Olá, Visitante. Por favor entre ou registe-se se ainda não for membro.

Entrar com nome de utilizador, password e duração da sessão
 

Autor Tópico: Grandes mitos - debunked (you're welcome)  (Lida 2433 vezes)

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Grandes mitos - debunked (you're welcome)
« em: 2015-10-19 17:37:26 »
China's Selling Tons of U.S. Debt. Americans Couldn't Care Less.

For all the dire warnings over China’s retreat from U.S. government debt, there’s one simple fact that is being overlooked: American demand is as robust as ever.
Not only are domestic mutual funds buying record amounts of Treasuries at auctions this year, U.S. investors are also increasing their share of the $12.9 trillion market for the first time since 2012, data compiled by Bloomberg show.



The buying has been crucial in keeping a lid on America’s financing costs as China -- the largest foreign creditor with about $1.4 trillion of U.S. government debt -- pares its stake for the first time since at least 2001. Yields on benchmark Treasuries have surprised almost everyone by falling this year, dipping below 2 percent last week.

It’s not the scenario that doomsayers predicted would leave the U.S. vulnerable to China’s whims. But the fact that Americans are pouring into Treasuries may point to a deeper concern: the world’s largest economy, plagued by lackluster wage growth and almost no inflation, just isn’t strong enough for the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates.

“As you develop a more pessimistic view on global growth, inflation, and rates, asset managers are going to buy Treasuries in that environment,” said Brandon Swensen, the co-head of U.S. fixed-income at RBC Global Asset Management, which oversees $35 billion.

Overseas Creditors

Overseas creditors have played a key role in financing America’s debt as the nation borrowed heavily to pull the economy out of recession. Since 2008, foreigners have more than doubled their Treasury investments and now own about $6.1 trillion.

China has led the way, funneling hundreds of billions into Treasuries as the Asian nation boomed and it bought dollars to limit the gains in its currency.
Now that’s changing.

This year alone, China’s holdings have fallen about $200 billion as it raises money in support of its flagging economy and stock market. If the pattern holds, it would be the first time that China has pulled back from Treasuries on an annual basis. The tally includes Belgium, which analysts say is home to Chinese custodial accounts.



The People’s Bank of China directed questions on its Treasury holdings to the State Administration of Foreign Exchange, which didn’t reply to a fax seeking comment.
The Chinese pullback has led some to raise troubling questions about the U.S.’s ability to borrow and refinance its obligations at ultra-low rates year after year. It’s also reignited long-held concerns, aired over the years by both Republican and Democratic politicians, that China’s ownership of U.S. debt is a threat to America’s independence.

Homegrown Buyers

Homegrown demand for Treasuries suggests there’s no reason to panic.
American funds have purchased 42 percent of the $1.6 trillion of notes and bonds sold at auctions this year, the highest since the Treasury department began breaking out the data five years ago. As recently as 2011, they bought as little as 18 percent.
As a group, U.S. investors of all types have also stepped up their holdings of Treasuries since they fell to a low in mid-2014. In 2015, that share has climbed 2.1 percentage points to 33.1 percent of the U.S. government debt market.
That might not sound like much, but the annual increase -- which has pushed up Americans’ holdings to a record $4.3 trillion -- would be the first since 2012.

Misplaced Worries

“The worries about China selling are misplaced,” said David Ader, the head of U.S. government-bond strategy at CRT Capital Group LLC. “This was one of the great fears of the bond market, and it’s happening and we took it in stride.”
While the appetite among Americans for the haven of U.S. debt has kept the government’s financing costs low, what’s worrisome is what it suggests about the health of the economy, according to George Goncalves, the head of interest-rate strategy at Nomura Holdings Inc., one of 22 dealers that are obliged to bid at Treasury auctions.



Sure, the U.S. is creating jobs, but a raft of disappointing indicators, from retail sales to manufacturing, suggests consumers are scaling back just as overseas demand weakens.
And wages are stagnating for many Americans. Since the recession ended, average hourly earnings have increased less than in any expansion since the 1960s. Without higher wages to spur spending, inflation has remained stubbornly low.

