US Steelmakers Support Green House Gas Legislation

carbon-cap-fedderman

I came across the group ‘The Cap Solution‘ through a few different avenues, energy industry related research, at the public library as an advertisement in the front hall, and at the local farmers market on a bulletin board. The Cap Solution is consortium of the Environmental Defense Fund, the Blue/Green Alliance, and the United Steel Workers.

Here’s what they stand for:

The cap solution in a nutshell

Capping carbon pollution encourages the growth of renewable energy and energy-efficient industries. It brings customers to these businesses, which in turn will create good jobs and help revitalize American towns.

They are correct that it will encourage the growth of renewable energy as a GHG cap will increase the costs of traditional generation (e.g., coal and natural gas). I’m not sure if it will create jobs, as that assumes the jobs lost from the coal and natrual gas generation sector will be more than replaced by jobs associated with ‘green energy’. Their logic does fully fall apart with the comment that a GHG cap will, “revitalize American towns.”

Let’s explore this logic a bit further:

New jobs americans can do tomorrow

Take the wind turbine. It’s a machine. Americans are good at machines. A typical wind turbine has 8,000 parts and is made of 250 tons of steel. Somebody’s got to make that steel, fabricate those parts, assemble those parts, deliver the assembled turbine to a wind farm, erect the turbine and manage the wind farm. That’s a lot of jobs right in the American workers’ sweet spot. And this is just one example. A Carbon Cap will create demand for energy efficient windows, LED lighting, ball bearings for turbines and thousands of other products.

So here is where I strongly disagree with their logic. If we implement a GHG cap we increase the price of manufacturing in the US, particularly the cost of manufacturing energy intensive products. Steel is energy intensive. So while we increase the costs of doing business and producing steel and India and China do not increase the costs, they become more competitive in the market and thus will be most likely the producers of the new wind turbines. In fact this article, claims that China will be the biggest producer of wind turbines in 2009. So why, in particular, is the United Steelworkers supporting this legislation. Well as an economist I tend to think of incentives, what is it that the United Steelworkers like, what reward would they possibly seek…protectionism.

This can be seen by the Cap Solution’s simple sentence:

And by starting now, we’ll make sure these products are made here and exported all over the world. Instead of becoming more products we have to import.

In fact the United Steelworkers couldn’t get any trade complaints passed through the Bush administration so their hoping for some traction with Obama (particular since he pledged to increase trade enforcement). They are currently trying to get ‘trade enforcement’ considerations by Obama on imported Chinese tires (see article).

Its unfortunate that the environmental leadership in our country can’t make the connection between increased costs of production and the health of our economy, and how the health of our economy allows us to purchase environmental services (e.g., pollution control and preservation). I also find that most people forget that the reason we get to even consider worrying about GHG is that we have a high standard of living. I fear that our ability to worry about GHG, our high standard of living, will erode as we start to turn our worries into policies. Policies that increase the costs of doing business in the U.S., while not simultaneously increasing the cost of doing business in other countries, putting all of us at a competitive disadvantage.

This group, waiting in line for free food for unemployed, aren’t waiting in line to volunteer for a non-profit, or learn about environmental degradation, they’re unemployed and employment and security definitely come before environmental protection.

Share

From Bear to Bull – Why I may be switiching to a Long Strategy

So for the last few months I definitely considered myself more of a Bear Market proponent on stocks than a Bull Market proponent. (i.e., I anticipated slow to negative growth), but this may be changing. My change of attitude is not so much about me changing my fundamental theory of markets and the need for the market to clear itself of bad assets, but rather a realization of certain dynamics. So here’s my proof on what may come of the Stimulus Package and the current financial crisis:

1) Consumer spending and investment drives our stock markets’ success. Stock market prices reflect the long term potential of companies, which is on a quarterly basis viewed as their ability to make quarterly earnings estimates. Their ability to make quarterly earnings estimates is dependent on selling their goods and services.

2) The ability of companies to sell their goods and services is dependent on consumers ability to pay for these goods and services. Consumers usually use credit to pay for things, hints our recent negative savings rates.

3) The results of the stimulus package and write-off of banks bad debt with tax payer dollars will revive the economy in the short term. This will be perceived in the short term by consumers simply as “things are fixed.” I highly doubt most consumers understand the need for an economy to self-correct and truly purge itself of bad assets and investment decisions. The propping up of these bad assets and investments will stimulate the economy in the short term, but will inevitable have to be paid for via increased taxes, inflation, and write-offs. Most people could care less if short term decisions don’t match their long term goals, hints our recent negative savings rate.

4) As consumers perceive things are fixed and they start spending again companies will make or exceed quarterly earnings estimates and the market will increase. The cheap dollar will increase exports, money will flow again, debts will be put off, taxes will stay the same, all will look good, until…

5) Eventually the economy will falter again and the government will try its same old trick of stimulating out of a problem, but next time it will be much more difficult due to the accumulation of debt, liabilities, and propped up bad assets that are now being created to stimulate ourselves out of this mess. The business cycle will become shorter and likely more severe.

