adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Investment

Consumption, not investment, now key to growth

Published

 on

CAI MENG/CHINA DAILY

Scholars and policymakers in China have not yet reached a consensus on whether stimulating consumption is the top priority for the Chinese economy at the moment. Some economists argue more about the need to boost growth by expanding investment, as they believe that stable investment will be the fastest way to encourage economic expansion.

My understanding is that competent policymaking departments and economists need to better realize and identify the importance of boosting consumption. Under China’s 20 years of stabilizing investment through infrastructure construction, it is necessary to completely change such concepts and realize the significance of encouraging consumption. There is still a lot of work to be done on this front. If this year’s policy is still the same as last year’s and the year before, it will affect growth stabilization performance in 2023.

What makes stimulating consumption for growth so important? The main reason behind it is that China’s economic structure has changed. In normal situations, consumption contributes about 65 percent of GDP growth in China. Therefore, as the proportion of fiscal funds spent to stabilize growth conforms to the economic structure, roughly 65 percent of fiscal funds are used to stabilize consumption, and the remaining 35 percent are put toward stabilizing investment. Yet, in practice, most of the fiscal funds are used to stabilize investment. This disrupts the overall growth structure.

With China’s economy developing and upgrading rapidly, consumption has now become the core factor in economic growth. The country has moved beyond the stage of 20 years of rapid urbanization and rapid industrialization, and infrastructure investment has been oversaturated. Therefore, if the method of stabilizing investment is once again applied to stabilize growth, it will seriously distort the driving force of China’s economic growth. However, I think such understanding has not yet been widely recognized by economists and policymakers, and therefore, further study on this matter is needed.

300x250x1

China’s previous strategy of stabilizing investment has caused distortions in the overall fiscal expenditure structure. Last year, China’s total GDP reached 114 trillion yuan ($16.2 trillion). The total amount of investment in fixed assets was 55 trillion yuan, while fixed-asset investment accounted for 48 percent of GDP. In comparison, in developed countries such as the United States, Australia, Japan and European nations, the annual total investment in fixed assets accounts for only about 20 percent of the country’s GDP.Long-term distorted structure caused by China’s large proportion of fixed asset investment in GDP is unsustainable.

I would argue that if the current economic structure is corrected and adjusted in the next 10 years, investment in fixed assets will drop from 55 trillion yuan to 30-40 trillion yuan and then decline further. Its high growth will undoubtedly crowd out consumption in the economy, and have a negative impact.

Here are some ways to boost consumption:

First, efforts should be made to promote consumption in terms of raising incomes, instead of working from the production standpoint. Since 2020, in Europe and the United States, the key measure to stabilize consumption has been to issue consumption vouchers to residents, and this has generated a notable effect in boosting the economy. If people’s disposable incomes decline, consumption will definitely drop. Therefore, efforts must be made to find a way to increase disposable income of Chinese consumers. However, if we talk about increasing disposable incomes and only work on stabilizing employment, it would not be sustainable over the long term. It is a long-term policy to stabilize employment as well as improve the social security system, medical system and education system, whatever the circumstances are. The core of stabilizing consumption is to increase household incomes. One way to bring this about is to increase current incomes; that is, issue consumption vouchers or money to residents. It is the correct way to stabilize consumption from the income side. Another way of effecting this is to increase investment income, such as making the stock market more prosperous, so that everyone makes money, thus leading to higher consumption.

Second, efforts should be made to increase the public’s marginal propensity to consume by cutting interest rates. The best way to increase the marginal propensity to consume in the short term is, in fact, by reducing interest rates, which frees up credit. The two methods for stabilizing consumption in Europe and the US in 2020 were distribution of money and lowering of interest rates. By raising incomes through distribution of money and lowering of interest rates, it is possible to increase the general public’s marginal propensity to consume. People’s incomes are divided into two parts. One part is used for saving and the other part is used for consumption. When savings increase, consumption decreases. Savings are closely related and very responsive to interest rate changes. When Europe and the US faced economic downturn pressure in 2020 and wanted to stabilize consumption, they once lowered interest rates to zero or even negative. But China seems to be more conservative with regards to cutting interest rates.

There are many reasons for China to be shy about cutting interest rates. These include the need to prevent real estate bubbles, avoid a stock market sell-off, safeguard against rampant inflation, and stabilize the RMB exchange rate. The goal of monetary policy is complicated and has many facets. It needs to work not only to maintain economic growth, but also to stabilize prices, support the capital market, undergird the housing market and stabilize the exchange rate. Currently, in terms of the stock market, the Chinese bourse has a flat performance during the past 10 years, and share prices of many listed companies have fallen to historic lows. A rise in the stock market can increase investment income and benefit consumption. In terms of prices, China’s producer price index has entered negative growth since October. Currently, we do not have serious inflation, so from the perspective of prices, cutting interest rates will also work. In terms of the RMB exchange rate, now that the appreciation of the US dollar has ended and interest rate hikes outside China have slowed, the pressure of RMB appreciation is gradually picking up. Therefore, to increase the public’s marginal propensity to consume and to stabilize consumption, we should cut interest rates.

In addition, it is also very important to boost consumption by creating consumption scenarios with engaging consumption activities, where consumers can truly interact with shops and products. If consumers cannot have such interactions, contact consumption in many scenarios will not be realized. This involves the impact of COVID-19 and how to contain the pandemic in a science-based, accurate way, instead of a one-size-fits-all approach.

To sum up, only by realizing the importance of consumption and work on the income front, cutting interest rates and creating more engaging scenarios for consumption can the Chinese economy likely see a rebound in the first quarter of next year.

The views don’t necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

The author is the director of the Wanbo New Economic Research Institute.

