rederob
ducati
There seem to be very few threads where you are taken seriously.
I agree. Everyone hates the contrarian, you could almost add, by definition.
There is data available to end September 2006, rather than accounting estimates for 2005.
And it is from the
(China Daily)
Updated: 2006-10-13 08:37
Which I'm quite happy to use as evidence, therefore;
It brought the country's trade surplus to US$109.9 billion in the first nine months, exceeding the US$101.9 billion for all of 2005.
Exports totalled US$91.64 billion in September, up 30.6 per cent from the same month a year earlier, and imports rose 22 per cent year on year to US$76.34 billion.
Intresting however the ratio of Exports to Imports, as is noted here;
In a bid to keep trade balanced, the Chinese Government should encourage more imports instead of merely dampening exports, suggested Shen Danyang, a researcher with the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Co-operation, a think tank under the Ministry of Commerce.
He said a decline in the growth rate of exports would result in a slowdown of GDP growth and loss of thousands of jobs.
"Increases in imports promote economic growth and create jobs and tax income although they might exert pressure on some industries or sectors," Shen said.
As already discussed in this thread, China has subsidised unprofitable business, [and I used Steel as the example] to maintain exports at high levels, to maintain high[er] employment.
Shrinking exports to the US are a phenomenon of units shipped + dollar value or [exchange rate] If therefore exports are measured in dollar terms, a depreciating dollar and appreciating Euro, will change the value of the measured exports...........having said that, Europe has certainly on the basis of this article surpassed the US, so apologies for my
dated data.
Accepting that this is the case this suggests that;
*Europe is in economic expansion, and increasing imports from China as a component of an increase in total trade [exports + imports]
*The US is in decline in total trade [which has been the case argued by myself]
Europe taken as a whole has not been growing YOY.
Czech Rep. 6.2%
Hungary 3.8%
Poland 5.5%
These are the three leaders, France, Germany & the UK are in the doldrums, and they also happen to be three of the larger world economies, and the larger of the European economies.
Therefore, it would seem quite possible that the growth in exports to Europe from China, measured in dollars, exacerbated by exchange rates, is due more to the shrinkage in US imports from China, due to a consumer slowdown, than huge growth from Europe, that is sclerotic [excepting the 3 hotspots].
As for yield curves, the question was put to you as it is you who has faith in its forecasting capacity.
Really.....where?
However, I shall answer the question because the later explanation misses the point [not that the information is incorrect, just the wrong emphasis]
Yield curves are very important to forcasting recessions when they are of a maintained duration because they illustrate the tightning of the credit cycle, viz Banks borrow short and lend long.
When they cannot do this, they cannot lend, thus there is a tightning of credit, and liquidity of capital, this is the basis of any carry trade.
Therefore, if the curve stays inverted in the US for at least 12mths, the US will go into recession.
If is the word to focus on.
The Fed. will be aware of this, and [rightly or wrongly] will possibly act to prevent this from happening, they will possibly [attempt]to do this by lowering the Fed Funds rate. This is why currently the Bond market is discussing rate cuts.
You continue to castigate others with sweeping "nonsense" assertions as you hold true to arcane accounting methodologies that simply present numbers into an agreed set of books in accordance with international standards.
Then you suggest these numbers, typically quite outdated given the speed that markets move, have a capacity to forecast the future value of companies.
This is in reference to BHP and related analysis [opinion].
Absolutely, and I shall continue to argue my point
until I see something logical, coherent, sensible, or overwhelming mathematical evidence that incontrovertibly proves me incorrect.
Then you suggest these numbers, typically quite outdated given the speed that markets move, have a capacity to forecast the future value of companies.
Since I have valued BHP using my arcane, outdated, etc methodology, what has actually happened in the market?
Why, BHP has fallen in price, and *real* analysts have downgraded both BHP & RIO, while I *downgraded* them months ago.
What valuation metrics do these guy's use?
Gee, they use forward NPV valuations.
I shall continue to "read" the markets as I see them, continue to make mistakes, and continue to prosper in that manner that I do.
Of course you will.
I shall also continue to read and disagree, [or agree] with said interpretations.
jog on
d998