Economist: Can Asians replace Americans as a driver of global growth?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 11:55:01 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
  Economist: Can Asians replace Americans as a driver of global growth?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Economist: Can Asians replace Americans as a driver of global growth?  (Read 1723 times)
phk
phknrocket1k
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,906


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 25, 2009, 04:54:41 PM »

Consumer spending in Asia
Shopaholics wanted

http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13900125&source=hptextfeature

Jun 25th 2009 | HONG KONG
From The Economist print edition
Can Asians replace Americans as a driver of global growth?



ASIA’S emerging economies are bouncing back much more strongly than any others. While America’s industrial production continued to slide in May, output in emerging Asia has regained its pre-crisis level (see chart 1). This is largely due to China; but although production in the region’s smaller economies is still well down on a year ago, it is rebounding in those countries too. Taiwan’s industrial output rose by an annualised 80% in the three months to May compared with the previous three months. JPMorgan estimates that emerging Asia’s GDP has grown by an annualised 7% in the second quarter.

Asia’s ability to decouple from America reflects the fact that the region’s downturn was caused only partly by the slump in American activity. In most Asian economies falling domestic demand was more important than the drop in net exports in explaining the collapse in GDP growth. The surge in food and energy prices in the first half of 2008 squeezed profits and spending power. Tighter monetary policy aimed at curbing inflation then further choked domestic demand.

The recent recovery in industrial production reflects the end of destocking by manufacturers as well as the large fiscal stimulus by most governments. But the boost from both of these factors will fade. Meanwhile, export markets in developed economies are likely to remain weak. So the recovery in Asian economies will stumble unless domestic spending, notably consumption, perks up.



Consumers’ appetite to spend varies hugely across the region. In China, India and Indonesia spending has increased by annual rates of more than 5% during the global downturn. China’s retail sales have soared by 15% over the past year. This overstates the true growth rate because it includes government purchases, but official household surveys suggest that real spending is growing at a still-impressive rate of 9%. In the year to May, sales of household electronics were up by 12%, clothing by 22% and cars by a stunning 47%.

Elsewhere in the region, spending has stumbled, squeezed by higher unemployment and lower wages. In Hong Kong, Singapore and South Korea real consumer spending was 4-5% lower in the first quarter than a year earlier, a much bigger drop than in America. But Frederic Neumann, an economist at HSBC, sees tentative signs that spending is picking up. Taiwan’s retail sales rose in May for the third consecutive month. Department-store sales in South Korea rose by 5% in the year to May.



It is often argued that emerging Asian economies have large current-account surpluses—and are thus not pulling their fair weight in the world—because consumers like to save rather than spend. Yet this does not really fit the facts. During the past five years consumer spending in emerging Asia has grown by an annual average of 6.5%, much faster than in any other part of the world. It is true that consumption has fallen as a share of GDP, but that is because investment and exports have grown even faster, not because spending has been weak. Relative to American consumer spending, Asian consumption has soared (see chart 2).

In most Asian economies, private consumption is 50-60% of GDP, which is not out of line with rates in countries at similar levels of income elsewhere. China, however, is an exception. Private consumption there fell from 46% of GDP in 2000 to only 35% last year—half that in America. In dollar terms, spending is only one-sixth of that in America. (Singapore’s consumption is also low, at just under 40% of GDP.)

This explains why China’s government has recently taken bolder action than others to boost consumption. Over the past six months the government in Beijing has introduced a host of incentives to encourage households to open their wallets. Rural residents get subsidies for buying vehicles and other goods such as televisions, refrigerators, computers and mobile phones; urban residents get a subsidy if they trade in cars and home appliances for new goods; tax rates on low-emission cars have also been cut. There is huge potential for higher consumption in the countryside as incomes rise: only 30% of rural households have a refrigerator, for example, compared with virtually all urban households.

The government has also introduced several measures this year to improve the social safety net, such as spending more on health care, pensions and payments to low-income households. On June 19th it ordered all state-owned firms that had listed on the stockmarket since 2005 to transfer 10% of their shares to the National Social Security Fund to shore up its assets. The short-term impact is likely to be modest but if such measures ease households’ worries about future pensions and health care, it could in the long term encourage them to save less and spend more.

