SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: THE ANT who wrote (81229)7/10/2008 7:36:44 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 116555
 
thanks for the explanation.

given multiple structural issuses in Brazil a minimum wage worker there is not competitive with the rest of te world.

with the significant exception of commodities, since they have a trade surplus which by definition means they are competitive.

so if the commodities Brazil exports are in a bubble, the real is in a bubble--would that be your argument? i am trying to decide about this because i have a BRL bond position i am considering closing.



To: THE ANT who wrote (81229)7/10/2008 7:52:56 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 116555
 
klaser, do you know why Brazilian interest rates, especially after inflation, are so much higher than not just places like the US, but also places like Latin America? i can understand why Brazil rates are higher than the US, but why are they so much higher than rates in Peru, Mexico, etc?

btw, wrt my previous post to you, it seems Brazil doesn't really need to export any manufactured goods as long as their commodity exports are so strong. maybe a commodity-based economy isn't good for increasing per-capita income, but if commodities remain strong, it is hard to see how the current situation is bad for BRL.



To: THE ANT who wrote (81229)7/10/2008 3:52:42 PM
From: elmatador  Respond to of 116555
 
klaser Brazil is too competitive. Hs been battling tariffs for decades. Would bankrupt whole regions if its products would be allowed in without tariffs.

(Steel, Cotton, Frozen orange juice, ethanol)

A plethora of companies would love a BRL devalued to export from a cheaper currency country. (See article VW below.) We know VW is affraid of China gulping those markets they want us to supply wityh cheaper BRL. But we don't need more USD from exports now. We are not going to compete with China. Let China specializes in prducing cheaper buses and cars. Let VW persuade the Chinese to sell cheaper vehicles.

Brazilians are 'tirando o atraso'. Never went abroad during Lost Decade. Now all want to go thinking that this is a widnow of opprotunity to take advantage of. They need to know that this is going to keep like that henceforth.

Eventually they'll get tired of going abroad. A little devaluation is good to make thos trips more expensive. Once imports skyrockets, ISD goes out, Real drops and re-estabilizes.



Volkswagen Brazil Says Exports May Double on Real (Update1)

By Fabiola Moura and Leonardo Lara

July 2 (Bloomberg) -- Volkswagen AG, Europe's biggest carmaker, said it may double bus and truck exports from Brazil in the event the country's currency falls about 30 percent.

The real, now trading at an average 1.60 per dollar, is likely to ``correct itself'' in the short term, said Antonio Roberto Cortes, chief executive officer of Volkswagen's truck and bus division in Brazil. A rate of 2.10 reais to the dollar would let Volkswagen expand bus and truck sales abroad to 40 percent of production from 20 percent now.

``An overvalued real is strongly affecting our profitability,'' Cortes said in a Bloomberg Television interview in Sao Paulo. ``If we can cut our prices, our exports could reach 40 percent of output. We have capacity to double the volume of our exports.''



To: THE ANT who wrote (81229)7/10/2008 4:02:05 PM
From: elmatador  Respond to of 116555
 
"European Union's 2008 handouts of 55 billion euros for farming and rural aid, or the five-year, $289 billion farm bill endorsed by the U.S. Congress in May -- for inflating prices and stifling food production in the southern hemisphere.

These are the guy we compete with. We are competing with their treasuries!

Rift With Emerging Economies Grows Amid Calls to Expand G-8

By James G. Neuger

July 10 (Bloomberg) -- The Group of Eight summit ended with the world's richest nations at odds with the most populous ones over climate change, agriculture subsidies and food prices.

The emerging economies represented at the meeting, led by India and China, refused to sign on to the G-8's pledged 50 percent cut in emissions by 2050, even after pressure from U.S. President George W. Bush. They also complained about subsidies developed nations give farmers.

The G-8, for its part, carped at its poorer cousins for stockpiling food supplies and keeping currencies artificially cheap to give exports a competitive edge.

