Connect with us


Nobel Prize-winning economist Robert Shiller explains how compelling stories are what really shape our economy — from bitcoin to Trump's presidency – Business Insider UK



This story requires our BI Prime membership. To read the full article,

simply click here to claim your deal and get access to all exclusive Business Insider PRIME content.

  • Robert Shiller is a Nobel Prize-winning economist, a professor at Yale University, and the author of “Narrative Economics: How Stories Go Viral and Drive Major Economic Events.
  • Shiller explains how compelling stories can impact actual economic outcomes. 
  • Shiller says the mysterious story of Satoshi Nakamoto was what really drove the price and popularity of bitcoin. 
  • He also says the Laffer curve became an important part of tax policy because of the powerful story, not because of an actual basis in economics. 
  • Shiller says this is the one place where he will gladly praise President Trump. According to Shiller, Trump is great at reading audiences, experimenting with narratives, and he is never boring. 
  • The Nobel Prize winner explains that these stories matter just as much as or more than the truth. And that these narrative disruptions make it very difficult to make long-term economic predictions. 

Robert Shiller sat down with Business Insider during the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland to discuss his most recent book and how it applies to the current economic landscape. Following is a transcript of the video. 

Silverstein: So, your new book “Narrative Economics” is a topic that you’ve been interested in for a very long time. Can you explain to me what narrative economics is?

Shiller: A lot of people think about narratives these days, it’s a new trend. But they tend not to be economists or financial analysts. Maybe they think about it, but they don’t research it. I think that major economic events, successes and failures alike, are typically driven by stories that went viral. And we don’t have a deep understanding of events until we understand, we start studying the narratives.

Genius Dog 336 x 280 - Animated

Silverstein: And can you give me examples of something recent that happened because of a narrative, a strong narrative?

Shiller: Yeah. OK, the, the Great Recession. We named it the Great Recession in honor of another narrative, which is the Great Depression. Now you would think that people would be forgetting about the Great Depression. That was 1929 and well into the ’30s. Like 10 years of economic slowdown. But it’s a long time ago. You think people are forgetting about it. But they’re not. And in fact, in the early 2000s, references to that exploded. I count, I count these things, how often they come back in the news media.

So, and then we named it the Great Recession. It’s obviously a reference to the Great Depression. And so people became scared and they stopped spending. They didn’t stop spending, but they cut back. You know they think, should we go on a cruise this year? Well, maybe not. You know, I feel a little unsettled. It’s going to cost a lot of money. If people cut back on their consumption enough that we have a recession. And these stories impact the economy in a way that otherwise wouldn’t necessarily be happening. Yeah. A lot of economists seem to think, want to think, that it must be something about technology, or productivity, or maybe what the central bank did. But I think it’s, it’s more generated in people’s minds.

Silverstein: And what’s so strong about the bitcoin story?

Shiller: Oh yeah, I use that as Chapter 1 of my book. It’s an example of how good stories create economic events. And in the case where — I think it’s clearly traceable to the story. Now I’m not going to even comment on whether bitcoin is a good idea or not. It doesn’t matter. I’m just looking at the story.

The story was that a man named Satoshi Nakamoto had an invention which he promulgated on the internet around 2008. And, it’s the greatest, most wonderful invention in a long, long time. It ties into stories about anarchism. Anarchists don’t like government. Well, bitcoin didn’t ask anybody’s permission. They didn’t go to any regulator to start their bitcoin. And it’s not even tied to a country. It’s international. We’re all cosmopolitans now. It just seems like a good story.

And then they put a little mystery into it. Satoshi Nakamoto has never been spotted by anyone who tells us about these things. How could it be? He’s one of the most famous people in the world now. And yet no one has met him. So maybe he doesn’t exist. Maybe there is a committee, maybe it’s a conspiracy. Who knows? But somebody wrote a nice paper that was, it just has an excitement. I can see people transform. When I bring it up in my class, my students react, they wake up when I bring up bitcoin.

Silverstein: How do you separate out the story from what’s real? And how much can the story affect what becomes real?

Shiller: It isn’t a single story, every telling of the story is a little different. There’s a core idea in the story. And, how do you tell whether it’s a real story or not? That takes work. And in the case of bitcoin, it’s kind of difficult to think through it. It’s not — it’s impressive. It’s not easy. But you can work at it. The problem is, if you reach a decision about bitcoin one way or the other, it’ll never get out, because it can’t compete with the narrative quality of the original story.

