Thoughts on 2014 – Moral Hazard PLUS – Part 1

Reflections on 2014

As a behaviourally focused economics publication we have been very quiet and inactive during 2014. A year of reflection and introspection, however, we are ready to resume service, with vigour. And what better way to start than with a reflective piece and thoughts on the biggest risk we believe are developing under the surface without warning. Our concluding theme of 2014 is that of moral hazard.

As Margaret Thatcher once said: “There is no society”; we state today that there is ‘No Moral Hazard’; in fact there is only Moral Hazard PLUS.

We believe that there is a strong correlation between QE (Quantitative Easing) and economic moral hazard developing a new strain, mutating like an unseen virus.

QE might have saved the financial system of the developed world, but it it only provided a shot in the arm and acted as a stimulus for sustaining moral hazard.

Economics follow a flow and cyclical pattern, as discussed in our article entitled ‘Information Age Irony‘. These patterns and flows weave themselves into the fabric of our lives and affect individual economies in different ways.

It is important to understand where and how economic cycles develop and flow and how much influence they have on our general economic activities on a day to day basis, but we should not become overly obsessed by them, as they can be short-circuited from time to time by policy and policy-maker’s actions, wherever individually or collectively.

In part 2 of this article we will focus on the revelations of QE and the underlying threat of moral hazard returning on a grander and more catastrophic scale, if it goes unchecked and misunderstood.

© theMarketSoul 2014

An Ownership Revolution is required

We have been following the G20 ‘get those naughty multinationals in the tax tent’ debates raging for a few months now, with amusement we have to add; here at theMarketSoul and have the following short thought piece to contribute to the debate.

We know the ‘outrage’ really is all about the what the OECD calls the ‘general erosion of the tax base’, which in our opinion is just a distraction for proper structural reforms in the western democracies contributing to the G20 and OECD coffers.

English: The logo of the Organisation for Econ...
English: The logo of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The real issue is the power of civil society structures, such as multinational corporations, versus nation states. We constantly get an earful on how undemocratic corporations are from a liberal social leftist media and how dangerous unfettered corporate power is.

Yet, multinationals are far more democratic, in both structure and performance, than any sovereign government will ever be. If the corporate governance structure is correctly set up, then every corporate entity has an annual AGM at which point the corporate leaders have to resign, on a rotational basis, depending on individual Articles of Association or Memorandum ofIincorporation provisions (depending in which jurisdiction the corporate entity ‘resides’). How often does a sovereign leader stand down, in comparison and leave it to the popular vote to be re-elected? Certainly not on an annual basis, as is the case for most corporate leaders.

Civitas Foundation for Civil Society logo
Civitas Foundation for Civil Society logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This leads us to the real thought piece of this article, namely the fact that corporate ownership and access to corporate ownership should really be extended to as wide a base as possible, rather than a few ‘monied’ or opportunist participants in the market.

Legislation around employee share ownership schemes are still very cumbersome and rules, rather than principles driven.

The real revolution we require is not around a new tax base or recapitalizing democratic bankrupt nation states; however we require a revolution of democratic corporate ownership to sweep the length and breadth of the land, in order to spread the risk, add additional wealth creation opportunities (and hence a widened wealth tax base) for smaller, leaner and meaner governments to address. This a cry from civil society to the inner ‘goodness’ of political society to sit up, take serious stock and work on longer-term solutions to the erosion of their tax bases, rather than the usual headline grabbing short-termist market distorting interventions the G20 governments are so infamous.

theMarketSoul ©2013

Behavioural Consequences – The UK Bond Market Rigging Scandal

Health Warning: The UK Bond Market rigging issue is all behaviourally driven. We express a personal opinion in this post and do not endorse or condone breaking any jurisdiction’s sovereign laws.

We would like to contribute a very short thought piece on this issue. Our premise basically goes like this and is grounded in behavioural theory:

2012 Behaviour Matrix copy
2012 Behaviour Matrix copy (Photo credit: Robin Hutton)

Take away any sensible incentive (by over regulating the market participants) and you create the disincentive for cheating behaviour to manifest. Simple.

It is a natural competitive behaviour to ‘cheat’ or try to cheat a system that becomes ‘badly’ designed, as in the case of the highly over regulated bond market and an environment of very low yields.

We find is amazing that the popular press only tend to focus on one side of the equation and distort the real issue and underlying drivers that lead tot cheating behaviour.