So I think I may move to a long position for the next 24 months or so and then transfer back into cash or gold, and wait for the next crash.

A few additional notes.

I think there are still bad assets on the books of some companies, likely concentrated on the financial sector. There is little to no incentive to mark these assets down, when the government is unpredictable (companies wait to find out if they will be bailed out like the rest).

I see this view as a balance between acknowledging what is inevitable in the long run with how humans will respond in the short run.

Consumers could also use the short lived boom to reduce their debt and begin saving again. To some this shouldn’t matter as savings will turn into investment, but for a post-Keynesian, this will lead to lower aggregate demand and a decrease in consumption.

The governments interference in the economy in the short run could hamper this movement. The current discussion on Cap and Trade comes to mind, although likely wouldn’t increase prices for some months.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Share

Should Savings Equal Investment

savingsI love the line from Obama’s address to Congress quoted in the NY Times article:

“We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before.”

The problem that some economist are pointing to is that we overbuilt and over-invested in our economy, and as a result the bubble busted. Now most would ask, how is it possible to over invest in an economy. Is not investment good? Of course its good, but it does need to match savings. The below is an articulation of the savings identity which states that the amount saved in an economy will equal the amount invested. This is an identity so it is true by definition. The affect of this identity on the health and sustainability of an economy is more closely analyzed and debated amongst economist than the identity itself. (Savings Identity via wiki)

Let’s think of a small household who is trying to manage its household budget. The household has a certain amount of monthly income, it uses this income for two purposes (1) to consume today and (2) to save to consume for tomorrow. This household’s and millions like it save a certain amount of their money. They deposit this money in banks who then turn around and make loans to businesses who are investing money to fulfill future consumption. The amount of savings in the economy tells the businesses how much consumption will occur in the future, how much people are saving for future consumption. This is conveyed to business borrowers by the price of investment, the interest rate.

The government through the Federal Reserve system manipulates the rate of interest. The rate does not match the rate that would exist without the government intervention, the natural rate which reflects the true savings of households. Economist from the Austrian perspective view this as a problem. The business owners who are investing in fulfilling future consumption are being misled by the artificial interest rate. If it is artificially low than they invest more than they should in fulfilling future consumption. When that future consumption does not materialize the investments fail, the half finished condos never get finished, car factories reduce output, small businesses go out of business.

More on the Austrian School of Economics
More on the Austrian Theory of the Business Cycle

Technorati Tags: , ,

Share

AIG

One of the few sensible articles on the AIG compensation issue appeared in the NY times (Link to Article)

The main points were that we should pay for the compensation because it is about honoring contracts, and that these individuals are the best possibility of steering AIG out of the rough seas. The issue of honoring contracts strikes a important note with anyone who understands the role of contracts in our ability to increase our standard of living (e.g., new institutional economists).

The most interesting development of the AIG compensation coverage, is that the AIG compensation coverage is more heavily covered than the news story of AIG listing the parties it paid with taxpayers money. (NY Times Article)

Here is the searchable counterparty list (See Link)

What a clever ruse. Have the public concentrate on 165 million in contractually obligated payments while a list of 10s of billions of dollars handed out to a range of banks (national and foreign) is released. I have more concern over the billions than the 165 million, but the media sells us on the importance of the 165 million because its a more profitable news story. Who wants to read about the details of 10s of billions of dollars and learn if they are prudent or not when we can read about the 165 million in bonuses which is easier to understand and bitch about.

Technorati Tags: , ,

Share

Fractional Reserve Banking Allegory

I found the below linked article on Strike The Root to be a good allegory showing the faults of fractional reserve banking. Read it over and let me know what you think.

“Scrounging for enough food to starve over years instead of days is an exhausting grind. Crusoe can only dream of capital projects. There appear to be sources for tool making, but always a little too far from food sources to consider risking.”

http://www.strike-the-root.com/91/lafave/lafave2.html

Share

What Happened to Wall Street

This short video, produced by The Wall Street Journal, is a good introduction to some of the issues surrounding the current financial crisis. I believe the first of the three part series is more concrete than the remaining two which are more speculative. As time moves us forward analysis and theories of what actually happened will further our knowledge of reality. Or the story will be told in a manner that does not match reality, as those in power will seek to tell the tale in a certain fashion.

Share

Myths of the Great Depression

I came across a great introduction to the ‘alternative’ view of the Great Depression, that is was not the lack of the markets ability to operate efficiently, but rather a large amount of government intervention which skewed the market.

I put the word alternative in quotes because its not too distant from a large portion of analysis of the Great Depression but is dissimilar to the common explanation given to non-economists.

Its interesting to think about these things in the context of what is currently occurring.

Check it out: http://fee.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/greatmythsdepression2008feemcppfinalweb.pdf

Share