Discord at the meeting, on the Japanese island of Hokkaido, raised questions about the future suitability of the G-8 as a forum to tackle global issues. After the emerging-economy guests upstaged the summit, French President Nicolas Sarkozy told reporters that meetings of the eight wealthiest nations are too exclusive.

``G-8 is an outdated concept,'' said Sung Won Sohn, a former White House economist and retired president of Los Angeles-based Hanmi Financial Corp., the largest Korean-American bank, in an interview. ``It is a rich-countries' party. It should be expanded to include key players in the world economy.''

Sarkozy's call for a bigger ``G'' to coordinate global economic policies was ignored by most leaders and shrugged off by next year's host, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. He said the current format permitted ``frank conversations.''

Wealth, Population

The G-8 -- the U.S., the U.K., Japan, Germany, Italy, France, Canada and Russia -- represents 870 million people who generate 62 percent of the world's economy, according to the University of Toronto's G8 Research Group. The so-called G-5 developing nations that attended the summit -- China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa -- account for 11 percent of global output and 2.8 billion people, 41 percent of the world's population.

The division between the G-8 and the emerging economies was evident in the summiteers' pronouncements on the environment. Bush said ``all major economies'' needed to work together to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, while Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said eradicating poverty should come first because ``a quarter of our population lives on less than a dollar a day.'

The finger-pointing reopened a debate over whether the advanced economies' club, which expanded to eight when Russia joined in 1998, should enlarge again to reflect the global economic realignment.

Quality Dialogue

``Don't call it G-13, don't call it G-16,'' said Jose Angel Gurria, a Mexican who is secretary-general of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, in an interview. ``Just keep the quality of the dialogue.''

At a press conference, Sarkozy said it was ``unreasonable to seek to tackle global issues without India, China, a country from South America, one from Africa and even an Arab country.''

Three leaders gave brief reactions and no substantial discussion ensued, according to a Japanese official's account of the closed-door meeting.

Every G-5 member will grow faster than the 1.3 percent rate projected for the ``advanced economies'' this year, led by China at 9.3 percent and India at 7.9 percent, according to the International Monetary Fund.

``It's not 1975 anymore, so for core economic issues in the globalized world, China and India are indispensable,'' said Andrew Cooper, associate director of the Centre for International Governance Innovation in Waterloo, Canada.

Climate Dispute

The biggest dispute between the two camps came over climate change. The G-8 said the route to solutions led through the G-5. Bowing to demands by Bush, the industrial eight -- producing 62 percent of global greenhouse gases -- insisted on ``sharing'' the goal of cutting carbon pollution with the less energy efficient developing world.

The G-5 issued its response from Sapporo, a half-hour helicopter ride from the G-8 enclave. In a dig at the gas- guzzling habits of SUV-driving Americans, the five demanded ``sustainable consumption patterns and lifestyles'' in the northern hemisphere.

Yesterday, the G-5 succeeded in stripping the numerical targets out of a joint statement with the G-8, along with Australia, Indonesia and South Korea. Mexican President Felipe Calderon said the rich world was shirking its ``unavoidable responsibility.''

Undervalued Currencies

G-8 criticisms weren't limited to climate. Taking aim at China, the G-8 leaders said some emerging economies are profiting from unfairly undervalued currencies.

Countries including India, China and Vietnam also were rebuked for stockpiling foods such as rice and corn to cope with rising prices instead of exporting them.

The lesser-developed countries blamed rich-world agricultural subsidies -- such as the European Union's 2008 handouts of 55 billion euros for farming and rural aid, or the five-year, $289 billion farm bill endorsed by the U.S. Congress in May -- for inflating prices and stifling food production in the southern hemisphere.

``There's no gain, no use to try to find a kind of scapegoat,'' IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn said in an interview.

Italy's Berlusconi will host next year's wrangling at a former American nuclear submarine base on Santo Stefano, a pink granite island off the northeast coast of Sardinia.

The Group of Five will be ready: It plans to meet two months earlier in Brazil.

To contact the reporter on this story: James G. Neuger in Toyako, Japan at jneuger@bloomberg.net