PERLAKUAN PASARAN SAHAM HUBUNGKAIT ANTARA BERITA DAN AKTIVITI PASARAN

Nota Ringkas


Ada banyak yang masih perlu difahami oleh pelabur.

a) Pasaran menggambarkan berita yang AKAN berlaku dan bukannya yang TELAH berlaku walaupun berita boleh datang dengan MENGEJUT sekalipun. Penganalis yang bijak akan melihat kepada 'apa kesan berita berkenaan terhadap pasaran SELEPAS ianya diproses'?

b) Kadangkala pasaran memberikan tindakbalas terhadap data atau berita. Ada juga berita dan data bertindakbalas berdasarkan pasaran.

Yang mana datang terlebih dahulu? Saya ingin menjelaskan mengenai korelasi antara semua jenis data dan peristiwa yang berlaku selepas langkah-langkah penting diambil oleh pasaran.

Contohnya peperangan, ramai yang menyangka bahawa pasaran akan menjadi teruk atau jatuh. Ini hanyalah reaksi psikologi bagi mereka yang tidak tahu bagaimana pasaran memproses maklumat berkenaan. 

Dan keadaan ini diburukkan lagi apabila manusia menyangka mereka akan kehilangan kerja, keluarga, pendapatan, jatuh miskin terutamanya jika mendengar pelabur sendiri yang mengeluarkan kenyataan berkenaan.

Samalah juga serangan 11 September, jika dilihat ketika itu, kepanikan banyak berlaku tetapi ke mana perginya rasa panik berkenaan masakini? Lihat dulu bagaimana pasaran memberikan reaksi kemudiannya. Sememang dijangkakan, ramai yang menyangka ekonomi dunia akan jadi parah walhal ketika itu, semua data-data telah ada 'backupnya' dan masih beroperasi seperti biasa sehingga kini?

Kita juga pernah mendengar terdapat gempabumi atau tsunami di Jepun, ada kepanikan berlaku. 

Cuba lihat pasaran ketika itu, adakah ianya memberikan reaksi yang teruk? 

Jawapannya 'TIDAK'. 

Ianya mungkin memberikan kesan sementara kepada sekitarnya (ASEAN) kecuali tempat berlakunya bencana alam berkenaan (Jepun) 

Namun, fenomena ini juga membuka peluang kepada pelabur-pelabur berskala besar untuk membeli saham-saham yang dijual murah disebabkan 'selling pressure'. Akhirnya, apabila pasaran kembali pulih, tiba-tiba saham yang dibeli murah itu naik berkali ganda.

Apa yang penting ialah bagaimana pasaran mengendali dan memproses maklumat berkenaan. 

Kata Kunci di sini (dalam konteks pasaran saham) ialah 'Jangan Panik' kerana 'panik' boleh membuka jalan kepada spekulator.

Pada tahun 2001, ketika itu pasaran sedang riuh kerana kejatuhan saham dotcom. 

Pada tahun 2003, US telah menyerang Iraq. Semasa itu, pasaran saham di US jatuh hampir 50%.

Percayakah anda : 

Pasaran 'bear' menyebabkan kejatuhan dalam kadar kelahiran.

Kita lihat, ramai yang masih memberikan reaksi psikologi yang negatif dan menyangka kejatuhan dalam pasaran saham akan menyebabkan mereka akan hilang kuasa kewangan - jadi mereka perlu merancang keluarga mereka?

Namun, pasaran 'bull' pula menaikkan pula kadar kelahiran. Pelik tapi benar. 

Kerana pasaran yang digambarkan sebagai 'bullish' akan meningkatkan lagi jangkaan pelabur bahawa mereka akan membuat untung.

Suasana ini berlaku di US dan kini 'berjangkit' ke serata dunia.

Ini menyebabkan ramai yang melihat apa yang berlaku sebelumnya dan bukan apa yang sedang berlaku. Setiap kali ada berita kejatuhan dunia sebelum ini, pasaran telah mengambil segala langkah untuk memastikan jika ianya berlaku sekali lagi, pasaran dapat memproses maklumat itu dengan lebih matang dan mencari 'kusyen' untuk 'jatuh'.

Jadi kadangkala kita tidak boleh terlalu bergantung kepada kisah lama seperti 'Great Depression' dan 'Big Bubble'.

