance of papers was almost absolute.

Nevertheless, all money was still backed by gold and other precious metals.  Papers and coins struck out of cheaper materials were merely claims to those precious metals. All issuers promised to convert those papers and coins to gold upon demand. So, gold may have lost its role as a medium of exchange during industrial times but it was still the ultimate arbiter of the value of money.

That last real function of gold ended in the 1970s. The United States government ended the direct convertibility of the US dollar to gold as a reaction to an economic crisis. Soon after, the world followed in ditching the convertibility and thus, gold stopped being special.

Many continued to believe that money, even in Malaysia, is backed by gold but the truth is that all economies in the world today run on fiat currency. That is, money today has value only because its issuers say so and the market believes the words of the issuers.

To put it in clearer terms, gold has no importance to modern central banking.

Of value instead to the modern central banking system — and the wider economic system — as far as money is concerned is trust. Indeed, at the heart of capitalism, is trust but not gold. Capitalism can survive without gold—it is running affirmatively better without gold—but it cannot survive without trust.

So, gold has no fundamental economic function to play anymore in our modern world. Gold is neither a medium of exchange nor does it back any money. Because of this, gold really does not deserve the reputation it enjoys now.

The reputation of gold lives on only because of humanity’s vestigial attitude towards gold.

The phenomenon is much like in the case of Pavlov’s dog. The dog learned that a ringing bell meant food. The dog then began salivating at the sound of the ringing bell instead of at the food per se. It did so even when food was not present. At the end of the day, the dog had been conditioned to salivate to something else entirely. In some ways, the dog had been tricked.

In the same way the dog had been conditioned, humanity has been conditioned to think favorably of gold. Gold has seeped into our consciousness regardless of the fact that gold now has no fundamental economic function anymore. So persistent in fact the favorable predisposition towards gold that too many laypersons still believe that money today is backed by gold, despite the abolition of such a system more than four decades ago.

The momentum of history is huge and it takes time for humanity as a whole to adapt to the new reality of fiat currency.

The failure to adapt can exert cost especially on the gullible. The case of Genneva is one example where individuals were cheated out of their vestigial sentiment for gold.

Believing that gold had a special place in the modern world, they too eagerly bought the metal from Genneva while not realizing that they were being manipulated. It is only too bad that reality had to set in and the scam had to end. Actions by the authority in both Malaysia and Singapore only hastened the inevitable collapse of Genneva, just as any large-scale scam eventually will under of its own weight.

Of course, financial scams come in so many other ways and gold is not an exclusive tool for scams. Old-styled Ponzi scheme relies on just money, plain old greed and some doses of gullibility. Still, the obsession with gold is unhealthy. The sooner we all realize that there is nothing special about gold anymore, better we all will be.

After the learning is complete then perhaps we may start to put our money into something more productive than the vestige of gold.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved
First published in Selangor Times on November 23 2012.

Categories
Economics

[2366] Does the rounding mechanism contribute to inflation?

Does the rounding mechanism in Malaysia contribute to inflation?

Malaysia implemented the rounding mechanism in 2008. All prices are now rounded to the nearest five sen. The mechanism makes the one sen coins redundant although the coins themselves are legal tenders still.[1]

To answer the question, I have an anecdote to tell.

Australia also employs the rounding mechanism. The only difference between the Australian and Malaysian systems is that the Down Under version applies to cash transactions only. In Malaysia, prices are rounded regardless of transaction types.

I am a stingy person. In the case with the Australian system, I was literally penny wise, pound foolish. Well, more penny wise and less pound foolish. Considerably less for the latter.

Really.

Anyway, whenever I went out shopping in Sydney, I would check up on the price and see if whether it would be rounded up or down. If rounded up, then I would use my card so that I would save a couple of pennies. If down, I would use cash to get penny discounts.

I did that because I thought these firms were getting too much of the good stuff. I also thought they might have purposely priced their items so that prices would always rounded up in their favor. Hey, if I were the shopkeepers, I would do that too. And some of these businesses are big. I am not anti-business or anything but I sure do think they can make do just fine by not squeezing another penny out of me. Not when I am still alive damnit!

So, I would do that. After awhile, I thought maybe, it did not matter in the end. The saving from this little exercise was really small that if the whole two years worth of saving were combined, I could probably get a candy. One candy. That would not have impressed the ex-girlfriend by much.

The point is that even if the rounding mechanism contributes to inflation, I doubt it is significant.

But that is an anecdote. Here is something more scientific.

Chande and Fisher in 2003 wrote about the effect of rounding mechanism in Canada. They concluded that the expected impact was small. In fact, the effect of rounding on inflation is expected to be zero. Why?