Silverstein: Can you tell me about the Laffer curve, something that I think a lot of people take to be fact, but you say that a lot of the strength from it comes from this very simple story?

Shiller: Yes, so I’ll tell you a story. In 1974, an economist named Art Laffer was having dinner at the Two Continents restaurant, a nice restaurant in Washington DC. And he was having it with Donald Rumsfeld, who was the secretary of defense for the United States — really big shot guy — and Dick Cheney, who would soon become vice president of the United States. So a bunch of the — and also Jude Wanniski, who is a writer for the Wall Street Journal who wrote the story up.

laffer curve

Dr. Arthur Laffer, Economist and professor at University of Southern California, with “Laffer Curve” on blackboard, Feb. 23, 1981.

AP Photo

And in that story, Art Laffer draws a diagram on a napkin, called the Laffer curve, which illustrates, I won’t get into the details, but supposedly illustrates dramatically how taxes can hurt incentives and destroy the economy. And that even if you, if you actually cut taxes, you may collect more taxes even though you cut, because people will be so much more affluent, they’ll be working and producing. Nice story. It went viral. But not in 1974. It wasn’t until in 1978, when Jude Wanniski wrote a book, a best-selling book called “The Way the World Works,” and he tells this story about the dinner. And afterwards, people want to know the whole story. They ask about the napkin. The napkin is a visual image that enhances the story.

And there it is. It’s now many years later — the Laffer curve went through a typical epidemic. It expanded right after 1978. And everyone was talking about the Laffer curve. Same time as Rubik’s cube came out. That was another, another such fad. Laffer curve and Rubik’s cube were both around that time. They both faded somewhat. But they’re both still here. And Laffer is coming back. It has an internal dynamic like that of a disease. I’m not calling it a disease.

Silverstein: How much does narratives impact how the Fed communicates or how the president communicates? How much does that impact the economy?

Shiller: The people who take positions like Fed or Treasury Secretary become intuitive narrative economists even though they weren’t taught any of that in grad school, because it’s so obvious that the narrative matters.

northern rock

Customers queue to enter a branch of Northern Rock in Kingston, Surrey, southern England.

Reuters/Alessia Pierdomenico

So for example, when the Northern Rock bank failed in the UK in 2008, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the head of the Bank of England reacted immediately because they didn’t want, it looked like it was a story about a bank run. This bank was failing and depositors were worried that they wouldn’t get all of their money out. There was deposit insurance, but it was only up to a small amount. And people who had their life savings, planning for retirement, panicked, they thought, maybe I’ll lose all of it. And so they rushed to the bank, and of course it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. The bank can’t pay out all this money at once.

They immediately rescued the Northern Rock bank and paid off all the depositors. So, the reason they did that is they didn’t want the narrative to get started. They knew that in the past it was rumor and stories that people went to many different banks and asked for their money right away.

Silverstein: And what about Trump? Is he good at this? Has he been able to —

Shiller: This is one place where I can be lavish in my praise of Donald Trump. He is very good at narratives. He’s very good at judging audiences. He experiments. This is a way, the way you launch narratives. You never know whether it will go well. He listens to the audience. He creates a whole story. The story of him at his rally, which is spread by word of mouth. It’s a visceral thing. Most of these people had never gone to a presidential speech before. And if they did it would’ve been boring. He’d be talking about statistics on the national deficit or something like that. Trump is not boring, really not boring. And it started a word of mouth thing that was huge.

Silverstein: And how much has this increase, or is it the same, with social media? Is the impact of narratives bigger or faster, or can we just see it more?

Shiller: Well, the impact of narratives is bigger with social media. But I have to say, I think the mistake people make is more often underestimating how important narratives were long ago. So we have the Latin word rumor, that has the same meaning as it does today. What is a rumor? It’s a contagious narrative, right? Which is not fact-checked by anyone, it’s just out there. So they knew about this thousands of years ago, and it was a factor thousands of years ago. But yes, it is bigger today. We’re living in a world with expanded information technology and ability to communicate. And to communicate with like-minded people. To find each other. Maybe they had computer dating and maybe that helped people find their spouse. But it’s much bigger now. They’re not just, it’s finding someone who has the same political views as you that you can talk with.

Silverstein: And you talk about how difficult it is to predict economic performance in the long term. Is that because of how much narratives play a part?