Tahun 2008 menyaksikan banyak sektor korporat telah mendapat kesan hasil daripada krisis kewangan. Malah ramai 'peramal-peramal' menyatakan, akan berlaku kemelesetan yang teruk. Pemimpin peringkat negara, masyarakat, dunia dsb. pula menganggap 'politik' tidak membantu. Akhirnya apa yang disebut berlaku kemelesetan, tidak berlaku sehingga kini.

Saya bertanya sahabat di U.S., sekiranya 'trading' adalah 1,050, S & P 500 jatuh 16.1%, adakah ini bermakna akan berlaku 'double dip recession'? 

Benar, index mungkin jatuh tetapi trend menunjukkan ianya akan bertahan pada satu tahap dan akhirnya naik kembali pada masa-masa yang akan datang.

Kesimpulannya, pasaranlah yang mencetuskan suasana ekonomi masa hadapan dan bukannya berita (atau khabar) semata-mata.

Lain kali, jika ada pergerakan pasaran saham ke suatu arah tertentu, jangan bertanya "apa yang telah berlaku yang menyebabkan pergerakan berkenaan?" tetapi tanyalah "apa gambaran yang cuba dilakukan oleh pasaran mengenai 'apa yang akan berlaku?' supaya kita boleh mengambil langkah berjaga-jaga.

Jangkapanjang sebenarnya lebih baik dari Jangkapendek.

GDP OF 6% IS FINE - By Nik Zafri

I'm not working with Bank Negara but when "smart" people (who is also not employed with Bank Negara as well) started to question Malaysia's targeted GDP of 6%, they are overlooking inflation, money flooding in without control, rising consumer demand and escalating commodity costs.

Before questioning the credibility of Bank Negara Governor, Tan Sri Zeti, I would like to point some things out for the sake of discussion.

We should consider inflation based on CPI (*energy, food etc) - which is the inflation's benchmark to determine our financial market.

(*I'm looking into the volatility of these prices translated from what I see on the field myself - people at ALL levels especially the medium income and the poor ones rather than sitting comfortably in an air-con office suite and thinking how to get publicity by criticizing Bank Negara)


GDP represents total aggregate output of our economy. As a market watcher, I told the investors that "WE MUST PLAY SAFE" - do not be too ambitious - so 6% is FINE by the standard of investors as the figures have been adjusted for inflation.

Let's say Gross GDP calculated 6% higher than last year, inflation measured 2% over the same period, thus : net growth over the period is reported as 4%.

Investors will look into GDP's annual growth - the primary stock performance driver - in order to determine whether 'to invest or not to invest'. Yes, it's true that if there in no change or a decline in the overall economic output, investors will translate these datum into companies inablity to make profit

So how about TOO MUCH GDP Growth? (or not 'trying to play safe' - take some risk) Definitely inflation will increase - killing the gains in the stock market hence our RM is also devaluated. So here we can see what will happen - more and more crime might happen, prices of food my go 'sky high' and unaffordable, more unemployment, more controlled of financing/loan/grants etc.

Furthermore it sounds good to increase GDP by linking to lowering unemployment rate but it will be out of control when supply decrease faster while services and goods' aggregate demand increase, constraint in the labour market that will result in company raising salary - where will this all end? Consumers definitely - in the form of price going higher. (Yes, in some way, some people are making profits out of these - maybe that's the reason they are restless seeing 6% GDP)

We should learn from what is happening around the world especially from the US. Almost all the US economists will agree with me that GDP growth causes inflation and inflation begets hyperinflation. The process can become a self-reinforcing feedback loop. Everyone in the world will start spending money which they know will be less valuable in due course. So...more increase in GDP = more price increase! Inflation are non-linear - 10% inflation is much more that twice as harmful as 5% inflation.

With that I rest my case.
------------------------------

FOR READING PLEASURE

WHAT'S DRIVING GOLD?

(A)

Cause :

Growth in World Money Supply

Years of easy monetary policies by central banks and now the trillions of dollars in economic stimulus to fight the global recession

Effect :

Inflationary Pressures

Excess cash in marketplace eventually tends to bid up prices for goods and services

Possible Ramifications

Declining Confidence in Paper Money

The prospect of inflation lowers confidence in Paper money a a store of value leading may investors to buy gold to preserve their wealth

(B)

Cause :

Volatile Stocks and Oil Prices

After several bull market years, stock and commodity markets turned down dramatically in 200 as the global economy slid into recession. While markets have partially recovered from their low, they remain volatile and many investors remain focused on capital preservation

Effect

Safe Haven Appeal

With other hard assets like real estate and commodities losing value, there was a revived appreciation of gold as a safe haven for investors seeking to protect themselves during difficult times.

