|
July
27, 2007
The Old
Mercantilism and the New
by Gary North, Ph.D.
The
United Nations Population Fund in June released a
report, "The
State of World Population 2007." In discussing
China, the report provided the official estimate
made by China's government that 18 million people
migrate from rural areas to cities each year. These
are predominantly men.
Consider the meaning of this figure. This is
approximately 1,500,000 people each month. This is
the equivalent of Phoenix's population, or a little
more than Philadelphia's.
Think of what it costs in resources and labor to
build enough living space and infrastructure to
make room for an influx of residents that would
equal the population of Phoenix, month after
month.
These are poor people. They do not come with
capital, other than their willingness to work at
whatever wage will feed them and provide minimum
shelter. They are moving from low-productivity
farms. They are younger sons who will not inherit
the family farm, or else they are the oldest sons,
who correctly see no economic future in small-scale
farming.
They cannot afford wives. Even if they could,
17% of them would not find a wife. The policy of
one child per family, announced in 1979 and
enforced, has created a historically unique
population distribution: 1.2 marriageable age men
for each marriageable age woman.
Millions of men cannot find single women who are
willing to marry them. Women can now afford to be
picky. So, there is tremendous pressure on young
men to get to a city, find employment at
above-average wages, and find suitable living
quarters. There is no time to waste. These men are
highly motivated.
They are competing against women in factories.
So, there is even more pressure to get into the
labor force. There is only one way for men with no
capital, poor educations, and short time frames to
do this: wage competition.
This wage competition is felt in the open labor
markets of the West. The products exported by China
are produced by laborers who are desperate. They
will work for wages that are a small fraction of
Western employees. The downward pressure on Western
wage rates comes through the actual products
exported by China. Western companies must meet the
competition by keeping prices low. They can bargain
with workers. If they fail to survive, the jobs
disappear. Think "Detroit."
This process will not end in my lifetime, or
theirs. China is estimated to be 37% urban. It is
expected to be 60% urban in 2050. This means that
the mass migration of young men from rural areas
will continue. The wage pressure will be
permanent.
To this wage pressure is added a similar
movement from rural India to urban India. These two
nations account for at least a third of the world's
population. The move from farms to cities is
masculine, irreversible, and permanent.
The only way that the West's workers can compete
is to compete in those sectors of the world's
economy that rely on advanced education,
innovation, and very high capital investment per
worker. This requires, above all, a social climate
favoring entrepreneurship: consumer-directed
innovation. This requires low or no taxes on
capital gains, low government regulation, and a
reduction in the supply of lawyers.
The United States has about a million lawyers,
the highest number on earth. Tax-supported state
university law schools crank them out by the tens
of thousands per year: a subsidized industry.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Government's Federal
Register prints 76,000 three-column pages of
regulations per year.
The household savings rate in the United States
has now gone slightly negative. Americans assume
that tomorrow will take care of itself. After all,
look how inexpensive it is to buy goods that are
made in China. And the government has guaranteed
Americans that the physical crises of old age which
once depleted family capital will be paid for by
taxpayers.
So, young men from rural China move to the
cities. They hope to get wives for themselves by
manufacturing toys for Westerners. We keep
buying.
SELECTIVE ABORTION AND SOCIAL
DISORDER
Consider the effects of Deng's one child per
family plan. It has produced side effects. The
biologist Garrett Hardin has defined "side effects"
as "effects we don't like."
The problem in China is selective abortion.
Asian rural societies for millennia have wanted
sons. Sons support parents in their old age.
Daughters marry into other men's families and will
support their in-laws. So, from 1980 on, Chinese
families began aborting females, just as Western
commentators said at the time that they would. But
the Communist government ignored these
warnings.
In April, 2006, CBS News' "60 Minutes" devoted a
segment to China's population problem: "China:
Too Many Men." The report did not discuss
infanticide. Instead, it discussed abortion. The
technology of the law's enforcement made abortion a
low-cost option.
- To make sure the women kept their birth
control devices in, the government -- starting
in 1982 -- sent portable ultrasound machines all
over the country. They are compact and
lightweight and even some small villages got as
many as two or three. But in a classic case of
unintended consequences, pregnant women realized
that the machines could also identify whether
they were having a boy or a girl. And, as a
result, by conservative estimates, more than 8
million girls were aborted in the first 20 years
of the one-child policy.
This figure is far too low. The
United Nations' estimate is 100 million
worldwide, with 80 million for India and China
combined. Understand, this is not the total number
of aborted females. It is the net deficit -- in
addition to the 50-50 abortion ratio.
The Chinese abortion policy was enforced by law,
though officially not for females only, so the
deficit in China could be as high as 60 million
females. No one knows.
The government today claims that it is illegal
for a physician to inform the mother of her baby's
gender. He would be fired if he did this. But the
free market has intervened. Chinese mass production
has made the ultrasound machines inexpensive.
- Ultrasound machines are inexpensive in
China; they cost about $360 and, as 60 Minutes
saw, they are small enough to be hidden in a
closet or even in the trunk of a car to do scans
on the run. And that's made it difficult to
crack down.
-
- We showed the minister some Chinese
newspaper photos of a van parked in a Beijing
suburb doing ultrasounds in the back.
-
- "We need a more enforcement," Zhao
said.
-
- "Well, one of the ways that this imbalance
came about is through abortion. Millions and
millions and millions of abortions. Why didn't
the government clamp down on that?" Stahl
asked.
-
- "Let me go to another point," the vice
minister replied.
This is what every government bureaucrat prefers
to do when confronted with the unwanted effects of
government policy. Call it verbal abortion.
- Her "other point" was that China's abortion
rate is going down, but she didn't explain why
abortions are still free and legal right up to
the ninth month, even as the boy-girl imbalance
grows.
China now faces a major problem: crime goes up
when young unmarried men increase as a percentage
of the population.
The politicians now are trying to respond to the
effects of their earlier -- and continuing --
population-control problem by setting up
counter-programs. They are imitating the National
Socialist and Fascist regimes of the 1930's. They
are offering subsidies for female children.
- And so the government has launched a
campaign to convince parents that having
daughters is a good thing: propaganda street
banners preach that preferring boys over girls
is old thinking; while school fees for girls
have been reduced, and laws changed so daughters
can inherit land.
-
- And state-run TV programs show the
government handing out cash to parents with only
daughters. A pilot project rewards these parents
from age 60 on with what amounts to $150 a year,
a doubling of their yearly income.
These programs are not working, any more than
the European socialist regimes' subsidies worked in
the Great Depression. The imbalance is getting
worse.
FROM SOCIALISM TO MERCANTILISM
Karl Marx offered a stage theory of history:
from primitive communism to feudalism to
mercantilistic capitalism to free market capitalism
to socialism to final communism. China is proving
him wrong. It has moved "backward" in Marx's stages
from socialism to mercantilism.
The Chinese government is still Communist in
terms of its centralization of political power in a
one-party state. Like all Communist parties, the
Chinese Communist Party is filled with old men.
They grew up in a very different world. They
survived Mao's purges through unquestioning loyalty
to Mao. Then, three years after Mao's death in
1976, they declared their loyalty to Deng,
accepting his reversal of central economic
planning.
What are they really loyal to? This: political
stability, with themselves at the top.
They now find that they are sitting on top of a
Chinese firecracker factory of enormous
proportions.
What they must achieve above all is low
unemployment. If unemployment rises, the dreams of
wealth for the urban masses will get sidetracked.
There are now 400 million people living in cities,
compared to 900 million in rural areas. These
cities are political powder kegs: "fireworks
factories."
To kick-start the Chinese economy after 1980,
the Communist Party adopted a strategy used by the
Asian tigers after 1950 to grow their economies:
export to the Industrial West. The Communist
politicians did not allow strictly free market
competitive forces to govern the allocation of
workers and capital. They would not turn loose of
the steering wheel.
What was the steering wheel? The money supply.
The Chinese central bank has copied what Keynesian
economists recommended for decades, from Keynes'
day until today. They increased the money supply in
order to increase effective demand. They, like all
Keynesians, see effective demand dependent on
government central planning: tax (fiscal) policy
and monetary policy. Keynes emphasized fiscal
policy, yet his system depends on monetary policy:
lowering real wages through monetary inflation,
thereby increasing employers' demand for
workers.
Full employment is the key of political survival
all over the urban world. When there are unemployed
men in the streets, there may soon be revolution in
the streets, especially if these men are recent
arrivals from the countryside and have no local
roots, especially wives and children to feed,
clothe, and house.
Thus, China's politicians did not block the
decision of the bureaucrats of the People's Bank of
China when they adopted policies of very high
monetary inflation.
Once adopted, the stimulative effects begin to
wear off as wage rates rise due to more money in
circulation. Price inflation is manifested in wage
inflation. Wages constitute well over half the cost
of production -- close to 70%. So, rising wages in
terms of money tend to undermine the policy's goal:
to increase employment by keeping real wages low.
Workers can pay more as money wages rise, meaning
real wages are rising.
What has kept money wages from rising among the
urban masses is the influx from the farms.