Price Pressures

The auction data shows that U.S. funds targeted 30-year bonds -- those most vulnerable to rising growth and inflation -- the most among interest-bearing Treasuries. That comes as traders are pricing in the likelihood the inflation rate will remain below the Fed’s 2 percent goal over the coming decade.

Yields on the 10-year note, the benchmark for trillions of dollars of debt securities worldwide, were about 2.04 percent on Monday. That’s about a percentage point below where they were at the end of 2013.

Economists in a Bloomberg survey now see a 15 percent chance the U.S. will slide into a recession in the next 12 months, the highest estimate since 2013.



Investors in the U.S. “are making a decision based on their outlook and it’s a reflection of the economy as well as their risk aversion,” Nomura’s Goncalves said.

It also suggests the Fed policy makers may want to rethink their assumptions about the need to raise interest rates any time soon. While Fed Chair Janet Yellen has said she still sees the economy growing enough for the central bank to raise rates by year-end, traders are skeptical. They see only a 32 percent chance of a rate increase by
December, while the odds of a March rise are at little more than a coin flip.
Some Fed officials are coming around to that view. Governors Lael Brainard and Daniel Tarullo both indicated this month the Fed should wait until clearer signs of inflation emerge.

“There’s no pressing reason for the Fed to hike rates and there are clear risks against a global backdrop that’s so fragile,” said Robert Tipp, the chief investment strategist at Prudential Financial’s fixed-income unit, which oversees $533 billion.

bloomberg
« Última modificação: 2015-10-29 01:59:54 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Incognitus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30961
    • Ver Perfil
Já se sabia que é irrelevante se a China vende ou não. A Fed pode comprar mais do que qualquer montante que a China possa vender, se necessário.
"Nem tudo o que pode ser contado conta, e nem tudo o que conta pode ser contado.", Albert Einstein

Incognitus, www.thinkfn.com

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
o interessante nisto, para lá do papão chinês se ter evaporado, é que quem está a tomar o lugar da China são fundos norte-americanos.

fazendo esboroar-se ainda outro mito: o de que a próxima geração de americanos estaria submergida em dívida.

a dívida de uma pessoa é o rendimento de outra.

a próxima geração de americanos poderá ter muita dívida (debatível) mas se a tiver, terá um income proporcional.

L
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Reg

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 13519
    • Ver Perfil
centros financeiros sedeados nas Caraíbas, com 350,6 mil milhões. Estes centros estão instalados em Bonaire, St. Eustatius e Saba, Bahamas, Bermuda, Ilhas Caimão, Curacao, Sint Maarten, e Panamá. Uma nova série estatística, iniciada em Junho de 2006, também inclui as Ilhas Virgens Britânicas.

http://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/mercados/obrigacoes/detalhe/japan_surpasses_china_as_top_foreign_holder_of_treasuries.html

sao maiores estrangeiros compram divida nao tem  fundos instalados na america
« Última modificação: 2015-10-19 18:46:16 por Reg »
Democracia Socialista Democrata. igualdade de quem berra mais O que é meu é meu o que é teu é nosso

VladIII

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Mensagens: 162
    • Ver Perfil
    • Chill
Oitras que estao cheias disso é santo domingo, st kits, e turks & caicos, mas o verdadeiro mercado negro das offshores nem é o caribe, é no oceano indico.

Zel

  • Visitante
o interessante nisto, para lá do papão chinês se ter evaporado, é que quem está a tomar o lugar da China são fundos norte-americanos.

fazendo esboroar-se ainda outro mito: o de que a próxima geração de americanos estaria submergida em dívida.

a dívida de uma pessoa é o rendimento de outra.

a próxima geração de americanos poderá ter muita dívida (debatível) mas se a tiver, terá um income proporcional.