Possible Ramifications

Increased Demand for Gold

The recession of 2008 created a large new class of gold investors. The strong demand exerted by this group, along with traditional gold buyers, drained the global inventory of gold coins and gold bars, thus driving up the price of bullion at a time of shrinking worldwide production.

(C)

Cause :

China

Gold has long been prized in China, which is one of the world's largest producers and consumers. Increasingly China's gold market has become more liberalized

Effect :



Trade Surplus

China has a huge trade surplus with the U.S. and Europe that generates vast quantitites of foreign currency. China also has one of the world's highest savings rates.

Possible Ramifications

China buys a considerable amount of U.S. Government debt, but it is diversifying its reserves by increasing its holdings of gold. In addition, China is pursuing investments to recycle its dollars into natural resource projects.

(D)

Cause :

Low Gold Price in 90s

After climbing as high as $850 an ounce in 1980, gold dropped as low as $252 an ounce in 1999.

Effect :

Cuts in Exploration

Low prices and environmental controls discouraged mining companies from spending the money to find new supplies of gold

Possible Ramifications

Falling Production

The lack of investment during the low-price years means new supplies of gold have not kept pace with gold demand

(E)

Cause :

Low Interest Rate

When real interest rates are low many investors turn away from paper assets with declining value and instead turn towar assets with real value, like gold.

Effect :

Hedging Curtailed

When interest rates are low, there is little incentive for hedging. As a result, gold is removed from the market.

Possible Ramifications

A decline in hedging shrinks short-term gold supply, creating a market imbalance during a time of escalating demand.

(F)

Cause :


Credit Crisis

The U.S. economy has been hurt by tighter liquidity associated with heavy losses in the key housing and financial sectors

Effect :

Interest Rate Cuts by Fed

The Federal Reserve has cut interest rates effectively to zero in an effort to lift the economy out of recession

Possible Ramifications

Weaker U.S. Dollar

Rate cuts drive down returns for currency investors. Many of those investors will buy gold as an alternative reserve asset, thus driving up demand.

To recover or not to recover?

Analysts these days are expecting (or speculating) recessions whether we're in L, U, V, W shapes.

Not a very long time ago, we faced difficulties in the construction projects - both material and labour. Richness have favoured oil exporters after the price was USD147/barrel. Then, we see light at the end of the tunnel for India and especially China - attaining good results instead of recession (China - the next country that will save the world? - we'll see) Next, we also see good signs in Australia and Canada as well.

US have been good before the subprime mortgage crisis that affect the whole world - thanks to capitalism. Now, it appears that; apart from US; almost every country in the West is in dire economic straits and surprisingly affecting the birthrate as well. Healthcare now is becoming a trend just like bailouts and stimulus. National debt and deficit to rations of Gross Domestic Product are alarmingly high. Many are now debt-laden. These unstable conditions may have hard effects on USD.

Taken from The Star - Business > News - Wednesday August 5, 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------

I think readers should read this article. I kinda like what Mr. Kumar is writing - it makes so much sense by asking two questions (save or spend - both have pro/cons) - almost related to what I've said in one of my articles about the paradox of 'so many sellers but not so many buyers'...both have pro/cons such as the purchasing power. Good work Mr. Pankaj...you made both Kurnia and Malaysia proud!!

Some suggestions on everyone's dilemma - To save or to spend?
By (Mr.) Pankaj Kumar (Chief Investment Officer - Kurnia)

OUR parents do it, our grandparents and forefathers did it, our siblings do it, as do some of our friends and colleagues. All for the rainy days, so we were told. Yes, savings.

We have to save for our future to ensure that we have something to meet unexpected expenses that may occur in our lives or to make the down-payment for the dream home or car or to pay for our once-in-a-lifetime event, where we become king and queen for a day.

When we are in a family with children, we also save for their future education needs as well as preparing ourselves for retirement.

Some say we do too much of it while others say there’s no such thing as enough. Our parents told us that we have to start young and we should build it up over the years so that by the time we retire we have enough to enjoy and live until we are called by Him.

Some say we have to save 10% of our monthly income as a benchmark while others try for more if they can afford it while some find it tough just to make ends meet, simply because of the higher cost of living.