Shiller: It’s hard to predict whether a new movie which hasn’t been shown yet will be a success. Notoriously hard. The director might have had successful movies in the past, he has famous actors and actresses, but nothing seemed to click this time. It’s when you put the movie in front of the audience and you start to listen to the word of mouth.

Silverstein: And how does that relate to, like, GDP estimates two years out?

Shiller: So when you talk about, oh, yeah, they’re not very good at forecasting GDP two years out because the disturbances are, I think, narrative-based. And they don’t generally systematically study them. And unfortunately, it does require some human judgment at this time anyway, to understand the importance of narratives.

Silverstein: Is there one big narrative that is happening right now that you think we should be paying attention to or that’s dislocating something?

Shiller: Well, a narrative that comes to mind is the artificial intelligence revolution. And we have many stories of neat things. Like your smart speaker, I guess like Amazon Echo that you have. It’s kind of, it does seem like the the new world. Something really fundamental has changed. But I don’t think it has scared us yet profoundly because we don’t have high unemployment. So people think, well, but the economy is strong so, not worry about it now. But I think if we do have another recession, that narrative could come roaring back and become again an obstacle to recovery.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Continue Reading


Was the Emergencies Act really about the economy?



Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Chrystia Freeland testifies at the Public Order Emergency Commission at the Library and Archives building in Ottawa on Nov., 24.Spencer Colby/The Globe and Mail

David Moscrop is a writer and political commentator. He is the author of Too Dumb for Democracy and a new Substack newsletter.

As the Public Order Emergency Commission moves on to its next phase – expert roundtable discussions ahead of tabling its findings in the House of Commons in February – observers are still working to make sense of the endless angles of the thing. But one has come into sharp relief during the hours of testimony before commissioner Paul Rouleau: It was at least partly about the economy. Of course it was.

We can debate what “partly” means. But the answer will depend on whose perspective you’re interrogating. During his testimony on the last day of the commission, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said economic concerns contributed to the decision to invoke the Emergencies Act, but they were secondary to public-safety concerns.

“My motivation was entirely about ensuring the safety of Canadians,” he said. “My secondary motivation was making sure Canadians continue to have confidence in their institutions and society’s ability to function and enforce the rule of law when it’s not being respected,” he added. That leaves the economy third.

Genius Dog 336 x 280 - Animated

Meanwhile, back at the Department of Finance, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland seemed far more motivated by the economic impact of the occupation and blockades. That checks out. That’s her bailiwick. During her appearance before the commission, Ms. Freeland testified to her concern that the occupation and blockades were bad for the economy – indeed, they were “profoundly jeopardizing it,” as she put it.

The Emergencies Act inquiry’s most interesting revelations, as told by its text messages

One may not be surprised to learn that what helped crystallize her understanding of the matter were calls with the chief executive officers of Canada’s major banks. The commission reveals the influence of the CEOs, who were concerned Canada was becoming a “joke.” Investors were nervous and there was growing concern the country might suffer long-term economic damage as confidence in the security and reliability of international trade and supply chains waned. So, their concern became the Finance Minister’s.

Ms. Freeland was careful to position the economic threats – such as the trade-disrupting blockade of the Ambassador Bridge between Windsor, Ont., and Detroit – as threats to national security as well.

Is that true? It depends on what you mean. Ms. Freeland’s framing may be persuasive, but the economic threats were political and immaterial in regards to the Emergencies Act. Skittish bankers do not constitute a national security threat. Nonetheless, she has a point.

That point ought to make observers a bit uncomfortable. By Feb. 14, when the act was invoked, the occupiers and blockaders had been ensconced for some time. The Ambassador Bridge was shut down from Feb. 7 to 13. The Coutts, Alta., border blockade began on Jan. 29; the Ottawa occupation started the same day. One would hope it wasn’t the worries of a handful of oligopolist bankers that finally secured the concern of Ms. Freeland that some extraordinary measure was required to dismantle the network of occupiers who had taken the country hostage in the capital and along two border crossings.

Of course, the bankers were important elements of the plan given that the Emergencies Act was used, in part, to freeze accounts and funds by way of the banks – a process that takes time and a court order under normal circumstances. Roughly $8-million was frozen across more than 200 accounts under the authority of the act. The government needed the banks to strangle the economic resources used by or available to the blockaders and occupiers to help send them packing.

