John Baeyens

Martin Warsawsky explained the dynamics behind the credit crunch crisis today. And European Central Bank Boss Trichet sees again stability on the markets…

Look at this excellent graph of the ‘credit crunch’ problem.

What do you see? Right, the North Western hemisphere.
True, Australia is a rare exception with some hedgefunds seeing black snow -did I mention Brazil has no hedge funds?- and admitted, some companies in Brazil postponed issuing bonds -of which one Cyreal Realty, too bad-. With South African’s current 12,5 intra-banking interest rates (going up to 14% end of this year) or Brazil 11,5 SELIC (coming from 18,5), the US problem of endangered credit lines backed by plummeting real estate prices is rare in those countries.
The times of cheap credits are over.

I’m a leave-it-to-the-market enthusiast, admitted. I’m also an opportunist with no comprehension whatsoever on what nationalistic pride is based on.
I might be worried about the future of our planet, maybe worry about the future of Europe, but the future of Belgium is the least of my worries.

But my enthusiasm doesn’t make me naïve. The naives will believe our soothing Belgian politicians selling the idea that there’s been no major crisis since the Argentine bankruptcy in 2002. How many Belgians can recall what kickstarted that crisis?
How many of my (Belgian) friends have any idea when the Brazilian financial crisis happened? And how many have a clue of the dynamics behind that crisis?
None.

It’s easier to explain to people that I’m keen on Brazil because of the beachlife, samba and caipirinhas. The real reason why I became intrigued about Brazil is my questioning how entrepreneurs like Norbert Odebrecht made a fortune in that turbulent uncertain country. Here in Belgium we have a very misleading false idea of control. Newspapers write about supposedly racism in restaurants and the need of a charter while at the same time the fundaments change under our lazy seats; fast, extremely fast. How many of my friends know that the Belgian GDP has been growing constantly slower for 3 years in a row? Few. How many people have any idea how negative the US trade balance really is and how positive the Brazilian and Asian trade balances are?

Every Brazilian knows that Lula campaigned with the promise of a 5% GDP growth in 2007. And every Brazilian is keeping an eye if he will be able to keep his promise -currently they are at 4,7%-. And even my Brazilian maid can explain you the dynamics behind the ’98 financial crisis in Brazil. What most Brazilians (and still most of the Belgians) don’t know is that commodities are hot. Ever since the Belgian coal mines closed, Belgium has no commodities, even no (water)energy and soon no nuclear energy. Meanwhile the agro industry in Brazil grows, no that’s not taking into account the soon-to-come ethanol boom. Meanwhile in Europe energy prices skyrocket, pasta, bread, chocolate and milk will become substantially more expensive in 2008. Our sustainable competitive advantage? You tell me.

But all that is not why I’m worried for the coming 3 years.
Ever since the Asian crisis in 1997 things have changed. And with the Euro, we Belgians have no clue what exactly changed. The markets are getting bigger, information is moving faster, flows are larges and capital markets keep integrating. The amounts of speculative capital sloshing around in global financial circuits are truly mindblowing. Traditional banks hold a substantial amount of those financial assets, but non-bank operators and investors held 46 trillion US$ in 2005, hedge funds 1,6 trillion US$ and private equity investors almost 600 billion US$. Our world has an overcapacity, it’s heating up -literally, we hear ‘less’ everywhere (fly less, drive slower, heat less, light less,…). In other words: our economies are stagnating. So, why would a capitalist invest in production when there’s overcapacity. The fews who can invest in commodities. Other speculate while it last. The ratio of global financial assets to annual world output has risen from 109 per cent in 1980 to 316 per cent in 2005; speculative activity as a mode of profit-making has also outran trade, with the daily volume of foreign exchange transactions in international markets standing at 1.9 trillion US$ daily, compared to an annual value of 9.1 trillion US$ of trade in goods and services. And the rest… the rest is (kept) blind or at best scared.
The above data were presented by economist C.P. Chandrasekhar at the conference “A Decade After: Recovery and Adjustment since the East Asian Crisis” held in Bangkok, the epicenter of the 1997 financial earthquake, on July 12-14 this year.