Chinese export-oriented firms can keep hiring
new workers. To do this, they need buyers abroad.
Buyers abroad want to buy cheap yuan. This has
forced the Chinese central bankers to retain
monetary inflation, so as to lower the
international value of the yuan, so as to keep
foreign consumers happy with low-cost Chinese
goods.
Chinese central bankers have bought what most
central bankers have bought: government debt
instruments. They buy their own governments' debt
certificates. But if they are pursuing modern
mercantilism, they also buy the debt certificates
of the governments to which the national planners
intend to sell the exported goods.
This means the United States.
As of May, 2007, China held about $1.2 trillion
worth of foreign currency reserves. This is not all
in dollars. This
figure rose by $136 billion in the first three
months. This increase was so rapid that the
People's Bank of China raised the foreign currency
reserve requirement from 4% to 5% for private banks
that hold foreign currency investments.
To keep the economy booming, the People's Bank
of China has forced down the overnight interest
rate -- the equivalent of the United States'
Federal Reserve-manipulated federal funds rate --
from 2.7% in late 2006 to 1.6% in mid-May.
Paul
Kasriel of the Northern Trust Company has provided
a useful graph of this. He has also offered a
graph of the increase in the rate of growth for
reserve money base. The year-to-year rate fell to
8% in early 2007. It moved up sharply to 23% by
March.
Kasriel's analysis is on target. The Chinese
central bank is trapped. It wants to expand
exports, which means it must keep the international
price of the yuan low. This means that it must
increase the supply of yuan. But it is now facing
rising prices domestically: up from 1% in early
2006 to 3% today (official figures), an increase by
a factor of three -- high. Kasriel poses the
problem very well.
- A slowdown in bank reserve provision would
lead to a rise in the overnight interbank
interest rate. The rise in this rate also would
put upward pressure on the yuan/dollar exchange
rate. And the PBOC also announced that it would
allow the yuan/dollar relationship to vary more
on a daily basis -- from 0.3% to 0.5%. Under
current conditions, the only way the PBOC can
rein in consumer and asset price inflation is to
slow down the provision of bank reserves and
that will entail a rise in the yuan relative to
the dollar. The PBOC has to make a decision --
does it want to maintain a relatively steady
yuan/dollar relationship or does it want to
prevent Chinese inflation? It can't have
both.
Adding fuel to the fire is a shift from the
mercantilism of Bretton Woods to something new.
THE EVOLUTION OF MERCANTILISM
Early mercantilism goes back to the seventeenth
century: trade wars that turned into real wars,
such as the Anglo-Dutch wars of the mid-seventeenth
century. The Bank of England was founded in this
period: 1694. The goal of government policy was to
increase the supply of gold in its treasury.
Adam Smith challenged this outlook in The
Wealth of Nations (1776). He called for
freer trade and the abandonment of export-driven
policies that led to gold in government treasuries.
The West had generally moved to Smith's position by
1850. But in the aftermath of World War I,
governments reverted to mercantilism. But there was
a change. The goal since 1922 has been to increase
the supply of foreign governments' interest-paying
debt obligations, not gold, in the central bank's
coffers. This policy favored Great Britain until
World War II broke out in 1939, and favored the
United States thereafter. It was put into law by
the Bretton Woods agreement of 1944.
When Nixon severed the dollar from gold on
August 15, 1971, the threat to foreign governments
was that they would buy U.S. government debt
obligations with their central banks' newly created
fiat money, only to be paid back in newly created
fiat dollars. That is, central
bank counterfeiters trusted each other less.
But since governments wanted to subsidize their
export markets, central bankers continued to abide
by the new mercantilism of Bretton Woods. U.S. debt
certificates piled up in central banks'
portfolios.
The central banks of China and Russia have been
big buyers of these debt certificates. China
exports trinkets; Russia exports oil and natural
gas. In exchange, they receive promises to pay
interest. But what will the money which is paid as
interest actually buy? The main export of the
United States: more debt. The West gets the
trinkets and energy, while the central banks in
China and Russia get paid money which buys . . .
what?
What, indeed?
There are hints that there is a new form of
mercantilism coming. China, meaning the People's
Bank of China, purchased 9.9% of the Blackstone
hedge fund in May. It paid $3 billion. The PBOC has
set up a rumored $300 billion fund for purchasing
foreign equities and other unnamed assets. This is
a shift from debt to equity, from foreign
governments' promises to pay to actual ownership of
foreign companies and assets.
If pursued, this will change the face of
international trade.
