Question – where next for Japan

An inquiry from a reader prompts Your Neighbourhood Economist to look into the prospects for Japan

There has been another knock at the door of Your Neighbourhood Economist, with a reader what I thought Japan should be doing in the short and medium term?  The question arrived just days before another big policy development in Japan with the central bank ramping up its monetary policy.  This is the latest attempt by policy makers in Japan to resurrect an economy that has been languishing for decades.  To get an idea of what Japan should be doing, we need to start with what went wrong and why Japan has not made much progress.

What is not going right?

Japan got itself into trouble in the 1980s with the spectacular collapse of a financial bubble from which it has never recovered.  Property prices have fallen almost every year for two decades while prices for consumer goods have been inching lower for almost as long.  Japan has repeatedly tried to use fiscal stimulus but higher government spending has been unable to mask deeper problems with the economy.  Along with numerous roads and bridges which are hardly used, the main result of these rescue attempts has been a ballooning amount of government debt which only adds to Japan’s woes.

Monetary policy has been adopted recently as the potential saviour in the fight against what has been deemed as the main problem – deflation.  Falling prices were seen as prompting consumers to hold off spending and preventing companies from investing.  With this in mind, the central bank in Japan announced plans to double the money supply in early 2013.  But the policy of pumping more money into the economy was based on the false logic that deflation was a problem rather than just the symptom of a weak economy.  Instead, it is likely the case that deflation persists because prices rises had gotten out of hand in the past and need to fall back to appropriate levels.

Fix-up job not working

The result of this monetary policy has been as Your Neighbourhood Economist might have expected with just a brief and temporary boost to inflation.  Prices for consumer goods cannot rise consistently if consumers themselves do not get a similar rise in pay.  Higher wages in Japan seem unlikely as a declining population hurts aggregate demand and Japanese firms invest more overseas than domestically.  Yet, rather than change tact, Japan’s central bank has opted for more of the same. 

This involves the Bank of Japan aiming for an even larger boost to the money supply in Japan with annual purchases of 80 trillion yen (US$720 billion or £450 billion) in government bonds.  The timing of the new policy comes as the Japanese economy is faltering under the added weight of a tax hike designed to fix the government’s finances.  Japan has gotten itself deeper and deeper into trouble and seems likely to be an example of what not to do in terms of fiscal and monetary policy.   

Where to from here

The best option left to the Japanese government is to reform the economy so as to increase competition and improve efficiency.  There is substantial domestic opposition to reforms even within the current government headed by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe who included reforms as one of his key policies.  An easy way to sidestep domestic politics would be to jump on-board to plans for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).  This is a free trade agreement with the United States, Australia, Mexico, Chile, and other countries around the Pacific Rim.

Left to themselves, Japan will probably continue to stagnated due to the stifling effects of its consensus style of politics which make it tough to come up with reforms that keep everyone happy.  As such, Japan has a history of positive change only coming when imposed from the outside and this free trade agreement looks likely to follow this trend.  Greater competition from foreigners will help lower costs of business and create impetus for freeing up businesses in Japan from a host of restricting rules.  Facing up to the outside world looks like the best way to inject life back into a Japanese economy that has been slowly decaying for years.

The Economics behind Populist Parties in Europe

Voters kick up a stink in the European elections but mainstream politicians only have themselves to blame

The success of anti-EU parties in the European elections has been in the news over the past week but it is economics that provides much of the backstory.  Voters in Europe have flocked to political parties offering the illusion of a way of opting out of the changes that threaten their livelihoods.  Such frustration is understandable considering that the more established parties have only offered up piecemeal measures as a solution.  Acceptance of the limited options available will be the first step to making real progress.

Going with the flow

The economic prospects of those with few skills are dire.  Many of the sectors that provided jobs for workers in earlier generations have shrunk due to the double whammy of technology and globalization.  Gains in technology have seen a rise in the mechanization or computerization of many tasks.  Globalization has allowed firms to search the world to find the cheapest workers.  These are not trends that are expected to change anytime soon.

