Tuesday 12 April 2011

US QE2 coming to an end in June 2011.

There has been significant speculation among market commentaries that QE2 would not be renewed with a QE3, at least not immediately, resulting in  market corrections preceding or immediately after the end of QE2.

And if you have wondered what QE is about, it is a program created by the US Federal Reserve to purchase US government bonds to finance US deficit.  In doing so, the US government can offer a lower interest rate on the bonds put up for sale, because the Fed will step in to help purchase US government bonds not picked up by market buyers.

Without QE3, the US government would have to offer better and higher interest rates to buyers, and when that happens, the price of bonds will fall.


Update: 
April 13, 2011 - 11:52AM: Goldman Sachs bearish on oil -
http://www.smh.com.au/business/markets/goldman-sachs-turns-bearish-on-oil-20110413-1dddf.html



Reference: http://seekingalpha.com/article/262856-qe3-will-come-when-markets-start-to-correct

QE2 is supposed to end on June 2011. Will the Fed continue with QE3? In short, yes, but probably not right away.
Lately, Richard Fischer of the Dallas Fed has called upon Mr. Bernanke to end QE2 right away. Oil, precious metals and food prices are soaring. Overall, the pressure on Mr. Bernanke to end quantitive easing is growing. However, although the pressure is mounting on the Fed to end quantitive easing, this outcome is not likely. More likely is that the Fed will stop QE2 temporarily in order to test how the equity and bond markets will react. And if the markets will start to correct, he will probably resume QE.
There are a few reasons for that: First, QE1 ended at the first quarter of 2010. Not long after (as can be seen from the chart below) the S&P 500 peaked. The S&P 500 has declined by about 16%. At the end of August 2010, Mr. Bernanke hinted he will start QE2. This announcement pretty much marked the end of the correction. It’s interesting to note that the only time since the beginning of QE that the S&P 500 had a meaningful correction is when the Fed stopped QE1.

From the chart below, you can see there is a high correlation between the expansion of the Fed’s balance sheet and the rise of the S&P 500. (According to David Rosenberg, there is an 88% correlation). This leads to the adding up that the current rally can be mostly contributed to the excessive liquidity. As Marc Faber said "When money is being printed every thing will go up." Therefore, this leads to the conclusion that the Fed will have to continue to support the market in order to avoid a crash in the equity markets.

The second reason is mostly political. If the market will start to correct after QE2 is ended, two things will happen: (1) The political pressure on the Fed to resume quantitive easing in order to "save" the equity markets will grow; (2) As the market corrects, the Fed will have an excuse to continue with QE, after which it will be harder to blame the Fed for continuing QE for no reason.
Thirdly, the Fed is the biggest purchaser of Treasury Bonds. If the Fed will stop the purchases of Treasury Bonds, they’re risking an interest rate spike, which as a result will make mortgages less serviceable (which will put additional pressure on the housing market), and will make the U.S debt compound at an even faster rate.

Lastly, the only way the U.S. government can "solve" their debt problem is by inflating it away (outright default is unlikely because of political reasons). If the Fed will keep inflation high, and as a result devalue the USD, this then makes the debt more serviceable.
To sum up, the Fed has no other option but to continue with quantitive easing. However, that will probably not happen right away. After the markets will start to correct and interest rates rise, only then the Fed will probably announce the continuation of QE.
Disclosure: I am long gold and silver

Tuesday 5 April 2011

PM Lee Hsien Loong says "Two-party system 'not feasible'"


http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20110406-271953.html

By Kenny Chee
Having a two-party system of politics is not feasible because there is not enough talent to form two first-class teams to govern Singapore well, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong last night.
"The most effective way to get a two-party system is to split the People's Action Party (PAP) in two because the talent is there," he said.
Speaking at a forum on leadership renewal at the University Cultural Centre, Mr Lee said the party had "seriously considered" splitting itself in two but did not go ahead because it could not form two teams that are each as good as the combined team.
Therefore, Mr Lee said that it is best to have one strong team with the best people.
If the PAP split into two, he said the Government would become weaker and the chances of thing going wrong would increase, or standard of governance would drop.
Mr Lee cited how two-party systems could also arise if society splits along the lines of race and religion, or along class lines such as with Britain and the United States.
He said the first scenario was the "worst possible" for Singapore and the second was "not a good outcome".
A two-party system could also arise from two groups pushing different policies, but Mr Lee sad this is unlikely as the PAP is pragmatic and open to all good ideas.


While I would agree that two-party system is not feasible for Singapore, but I also believe that a one-party system is obsolete in the 21st century.  So what do we do?

Beyond a one party and two party system, there is also something known as a multi-party system.  This system ensures that no single party dominates the government.  Such a system is common in small democracies similar in population size to Singapore such as Finland and Sweden and has proved to work as evidenced by the successful economies of Finland and Sweden.