L

isso eh como dizer que a desigualdade nao eh um problema

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
o interessante nisto, para lá do papão chinês se ter evaporado, é que quem está a tomar o lugar da China são fundos norte-americanos.

fazendo esboroar-se ainda outro mito: o de que a próxima geração de americanos estaria submergida em dívida.

a dívida de uma pessoa é o rendimento de outra.

a próxima geração de americanos poderá ter muita dívida (debatível) mas se a tiver, terá um income proporcional.

L

isso eh como dizer que a desigualdade nao eh um problema

não. o argumento dos catastrofistas era que a américa devia ao estrangeiro e que a próxima geração iria carregar uma enorme dívida ao estrangeiro. é falso. só isso.
os americanos devem fundamentalmente a si próprios.
estou a falar da falência de um mito. não de outra coisa.
'tá?

L
« Última modificação: 2015-10-20 01:45:59 por Lark »
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Grandes mitos - debunked (you're welcome)
« Responder #7 em: 2015-10-29 02:00:15 »
Paul Krugman - New York Times Blog



Via Mark Thoma — whom everyone interested in today’s economic debates should check out daily — Thomas Laubach and John C. Williams of the Fed have a new paper updating their estimates of the natural real rate of interest. For those new to the term, the natural rate is a standard economic concept dating back a century; it’s the rate of interest at which the economy is neither depressed and deflating nor overheated and inflating. And it’s therefore the rate monetary policy is supposed to achieve.

Laubach and Williams find that the natural rate has plunged in recent years, and is now very, very low. The particular statistical method they use is reasonable, but in any case — as they document — the result pops out for pretty much any plausible methodology. Basically, we’ve had multiple years of very low rates, with no hint of a runaway boom or an inflationary takeoff, so any reasonable estimate is going to say that these low, low rates are close to (and maybe above) the natural rate.

L-W attribute the decline in the natural rate largely to the slowing of potential output, which in turn reflects demography and what looks like a slowdown in technological progress. That’s more speculative. But the low natural rate is as solid a result as anything in real time can be.

This in turn tells you several things. It says that all the complaints that the Fed is artificially keeping rates low are nonsense; rates are low because that’s what the real economy wants, and the Fed’s only alternative would be to create a depression.

It also casts even more doubt on the wisdom of the Fed’s urge to raise rates. Nothing in the economic situation suggests that rates are too low right now. And don’t tell us that we need to start “normalizing”: all indications are that “normal” has changed a lot since 2008, and trying to set interest rates as if the old normal were still valid is a recipe for very bad outcomes.

Finally, if the natural real rate is zero or less, a 2 percent inflation target gives very little room for interest rate cuts to fight recessions. The case for raising the target — which means not raising rates if and when inflation finally creeps up to 2 percent — just keeps getting stronger.

In any case, the message about what the Fed should do now is clear: nothing.

K
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Grandes mitos - debunked (you're welcome)
« Responder #8 em: 2015-11-12 00:43:11 »
A Note on Aggregate Demand and Aggregate Supply
January 19, 2011 2:57

Just a brief note: one thing that keeps appearing in comments is the notion that because we had a bubble, in which some people were borrowing too much, the economic growth of 2000-2007 wasn’t “real” — that it was all a figment of our imagination.

This is confusing demand with supply.

We really did produce all the goods and services counted in GDP; we were able to do that because we had willing workers, a sufficient capital stock, the right technology, and so on.

What is true is that some of the spending that created demand for those goods and services was debt-financed, and those debtors can’t continue to spend the way they did. But that doesn’t say that the capacity has somehow ceased to exist; it only says that if we want to keep the capacity in use, someone else has to spend instead. In other words, past growth wasn’t an illusion, or a fraud; but we need policies to sustain aggregate demand.

krugman
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Lark

  • Ordem dos Especialistas
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 4627
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Grandes mitos - debunked (you're welcome)
« Responder #9 em: 2015-11-12 00:45:13 »
Paul Krugman - New York Times Blog

So, if the Minneapolis Fed felt the need to maintain conservation of NK, they could have chosen to replace Narayana Kocherlakota with a New Keynesian. Instead, they chose Neel Kashkari. Brad DeLong isn’t happy, and this Twitter exchange suggests that he has good reason to worry.