The whole affair leaves those who are critical of both bank power and the occupiers and blockaders in an awkward but not irreconcilable position. The primary motivation for ending the sieges ought to have been that Canada must not tolerate sustained illegal and dangerous action by purveyors of reactionary white grievance politics. Whether they pose an economic threat should be a secondary concern.

The blockades and occupation were indeed a threat. And the people harmed the most by that activity were the working-class people who, ostensibly, the convoy participants and their boosters were pretending to stand up for. Jamming up trade routes that workers rely on, keeping people from going to their jobs, and indeed risking the very existence of those jobs is not worker-friendly action. More to the point, the blockades and occupation weren’t about the interests of workers. They were a reactionary tantrum. Accordingly, as sometimes happens, the interests of the banks, the government and workers aligned.

That was then. Now we ought to maintain a critical eye on the oversized and growing power of oligopoly in Canada and ensure that should something like the convoy happen again, we are not left relying on a temporary alignment of interests and the panicky persuasion of the country’s big banks.

Source link

Continue Reading


How will the space economy change the world?




The passengers who boarded commercial flights just after World War II didn’t know that air travel would begin to soar over the next decade, nor did the masses who first logged onto the internet in the 1990s realize that computers would one day provide much of their news, entertainment, and social life. And today, few people understand that the space economy—broadly defined as activities in orbit or on other planets that benefit human beings—could soon transform how they live and work.

Some hints of the coming changes are apparent, including the frequent headlines about SpaceX, Blue Origin, and other private companies launching their own rockets and deploying satellite constellations. These activities, once primarily the domain of government agencies, are now possible in the private sector because recent technological advances in manufacturing, propulsion, and launch have made it much easier and less expensive to venture into space and conduct missions. Lower costs have opened the door to new start-ups and encouraged established aerospace companies to explore novel opportunities that once seemed too expensive or difficult. The technological improvements have also intrigued investors, resulting in a surge of space funding over the past five years.

The potential for innovative space applications is immense, especially if established aerospace companies form partnerships with businesses that traditionally haven’t ventured into orbit. Pharmaceutical companies might establish a lab on a space station to study cell growth, for instance, or semiconductor companies might manufacture chips in extraterrestrial factories to determine whether any aspects of the space environment, such as the lack of gravity, improve the process. Such possibilities, which might have seemed like the stuff of science fiction a few years ago, could become an essential part of a business across multiple industries in the near future.

Genius Dog 336 x 280 - Animated

But how and when should companies take advantage of their greater access to space and pursue emerging use cases? And how can they decide what opportunities are most promising when the technology is so nascent? Although much remains uncertain, companies that begin exploring these questions now could gain a long-term advantage.

The benefits of the space economy—with more to come

Space has long been a potent incubator for innovation—first from governments and large telcos and now from multiple private companies as well. From the launch of Sputnik 1 in 1957 through today, the space economy has delivered most of its value through satellite services, including communications and data and image collection and analysis. Satellites help large companies with multiple tasks, including inventory monitoring at distant locations, instant authorization of credit-card transactions, and international videoconferencing. Consumers use satellite technology whenever an online navigation system pinpoints their location, or when they make calls during plane flights or from rural locations that lack cell phone towers. And television viewers can thank satellites for beaming the signals that allow them to watch their favorite programs. The role of satellites in these activities is often overlooked—many people may think terrestrial computer networks provide the necessary connectivity—unless a glitch occurs and draws attention to the unobtrusive technology operating in the background.

In addition, satellites help world leaders address intractable social, environmental, and economic challenges. Consider a few ways that satellite data can provide insights—often more effectively and comprehensively than other sources:

  • Climate change. More than 160 satellites monitor Earth to assess the effects of global warming and detect activities, such as illegal logging, that might contribute to the problem.


    Six ways space technologies benefit life on Earth, World Economic Forum, Global Future Council on Space Technologies, October 16, 2020.

    NASA has used an instrument mounted on its Aqua satellite to monitor environmental changes, including those related to ocean water, water vapor, clouds, sea and land ice, and precipitation, for more than 20 years. Other satellites provide information that can help government agencies take urgent action on wildfires, coastal erosion, and other climate-related natural disasters.
  • Food security. Satellite data is increasingly used to monitor crop development and potential threats to harvests, such as drought or insect invasions. The SERVIR project, a partnership between NASA and the US Agency for International Development, uses data from Earth-imaging satellites and geospatial technologies to help governments address multiple issues, including food shortages.
  • National security. Governments, often working with companies in the private sector, can use satellite images and data to gain valuable intelligence, such as information on the movement of troops or the installation of weapons systems.