One thing without doubt is that we have this inherent habit of saving for the future and, to the extent, we save so much that we do not know what to do with it.

My argument is simple as if we look at the current banking system in the country and capturing data related to savings, fixed deposits and demand deposits, individual savings amount to about RM388bil against the total of RM695bil as at June 30, 2009, representing about 56% of the banking system.

If we were to measure the above data in terms of per capita deposit and based on our total population of 28.3 million, per capita individual deposits in the banking system is about RM13,700.

In any society, savings is the pillar of economic expansion as the savings mobilised can be utilised to fund investments. This is indeed very different in Western society, particularly the US where it was only recently that the US found reasons to save due to the on-going economic fallout.

For years the rest of the world has been funding US consumption as the US has been running current account deficits for years and now ranks as the worst country in the world with the highest amount of current account deficit of US$862.3bil.

Malaysia proudly ranks number 17 with a current account surplus of US$17.86bil.

What is the irony of the Americans and us in Asia? It seems that much of Asia’s savings are channelled towards America’s consumption.

We save and the US spends, but it is Asia’s economy that is said to be weak while Uncle Sam is who the world looks up to as without the US spending power, the rest of the world could collapse, starting with significant decline in trade between the rest of the world and the US.

Based on a recent article by Dr Jagdish Bhagwati, a famous Indian-born economist in the US, the US had taken over US$5 trillion from the world and, today, to keep the US spending habits, the rest of the world has to invest US$2bil per day.

Today, almost US$1.3 trillion of US treasuries are held by the Chinese and Japanese. With more US papers flooding the market and to ensure that the dollar doesn’t collapse, the rest of the world has no choice but to buy these papers.

It is indeed a vicious cycle that we are in now as the world is too dependent on US consumption for its own growth.

Bhagwati further commented in his recent article that a nation cannot grow unless the people spend, not save. Not just spend, but borrow and spend. Saving is sin and spending is virtue.

I must say that the above argument has its merits in the American context but we Asians believe in our own values.

Hence, savings will remain a virtue and we will continue to embrace this belief in us and our children as it is our savings habit that has brought us to where we are today while our spending habits are slowly but surely rising.

It may not come as a surprise that one day, we in Asia too will increase our desire for goods and services to the extent it undermines our ability to save and, at the same time, our ability to be a source of funds for the nation’s economic growth.

THE NORMAL ANECDOTE

I'm back!!

I've been relooking into the 1998 - 2001 Malaysian economy and discovered many great things. Not about the recession but about how we rebound and learn from our past mistakes. There have been hiccups here and there but yet we survived. I think IF given limited choice, which were the best two ideas that helped - I would vote for two (Of course it's the Legendary Tun M) :

a) 'controversial' decision to peg the RM to the USD and
b) Reintroducing/Rebranding of ICT & new technology

Between 1999 - 2000, new technology including ICT have been reintroduced 'cautiously' into the market and this time, the technology are there to stay and a lot of good things been happening. To mention a few, the Knowledge Management era, B2B/B2C and finally e-commerce.

Numbers of IPOs increased dramatically especially those having to do with technological stocks.

Early 2001 US Market a.k.a. NASDAQ experienced a 'burst of technological bubble'. The Feds attempted to minimize borrowings by increasing the rates to stop bubble burst but the effort came too late.

Then I dig further which leads me towards the fundamental principles of economy. I did say these sacred words (where was it huh?):

"If everybody want to sell, who wants to buy" or "If everyone is a supplier, who is the customer then?"

As you no doubt have guessed - the principle that I'm talking about is "Supply, Demand and Equilibrium" but in a different perspective.

Malaysia almost made the same mistake by giving out loans and grants (via Banks & Financial Institutions including some Government Agencies) but the businesses they were 'helping' are mostly suppliers/contractors/service providers/sellers etc and not customers. New products, New technologies - everything NEW - mostly claimed to 'assist the Government in their plans' but actually to 'make more money'. (In the end suppliers are flooding the market and not customers)

Again, I'm not implying that the business plans submitted didn't take into account the target market a.k.a. the customers but I'm just looking at the facts.

In laymen term, the customers at the point where borrowings were provided to the suppliers or sellers - are either :

a) loosing their purchasing powers quite rapidly.
b) Or did they have too many suppliers to choose hence, they thought of one good idea -
c) why not I just keep my money without spending them?

