Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis |
European Border Controls Return; Is the Schengen Free Movement Treaty Dead? Posted: 13 Sep 2015 09:52 PM PDT The Schengen Agreement represents a territory in Europe where the free movement of persons is guaranteed. 26 nations signed the treaty. The signatory nations abolished internal borders in lieu of a single external border. Common rules and procedures apply to visas, asylum requests and border controls. The treaty has been under pressure with a huge wave of migrants pouring into Germany, Sweden, Hungary, Italy, and Greece from Syria and other countries. Last week I noted Denmark Cancels All Trains From Germany. Today, reader Olivier pinged me with this comment "An Austrian rail company spokesman said trains from Austria to Germany have stopped running." Confirmation comes from Spiegel article Stopped Trains from Austria to Germany: Refugee Crisis. Trains were not stopped heading the other direction. "Temporarily" Halted Trains The above train information from http://fahrplan.oebb.at/bin/help.exe/dn?tpl=showmap_external. Border Controls Return Supposedly this is a "temporary" measure until border controls can be reinstated. Olivier offered this opinion: "I am afraid the Schengen Treaty is dead ("lettre morte", as they say in French). Speaking for myself that was one of the more tangible benefits of the European construction. If that is no more, it's one less reason to hang on to the EU." Definition of Temporary Temporary did not last long. A couple hours later the Guardian reported: Germany Reinstates Controls at Austrian Border. Germany introduced border controls on Sunday, and dramatically halted all train traffic with Austria, after the country's regions said they could no longer cope with the overwhelming number of refugees entering the country.Numbers Exceed All Expectations The only expectations that were exceeded were the expectations of complete economic illiterates. I predicted this well in advance as did anyone else with so much as an ounce of common sense. EC president Jean-Claude Juncker and Keynesian fools who stated immigration would pay for itself are on top of the list of illiterates. The Fence Maizière said Germany had reintroduced border controls for reasons of security but added pointedly that they were also "a signal to Europe".As I have stated on numerous occasions: "There is an unlimited demand for free services, free food, and free shelter". Recent drownings, passport theft, and passport forgery is proof enough. Upping quotas as Merkel proposes is not the answer, because as we have seen, numbers will easily surpass expectations. Mike "Mish" Shedlock |
China Announces SOE Shakeup: Too Little Too Late to Matter Posted: 13 Sep 2015 11:00 AM PDT What are SOEs? Who Benefited From Them? SOEs are State Owned Enterprises. The SOEs made millions for the people who controlled them, largely corrupt local politicians along with the politicos friends and associates. The SOEs also created jobs, but did so at huge expense: By taking productive land from farmers, by massive pollution, vacant cities and malls, forced migration, and an untenable reliance on fixed investment growth. Overcapacity is rampant. We now see the effects in steel and cement production, crashing commodity prices, capital flight, and a plunging stock market. China Announces SOE Shakeup As a proposed remedy to this mess, China Plans Shake-Up of State-Owned Enterprises to Boost Growth. China has unveiled the much-awaited guidelines for reform of its bloated state-owned enterprise sector as the latest official data show its economy continuing to slow.Game-Changer Not Color me totally unimpressed. This is not a game changer, it is an effort to hide the fact the SOEs are for the most part bankrupt. China would not need to "actively introduce different investors" if the SOEs were solvent corporations. Instead, it's pretty clear China hopes to transfer massive malinvestment losses to the public. China need fools to bail out the system. Classification Shell Game One has to laugh at the notion "SOEs would be classified as either playing a social or commercial function, to better integrate them with the market economy". Really? How the hell is reclassifying businesses as to social or business function going to do anything? Instead, I propose classifying SOEs as viable or nonviable. Next, nonviable businesses should close and viable businesses privatized. My proposal might actually be a game-changer, but it's not going to happen because it would result in an immediate slowdown at expense of the local politicians who do not want to give up the gravy train. Michael Pettis Chimes In I mentally penned the above while reading the article. Towards the end of the article, Michael Pettis at China Financial Markets offered a few similar thoughts. "What China needs to do is transfer wealth from the state to the household sector, for example by lending more to private enterprises and less to SOEs and local governments. But it's tough to do so because it means taking away resources from those that have benefited over the last two or three decades," said Pettis Pettis added "Xi's administration has inherited a country with deep imbalances and enormous amounts of debt. There's no precedent in history for a country resolving those issues without a significant slowdown." China's "Socialist-Market" Goals
Conflicting Goals China's goals are incompatible with reality. Huge writeoffs are coming on SOE assets, as is a huge slowdown in GDP, if not an outright contraction in growth. The sooner that happens, the better off China will be. China seeks a miracle, but a miracle isn't coming. Instead, expect a strongly renewed witch hunt for scapegoats when growth slows. Mike "Mish" Shedlock |
You are subscribed to email updates from Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States |
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu