|
Unlike other G-(insert number) meetings this one will be more than a photo-op
as policymakers face some of the worst financial problems in history. There
is no time to pass on items at this meeting or save them for the next meeting
because waiting in this rapidly changing global economic environment could
prove to be disastrous.
It's a good thing that there are two photo-ops at these meetings, one at the
start and one at the end, because the G-20 almost became the G-19 when French
President Sarkozy threatened to walk out over issues regarding financial regulations.
Knowing the French I am sure he wanted to blame the U.S.'s lack of financial
regulation for the entire global financial crisis. I am sure that he let the
other world leaders know that it was the lax supervision by the U.S. regulators
that led to the tremendous losses. I'm almost positive that he even suggested
that U.S. policies of allowing excessive leverage led to failures at some of
the largest financial institutions - failures that spread across international
borders affecting financial decision making all over the globe.
Why do I know this? Because in January 2008 French bank Societe Generale suffered
a $7.14 billion loss at the hands of an unsupervised rogue trader who leveraged
the bank's money. While he was making money, no one at the bank even noticed
him. It wasn't until his gains turned into losses that he was caught. And what
did the French do? They sold massive positions in the open market to cover
the losses. This triggered a worldwide panic in the financial markets and may
have been a contributing factor to a 75 basis point cut by the U.S. Federal
Reserve at just about the same time. Mr. Sarkozy, do share your notes on financial
regulation with the other 19 members.
Another issue that is likely to come up is the lack of coordination between
central banks. Here is the breakdown. In one corner are central banks that
are still cutting interest rates. In another corner are central banks which
have cut interest rates and are now applying quantitative easing. In a third
corner are central banks that have cut rates, applied quantitative easing and
have moved on to intervention. Finally there are those central banks that are
in between cutting and easing and easing and intervention. I know it sounds
confusing but this is why they have to coordinate their efforts.
The European Central Bank is still in the process of cutting interest rates.
On April 2 it is expected to cut 50 basis points to bring rates to 1.00%. This
rate will not be as low as most other central banks, but it is getting closer.
The U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bank of Japan and the Bank of England have all
cut rates to near zero and are now applying quantitative easing. Only the Bank
of Japan is a candidate for intervention at this time.
The Swiss National Bank only three weeks ago hit the market with intervention.
It wanted a weaker Swiss Franc and it wanted it fast. The reaction was almost
immediate.
Sitting in between is the Bank of Canada that will finish slashing rates later
this month and move to quantitative easing. The Reserve Bank of Australia and
the Reserve Bank of New Zealand still have relatively high rates but they like
the rates where they are. They don't like the pace at which interest rate cuts
and financial stimulus move through the economy. These two central banks are
likely candidates for intervention.
All of these factors have to be discussed by the G-20 countries so that they
get on the same page. Most of all, the European Central Bank has to start playing
ball with the rest of the world.
This point was brought up by Japan on Wednesday when its representative scolded
Germany for its lack of spending. There is no question that the Germans like
to save and hold on to their money. The German stimulus packages have been
weak and the lack of concern for struggling Eastern and Central European economies
have been noted in the press. This year is an election year in Germany and
I think that the incumbents are afraid to spend money out of fear that they
will be accused of having good money chase bad.
Furthermore, George Soros earlier in the year even questioned the very survival
of the European Union if it does not coordinate efforts to help the weaker
nations of the union. There is no doubt that aid to these ailing nations will
be discussed at this meeting. I am sure that promises of funding will be made,
but check with me in a few months to see if any money actually changes hands.
Finally, protectionism is also a major issue that will be discussed. Europe
has become a hotbed of protectionism. Banks are denying credit to foreign companies
doing business in their countries. Politicians are denying help to foreign
companies. Companies are being encouraged to lay off foreign workers. This
is protectionism at its finest. Hopefully this issue will be discussed and
a solution will be found.
The topic that should not be discussed is the one regarding a one world currency.
If this topic comes up there is likely to be volatility in the markets. Last
week China introduced this topic and U.S. Treasury Secretary Geithner set off
a sharp break in the Dollar and U.S. stock markets when he said the matter
was being discussed.
This discussion is best left behind closed doors. The markets are too fragile
at this time to handle a discussion about replacing the U.S. Dollar as the
world's reserve currency. If there are any surprises at this meeting that rock
the markets I can almost guarantee you that it will be regarding this issue.
This meeting should be more than a photo-op so expect something concrete to
come out of it. I'd put my money on more coordination between central banks.
Protection is very personal to the Europeans and they are unlikely to change
their practices. Promises of aid to emerging markets will be just that - promises.
|