I’ve written before about the all-too-common fallacy of confusing demand with supply, of arguing that because we had a bubble — so that some component of aggregate demand was unsustainable — the economy as a whole was somehow producing more than its potential. Let me just repeat what I said then:

Just a brief note: one thing that keeps appearing in comments is the notion that because we had a bubble, in which some people were borrowing too much, the economic growth of 2000-2007 wasn’t “real” — that it was all a figment of our imagination.

This is confusing demand with supply.

We really did produce all the goods and services counted in GDP; we were able to do that because we had willing workers, a sufficient capital stock, the right technology, and so on.

What is true is that some of the spending that created demand for those goods and services was debt-financed, and those debtors can’t continue to spend the way they did. But that doesn’t say that the capacity has somehow ceased to exist; it only says that if we want to keep the capacity in use, someone else has to spend instead. In other words, past growth wasn’t an illusion, or a fraud; but we need policies to sustain aggregate demand.

But now we are about to have a Fed president who says:

How’s this? Growth was artificially fast due to leveraging of econ. Trying to return to that rate thru def spend is futile.

In the words of Charlie Brown, AAUGH!

That word “artificially” is the real telltale, as is Kashkari’s description of Japanese monetary stimulus as “morphine.” It’s straight out of the liquidationist playbook, e.g. Hayek denouncing the use of “artificial stimulants” to fight the Great Depression.

So, great: we now have a liquidationist in a senior position in the Fed system.

krugman
Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Battle.
Ian Mclaren
------------------------------
If you have more than you need, build a longer table rather than a taller fence.
l6l803399
-------------------------------------------
So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Incognitus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Mensagens: 30961
    • Ver Perfil
Re: Grandes mitos - debunked (you're welcome)
« Responder #10 em: 2015-11-12 01:05:02 »
A falácia aí é a seguinte. Imagina uma economia com apenas 2 pessoas. Uma faz batatas e a outra faz alfaces, e elas trocam entre si. 1 batata por uma alface. O tipo que faz batatas consegue fazer 10, o que faz alfaces consegue fazer 5. Mas durante algum tempo, o tipo que faz alfaces obtém crédito e consegue comprar 10 batatas apesar de só ter 5 alfaces para entregar.

Depois, o tipo das alfaces esgota o crédito.

O que acontece?

O tipo das alfaces tem que reduzir o seu consumo de batatas para 5. E o tipo das batatas não lhe adianta produzir mais do que 5 batatas. Adicionalmente, neste processo, existe um processo deflacionário que pressiona em baixa o valor das batatas, tentando encontrar um reequilíbrio sem que a produção de batatas caia tanto.

Bem, o que o Krugman diz é:
* O tipo das batatas conseguia fazer 10! Só falta procura! Pois só falta, mas qualquer solução que não seja a deflação, é uma tentativa de enganar o tipo das batatas ... basicamente, seria dar crédito ou dinheiro "gratuito" ao tipo das alfaces para ele conseguir comprar as 10 batatas. E o que ganhava o tipo das batatas desse processo? Ganhava ser o otário da história.
* A alternativa seria a deflação natural. Mas lá está, tal coisa não agrada ao Krugman.

Já agora, a deflação iria ocorrer para remover produção de batatas. Se existissem muitos produtores de batatas, o preço da batata cairia e os produtores menos eficientes de batatas iriam sair do negócio e produzir outra coisa qualquer. A economia ficaria mais equilibrada já que a produção nova seria teoricamente mais sustentável (estaria disponível para trocar por batatas ou alfaces). A sociedade ficaria mais rica, porque para o mesmo número de produtores teria maior diversidade de produtos e até maior produção e produtividade (já que os produtores que mudam de ramo são os menos eficientes no ramo original).

Um processo equivalente ocorre com um aumento de produtividade.
« Última modificação: 2015-11-12 01:07:07 por Incognitus »
"Nem tudo o que pode ser contado conta, e nem tudo o que conta pode ser contado.", Albert Einstein

Incognitus, www.thinkfn.com