Then the banking and financial institutions have no choice but to increase the rate in order to minimize borrowings. Although this has; in a manner of speaking; helped in the 'rebounding process, - but again, there were little effort to help out the customers to regain their purchasing powers or increase promotion on buying rather than keeping.

The 'rich' customers did spend their money but based on my analysis on people going out for vacationing and business purposes overseas, these customers were spending outside Malaysia!

Despite the tourism industry did spur the growth of tourists coming in assisted by MIDA, MITI etc for prospects of domestic investment or export but nobody really tried to capture how much money Malaysians are spending outside? (Here, I'm referrring to those who did not use MITI or MIDA avenues to invest outside but rather - their own initiatives - perhaps due to some 'smart partnerships' or 'JVs' that were not announced in the medias. Apart from this category, I will not touch on those who used their money for crazy shopping spree or gambling (well..it's their rights)

The other customers? You've heard it all the time :

Those 'customers really loosing the purchasing power' (moderate or poor family) decided to spend their money by saving them or buying only the required consumables may not be able to invest in 'high end investments'.
------------------------------------------
Back to the future : (now)

Old habits never die.

We have experienced above 1000 KLCI achievements and suddenly (as I have said in another topic) the market become erratic. Yes, I did say that Banks and Financial Institutions including relevant Government Agencies should help and I must admit I was a bit wrong in my decision. (when I found out - loans and grants are focussing mainly on Suppliers again - as I speak)

So, how to balance and reach 'equilibrium'? (not necessarily 50%-50% - you can't do that)

I was speaking to a Malaysian friend working in the Middle East. He noticed one remarkable thing...it's not easy to find a 'poor guy or family'..everyone is working or at least doing business, or very rarely he heard that people cannot buy things over there.

Again, I dig further...my friend told me that if there is a poor guy and they got to know about it...two things will be done :

a. Giving him/her a sum of money to cater for himself and family, pay his/her debts/overheads etc.

b. Next, giving him a job with proper training and development so that he too can earn a salary just like everyone else,

c. Alternatively, he will be given (not a loan) a sum of money to open up a business (again with training) if he has interest in any kind of business or accepting suggestions from Government 'experts/consultants'.

(Yes, you might say that the Middle East have abundance of oil and everyone is rich. But this country in the Middle East is a LOT bigger than Malaysia. For Malaysia and its population, we also have enough supply of fuel/oil and abundance of resources for everyone as well..)

I'm not asking too much - all I'm hoping for we can take good examples - how we're going to do it..that is really up to us. I think 'good intentions' must also be there before we do everything.

So conclusion for now....make effort to 'balance up' between the 'sellers' and 'buyers'...you'll see improvements in economy..I guarantee it!

--------------------------------------------
Here's my complaints for the day :

1) Funny, I still see 'genuine poor people' in Gombak who are really scared to ask for help because

a) they are illiterate or

b) been cheated with their ICs 'taken away' by unscrupulous people or

c) too scared to go to Government offices to ask for help or scared of procedures or scared of being chased out and many more.

so where's the 'Wakil Rakyat'? Where's the 'Ahli Parlimen' - don't care 'lah' whether you from BN or BA..just do your work - do not treat these people as 'don't exist'!

2) Funny, for almost 10 years, I still see 'rats' and 'unattended garbages' - if we can't solve these two 'small problems' or start pointing hands to another party - then what more to solve problems of people?

NIK ZAFRI'S (HUMBLE) ASIA/SEA ECONOMICAL FORECAST 2009

Many have forecasted that SEA will be the first to rebound from the current economic crisis by September, 2009.

On the other hand, what saddens me most is that some even forecasted that Asian economy will fall badly in 2009 - such a pathetic statement meant to discourage us.
In the past, we have been known for the reputation of outperforming the US and Europe due to the right planning and eventually become very immune to any credit crunch from the West.

Some countries are not even depending on IMF or World Bank in 1997-1998-remember? Even China has been too much underestimated (not that I disagree but too much 'smart' speculations..come on) by these 'so-called' economic forecasters.

I have always been known as a 'reverse psychological' person. I don't believe in 'too obvious bad news' being reported meant to lure the small investors away but giving great monetary advantages to speculators.

Based on these 'unfounded fears', I feel strongly that the Asian will be one of the key players in the world economy commencing from 2009.

But of course, I have a different theory (especially for Malaysia) - I think it's earlier than that...say April, 2009?

