This podcast was first and originally published by Peter Lewis’ Money Talk. Find the Substack here:
https://peterlewismoneytalk.substack.com/p/peter-lewis-money-talk-friday-22-6c2
Topics discussed:
- Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell’s perceived dovish stance is critiqued for potentially leading to increased inflation and discontent among voters.
- Market reactions to the Federal Reserve meeting were positive, resulting in a broad rally across various asset classes.
- Concerns are expressed about the impact of new legislation in Hong Kong, particularly on foreign investors and the perceived shift towards authoritarianism.
- The potential implications of stricter laws on data privacy and state secrets in Hong Kong are discussed, raising concerns about its impact on the region’s business environment.
Transcript
Peter Lewis
Tony, what are your thoughts? I mean, it’s interesting, isn’t it, because he’s raised the inflation forecast. He’s raised his growth forecast quite considerably, but no change to the number of rate cuts this year, although we did get one taken off for next year, didn’t we? There was going to be four next year. Now they’re only talking about three year. So I suppose one of the rate cuts has come out for next year. But what are your thoughts?
Tony Nash
I think it’s silly, Peter. We can’t be raising our economic expectations, seeing wages rise, seeing prices rise, raising our inflation expectations and saying, oh, yeah, we’re going to make money easier. Right. And he even said during the meeting that they were going to slow the pace of the offtake from the fed balance sheet. They’re cultivating an environment for pretty easy money where demand seems to be right now. And that’s how markets took it. Markets took it after the meeting and they just ran with it because he came across as very dovish. In fact, Powell has a way of coming across either way too hawkish or way too dovish. And then other Fed speakers have to course correct in the following days. So I think he probably came off way too dovish. And I think we’re going to see fed speakers over the next week. Correct. More on the hawkish side to say, whoa, that’s not really what we meant. And I really think that that’s what’s going to happen is they’ll make the three interest rate cuts seem more questionable than they are. Although the vote was unanimous, we did see a slightly more hawkish trend in the dots.
Tony Nash
Not a lot, but slightly more hawkish.
Peter Lewis
And what was also interesting was out of the 19 FOMC members, nine of them, so a minority, but a substantial minority, actually think the Fed is going to cut less than three times this year. So I think that’s maybe Jerome Powell is sort of out on a bit of a limb there, isn’t he?
Tony Nash
Yeah, I think you’re right. I do think that he does over calibrate either hawkish or dovish, depending on the direction, and I think he’s trying to signal the direction, but I think he always overdoes it just a little bit. He doesn’t have an easy job. Everyone reads everything into the way he holds his papers, the way he clears his throat or whatever. Right. I mean, everything is overly analyzed with him. But again, we have seen this where he comes out and he’s overly one way or the other. And I think, yeah, seeing those nine voters say hey, we’re not going to have three this year. I think as we’ve been talking about, my team has been talking about a resurgence in inflation for over a year, and we’ve seen it over the past couple of months, and we’re going to see that accelerate. They try to present Jan, Feb as just an aberration, but it’s not. And so it’s going to accelerate. Their expectations are going to be probably even exceeded. And it’s very difficult to have an interest rate cutting environment when you have inflation rising because it’s an election year.
Tony Nash
And consumers love, and voters love to complain justifiably about prices and prices keep rising. What did we see after the Fed meeting? We saw commodity prices soar. A lot of commodity prices soared after the Fed meeting, and that’s going to hit consumers within two. You know, this very unnecessarily dovish talk out of Powell has resulted in inflation definitely being locked in for at least two months.
Peter Lewis
Tony, I’m wondering what you think about this. Is the Fed taking a risk here? Because they basically seem to be saying the economy can run faster without generating significant overheating pressures and they’re willing to cut even while they’re still away from their target.
Tony Nash
Well, this is very similar to like a 2020 2021 argument when things were actually doing okay in the middle of COVID at least in the US, and people kept saying, hey, let it run hot. Let it run hot. Right. And it seems like we’re replaying that again, where, although people may not be using those words, the subtext is let it run hot. And I think the problem is, as Andrew was talking about GDP, the quality of that GDP is not great. It’s overwhelmingly government spending in terms of the growth areas. Okay, so we’re not having private sector growth as a contribution of GDP in the US. We’re having government spending as a growth area in GDP. And so what we’re seeing is heavy fiscal and we’re seeing dovish monetary. And so that’s great, but it just means that we’re going to see more inflation. Inflation is going to come back. Well, it already has, but it’s going to continue to accelerate. If this is the world that policymakers are comfortable with and if this is the world that policymakers are comfortable with, it makes us voters very unhappy because their pay rises are not keeping up with inflation.
Tony Nash
Now, what’s interesting, public sector pay rises are something like twice the size of private sector pay rises. So public sector wages are keeping up with inflation, but private sector wages aren’t and so this is the problem with an election year. American voters are really tired of it and inflation comes up in almost every discussion I have.
Peter Lewis
And I wonder what American voters also think about what he said about labor supply. He sort of mentioned the strength of the data on labor supply, but then he pointed to the strong pace of immigration as helping on that front. That’s rather a hot political topic to.
Tony Nash
It’s a lightning rod, and it’s not a very positive discussion in most parts of the US, even in very heavily democratic parts of the US, which favor inflation in state Massachusetts, New York, it is just a sour topic for people and it’s a very sensitive topic. So when the Fed chair gets up and says immigration is helping the labor market, it makes Americans very uncomfortable and it makes them not really like him.