Illustration for Cheating Français : Illustrat...
Illustration for Cheating Français : Illustration d’une antisèche Español: Ilustración de una chuleta Deutsch: Illustration zum Schummeln (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The rule of law should be the overriding guiding principle and helping to design markets and market participant behaviours based on properly incentivised interactions is part of any regulatory system. In the recent past, we have forgotten to bear this in mind…

…and then we act surprised when market actors (participants) misbehave?

theMarketSoul ©2013

Related articles

US Treasury Yield Curves – Revisited mid July 2013

Seal of the United States Department of the Tr...
US Treasury Seal (Source: Wikipedia)

We resume our intermittent analysis of the US Treasury Yield Curves today with a comparison between the mid July 2013 versus mid July 2012 (in chart 1) and mid July 2013 versus mid July 2011 (chart 2).   US DoT Yield Curves Mid July 2013                       Chart 1 – Mid July 2013 versus mid July 2012 In the absence of any meaningful data on ‘proper’ yield curve rates, this analysis will have to do.   US DoT Yield Curves Mid July 2013vsJuly 2011 (1)                       Chart 2 – Mid July 2013 versus mid July 2011 Finally, we compare mid July 2013 versus mid July 2007 (chart 3), the last time we experienced an Inverted Yield Curve and had any meaningful Yield Curve data. Note that the short versus longer term yield rates had a much flatter yield rate curve than in the recent past.  This is partly a reflection on the risk profile of financial gilt debt instruments back in 2007 versus today.   US DoT Yield Curves Mid July 2013vsJuly 2007 Chart 3 – Mid July 2013 versus mid July 2007 theMarketSoul ©2013

Hiatus over!

Yes, we apologise further lack of service and posts on the forum over the last 13 months.

XXX
(Photo credit: Frank Kehren)

Today, we can declare the the hiatus is over and that regular(ly) services will be restored.

Hence, to kick-off, we will focus on recent discussions with ‘causal economists’ we have reached out to.

The key message is this:

Forget the Kondratiev wave, we are back in a Kuznets swing, with a clearly defined down tick in the cycle.

There ride will inevitably not be smooth, they never are, with significant volatility in between. However, the Kuznets swing has as an average a run time structure of 15 – 25 years.  [Out of interest, the last Kuznets swing lasted 21 years, depending on whether your started counting from “Big Bang“]

Are we prepared for it?

Yes and No might be the correct answer.

No, because we just don’t have the data for it currently.

Yes, possibly, because the effects of a digitised economy is the new unknown. This points us back to our own ‘philosophy‘ page on this site.

More in depth analysis and discussion on the new cycle will follow soon.

theMarketSoul ©2013 

The Flight – Keeping an eye on the real 30 Year Treasury Yield Rates

The real (inflation adjusted) 30 Year T-Bill rates have since the beginning of the year averaged 1.72% (simple averaging).

 

 

Since the beginning of September 2011 the average real rate has dipped to below 1.00% to 0.99%. (Our measurement).

 

Does this mean that the flight to other asset classes is now in full-swing or rather; where on the ‘flight to safety’ trajectory do we believe we are now?

 

We offer no opinion, but keep your beady eye on the T-Bill rates in the months to come, especially when the election process officially kicks off in the USA.

 

theMarketSoul ©2011

The US Treasury Yield Curves #2 – Do you factor inflation into the deal?

In the previous article we posted, mention was made of the (0.72)% [negative 0.72%] real return US Treasury investors can currently expect on 5 Year Treasury Bills.  The Nominal (quoted) Yield Curves and Real (Inflation adjusted) Yield Curves for two specific points in time, namely Friday 29 July 2011 and 30 July 2006 are listed below.

Yield Curve 1

What is interesting to note is the very flat nature of the Yield Curve for all T-Bills at the end of July 2006, at around a 5% Nominal Return for investors.  Yet the most significant fact is that the Real Yield was around 2.37% on 5 Year Treasuries, versus today’s (0.72)% on 5 Year or (0.18)% 7 Year T-Bill yields.  In order to generate a very small Real Return, you have to be looking at purchasing a 10 Year T-Bill to obtain a modest 0.38% Real Return in today’s market.

A cynic might make this remark:

“Not only do you pay your taxes, but with the negative Real Yields on both 5 & 7 Year T-Bills, you are paying the government to hold on to your cash too”

They win both ways!

theMarketSoul ©2011

Source Material:  US Treasury web site:

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/interest-rates/Pages/Historic-Yield-Data-Visualization.aspx