Junk Statistics Junk Statistics: Cerebral Striptease, Part II Edited by Eric J. Fry The Rude Awakening Wall Street, New York Friday, December 30, 2005 The debate continues, this time among Chris Mayer, Justice Litle, Bill Bonner, Addison Wiggin, and Byron King, discussing, among other things, Junk Statistics, the trade deficit, the latest GaveKal book, and profit. ------------------------- - The second installment of a financial
striptease...now that's sexy!
- Is the American economy a slender supermodel or a
heaving, bloated mass of lard?
- The hottest predictions for the coming year and much
more...
------------------------- Eric Fry, filing his very last report of the Old Year, writes..."We're doing something that's never been done by any prior generation. We're looking fabulous until the day we die," Cheryl Tiegs recently remarked on a daytime talk show. The U.S. economy may not be so different...A little GDP- augmentation here, a little foreign-capital injection there, and before you know it, you look absolutely fabulous, even as you hobble inexorably toward that final hour. To judge from outward appearances, the American economy still boasts an enviable physique. But perhaps this economic supermodel is somewhat more feeble than appearances would suggest. Perhaps, for example, continuous injections of foreign capital are propping up many of the things that would otherwise sag in unsightly ways. Perhaps the billions we borrow from abroad provide an aesthetically pleasing lift to the bond market, to the stock market to the housing market...and thus to the entire economy. On the other hand, as several "new era" economists would argue, maybe we Americans deserve the steady flow of foreign money. Maybe we really are the hottest thing around, economically speaking, and fully deserving of all the money the world throws our way. Our current account deficit grows, therefore, simply because capitalists the world over are freely electing to send it here in search of high returns. As long as America rewards the capitalists, the theory holds, the foreign capital will continue to pour in. Over the last four weeks, the Boys of the Rude Awakening have been debating this very topic, as well as various related topics. In yesterday's column, we presented the first part of the debate. In today's column, we bring your Part II... --- Advertisement --- This time next year, you could have doubled your money. In fact, if you don't do so 12 times in the next 12 months, we'll give you a FULL REFUND. The man's name is Steve Sarnoff. The time frame is one year. The profits are guaranteed. Don't miss a single alert. Click here now. http://www.agora-inc.com/reports/OHL/EOHLFC07 ------------------------- Cerebral Striptease, Part II Edited by Eric J. Fry "I'm coming down on the side that the trade deficit is another junk statistic - like CPI or GDP," scowls Chris Mayer, editor of Capital & Crisis. "GDP, the Producers' Price Index, the CPI, Productivity stats, etc. etc. They are all so flawed as to be practically useless. These things are so abstract that they hardly matter, especially as investors. I know of no great investor who has made money in the market by interpreting trade statistics. They are accounting fictions. It's a bunch of baloney, really. "As Bonner might say, my breakfast tastes no better, my wife is not any prettier, nor does the sun shine any brighter because the trade deficit goes down. And I have to tell you, the argument that the trade deficit is an accounting abstraction with little meaning, in and of itself, is quite old. "I just pulled Murray Rothbard's huge textbook 'Man, Economy & State,' off my shelf and flipped to the following excerpt: 'More nonsense has been written about balances of payments than about virtually any other aspect of economics...Worries about national balances of payments are the fallacious residue of the accident that statistics of exchange are far more available across national boundaries than elsewhere.' "Look, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. But I am interested in getting at the truth of this thing. And I'm not sure the conventional 'we're losing out to the world - just look at the trade deficit' argument is right. In fact, I'm inclined to think it's wrong." Junk Statistics: Intellectual Property Is the Future "Amen!" Justice Litle promptly replied. "Getting at the truth is what it's about, or should be anyway. My 'hunch' is that those who get hopping mad over the trade deficit are mostly responding to the perma-bulls who cheerily suggest the deficit doesn't matter. "I think intellectual property is the future. As a general rule of thumb, profit margins increase as one moves further towards the abstract. (Just look at Bill Gates and his idea-based creation!) What's the marginal profit margin on a good idea? But at the same time, there are very real sociopolitical issues to deal with that just won't go away. We can't just throw out the realities and constraints of the industrial world like an old hard drive." "Agreed," said Mayer, "and when we are talking about trade statistics for the entire nation, I can't get my mind past one big thing: Trade stats only look at SALES not PROFITS. This is undeniable. And it seems so important as to kill any usefulness of looking at the trade deficit without considering profits or the composition of that deficit. Obviously, profits matter more than sales. The underlying assumption of trade stats is that a dollar of exports is worth the same as a dollar of imports...That's a fatal flaw! "Anyway, I highly recommend GaveKal's book to stimulate thoughts on these matters." Junk Statistics: Profit Figures Are Irrelevant Finally, when Bill Bonner could no longer restrain his cyber-pen, he weighed in: "I did a lot of thinking on this GaveKal point too... "But I finally decided that the profit figures are irrelevant. A company may increase profit margins by becoming a 'platform' company...and benefiting from lower labor costs overseas. So what...it still means that labor costs are falling. The capitalists don't care. They'll take their profits wherever they find them. Money has no patriotic impulse. So the actual owners may not even be in the economy we're talking about. They could be European hedge funds...or Chinese banks. "The current account measures the entire flow of funds that are current (not capital). If the figure is negative...it means that the country as a whole is losing money (even though many of its capitalists may be having the time of their lives). "And when a company cuts its payroll costs...it may show a higher profit. But it hardly makes the society richer. Because the payroll costs are the income of the workers (who are usually the customers). A company can get rich by cutting expenses. But a society can only get rich by increasing them." The Daily Reckoning's co-editor, Addison Wiggin, jumped in next: "I haven't read the Gavekal book yet, but it seems to echo Andy Kessler's point: 'We think, they sweat.' [Editor's note: Kessler in a December 24, 2004, Wall Street Journal article entitled, 'We Think, They Sweat,' champions the idea that a trade deficit is a good thing. A thematic quote from the article might be: 'You start to get a feel for how the world works. A $1.5 billion trade deficit increases wealth in the U.S. by some $16 billion - I'll take that trade any day.'] 