Which brings me to the essence of my fear: what really changed since the 1997 financial crisis? Here’s the answer.
Did you read that the Chinese government has begun a concerted campaign of economic threats against the US, threatening that it may liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries if Washington imposes trade sanctions to force a yuan revaluation? Two officials at leading Communist Party bodies have given interviews in recent days warning - for the first time - that Beijing may use its $1.33 trillion of foreign reserves as a political weapon to counter pressure from the US Congress.

And you were afraid of a nuclear *bomb*?

In July and August 1997, the ASEAN countries made a deal with China, South Korea and Japan and formed the “ASEAN plus three” financial grouping enabling members to swap reserves in case of a 1997 scenario would happen again. Since then, they have built up huge financial reserves by running massive trade surpluses, an objective they have achieved by keeping their currencies undervalued. The group has now more then 2,7 trillion US$ in financial reserves. Look at this graph and list the countries which have a factor foreign reserves versus yearly import. Argentina, China, Chile, Brazil,… all have between 0,7 and 0,8 times their import in foreign reserves. Brazil has a positive trade balance every quarter (even with the high Real currency) and has a record high high 114 billion US$ reserve.

A graph makes it more clear:

(the reserves of the European Central Bank are also in the “mature economies” space).

Yes, the US has turned its back away from the nations of the South, and is now transfixed on the Middle East. Some Latin American nations have walked through an open door to increased political and economic collaboration with China, India and Taiwan. China is allover in Africa and Brazil the last year. The Andean nations of Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia and Chile have begun negotiating free trade agreements with the Asia-Pacific region as part of the Andean Community of Nations (CAN) economic trade bloc. There is also evidence that Latin America is further organizing itself into an entity that can contest US interests. The possible creation of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), could turn out to be an economic organization akin to the European Union, which could bypass restrictive US trade and establish networks with some of its major rivals.
What do I hear you whispering? IMF? LOL !
The IMF is in a serious budget crisis itself. The biggest borrowers refuse to borrow. After 1997 “never again” became the slogan of the affected Asian governments.

Now, there are a lot of speculations about what would happen when the dollar would actually fall. It all depends on the oil producing countries in my opinion. Normally, when the dollar becomes cheaper. American products and services become cheaper for foreigners. Instead of buying bonds, foreigners would increase their imports from the US. Simultaneously, foreign goods will become more expensive for the US. But once again, the US will profit from the oil trade. Oil producers will not accept a lower value for their barrils. If the dollar goes down 10 percent, their prices will “logically” rise 10 percent. Read: the price converted to euros would remain the same. The only solution for this problem would be that oil selling countries accept all currencies on the market. Tehran has already taken into consideration to accept more than one currency and not just the euro. Brazil becomes oil self-sufficient, Chavez hates the US, Iran and Chavez are big buddies, China is luring in Africa,… It’s just a matter of time before oil is traded in multiple currencies, the US just made too many enemies. And when that happens, a fall of the dollar could become a nuclear bomb whipping away the US.

Some people call me a neoliberalist. I prefer being called an ‘opportunist’, since I don’t believe in Neoliberalism. Sure, it would be fashionable to see De Decker in Belgium pushing through his flat-tax regime. It would give a temporary boost to our exhausted Belgian Duracell batteries. And admitted, Brazil can go through another hickup this year; the challenges are vast. But by the end of this decennium the Belgian economy is doomed. The Belgian economy is build to prosper on a thriving globalizing world.  Ones that globalization trend stops, there’s nothing here.  Brainware?  Serious now… 

But one of the other reasons why I went to Brazil is an economic paradigm promoted by the Thai monarch King Bhumidol, called “suffiency economy”.
Actually Lula won the elections on the same paradigm. Weeks before the elections you saw all over the country that Brazil became oil auto-sufficient. Nothing to do with ethanol, rather the unique expertise of Petrobras for deep-sea oil drilling.

