.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Visit Freedom's Zone Donate To Project Valour

Sunday, December 26, 2010

China Hound News

This is the second failed Chinese bond auction:
The finance ministry sold 16.76 billion yuan ($2.53 billion) of 91-day securities, falling short of the planned 20 billion yuan target, according to a statement on the website of Chinabond, the nation’s biggest debt-clearing house. The average winning yield was 3.68 percent...
...
The seven-day repurchase rate, which measures lending costs between banks, has more than doubled in the past two weeks and yesterday reached a three-year high of 5.67 percent....
The reserve ratio was recently increased, and banks are short money.

Banks are short money in India also. There it seems mostly related to the huge government sales of rights and stakes. The Indian government has raised a lot of money doing that, but it has also pulled a lot of money out of the system. So cash is being injected there.

But back to China. First, there is some non-official lending going on. Second, I'm kind of surprised that they sold as much of the government bonds as they did with an interbank effectively that high.

The Chinese government imposed price controls on coal, which resulted in power problems and outages in some provinces recently. I'm not convinced that All Is Well.

A huge boom in copper - look at the Chinese PPI for manufactured goods. The "previous period" was December 10th of 2010. That is a two week appreciation rate, not an annualized rate.


Comments:
I now beg for an economics lesson. Given that the Chinese have a huge surplus to purchase the bonds of other nations, why do they need to issue bonds themselves? If they need cash in the short term, why can't they just sell a few of the bonds they hold?

Is this somehow related to the use of bond holdings to control the cash available to the banking system?

Side note on a previous discussions: if the Commerce Clause were simply repealed, wouldn't the Tenth Amendment give states the right to regulate interstate commerce--in other words, to put up state-to-state tariffs? You would need to replace that commerce clause with one that forbade regulation of interstate commerce, but still allowed for enough regulation to permit the E-M spectrum to be shared and to permit some regulation of harmful emissions and some highway safety regs (e.g. taillight standards).
 
MOM,

Someone has left you a nasty "Teeth Brilliant" link on your previous thread. It brings up a dialog box asking if you are sure you want to miss out on the offer when you attempt to navigate away from that page.

You might consider deleting it and I would advise others not to click on it.
 
"I'm not convinced that All Is Well."

All Is Well?
Alice In Wonderland?

MaxedOutMama: Scrubbing The Woodwork Again

White Rabbit

And if you go chasing rabbits
And you know you're going to fall

 
NJCommuter - yeah, it's a way to pull money in and out of the banking system. When the state bank sells bonds it pulls money out and when it buys them it injects money. The other way to inject money is to lend money to banks or to put CB funds on deposit at banks which banks can then lend.

As to the Commerce Clause, surely a simple definition would be the right way to go. Perhaps something that says "Commerce is defined as a transaction in which money or goods are exchanged" would do.

Really, you growing carrots in a window box is not commerce, but SC decisions have decided that it is.

Such a definition would discard Gonzales v Raich and Wickard, but it wouldn't overthrow the main thrust of all the body of law and practice that has been built up over the years.

This obviously also wouldn't allow Congress to decide that you have to buy a private insurance policy or four servings of fruit and vegetables a day.

We don't want to be revolutionary, but we do want to evade crazy congressional excess. I fear the reach involved in health care reform. If the mandate stands, Congress can satisfy its urge to give goodies to those who give them money without any government funds by simply passing laws mandating that citizens buy a particular product. At that point, we would live in a complete dictatorship.
 
Mark - square footage sales in Beijing are down YoY. That has clearly priced its way out of most persons' ability to buy.

All good things must come to an end, and so must all wicked things. Whether you want to define the Chinese property chase as a good thing or a wicked thing, it is slowly running into the phase of buyer exhaustion.

After going through Chinese retail sales and CPI, and looking at clothing prices down YoY and jewelry up over 15% YoY with food up over 10%, I must conclude that inevitability is knocking at their door.

It's not a good sign EVER in an economy when you have high inflation in food, deflation or almost no inflation in more discretionary items such as clothing, furniture and household goods, and inflation in metals and precious metals. Their last reported fuel inflation was 8% YoY.

The property chase is still running over there, but it has gotten to be the tail wagging the dog. I cannot figure out what happens next.
 
"After going through Chinese retail sales and CPI, and looking at clothing prices down YoY and jewelry up over 15% YoY with food up over 10%, I must conclude that inevitability is knocking at their door."

Surely they are at least as savvy this time as they were the last time though. They only missed the last top by a few months.
 
As to the Commerce Clause, surely a simple definition would be the right way to go. Perhaps something that says "Commerce is defined as a transaction in which money or goods are exchanged" would do.

I doubt that anything will be safe with Sotomayor and Kagan on the bench. Not even the stone-cold ''... shall not be abridged'' of the Second Amendment is beyond their willingness to twist, distort, and simply ignore.
 
Off topic, but germane to the discussion of the last few weeks.

Thre will be no cap and trade legislation. We're going to get the same thing only by EPA edict.

Read this and see if it doesn't make you want to vomit:

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2010/12/breaking-obama-administration-radical-environmental-groups-to-set-greenhouse-gas-standards-for-industry-to-fight-non-existent-global-warming/

Yeah, Obama is working night and day to create new jobs. The problem is, he has no idea what that means.
 
He's creating new jobs for bureaucrats. Bureaucracy is all he knows.
 
Jimmy J.,

"Yeah, Obama is working night and day to create new jobs. The problem is, he has no idea what that means."

October 28, 2009
Capitalist/Socialist Utopia!

"Let's start with the concept of borrowing money we don't have to fund programs which will eventually eliminate up to 47,000 jobs long-term. Surely that will help our economy. Right?"

Speaking of Utopia, it was yet another day of snarkage.

The Amazingly Twisted Logic of Paul Krugman

"Let's all embrace Krugman's utopian dream. Although that is not how the real world works now, it could happen if we all wish hard enough. I'm sure of it!"
 
MOM,

I just wanted you to know that you've achieved the same level of success as Thrifty Decor Chick. Congratulations! Hahaha! :)

"Its different compared to thousand other blogs. It makes me wonder how to make my blog special and unique just as yours." - Top World News (your blog)

"Its different compared to thousand other blogs. It makes me wonder how to make my blog special and unique just as yours." - Top World News (Thrifty Decor Chick)

My word verification is "unduck".

Now might be a good time to respond to something you said to me in a previous post.

Now why in the world would anyone click on a link that says "Teeth Brilliant?"

I read the previous line and as I was clicking to know more the word "teeth" formed in my head. It was an awful feeling, lol.
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?