Another way to boost consumption is to make it easier to borrow. In most Asian economies household debt is less than 50% of GDP, compared with around 100% in many developed economies; in China and India it is less than 15%. South Korea is the big exception: households have as much debt relative to their income as Americans and their saving rate has fallen over the past decade from 18% of disposable income to only 4%. In many other Asian economies financing for consumer durables is virtually nonexistent. Promisingly, the Chinese bank regulator announced draft rules in May to allow domestic and foreign institutions to set up consumer-finance firms to offer personal loans for consumer-goods purchases.

These measures are a modest step in the right direction. But a bigger test of Asian governments’ resolve to shift the balance of growth from exports towards domestic spending is whether they will allow their exchange rates to rise. A revaluation would lift consumers’ real purchasing power and give firms reason to shift resources towards producing for the domestic market. But so far, policymakers have been reluctant to let currencies rise too fast.

Asian spending is already an important engine of global growth. Even before the crisis, emerging Asia’s consumer spending contributed slightly more (in absolute dollar terms) to the growth in global demand than did America’s. But it could be even bigger if Asians enjoyed the full fruits of their hard labour, rather than subsidising Western consumers through undervalued currencies. It is time for an even greater shift in spending power from the West to the East.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 25, 2009, 06:18:47 PM »

In a while, yes.  But a lot of things have to happen first.  A lot of things.

For example, the present attempt by China at debt-fueled growth to escape deflation won't work and is likely to end badly.  Very badly.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 25, 2009, 07:38:43 PM »

The question I would pose would be why should we be obsessed with consumption, and economic growth? Is there something wrong with simply having a good, stable economy, in which the government is able to care more for it's people? I would have more problem with the never-ending search for more wealth and higher growth, rather than a slower economy in which people are less greedy because of such a mindset.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 25, 2009, 07:58:11 PM »

The question I would pose would be why should we be obsessed with consumption, and economic growth? Is there something wrong with simply having a good, stable economy, in which the government is able to care more for it's people?  I would have more problem with the never-ending search for more wealth and higher growth, rather than a slower economy in which people are less greedy because of such a mindset.

It is quite easy to be fooled into that type of utopian ideal.  You see, the problem is that this type of ideal "good, stable economy" where "gov't is able to care more for its people"  cannot be maintained long-term (my numbers would suggest 60-70 years) because of a whole host of factors, but most importantly, inefficiency.

It is the same type of fallacy as the capitalistic fallacy that occurs in natural bubble formations where we get lines like "asset values never fall" (sound familiar).

Also, do not make the assumption that consumption and economic growth are related.  Too much consumption tends to sap economic growth over time.

More interestingly, (in my broader outlook) we are probably concluding an epoch where an attempt was made to maintain both your ideal and the capitalistic ideal together.
Logged
phk
phknrocket1k
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,906


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 25, 2009, 08:14:14 PM »

The implication for this is RIP "Global Savings Glut".
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,905


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 25, 2009, 08:20:27 PM »

The implication for this is RIP "Global Savings Glut".

GSG glut is a myth made up by Greenspan, Bernanke & Co. to justify low interest rates in the mid-2000s. At most it was an "Asian investment dearth" combined with "Western consumption excess."
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,905


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 25, 2009, 08:33:24 PM »

The question I would pose would be why should we be obsessed with consumption, and economic growth? Is there something wrong with simply having a good, stable economy, in which the government is able to care more for it's people?  I would have more problem with the never-ending search for more wealth and higher growth, rather than a slower economy in which people are less greedy because of such a mindset.

It is quite easy to be fooled into that type of utopian ideal.  You see, the problem is that this type of ideal "good, stable economy" where "gov't is able to care more for its people"  cannot be maintained long-term (my numbers would suggest 60-70 years) because of a whole host of factors, but most importantly, inefficiency.

It is the same type of fallacy as the capitalistic fallacy that occurs in natural bubble formations where we get lines like "asset values never fall" (sound familiar).

Also, do not make the assumption that consumption and economic growth are related.  Too much consumption tends to sap economic growth over time.

More interestingly, (in my broader outlook) we are probably concluding an epoch where an attempt was made to maintain both your ideal and the capitalistic ideal together.

I am still quite skeptical of this proposition. It is easy to say that "60-70" years is the cyclical time period from the beginning of growth to today, now that we are facing the worst economic upheaval in... 60-70 years.

But even if this is a debt deflation and the deflation continues all the way, broadly speaking, political demands would ensure that the government, by whatever means necessary, stepped in to fill the void. And ultimately, I do think governments can be stronger than bond markets, or any other kind of market. However, once recovery began, demand for freedoms and markets would return.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.053 seconds with 11 queries.