According to the not-for-profit Space Foundation, the space economy was valued at $469 billion in 2021, up 9 percent from 2020, the highest recorded growth since 2014.


See “Space Foundation releases The Space Report 2022 Q2 showing growth of global space economy,” Space Foundation, July 27, 2022; and Michael Sheetz, “The space economy grew at fastest rate in years to $469 billion in 2021, report says,” CNBC, July 27, 2022.

Although the space economy now generates most value by enabling or enhancing activities on Earth, significant future value could arise from functions that occur entirely in orbit, such as in-orbit servicing, research and development, and manufacturing. That said, the satellite services available today will remain important and could be critical to some emerging use cases.

Finally, a tipping point

Researchers and other space enthusiasts have long discussed the potential for business activity in orbit, or even the development of space cities. But now, with lower costs and greater technological capabilities, the space economy may finally be at a tipping point, where businesses can conduct large-scale activities in space. As costs continue to drop, even more companies may contemplate space ventures; and for the first time, they might even be able to profit from forays into space.

More launches, lower costs

The costs for heavy launches in low-Earth orbit (LEO) have fallen from $65,000 per kilogram to $1,500 per kilogram (in 2021 dollars)—a greater than 95 percent decrease.


Thomas G. Roberts, “Space launch to low Earth orbit: How much does it cost?,” Aerospace Security, September 1, 2022.

Computer-aided design, 3-D printing, and other innovations have contributed to the cost reductions by streamlining the manufacturing process and improving supply chains. The emergence of new commercial launch providers that prioritize efficiency is also helping. For instance, engineers at these companies have developed reusable components for launch vehicles, which lowers costs while promoting sustainability. The recent increase in launch frequency, particularly at SpaceX, is accelerating the drop in costs.

Current R&D efforts could reduce launch costs even further. Relativity Space, for instance, plans to use 3-D printing, artificial intelligence, and autonomous robotics to build a fleet of fully reusable, low-cost rockets. The first launch for these vehicles is planned for 2024 at Cape Canaveral, Florida. Similarly, SpaceX plans to conduct a full-scale, orbital test flight for its reusable Starship launch vehicle—the tallest and most powerful ever built—in late 2022.

Smaller satellites, bigger gains

The size and weight of satellites have fallen significantly in recent years because of various advances, primarily driven by private companies, such as the use of lighter solar panels and more efficient batteries. These changes, combined with greater use of commercial, off-the-shelf components, have decreased satellite costs and made their launch and operation feasible for many more organizations. Greater satellite demand is also improving costs because manufacturers obtain economies of scale by increasing production volume. These lower costs have helped alter the space landscape. Large government satellites, some of which cost upward of $1 billion and tend to be deployed in orbits far from Earth, are now outnumbered by smaller commercial satellites in LEO, often deployed in constellations, that can cost $100,000 or less.

In tandem with the cost decrease for satellites, researchers have created new technologies, such as higher-resolution sensors, that are boosting image capture, data processing, and other functions. Satellites can now collect, analyze, and transfer much larger stores of data than they could just five years ago.

Greater investment, more innovation

Public agencies, especially NASA and the US Department of Defense and Intelligence Community, have traditionally provided most space investment. While these agencies will continue to be a major source of funding, the combination of lower costs and more sophisticated technology is attracting more investment from both special-purpose acquisition companies (SPACs) and private investors—a trend that is driving innovation.

In 2021, private-sector funding in space-related companies topped $10 billion—an all-time high and about a tenfold increase over the past decade. The percentage of global space R&D funding coming from the US government decreased from about 70 percent to around 50 percent over the same period.


“The space report online,” Space Foundation, 2021; The space economy at a glance, OECD, July 22, 2011.

Meanwhile, the number of space-related start-ups funded annually increased more than twofold from 2010 to 2018.


Start-up space: Update on investment in commercial space ventures, Bryce Tech, 2021.

Commercial funding could surpass government funding within 20 years, a trend that government is largely embracing and that could lead to mutually beneficial public–private partnerships.