Peter Lewis
Tony, what do you make of the market reaction to this? Jerome Powell didn’t talk down the rally at all, did he? In his press conference in either stocks or risk assets. He didn’t even acknowledge that this is easing financial conditions and maybe making their job a bit harder.
Tony Nash
He did not. And I think he turned it from a tech rally to an everything rally. If you look across markets at the close in the US today, and as you mentioned at the top of the program with Hong Kong was coming on strong this morning, international markets coming on strong this morning. I think with this, I think overly dovish Fed meeting, he turned the rally from a tech rally to an everything rally.
Peter Lewis
Do you think this is going to continue?
Tony Nash
It’s possible. I think we have to see how things go into the end of the week. If things stay strong into the end of the week, then look out. But I think if we start to see things stall out Thursday and Friday in the US, then we could see things settle back to the levels we had seen a few days ago.
Peter Lewis
Tony, if you look at the reaction of the yen to this, clearly the currency traders don’t think that this is the start of a sustained period of rate increases in Japan. And there’s still going to be that wide yield differential between US rates and Japanese rates.
Tony Nash
Yeah, it wasn’t a big statement. ET seems to be very conservative. He doesn’t want to be seen as shaking things up at the BOJ. He almost acts like a caretaker. And so I think currency traders expected something a little bit more. They want a little bit more in the end, want a little bit more. In terms of markets being slightly tighter, he’s not a big bold move maker and this just wasn’t it. So to see the end continue to weaken on this was just really interesting for me to watch this.
Peter Lewis
Okay. Okay, Tony, what are your thoughts? You’re obviously looking at this from overseas. As Andrew says, it’s no surprise it passed, and it passed with unanimous vote in ledge coat. But now that it has passed, and foreign investors are going to have a chance to scrutinize it and see the impact of it, is there anything to worry them?
Tony Nash
Oh, sure there is. I think the law allows trials without a jury. It allows trials behind closed doors. It allows handpicked judges. So anybody forming a company, anybody who’s a board member, anybody who’s an officer in a company, in a jurisdiction like Hong Kong, you have to worry. Why don’t you have a lot of international companies centered in Beijing because of laws like this, right? So Hong Kong, which 1020 years ago, 30 years ago, was the place to have a company because it was the most business friendly city in the world. Today it’s not that way. And if you’re an officer or director in a company, it’s got to be a little know, give you second. You know, one of the attractors for Hong Kong for a few decades has been media. There is great media in Hong Kong, but it’s no longer a media center, it’s no longer an arts center. And the sad part about that is a lot of that stuff is moving, or has moved to Singapore, which is a pretty strong state in terms of control of messages. So people are so worried about the impact of this new law on Hong Kong that they’re moving to Singapore and seeing it as a freer place than Hong Kong, completely 180 degrees from the way things were ten years ago?
Peter Lewis
John Lee and the government will say, what this Article 23 legislation does is it brings stability to Hong Kong. So will foreign investors look at that and say, yes, Hong Kong is more stable as a result of that, and that’s a positive.
Tony Nash
No, it brings opacity and it brings authoritarianism, in truth. And authoritarianism generally is stable until it. And so, you know, Singapore is an authoritarian place and it’s stable. It’s marginally freer than Hong Kong now, I guess. But no, authoritarianism doesn’t bring stability necessarily, or the stability it does bring is short lived. And again, Hong Kong was very vibrant, very creative, very interesting business hub. And I don’t think it’s totally gone, but I think the risks to officers, investors, board members and so on are much, much higher than they were before.
Peter Lewis
Tony, you are a financial analyst. If you were based in Hong Kong, would you be worried about this state secrets legislation or this state street secrets article that includes economic information, technological information on Hong Kong?
Tony Nash
Yeah, absolutely. So I used to be with a company called IHS, and it’s since been bought by S and P. But twelve or 15 years ago, there was an IHS analyst who lived in China who had some information on crude output or something like that, crude storage. And this person, from what I understand, got it from an industry association or something because they used it in a business environment. The chinese authorities prosecuted him and put him in jail for a long, long time. And at the time, I was working with the economist, but we were shocked at what was happening, because you used to be able to do research, find information, and if you could find information, you could use it to your advantage. And part of using things to your advantage is to trade on it. Right. And so if Hong Kong is to remain a vibrant financial center and a vibrant trading hub, you have to be able to dig for information. But if the Chinese authorities are going to prosecute people for finding information, then Hong Kong as a competitive center is no more. It just isn’t.
Peter Lewis
I mean, that’s what some people are worried about is that Hong Kong is becoming more like mainland China in terms of things like data privacy, state secrets, and what constitutes state secrets?
Tony Nash
Well, there are huge data centers in Hong Kong, right? I mean, there have been for 30 years. And so those data centers, I don’t know, a lot of foreign companies that people have their servers outside of China for a reason, and they have their data stored outside of China for a reason. These new laws allow the government to look into whatever they. So, you know, that stuff that has remained in Hong Kong, I’m sure at some point will move elsewhere if it’s remotely confidential.
Peter Lewis
Okay, well, thank you very much for your thoughts this morning. Great to hear you. That’s Tony Nash over in Texas, USA, who is the founder of Complete Intelligence.