Despite the large number of those put out by these trends, the benefits for the economy as a whole have been unprecedented.  Technology has brought a wealth of information and possibilities to our fingertips and outsourcing has made the bulk of things we buy much cheaper.  There is no one who has not gained in some way with the overall gains far outweighing the costs.  The problem is that these costs are borne by a relatively limited number.

In an ideal world, some of the wide spread benefits would be used to compensate those missing out due to the rise of technology and globalization.  However, governments in the Western world have been moving in the opposite direction.  People are increasingly left to fend for themselves with few hand-outs from the government.  The affected workers need money during periods without work as well as help with reskilling to move into growing industries.  Yet, unemployment benefits are being trimmed back and education is becoming more expensive. 

Instead, governments look to shield themselves from the blame, and since no one is going to come out against technology, globalization is the obvious fall guy.  The EU takes the blame in Europe as the epitome of the uncontrollable external forces pushing for more open borders.  Rather than admit that they are almost powerless in the face of outside influences which are part of globalization, politicians offer temporary reprieves.  Typical responses include attempts to limit immigration, moves to block factory closures, railing against takeovers by foreign firms, or moaning about a strong currency hurting exports.  The failure of such actions to have any substantive effect leaves governments open to criticism.  Hence, the rise of political parties proposing to do more.

A dose of honesty

The policies of populist parties will not offer any long-term respite.  It is possible for an economy to shut itself off from the global economy.  However, fighting against the tide of history is not a long term option - a faster pace of economic growth in other countries which are more open will inevitably reveal the folly of such isolation.  Instead of being a viable alternative, the anti-immigration political parties tend to function as a form of protest for voters to vent their frustration at the status quo.  But there is still the possibility of one of these protest parties snatching power, likely with dire consequences.

The main remedy might be something as simple as a bit of honesty.   Politicians need to be more open with voters about the limits of their policies.  This would give them the scope needed to deal with the negative effects of technology and globalization which need more than ad hoc measures.  Long term investment in education and infrastructure will be key in terms of both dealing with the negative and reaping the most benefits.  Now is the time for governments to step up and act or else face a more rapid tumbling down the global pecking order.  Politicians and voters need to come to their senses.  And soon.

Growth in China: Steel vs Butter

Diverging fortunes of countries down under illustrate how China is changing

Trading with China can be like a roller coaster ride – lots of ups and downs without knowing what is coming next.  At a time when most of the global economy has been in the doldrums, tapping into the Chinese market has lifted the economies of a lucky few.  Australia and New Zealand are among the fortunate ones, but the diverging fortunes of these two countries highlight a shift in China’s development which will have profound effects for many others.

Riding out the twists and turns

Economic development of any country is never a smooth ride.  Growth in China has been bumpier than most with its economy jumping into life at a time when the world was becoming a much smaller place due to globalization.  The Chinese economy has expanded at an unprecedented pace due to its role as a manufacturing base built on access to foreign markets and funds from overseas. This has resulted in greater scarcity of many of the basic commodities extracted from or grown in the ground.

Countries fortunate enough to possess an abundance of natural resources, such as many in South America and Africa, gained a boost from high commodity prices at a time when the global economy is weak.  But these benefits are likely to be a temporary upturn with demand for commodities shifting as China develops.  The initial stages of the growth in China came through investment amid a building frenzy as firms rushed to put up factories to produce goods for exporting.  This has continued as the Chinese government has ramped up spending on infrastructure to counteract the weak global economy. 

The result has been a prolonged period of China sucking in resources such as iron ore, coal, and natural gas.  However, spending on investment was surging ahead at a pace which could not continue and has shown signs of an inevitable tailing off over the past year or so.  The government has instead eyed consumption as a new source of economic growth and as a means to keep the population happy.  This change in focus in China will be felt throughout the global economy.