New use cases and more momentum

Although much uncertainty persists, analysts are so optimistic about space that some believe it will become a $1 trillion industry, thanks to enhancements to existing use cases and the development of entirely new applications. Much progress, including further reductions in launch and operational costs, must be made before many ambitious space projects can become a reality, but continued technology improvements are encouraging companies to increase their investments in the space economy now. The new use cases can be divided into two broad categories: space-for-Earth applications, which facilitate terrestrial activities, and space-for-space applications, which only involve activities that occur in orbit.

Space-for-Earth applications

Satellites are becoming more sophisticated each year, allowing researchers to enhance existing use cases and develop new offerings. Many companies have recently deployed smaller, less expensive satellites in LEO—an orbit that is ideal for high-bandwidth, low-latency communications—to provide better satellite connectivity. While most past efforts to launch LEO constellations failed because of high costs, limited demand, and inadequate funding, the situation is much different today. SpaceX’s Starlink has already launched an LEO constellation and has paying customers for its satellite broadband network. OneWeb and Amazon’s Project Kuiper, among others, also plan to deploy LEO constellations soon. Satellite imaging, another technology frequently used in current applications, has also improved and could enable multiple new use cases by providing more detailed and accurate information.

Some of the most important space-for-Earth applications include the following:

  • Internet services in remote locations. Terrestrial networks are often difficult or uneconomical to install in underserved or rural areas. Beyond basic inconveniences, a lack of connectivity can interfere with vital services, including provision of remote learning or online medical consultations. By providing internet services to these areas, satellite connectivity could increase educational equity and social interactions and improve public health, especially in cases where the COVID-19 pandemic still limits some in-person interactions.
  • Agriculture. Space-based remote sensors collect a multitude of data, including images, information on weather patterns, and measures for electromagnetic waves, all of which have applications for agriculture. McKinsey’s annual digital farmer adoption survey shows that 29 percent of row-crop farmers and 45 percent of specialty-crop farmers already rely on such data or plan to do so. The greatest value from satellite sensors for agriculture relates to yield-improvement opportunities. For instance, farmers can use satellite images to identify areas that require replanting early in the season, rather than conducting a manual inspection that might be time consuming and miss some areas of the field.
  • Energy. Utilities can use satellite data to monitor vegetation that might be interfering with critical infrastructure, including power lines. By addressing the problems before they escalate, companies might avoid power outages.
  • Mining. Satellites can support some of the most important functions at mining companies. Better connectivity might improve productivity at remote sites by helping headquarters-based experts communicate with local staff to solve problems. Satellite data can also help mining companies map emissions, monitor shipments along the supply chain, and improve exploration efforts by identifying mineral-rich areas.
  • Insurance. Better imaging might allow more insurers to cost-effectively assess risks and damages at remote locations, with improved resolution and greater image-sequencing frequency pinpointing problems more clearly and eliminating the need for in-person visits. Pilot tests of radio-frequency-based mapping, which can detect “hidden” shipping activity, could help maritime and commodities-based hedge fund customers track the movement of goods overseas.

Space-for-space applications

Many of the emerging “space for space” applications are now possible for the first time because lower costs make frequent launches and long-term missions more financially viable. Consider a few use cases that could gain traction:

  • Research and development. Space R&D is not a new application, but businesses outside the aerospace sector have not traditionally undertaken large-scale projects in this area. With lower costs and better technologies, however, this could change as companies build upon the research done to date on the International Space Station. Among other applications, pharmaceutical companies could develop cell cultures for predicting disease models. While these cultures develop in well-known patterns on Earth, the novel environment in space would shift growth patterns and reveal new insights. Similarly, consumer goods companies might want to develop products in space, where high levels of radiation, a near vacuum-like state, and zero gravity might improve design and manufacturing. For instance, a manufacturer of beauty products might discover new information about skin care in the harsh space environment, which accelerates aging.
  • Manufacturing, construction, and assembly. Super-heavy launch vehicles, such as SpaceX’s Starship, may make it easier for companies to create factories or manufacturing plants in orbit. Some semiconductor companies are already exploring the potential for creating chips at such facilities, since the natural vacuum in space could potentially facilitate innovative thin-layering techniques by reducing or eliminating gases during production.
  • Greater exploration and habitation in space. Innovative forms of deep space exploration, including crewed missions to Mars, might become possible if technologies such as nuclear propulsion continue to advance. Some leaders, including Jeff Bezos of Blue Origin, are already speculating that large numbers of people may even be able to live and work in space. Recent headlines about space tourism may be the first sign that space is no longer the domain of a few carefully selected astronauts.