'After working with Kessler's idea in 'Demise of the Dollar,' it seemed to me that 'we think, they sweat' is a good investment maxim... a good way to find high net return companies... but not a good measure of the wealth of nations. You can have highly successful platform companies right along side high unemployment and deflation in wage rates. In other words, both descriptions of what's going on with "globalization" can be true at the same time." Sign Up for The Rude Awakening Start your mornings off with a dose of Rude news. The Rude Awakening is dedicated to highlighting phenomena in the financial markets that others may not see. Let the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times "break news." Sign up FREE Today! We will not share your email address with anyone else, period. -Andrew Palmer, Director E-commerce Marketing We Value Your Privacy |
Junk Statistics: Profit Is Not Irrelevant Mayer, responding mostly to Bonner, wrote: "Well, I don't see how profit is irrelevant. You're assuming companies expand profit margins and profits only by lowering labor costs...and that the payroll lost in one US company is not picked up by another US company. "The evidence suggests companies can expand margins, profits and increase payrolls. An Intel or Apply employs more people than 10 years ago and makes a lot more money. Lots of smaller companies have also been expanding payrolls and growing profits at the same time. "More people are employed in this country than ever before, as GaveKal points out...and however you slice the unemployment data, they are low by historical standards and far better than, say, EU countries. "So, we see no decline in employment over the years this deficit has grown to historic levels." Byron King, contributing editor of Whiskey and Gunpowder, interceded: "Chris, I think that Bill's point (not that I have to put words in the mouth of such a wordsmith...) is that what might be good for General Motors is not necessarily good for America. Strange, isn't it? Back in 1913, Henry Ford did something that appeared NOT to be good for Ford, by paying his workers $5.00 per day, an unheard-of wage before then and certainly for factory work. People thought that Ford was nuts, and would soon be out of business. Not to make too much of a caricature, but the conventional wisdom was that you could not run a business without grinding the faces of the poor workers. "But as it turned out $5.00 per day was good for both Ford, his workers and for America, because it ushered in the rise of an American middle class of consumers, employed at (relatively) high wage & high skill jobs, making stuff that other people wanted to buy. The workers could afford to buy their own product. "The idea of so-called platform companies strikes me as being a relatively small, transient, if not effervescent part of the economic ecology. 'We think, they sweat' seems to me to be an arrogant attitude that places those self- selected companies at the top of a food pyramid. Call them 'predator' companies, if not 'vulture' companies. That is, a few, relatively small companies (eagles or buzzards, your pick) have some particular niche-skill through which they survive by focusing production of something by the lowest- cost, lowest-factor producer, and selling that product into the market that consists of whatever remains of the wealth of a nation in decline. Break one part of the food chain, however, and these birds are out of business. "That is, continuing the raptor-analogy, if the population of small prey goes away (something wipes out the food source at the bottom of the pyramid), the population at the top of the chain also declines radically. Applying the analogy to economic ecology, if Peak Oil causes production and transport from distant locales to become prohibitively expensive, then an entire segment of the chain is lost to the platform company. "And also, a company that sells into a market, taking the underlying wealth and accompanying profit out of that market, but without putting anything back in return.... well, how long can that last? You are asking people to burn their furniture not just to keep themselves warm, but to warm your house while theirs gets colder and colder. "At root, platform companies do not offer a long term solution, let alone a sustainable one, to any economy." To be continued one more time...In a rare Monday morning edition of the Rude Awakening we'll present the concluding thoughts from the debate's participants. [Joel's Note: These blokes get together once a month to but heads, challenge each other's ideas, debate, pound fists on a boardroom table and distill down the best investment ideas they can come up with. This information is actionable, profitable and available for you to listen to right here: Who's afraid of a Webinar? http://www.agora-inc.com/reports/400SPRED/E400FC33 --- Advertisement --- Tune into the 11 Hottest predictions of 2006, right here. Imagine the money you could have made had you known the trends of 2005 at the beginning of the year. Listen in on the sharpest financial minds discussing the greatest trends for the year ahead. This time-sensitive information is available at a special discount...but only until Jan. 2nd, 2006. Click here to learn more. http://www.agora-inc.com/reports/400SPRED/E400FC33 ------------------------- And the Markets... | Thursday | Wednesday | This week | Year-to-Date | DOW | 10,785 | 10,796 | -98 | 0.0% | S&P | 1,254 | 1,258 | -14 | 3.5% | NASDAQ | 2,218 | 2,229 | -31 | 2.0% | 10-year Treasury | 4.36 | 4.37 | -2.00 | 4.32 | 30-year Treasury | 4.52 | 4.53 | -3.00 | 4.47 | Russell 2000 | 678 | 680 | -8 | 4.1% | Gold | $516.70 | $516.60 | $13.91 | 18.1% | Silver | $8.85 | $8.91 | $0.28 | 29.9% | CRB | 329.32 | 329.32 | 3.01 | 16.0% | WTI NYMEX CRUDE | $60.29 | $60.07 | $1.86 | 38.8% | Yen (YEN/USD) | JPY 117.82 | JPY 117.93 | -1.59 | -14.9% | Dollar (USD/EUR) | $1.1848 | $1.1831 | 26 | 12.6% | Dollar (USD/GBP) | $1.7245 | $1.7166 | 103 | 10.1% |
|