Good and bad of changes in China

China was at the forefront of the mind of Your Neighbourhood Economist during a recent visit back home to New Zealand and a side trip to Australia.  Demand from China helped both countries to avoid a downward spiral following the global financial crisis, with Australia racking up an astounding 22 years without a recession.  Yet, it is Australia that is looking nervously at developments in China while New Zealand is looking to raise interest rates due to a booming export industry. 

The reason for concern among Australians is that its mining boom is starting to peter out.  Exports to China are still hitting record highs even as growth in the Chinese economy slows.  But investment in the mining industry has dropped off as commodity prices have fallen.  This leaves Australia in a tricky position as money from mining has pushed up the cost of living, resulting in wages that are too high to be competitive.  Employment may be starting to suffer - Your Neighbourhood Economist struggled to spot many Australians among the cabin crew on the Qantas flights to and from London.

Two gauges of economic health augur tougher times ahead.  The central bank in Australia has pledged to keep interest rates at a record low of 2.5% for some time.  Along with this, the exchange rate for one Australian dollar has dropped below parity with the US dollar after having been worth more than its US counterpart in 2011 and 2012.  In contrast, New Zealand has seen its dollar continue to climb in value with the NZ central bank already having lifted interest rates twice to 3.0% in 2014.  It is milk and cheese that is driving the upturn in the New Zealand economy with the Chinese developing a taste for dairy products as their levels of wealth expand.

The shifting fortunes of Australia show that tapping into a growing Chinese economy has its downs as well as ups.  Despite this, New Zealand shows how change in China can be turned into a positive.  With China as one of the few bright spots in the global economy, this is a story that a lot of countries will be interested in.

Free Trade – Missed by Many

Free trade is a route to greater prosperity and better government but its biggest advocate has retreated from its crucial role

US foreign policy was something that people loved to hate.  America was portrayed as a global bully who pushed everyone else into playing by its rules.  The Iraq War is perhaps the most obvious example of this but the conflict also marked a turning point when the US started to withdraw from its dealings with other countries.  While this might appear to be cause for rejoicing, the retreat of the US from international affairs has left a gap that has yet to be filled.  A lack of impetus in the promotion of free trade is one key area where the world is missing the US in a way that is not yet widely understood.

More than just buying and selling across borders

Free trade is something that many people would be glad to see the end of.  It allows for greater globalization which has been vilified as costing jobs and hurting our economy.  Although a source of pain for some in the West, globalization has been a boon for most of us, providing a range of cheaper goods for everything from bananas to iPhones.  At the same time, export industries in less developed countries have pulled millions out of poverty.

Openness to free trade with the rest of the world involves more than just exporting and importing.  It is part of a bigger package that includes less overall regulation and more economic freedom.  This may not seem like much to those in countries that already have this in place, but to places under the rule of an autocratic government, it is something worth fighting for.  Such a battle has dominated the news so far this year as it plays out in Ukraine.

The protests that overthrew the oppressive regime in Ukraine were triggered by the government stepping back from an EU trade agreement and instead opting for a closer relationship with Russia.  This was taken to have the broader meaning that the Ukrainian government was choosing the autocratic style of government characterised by Russia rather than the democratic freedoms of the EU.  Yet, the unrest in Ukraine shows the preference of its citizens and how opening up to trade (and expansion of the EU) can spur on hearts and minds when seen as part of a bigger picture. 

Free trade can have a positive influence in other ways as in Japan.  Political lobbyists such as farmers have tended to block greater access for imports into Japan.  Japanese politicians are apt to side with such vested interests instead of with voters in general who would benefit from cheaper imports.  In the past, it has only been pressure from outside the country - typically from its main ally, the US – that has helped open Japan up to free trade.  Delayed but critical reforms needed to fire up the Japanese economy could be pushed through if a deal were to be done on the Trans-Pacific Partnership which is a free trade zone encompassing countries on the Pacific Rim.

China can only offer so much

The fight for free trade typically needs a champion.  This is because the negative impact of greater trade is concentrated in a few sectors which are proactive in their opposition.  The gains from more open borders are, on the other hand, spread out amongst us all, resulting in only weak support.  Thus, despite the substantial advantages of free trade, progress has been halting.  The problem is exacerbated by each country having its own boisterous domestic forces against free trade so that getting a large number of governments to sign up is a tricky proposition. 