Why Blackstone? Because Chinese bureaucrats will
get access to inside information about the
previously private hedge fund's investment
strategy. The
Economist had a good article on this
purchase.
- Like China, whose proposed Blackstone stake
is part of $300 billion that the government
plans to set aside this year for investment
purposes, dozens of countries have set up what
are now commonly referred to as sovereign-wealth
funds. They manage money drawn from reserves,
natural-resource payments and the like. China is
chiefly concerned to diversify its foreign
reserves, but other sovereign-wealth funds own
national, as well as international, assets.
But China is not alone. Other export-driven
nations are beginning to enter the equity markets.
The numbers are potentially immense.
- The top 12 each have anything from $20
billion to hundreds of billions of dollars to
invest (see table). Recently, Japan, Russia and
India have reportedly been considering setting
up funds along similar lines. Some estimates put
the size of the funds at $2.5 trillion by the
end of this year (in contrast, hedge funds are
thought to have a mere $1.6 trillion), with
another $450 billion in transfers from reserves
being added annually. Including capital
appreciation, the amount could swell to $12
trillion by 2015.
The central banks will become the equity buyers
of last resort rather than the government debt
buyers of last resort.
COMMODITIES
I think China's next move is obvious:
commodities. It is building the equivalent of a
city of Phoenix every month. It needs cement,
copper, and everything else needed to grow new
cities and expand old ones.
At some point, the Chinese central bankers are
going to buy commodity futures. They will not be
selling short.
The central bank through its sovereign-wealth
fund can take ownership positions for 10% down or
less. Then, at some point, it can begin taking
delivery.
The commodity futures markets operate on the
assumption that no more than 3% of the investors
will actually take delivery. The threat of "longs"
taking delivery is the sword of Damocles over the
heads of "shorts."
When Bunker Hunt in 1979 began taking delivery
of silver, the price moved from about $6/oz to $50
in January, 1970. The futures exchange changed the
rules, forbidding anyone to go long unless covering
a short position. This bankrupted Hunt in 1980, but
it was a gross violation of contract.
The Chinese are not Bunker Hunt. They have deep
pockets. A change of rules on one national exchange
is not the same as it was in 1979 -- not when the
long demanding delivery has $1.2 trillion in
reserves (in 2007).
CONCLUSION
The Chinese Communist Party has a tiger by the
tail: a 17% per annum increase in the M-2 money
supply, and a need to provide employment for 1.5
million new arrivals every month in Chinese
cities.
The Chinese economy is now dependent on
long-term monetary inflation higher than anything
ever seen in a major nation in peacetime. The bust
side of the monetary boom-bust cycle now threatens
the legitimacy of the rulers of China. They dare
not let it happen. But if the central bank slows
the rate of monetary inflation to a single-digit
rate for a year, it will happen.
The basic infrastructure needed to accommodate
1.5 million arrivals each month must consume vast
new quantities of commodities. This is the real
world. These are real people who want real roofs
over their heads. Their employers require oil,
electricity, and cement.
The invisible digital economy eventually affects
the see-touch-feel economy. Nowhere is this
connection more politically explosive than in
China.
The Chinese central bank is trapped. It will try
to walk the tightrope between exports and domestic
price inflation. How? By means of a 17%
year-to-year increase in M-2 and a 23% year-to-year
increase in the monetary base.
If the bureaucrats fall off, taking the domestic
economy into depression, the economic fallout will
be international.
In any case, if the central bank moves to the
new mercantilism and away from Bretton Woods
mercantilism, the days of low interest rates will
end in the United States. If Uncle Wong decides
that Uncle Sam's promises to pay cannot be trusted,
and therefore cement is a better deal, the U.S.
government's fiscal policy will soon have feet in
cement.
If this happens, the U.S. debt-driven economy
will face the problem faced by Luca Brassi in
The
Godfather. He sleeps with the
fishes.
Gary
North Archive
Dr.
Gary North earned a Ph.D. in history and is one of
America's keenest economic analysts and
commentators. He supports the Austrian school of
economics and is a previous assistant to
libertarian congressman Dr. Ron Paul. Visit his
website at http://garynorth.com.
To
subscribe to Gary North's Reality Check go to
http://www.dailyreckoning.com/sub/GetReality.cfm
If
you enjoyed this essay and would like to read more
of Gary's writing please visit his website at
http://www.garynorth.com
or http://www.freebooks.com
Articles
& Essays Index
Because
The Radical Academy publishes essays and articles
on its website does not imply acceptance or
approval of the comments or opinions expressed by
the author of the material. Nor is the Academy
responsible for any misrepresentation of the facts
included. It is your job to be a critical
reader.
|