They assumed the last digit that matters in rounding is uniformly distributed from 0 to 9. Therefore, the probability of each digit occurring is 10%. Since four digits will be rounded up, four digits will be rounded down and another two do not need to be rounded, the expected extra cost or revenue incurred or earned from the mechanism is zero. In simpler terms, the mechanism’s expected contribution to inflation is zero. On average, the sellers and the purchasers do not enjoy or suffer extra revenue or cost due to the rounding mechanism.

The authors ran a simulation and concluded that for purchases more than two items, the last digit of the price did distribute uniformly across the natural number line.

For purchases of less than three items, the digits did not distribute evenly. This suggests that this kind of purchases does contribute to inflation but since it is one or two purchases, its impact is likely small as suspected by Chande and Fisher.

How about strategic pricing?

Let me quote the paper I mentioned:

Thus, in order to take advantage of rounding, a retailer would need to know how frequently different combinations of items are purchased. While retailers like Tim Horton’s would have access to such data, Table 2 suggests that even if prices were strategically adjusted by firms to squeeze extra revenue from their customers, the amount per transaction would be so trivially small as to have little impact on consumer behaviour or welfare. Moreover, we have focused on price-setting by a single firm and ignored the reaction of other firms selling in the same market. It is an open question whether an oligopolistic market would lead to equilibrium prices that exploited rounding to the detriment of consumers. Indeed, anecdotal evidence from New Zealand suggests that such fears maybe unwarranted. Correspondence with the Reserve Bank of New Zealand, which in 1990 removed its 1- and 2-cent coins from circulation, revealed that some supermarkets at the time advertised they would always round in favour of the customer. [Dinu Chande. Timothy C. G. Fisher. Have a Penny? Need a Penny? Eliminating the One-Cent Coin from Circulation. Canadian Public Policy. December 2003]

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

[1] — The Rounding Mechanism is a method whereby the total bill amount (including goods and services subject to tax) is rounded upwards or downwards to the nearest multiple of 5 sen. In this regard, total bill amount that ends in 1, 2, 6 and 7 sen will be rounded down while 3, 4, 8 and 9 sen will be rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5 sen. [Frequently Asked Questions on Rounding Mechanism. Bank Negara Malaysia. Accessed May 19 2011]

Categories
Economics

[2333] A story that is likelier better than deposits battle narrative

I had some trouble reading an article on the front page of the business section of The Star dated today. The headline “Battle for deposits” roars to tell the world that Malaysian banks are in the battlefield sword in hand fighting for deposits, especially for current accounts.[1] I find the whole idea somehow unconvincing. I could not quite finger it but there was something definitely missing from the picture. I wanted to roar back and so I gave it a thought. And I think I have got it.

The article reasons that with the overnight policy rate increasing, these deposits offer cheap source of financing for banks. It sounds fine until one asks, why are the owners of funds putting their cash in low yielding accounts? Hmm…

That is a far more interesting issue at hand than the alleged battle for deposits. I will come back to this.

But first, I did some calculation after mining the relevant data from BNM just to satisfy this weird curiosity of mine. Compare the graphics produced by The Star

…with this longer period time series that I produced using the same data:

As you can see, the rate 11% is rather typical for the past 10 years for deposits in current accounts. Annual growth rate between 2001 and 2010 is close to 13%. So I am wondering if the proof of 11% offered is any proof at all.

Maybe, there is a battle for deposits. Maybe, there is less wealth around and so these banks have to work harder than usual, thus the battle for deposits. Maybe but I am skeptical of it. Even if it is true, like I said, there is a more interesting issue at hand.

Another point that does not run parallel with the deposits war story is the drop in savings deposit growth rate. The average annual growth rate for savings deposits is 8%. If 11% annual growth rate of deposits in current accounts that is really around average paints the picture of a battle, what about 3% rate for savings that is well below average?

I have a more interesting and a likely more consistent story to tell.

I think the whole issue is a symptom of economic recovery. It might be an affirmation of economic recovery.

The continuing growth of deposits in current accounts suggests that there are more transactions going on. The drop in savings deposit suggests that individuals and companies might be using the money or putting it somewhere else with better returns rather than keeping it relatively idle. Companies might have purchased more supplies for sales or invested more, while individuals might have gone spending somewhere. More spending, less saving.