The US government had been the driving force behind free trade, using access to its own lucrative domestic economy as a bargaining piece.  Rather than being a bully, the US spread economic freedoms through trade like a benevolent power.  But, the US no longer has the ability or willingness to play this role.  A rebalancing of the global economy means that the lure of the US economy pales in comparison with other countries such as China.  The weakening of its relative economic strength also means that the US is less generous in its bargaining with other countries.  This is reflected in the stalling of what was supposed to be the next big round of global trade talks which started in Doha in 2001.

The lure of Western ideals as embodied in free trade still remains.  Countries clamber to join the European Union despite its recent troubles.  Economic power may be shifting away from the US and Europe but their democratic style of government is still sought after by many (although politicians have not been showing themselves in a good light).  Free trade in itself is not the answer but it will help push many countries in the right direction. 

Insights from Asia: New Opium Needed

China has always been a tricky country to trade with but there are still ways of tapping into its growing wealth

Your Neighbourhood Economist has just returned from a four week trip around Asia which provided a few insights worth mentioning.  The first of these came during a layover in the bustling metropolis of Hong Kong with its unique mix of the old and new.  It was the history behind Hong Kong becoming a British colony that caught the attention of Your Neighbourhood Economist because it now seems as if history is repeating itself.

Similarities between Past and Present

In the 18th century China was beginning to open up to trade with European countries.  Goods from China including tea, silk, and porcelain were proving popular in Europe but there was nothing that Europeans merchants could tempt the Chinese into buying in return.  Thus, payment for Chinese goods was made in the form of silver which became a drain on finances.  As a solution, Britain increasingly relied on bringing opium into China but this created conflict between the two countries as importing opium into China was illegal.  The result was the Opium Wars which ended with a British victory and the island of Hong Kong being ceded to Britain by the Chinese as part of their surrender.

Move the clock forward a hundred and fifty years or so and some things are still the same.  China is again exporting goods that the West is keen to purchase – nowadays it is not luxuries but items produced using cheap Chinese labour.  Further similarities include the strong grip exerted by Chinese leaders over the management of the local economy.  Western firms are still eager to sell to Chinese consumers but their options for doing so are limited.  However, this is not because foreign companies have nothing with which to entice the Chinese.  This time the reason is that the Chinese government is acting to stall an invasion of multinational firms until local businesses become large enough to compete.

It makes sense for China to keep control over one of its main resources – a domestic consumer market with one billion enthusiastic participants.  Your Neighbourhood Economist would also advise the same policy of protecting up-and-coming Chinese firms from their battle-hardened Western rivals.  There are few things that China needs at its current state of economic development that it cannot provide for itself.  One of the handful of sectors where imports are important is commodities but China already gets most of its supplies from other emerging economies.

What to do differently this time around

All this has left Western governments scratching their heads with regard to selling to China.  Some countries such as Germany have prospered by selling machinery for Chinese firms to use in their factories.  But most other developed countries are struggling to find their own niche products to sell to China.  As a consequence, large numbers of container ships sail back to China mostly empty.  Opium is obviously no longer an option yet countries like Britain do need to find a way to tap into the growing wealth in China.

It is trade in services that is likely to be key.  Britain has lots of creative and business savvy firms specialising in the design and technology sectors.  Finance is one area which is still out of bounds in China but other sectors are open to outsiders.  Education, on the other hand, is a service that China is finding it hard to provide for itself in either sufficient quantity or quality.  Countries such as Britain can access Chinese wealth while also expanding its educated workforce either through Chinese students who study aboard or foreign schools set up in China.  In the future, higher paying service jobs rather than employment in declining industries such as manufacturing are more likely to provide the bulk of “good jobs”.  China will not always be so closed off or in need of education services but a focus on education seems like a winning formula in the meanwhile.