Activity in most of these space-for-space areas is now very limited, but further technological improvements, such as laser communication between satellites and better edge processing (making sense of data in space, rather than after downloading it) could accelerate progress. Although it’s still difficult to determine which use cases, if any, will gain significant traction, industry stakeholders may promote progress by considering measures that will help space companies and others navigate the new landscape. For instance, guidelines about use of orbits might help reduce the chance of collisions in space that could result in debris.

Thanks to lower costs and greater access, space is no longer the sole domain of large aerospace companies or public agencies with vast budgets. It’s a place that can deliver many benefits—both on Earth and in orbit—to almost any business sector. Across industries, from pharmaceuticals to semiconductors, some companies are already expanding their space capabilities, exploring new use cases, or piloting innovative applications. In a few years, industry leaders may compare these early movers to businesses that recognized the internet’s potential in the early 1990s and moved quickly to establish an online presence. The challenges ahead—both technological and financial—can’t be understated, but the potential of space is also immense. Companies that ignore it, either because they are bogged down in current challenges or underestimate the opportunities ahead, might eventually find themselves scrambling to catch up to the early leaders.

Source link

Continue Reading


Top Canadian Stocks to Hold During a Recession



Top Canadian Stocks to Hold During a Recession

In a recession where markets are prone to heavy volatility and uncertainty, generating stable returns is hard to come by. However, compared to other stock markets, Canada harbours some of the most dividend-focused companies. Not only are these companies consistently growing their dividend, but have been resilient in past recessions.


Here are the top Canadian stocks to hold during a recession.


Genius Dog 336 x 280 - Animated

Royal Bank of Canada (RY)

FILE PHOTO: The Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) logo is seen outside of a branch in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, February 14, 2019. REUTERS/Chris Wattie/File Photo

Despite being the largest Canadian financial institution and ‘boring’ in nature to many growth-focused investors, Royal Bank has flourished in the past couple years as shareholders raked in consistent dividend income and capital appreciation. In fact, the stock has outperformed the S&P 500 year-to-date.

In the past ten years, Royal Bank has grown its dividend tremendously. As of right now, the annual dividend payout for each share is $5.12, which gives it a dividend yield of 3.85%. With dividends included, the stock softened the volatility of woes and worries revolving around the economy.

In addition, Royal Bank’s payout ratio, which is derived from how much of earnings is paid out to shareholders, is 33.4%. This ratio is low enough that the company could continue to raise the dividend for many years, even without substantial earnings growth. The bank’s revenue and earnings growth has also been stellar in contrast to other companies which have seen headwinds, rising costs, and reduced headcounts. These strong fundamentals indicate that the dividend safety is high.

Royal Bank has shown investors predictability and certainty in a market of declining confidence. Looking forward, Royal Bank stands to benefit from rising interest rates. For investors who want exposure to the financial sector without volatility and oversized risk, RY stock could be a great option.


Canadian Pacific (CP)

FILE PHOTO: A Canadian Pacific Railway crew works on their train at the CP Rail yards in Calgary, Alberta, April 29, 2014. REUTERS/Todd Korol/File Photo

Up next is Canadian Pacific. The company, which owns and operates one of the largest railway networks in all of Canada, has seen tremendous stability in the past year. Despite ongoing macroeconomic headwinds, Canadian Pacific has been resilient in growing its revenue and earnings,

Right now, the company provides an annual dividend of $0.76 per share. While the dividend is not that substantial, its rapid growth is what intrigues investors. In the past ten years, the dividend has tripled, factoring in the 5:1 stock split last year. Like Royal Bank, the same case can be made with Canadian Pacific, since its dividend payout ratio is a mere 21.2%. The future earnings growth potential is sizable.

Canadian Pacific shares have outperformed the S&P 500 in the past year, likely due to earnings growth in the latest quarter of over 88.7% year-over-year. In one month alone, Canadian Pacific shares are up 11%. Moving forward, Canadian Pacific is well positioned to continue paying out shareholders in the form of stable, growing dividends, and potentially further stock price appreciation.


Closing Thoughts

Both Royal Bank and Canadian Pacific have demonstrated their resilient stance in the stock market, particularly during a time when volatility is prominent. Looking ahead, we can expect both companies to continue distributing and raising their dividends given their low dividend payout ratios. These two companies could make an investor’s portfolio nearly inflation and recession-resistant, which is extraordinarily rare to find anywhere else.


Continue Reading