What adds to the plausibility of the story is that in 2008, growth rate of deposits in current accounts slowed. The recent financial crisis began in 2007 while the full realization that we were in trouble only became clear in 2008. That hit confidence and many began to hoard money. That meant harder business environment and less transactions. Since current accounts are typically used for business transactions, deposits in current accounts should not grow too big, or should even shrink. Look at the growth rate in 2008: 6% compared to 23% the year before and 11% the year after.

Here are a few things that may strengthen the story further. One, increasing sales and investment figures for companies. Two, increasing private consumption for individuals. Three, higher velocity of money.

Anybody wants to check that? I am going to bed.

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

[1] — PETALING JAYA: Banks are engaged in a war for deposits, especially for current accounts, in their drive to build up low-cost deposits as a means of cheaper funding.

“Demand deposits (current account), which were relatively much cheaper than fixed and savings deposits, had been marking a strong year-on-year (y-o-y) growth of about 11% from 2008 to 2010,” RAM Ratings head of financial institution ratings Promod Dass told StarBiz.

”This clearly indicates the drive among banks to build up low-cost deposits for access to cheaper cost of funds. This active strategy of promoting current accounts usually involves corporate clients who utilise the service for their businesses,” he said.

According to Dass, this was in line with the increasing overnight policy rate (OPR) where the average deposit rate had risen since 2009. [Battle for deposits. Sharidan M. Ali. The Star. March 14 2011]

Categories
Economics

[2236] Of Kelantan gold dinar is bound to fail

The idea of the issuance of gold dinar and silver dirham as currency in Kelantan is not new but this week, the northern Malaysian state has decided to go ahead with it finally.[0] This will be a lesson demonstrating the superiority of  fiat currency to that which is backed by commodity: commodity-backed currency simply does not do well alongside fiat currency.

Never mind the legality of the whole thing.

First of all, the dinar and the dirham are pegged to the ringgit.[1] This option eliminates the need to use the new currency vis-a-vis the ringgit, notwithstanding the supposedly Islamic ideal. With wider circulation, why would a person not choose the ringgit over the new currency? Call it the status quo bias but that is the reality.

Furthermore,  the dinar is likely fail to fulfill the double coincidence of wants, which is necessary for any trade to happen between at least two parties. This is the reason why barter trading is not nearly as popular as trading done through a medium of exchange called money.

A far more threatening factor is the prices of metals. Sufficient increase in gold and silver prices vis-à-vis the exchange rate will make the money more valuable as metals than as a medium of exchange. That will create an incentive to sell the dinar and the dirham as metals, thus lowering the quantity of money in circulation. The next time metal prices go through the roof, one may expect the dinar and the dirham as a currency to collapse or at the very least becoming very, very unpopular. It will be hard to see the currency around and in use.

One possible solution to the circulation problem is that the Kelantan government may want to support the currency by printing more of them. That will prove to be a costly policy to carry out in the long run.

Alternatively, the Kelantan government may reevaluate exchange rate between the commodity-backed currency and the fiat ringgit to address rising gold prices. The higher value of the commodity-backed currency compared to the prices of the relevant metals, the more valuable it will be as currency and less as metals.

If reevaluation is the favored policy, it will be a race between the issuer and arbitrageurs: who can act first. There is an handsome profits to be made. Remember, for instance, the painful experience of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism.

Between a state government (along with the issuer) with no experience in monetary policy and countless arbitrageurs, I have a feeling the state government will not fare too well. I doubt Kelantan has sufficient reserve to support a currency, in case of a run. Somebody once said something to this effect in a different but entirely applicable scenario: the government has to win every time but the arbitrageurs need to win only once to induce a collapse of the currency.

Or, the Kelantan government can float the exchange rate. But if it does so, there is a feeling that that policy would make the dinar redundant as a currency to the ringgit, leading us back to the status quo bias.

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

[0] — KOTA BAHARU, Aug 12 (Bernama) — Kelantan paved the way to become the first state to introduce the gold dinar and silver dirham currency on Thursday.

Speaking when launching the Syariah currency, Menteri Besar Kelantan Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat said the state would strive to expand the use of gold dinar and silver dirham in all transactions, including paying civil servants’ remuneration. [Kelantan Launches Dinar Gold. Bernama. August 12 2010]

[1] — The exchange rate are RM589 to a dinar and RM13 to a dirham. See World Islamic Mint. Accessed August 13 2010.

Categories
Economics Science & technology

[1862] Of orangutans understand money

Really!

Orangutans can help each other get food by trading tokens, scientists have discovered – but only if the help goes in both directions.

Researchers from the University of St Andrews found orangutans could learn the value of tokens and trade them, helping each other win bananas. [Orangutans learn to trade favours. BBC. December 24 2008]

How cool is that?