Skip to main content

Debt as Heroin

A shocking title, but I just read a fascinating analysis by Albert Edwards (from SocGen).  Edwards has been working on the sovereign debt problem.  Those investors who benefited the most from shorting Greece will remember his Q3/09 commentaries [around US Thanksgiving] where he mentioned that the PIGS were in immediate danger of defaulting on their debt obligations.  Earlier this week he wrote a more comprehensive analysis based in part on the work of Jagadeesh Gokhale (Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute – a rightwing think-tank…).

Edwards’ analysis is fascinating.  He makes a very interesting observation: those countries that suffer from the worse structural deficit – a government deficit even when the economy is operating at full steam, are behaving like heroine addics; they will promise anything as long as they can get their next fix!  Edwards takes the view that those same countries that have the largest gap are those who historically been the worse at managing their debt burden.  The guiltiest parties are the usual names plus a few surprises (Norway...):

Difference between required and actual primary surplus (% of GDP)




It gets worse, much worse, if “off balance sheet” obligations are included the operating surplus certain European countries need to generate are staggering.  

 


Taking France as an example, their structural deficit is around 1.75%, currently the French government is running a government deficit in the range of 8.2% (depending on a number of assumptions).  Because of France’s “unfunded liabilities” the total surplus it needs to generate is slightly north of 9%.  The difference is almost 12%, which is simply unmanageable, there is no way (politically or socially) for France to move to this type of surplus.  A solution will require not only a reduction services but also a dramatic reduction in benefits; retirement age will have to increase (e.g. truckers retire with full benefits when the turn 55).  Canada is in somewhat of different position.  In fact, it can run structural deficit because of the nature of its economy – natural resources exporter (Canada’s government also aggressively tackled its fiscal deficit in the mid 90s).  

The assumptions on which Gokhale makes his “unfunded liabilities” projections are fraught with risk (Generational Accounting) especially with regards to their magnitude. However, for the purpose of this analysis it is largely irrelevant because the gulf between where we are and where we need to be is so large that error factor is irrelevant.  In the case of France whether the structural surplus is 8% or 12%, doesn’t impact the overall message of social and economic dislocation.

It would appear that the European central bank and Germany are not buying the "addicts" line that after this one fix they will change their way.  This morning Angela Merckel indicated that there would be no German guarantee forthcoming for Greece.  

This should be interesting!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ok so I lied...a little (revised)

When we began looking at farming in 2013/14 as something we both wanted to do as a "second career" we invested time and money to understand what sector of farming was profitable.  A few things emerged, First, high-quality, source-proven, organic farm products consistently have much higher profit margins.  Secondly, transformation accounted for nearly 80% of total profits, and production and distribution accounted for 20% of profits: Farmers and retailers have low profit margins and the middle bits make all the money. A profitable farm operation needs to be involved in the transformation of its produce.  The low-hanging fruits: cheese and butter.  Milk, generates a profit margin of 5% to 8%, depending on milk quality.  Transformed into cheese and butter, and the profit margin rises to 40% (Taking into account all costs).  Second:  20% of a steer carcass is ground beef quality.  The price is low, because (a) a high percentage of the carcass, and (b) ground beef requires process

21st century milk parlour

When we first looked at building our farm in 2018, we made a few money-saving decisions, the most important is that we purchased our milk herd from a retiring farmer and we also purchased his milking parlour equipment.  It was the right decision at the time.  The equipment dates from around 2004/05 and was perfectly serviceable, our installers replaced some tubing but otherwise, the milking parlour was in good shape.  It is a mature technology. Now, we are building a brand new milk parlour because our milking cows are moving from the old farm to the new farm.  So we are looking at brand new equipment this time because, after 20 years of daily service, the old cattle parlour's systems need to be replaced.  Fear not it will not be destroyed instead good chunks will end up on Facebook's marketplace and be sold to other farmers for spare parts or expansion of their current systems. All our cattle are chipped, nothing unusual there, we have sensors throughout the farm, and our milki

So we sold surplus electricity one time last summer...(Update)

I guess that we will be buying an additional tank for our methane after all.   Over the past few months, we've had several electricity utilities/distributors which operate in our region come to the farm to "inspect our power plant facilities, to ensure they conform to their requirements".  This is entirely my fault.  Last summer we were accumulating too much methane for our tankage capacity, and so instead of selling the excess gas, that would have cost us some money, we (and I mean me) decided to produce excess electricity and sell it to the grid.  Because of all the rules and regulations, we had to specify our overall capacity and timing for the sale of electricity (our capacity is almost 200 Kw) which is a lot but more importantly, it's available 24/7, because it's gas powered.  It should be noted that the two generators are large because we burn methane and smaller generators are difficult to adapt to burn unconventional gas, plus they are advanced and can &qu