Also don’t forget that in 2006 Brazil and Argentina, following Thailand’s example, paid of all their debts to the IMF to achieve financial indepence.  Some months later, Hugo Chavez dropped another shoe by announcing that Venezuela would leave the IMF and the World bank; the boycott by its once biggest borrowers now put the IMF in a serious budget crisis.

Never forget that in the 80s, during the military regime (only 27 years ago), all Brazilians lived in a country with no imports. My wife remembers crystal clear her father driving with a Brazilian-made polyster car and even more clearly the day in the mid 90s when the first non-Brasil made computers arrived in the country.  True, a lot has changed since then.  But still today Brazilians prefer buying goods with the “Industria Brasileira” labels over the imported ones.  During my first weeks in Brazil I got very annoyed by the lack of imported products.  Most Brazilian products are fine, but they are somewhat mediocre compared to our products.  Even when it comes to washing soaps, etc… The foreign brands you’ll see will be made locally.  My frustration even got bigger when I realised how hard it was to set up a business in Brazil; opening a bank account and wiring in capital is quite a challenge for a foreigner.  Not to say that I exploded when I saw that a Powerbook costs 3 times more expensive than the same model in the US.
Two years down the road I started understanding what a unique asset this could be for Brazil.  Contrary to Belgium, Brazilians actually don’t need any foreign goods, raw materials, petrol, scientists,…  In Brazil import is luxury.  You can buy a VW Golf for a really good price.  If you want a Passat, you’ll pay what you pauy for an Audi A6 in Europe.  Not to mention the price of a BMW.  But what’s wrong with a VW Golf or a VW Paraty?  The only people who force Brazil in opening up more and growing beyond 5% yearly are the US and Europe. 

Brazil can implement the ideology of a sufficiency economy in a matter of years.  They did already so in the military dictatorship.  A grand idea, just 30 years to early and the wrong leaders.   And this is exactly what the 2010 presidential elections will be about.  Contrary to the US, where no economical alternative besides continuation exists (is possible), Brazil has a very clear polarization shaped into the PT-PSDB opposition: should Brazil pursue a “third-world” strategy or one close to the major powers?

But Lula also is working to come to agreements with the PSDB, especially the re-elected governor in Minas Gerais, Aécio Neves. Part of this discussion is the issue of the 2010 elections and the question of who will be the successor after Lula. As Lula can’t stand in the elections in 2010, he is working to build an alternative that involves sections of the PSDB. In the PSDB, Aécio Neves is competing against José Serra, newly elected governor of São Paulo, over who will be the party’s candidate for president in 2010. Facing a possibility of being defeated in his own party, Aécio is leaving the door open for a future closer relation with Lula and the PT.

The coming 3 years, a complex process of political reorganistion will happen in the ruling class of Brazil.  Today José Serra would be candidate for the PSDB and Tarso Genro for the PT.  I would certainly not vote for Serra; but Tarso Genro is also not quite the man who could bring Brazil where it could land.

Actually, it doesn’t take so much to be an excellent Brazilian president, the requirements:

1. Know what you are doing,
2. be honest and persevere
3. take a middle path, avoid extremes
4. be sensible and insightful in taking decisions
5. build protection against shocks

Slowly I’m realising Lula is not so bad as a BR president, I’d give hime the following scores on each axis:

1. 65%
2. 45%
3. 90%
4. 85%
5. 90%

This is what makes Brazilian politics so much different compared to Belgian (or US) politics: politicians can actually make a difference.
Maybe in 2014, when the world is in dark clouds, a ‘Lula improved version’ will choose implementing the paradigm of a suffiency economy.  By that time I need to pick a primary school for my kids…