But, I share the agreement that it is likely going to be Singapore then probably followed by Malaysia. There have been a trend of banking and financial institutions in these two neighbouring countries offering new packages to GLCs and MNCs. These efforts would probably contribute to economy recovery in 2009. There has also been a higher demand for exports from Malaysia and Singapore based on the increased spending in the Euro and US.

The banking sectors in Japan are planning to buy securities, stocks and bonds (corporate) etc - and if these plan works, it will help stabilise their financial market. The Government has announce Japan's biggest ever annual budget Y12,000bn.

China however would still have to be put under alert - to grow or not to grow. Since China are trading with other SEA countries, their ability to export surplus stocks financed on credit should be monitored. New policies to boost consumption need to be drawn up to counter this possibility. I do know that China works very-very hard lately not to be bound to 'intelligent economic comments' e.g. decoupling - and I have every confident that they will succeed.

In Indonesia, the President announce the budget of USD200 billion ++ and a 6.2% growth is expected. However, they are not too sure about the outcome of issuance of Government bonds and probably there will be a budget deficit of nearly 2% GDP. Mainly taxes will play a role for the main revenue followed by non-tax sectors. There will also be about 102 trillion rupiah for fuel subsidy.

The only biggest dillema in Indonesia is corruption - if this is not being minimized, I do not think that they can reach the target that they are hoping for. While for the good part that Indonesia has done right is their achievement of regaining self-sufficiency in rice where the production has surpassed the country's rice consumption. This has made them better in terms of food situation and probably would take them out of the current global food crisis.

For Korea, they are not too ambitious; which I find a good thing to do - be cautious. While everyone is hoping and praying for a 2009 turnaround, Korea predicted a 3% growth and the focus is mainly creating new job opportunity. They have also cut taxes here and there.

Korean consumer price is estimated to stabilize to less than 4% and there may also be decreasing service deficitit and rising goods surplus - thus making 2009 account surplus to exceed USD10 billion. I personally think that Korea should now put an effort to minimize their dependency on IMF as what they have done before in 1997.

I will keep you all updated.

As you all have already known that the financial experts (or so called) have commenced their efforts to charter the implications of this year's credit crisis (esp. in the US) as a result of financial market turbulence. Not too long ago, everyone is aiming at the renaissance of China but with the current condition they are facing, it may potentially be a little while before their internal problems can be stabilized if not solved fully.

So, what can our world governments do? I humbly think that the financial market should be slowly integrated to become a global network or hub. Except for US, I've seen efforts via conferences and seminars towards implementing such plans. I'm also shocked to know the rate of countries retreating from Euro these days.

US on the other hand; if not properly controlled; may affect even to the security matters - just wait if New York started to feel the pinch and everything will start to lead to one problem to another. (esp. security matters) I do not know if US need to cut down on foreign assistance at the moment - but if this is the case, then the fiscal pinch may affect the amount of such aid. If I may say, I hope that New York can start efforts of working together with other financial hubs to become a network of global capitals. The only setback is the global political stability as whenever there are plans of more effective and beneficial integration, the political element has to be part and parcel of financial market. Of course, I don't need to tell how much US can save by less interfering in other countries internal affairs as what have been done in Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. US Bush Administration has tried their best to save their economy but it is too sluggish - I hope they can crush their ego and restrategize - try to create a better relationships with other countries - they have tried too many models and these models just don't work...

We can no longer depend on IMF, World Bank (now almost irrelevant) and even the UN (they themselves are now in hot soup despite funded the US) but we have to do something NOW to create a healthier market - e.g. making more rooms for reserves. We know that UN's stand on Darfur, Georgia & Pakistan - total silence for unknown reason.

When I talk about integration or interdepence, I'm not really pointing towards globalization as it is still a concept of uncertainty that may become a friend or a foe. That is too much for a small guy like me to anticipate. Just referring to the good ol' concept working together as a team. This 'teamwork' may lead to good global financial governance will create better monetary policies, securities regulations and even signifcant changes can be made to auditing and accounting standards.

Where would be the ideal starting point? The answer is the first tier - Banking and Financial Institutions. I would like to open this suggestion to Asia (or SEA) as Asia is a very unique continent that has always found a way towards survival. (perhaps some democratization of financial policies should be in place) Most important is TRUST and coordinated efforts one another - as every bankers and financiers have all the knowledge. (Don't wait for someone else to start first) There should be no more too much dependency on certain elite groups or industries that are 'controlling the financial world' and we have seen the impact when these 'big mega industries' started to fall. (NASTY!)

Again, my 2 sens worth!

WASHINGTON POST


No Depression
This Time, Uncle Sam Has Got Our Back

By Laurence J. Kotlikoff and Perry MehrlingThursday, October 9, 2008; Page A21

Global markets have not been reassured by the coordinated interest rate cuts of several central banks or by recent congressional action, but they should be. Our bet is that financial markets will return to normal in short order and that the U.S. economy will squeak by with a moderate recession. Recapitalizing the banks and working out mortgages will take time, but the financial system will not collapse -- the government won't let it.

The markets, of course, seem to be factoring in some probability of collapse. Why is this wrong?
For starters, the biggest subprime mortgage gamblers have already failed, been nationalized or been married off, shotgun-style, to banks run by grown-ups. Yes, lots of small shoes may still drop, but the Paulson "buy-up" bill, and, ultimately, the Fed's ability to print money, provides the Treasury and Federal Reserve all the tools they need. The media don't seem to have noticed, but Section 113 of the bill authorizes government capital infusions into the banking system as necessary -- something the British government is now doing and the Swedish government successfully did in the recent past. That means any bank with a viable business will not be allowed to fail simply because it is temporarily undercapitalized.

Second, Uncle Sam (a.k.a. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke) is doing precisely what's needed to avoid the mistakes of the 1930s. With credit markets drying up, he's turning on the faucet by recycling our panic dollars back into the financial market.

The government is taking in our money (in exchange for Treasury bills) and using it to make mortgages and buy up the assets we're too scared to hold. It's doing this via the Treasury, the Fed, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the Federal Housing Administration, the Federal Home Loan Bank, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other appendages. It's starting to lend directly to large and small businesses whose usual sources of credit have become unavailable.

In short, Uncle Sam is becoming our new bank. He has also become our new insurance company with his effective purchase of the world's largest insurer -- AIG.

In the 1930s, nobody in the private sector could borrow, raise equity or sell insurance because everyone lost trust in everyone else. Uncle Sam stood on the sidelines and marveled at the chaos. But today Uncle Sam is saying, "Listen, if you households and firms are too scared to invest in each other or sell each other insurance, give us your money, and we'll do it for you. We'll pay you a sure return on the Treasuries and, if our investments and insurance sales do well, you'll benefit by paying lower taxes."

This may sound like socialism or state capitalism, but it's simply rearranging the financial furniture. As Americans have freaked out, Uncle Sam has stepped up. He'll continue doing so until we realize the sky is not falling. The $700 billion rescue authorizes the federal government to keep doing what it has been doing for the past year to the tune of $400 billion -- buying distressed assets at bargain-basement prices and selling insurance at high premiums. If all works out, Uncle Sam will make a killing. This would be great, given our government's real problem -- paying the long-term Social Security and medical costs of retiring baby boomers.

Point three is clear: This financial chaos has ruined our sleep but left our physical and human capital unscathed. We have the same productive capacity today we had a year ago. And if our capital hasn't changed, we've suffered no overall capital loss.

This means that our accounting, which has focused on financial losses, is missing lots of offsetting financial gains. The offsetting gains are accruing to current or prospective purchasers of the assets whose market values have dropped. Asset buyers, whether they are young people buying their first homes, middle-aged workers contributing to their 401(k)s or billionaires such as Warren Buffett buying financial firms, can now acquire homes and stocks (claims to the same capital inside the companies) at a roughly one-third discount from a year ago. That's great for them, and lousy for the rest of us, but not a net economic tragedy.

The economic tragedy comes if we get hypnotized by the bad news, ignore the good news, fight about things we're already doing (e.g., having Uncle Sam buy and insure troubled assets) and pull our economic heads inside our shells. We Americans have lots of moxie. What we need is a strong pep talk and absolute assurance that credit will continue to flow, that insurance policies will continue to be honored, and that Uncle Sam is willing and able to invest directly in the private economy on our behalf.

So after scaring us half to death, this would be a good time for our other uncles -- Hank and Ben -- to make clear that we're heading for a safe landing and that there is no way in hell they will let this economy go down the tubes.

Laurence J. Kotlikoff, a professor of economics at Boston University, is co-author of "Spend 'Til the End." Perry Mehrling is a professor of economics at Columbia University's Barnard College and author of "Fischer Black and the Revolutionary Idea of Finance."