Lee Hsien Loong has already admited that it is difficult to attract young people into the government.  The PAP is experiencing a confidence and morale crisis which will certainly result in a greatly weakened government in the future.  In theory and in the past, the one-party system is the best solution for Singapore, but this is no longer the case in today's world.


 Summary of the 18 March 2007 Parliament of Finland election results
Parties Votes % Seats
Centre Party (Suomen Keskusta, Centern i Finland) 640,428 23.1 51
National Coalition Party (Kansallinen Kokoomus, Samlingspartiet) 616,841 22.3 50
Social Democratic Party of Finland (Suomen Sosialidemokraattinen Puolue, Finlands socialdemokratiska parti) 594,194 21.4 45
Left Alliance (Vasemmistoliitto, Vänsterförbundet) 244,296 8.8 17
Green League (Vihreä liitto, Gröna förbundet) 234,429 8.5 15
Christian Democrats (Kristillisdemokraatit, Kristdemokraterna) 134,790 4.9 7
Swedish People's Party (Svenska Folkpartiet, Ruotsalainen kansanpuolue) 126,520 4.5 9
True Finns (Perussuomalaiset, Sannfinländarna) 112,256 4.1 5
Communist Party of Finland (Suomen Kommunistinen Puolue, Finlands kommunistiska parti) 18,277 0.7 0
Seniors' Party of Finland (Suomen Senioripuolue, Finlands Seniorparti) 16,715 0.6 0
Bourgeois Alliance (Borgerlig Allians, Åland) 9,561 0.3 1


Summary of the 19 September 2010 Parliament of Sweden election results
Parties and coalitions Votes Permanent seats Adjustment seats Total seats seats %/votes %
# ± % ±% # ± # ± seats swing
Swedish Social Democratic Party
Socialdemokraterna
1,827,497 decrease115,128 30.66 decrease4.33 112 decrease18 0 steady 0 112 decrease18 1.05
Moderate Party
Moderaterna
1,791,766 increase335,752 30.06 increase3.83 107 increase10 0 steady 0 107 increase10 1.02
Green Party
Miljöpartiet de Gröna
437,435 increase146,314 7.34 increase2.09 19 increase10 6 decrease4 25 increase6 0.98
Liberal People's Party
Folkpartiet liberalerna
420,524 decrease2,129 7.06 decrease0.48 17 decrease5 7 increase1 24 decrease4 0.97
Centre Party
Centerpartiet
390,804 decrease46,585 6.56 decrease1.32 21 decrease6 2 steady 0 23 decrease6 1.01
Sweden Democrats
Sverigedemokraterna
339,610 increase177,147 5.70 increase2.77 14 increase14 6 increase6 20 increase20 1.01
Left Party
Vänsterpartiet
334,053 increase9,331 5.60 decrease0.24 9 decrease4 10 increase1 19 decrease3 0.97
Christian Democrats
Kristdemokraterna
333,696 decrease32,302 5.60 decrease0.99 11 decrease6 8 increase1 19 decrease5 0.97

Pirate Party
Piratpartiet
38,491 increase3,573 0.65 increase0.02 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
Feminist Initiative
Feministiskt initiativ
24,139 decrease13,815 0.40 decrease0.28 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
Swedish Senior Citizen Interest Party
Sveriges pensionärers intresseparti
11,078 decrease17,728 0.19 decrease0.33 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
Rural Democrats
Landsbygdsdemokraterna
1,565 increase1,565 0.03 increase0.03 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
Socialist Justice Party
Rättvisepartiet Socialisterna
1,507 increase410 0.03 increase0.01 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
Norrland Coalition Party
Norrländska Samlingspartiet
1,456 increase1,456 0.02 increase0.02 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
National Democrats
Nationaldemokraterna
1,141 decrease1,923 0.02 decrease0.04 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
Classical Liberal Party
Klassiskt Liberala Partiet
716 increase514 0.01 increase0.01 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
Freedom Party
Frihetspartiet
688 increase688 0.01 increase0.01 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
Party of the Swedes
Svenskarnas Parti
681 increase681 0.01 increase0.01 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
Unity
Enhet
632 decrease2,016 0.01 decrease0.04 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.00
Parties with less than 500 votes 2,929 decrease1,837 0.05 decrease0.03 - - - - - - 0.00
The Alliance
Alliansen
(Moderate Party, Liberal People's Party,
Centre Party, Christian Democrats)
2,936,790 increase258,994 49.27 increase1.03 156 decrease3 17 decrease2 173 decrease5 1.01
Red-Greens
Rödgröna
(Social Democrats, Green Party, Left Party)
2,598,985 increase40,517 43.60 decrease2.48 140 decrease11 16 decrease4 156 decrease15 1.03