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Honda Commits to E.V.s With Big Investment in Canada

Published

 on

Honda Motor on Thursday said it would invest $11 billion to build batteries and electric cars in Ontario, a significant commitment from a company that has been slow to embrace the technology.

Like Toyota and other Japanese carmakers, Honda has emphasized hybrid vehicles, in which gasoline engines are augmented by electric motors, rather than cars powered solely by batteries. The Honda Prologue, a sport-utility vehicle made in Mexico, is the company’s only fully electric vehicle on sale in the United States.

But the investment adjacent to the company’s factory in Alliston, Ontario, near Toronto, is a shift in direction, raising the possibility that Honda and other Japanese carmakers could use their manufacturing expertise to push down the cost of electric vehicles and make them affordable to more people.

“This is a very big day for the region, for the province and for the country,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said at an announcement event in Alliston, where Honda manufactures the Civic sedan and CR-V S.U.V. The investment is the largest by an automaker in Canadian history, he said.

300x250x1

The company also plans to retool its flagship factory in Marysville, Ohio, near Columbus, to produce electric vehicles in 2026. The investment in Canada is a sign that Honda expects the technology to grow in popularity, despite a recent slowdown in sales.

Canadian leaders have been wooing carmakers with financial incentives as it tries to become a major player in the electric vehicle supply chain. Vehicles made in Canada can qualify for $7,500 U.S. federal tax credits, which are available only to cars made in North America.

Volkswagen said last year it would invest up to $5 billion to construct a battery factory in Thomas, Ontario. Northvolt, a Swedish battery company, announced plans last year for a $5 billion battery factory near Montreal.

Honda will benefit from up to $1.8 billion in tax credits available to companies that invest in electric vehicle projects, Chrystia Freeland, the Canadian finance minister, said Thursday at the event.

Canada also has reserves of lithium and other materials needed to make batteries, and generates a lot of its electricity from nuclear and hydroelectric plants, which allows carmakers to advertise that their vehicles are made with energy that releases no greenhouse gas emissions.

“As we aim to conduct our business with zero environmental impact, Canada is very attractive,” Toshihiro Mibe, the chief executive of Honda, said Thursday in Alliston. Honda will also work with partners to convert raw materials into battery components, he said.

However, recent declines in the price of lithium have raised questions about whether mining the metal in Canada will be profitable.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Investment Statistics (10 Investment Statistics Investors Need To Know) – Forbes

Published

 on

By


Understanding investment markets can be difficult, as there’s so much information to sort through. Fortunately, you don’t need to understand every single concept or piece of data to have success as an investor.

A few important, simple and often surprising investment statistics can guide your choices and make you a better investor in the long term. Here are a few worth considering.

.myfi-widget-mb-0 iframe margin-bottom: 0px !important;

300x250x1

1. The Annual Return of the S&P 500 (10% Per Year)

The stock market has been a consistent way to build wealth over the past 100 years. Likewise, from April 1, 1936 through March 31, 2024, the S&P 500 Index–a widely followed barometer for the broad U.S. stock market–averaged an annual return of 10.75%.

To put that return into perspective, if you earn 10% per year on your savings, and your gains compound quarterly, you’ll double your money roughly every seven years. Put $20,000 in an S&P 500 fund today, and if you earn the historical return of 10% per year, you’ll have $40,000 in about seven years.

Of course, the stock market is unpredictable and goes through swings. Your portfolio might go down some years and up by more than 10% in others. The key takeaway is that the stock market posts a substantial average annual return over time.

2. The Average Annual Inflation Rate (3.8% Per Year)

Inflation is another reason why it’s essential to invest. When prices go up, the purchasing power of each of your dollars goes down. On average, U.S. inflation has been 3.8% percent per year from 1960 to 2022. If you aren’t earning at least that much on your money, it’s losing value. Your balance might stay the same in a bank account, but it buys less and less, making you poorer.

Investments like stocks historically outperform inflation. By investing some of your money in stocks and stock funds, your savings and spending power can keep up with rising prices.

3. The Number of Active Day Traders Who Lose Money (80%)

Using an index fund, you can often match the performance of the entire S&P 500 and various major stock markets. This is different from buying and selling–or trading–individual stocks. Trading individual stocks can be exciting when it succeeds, leading sometimes to sharp short-term gains, but profiting consistently is very hard.

In fact, 75% of day traders trying to invest professionally quit within two years, and 80% of their trades are unprofitable, according to a University of Berkeley study. And individual stock day traders working through a taxable account often generate short-term capital gains, which are taxed at higher ordinary income rates than long-term capital gains. Day traders can also trigger a lot of investment fees. Also, as a day trader you’re competing against the best professional investors on Wall Street, many backed by big research teams.

Most regular investors are better off using mutual funds and exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, that aim to match the stock market instead. It’s less exciting but still lucrative in the long term.

4. The Cost of an Index Fund vs. an Active Fund for a $1 Million Portfolio ($1,200 vs. $6,000 Per Year)

If you’re trying to pick an investment fund, consider the cost. An index fund keeps costs low by simply trying to mimic the performance of a specific segment of the market. The S&P 500 is one. It consists of 500 of the largest companies listed on U.S. stock exchanges. The Nasdaq 100 consists of stocks issued by 100 of the largest nonfinancial businesses listed on the Nasdaq stock exchange.

Many index funds track each of those groups. Generally, their costs are kept low because they don’t have to pay for lots of investors, analysts and software wizards to find stocks. In contrast, actively managed funds do pay for talented people who can pick stocks that outperform. Those costs get passed on to shareholders like you.

Index funds, on average, charge 0.12% per year versus the 0.60% charged by active investment funds. That means on a $1 million portfolio, you’d pay $1,200 per year for an index fund versus $6,000 a year for an active fund.

Despite charging much more, 79% of active funds, trying to earn higher returns, underperformed the S&P 500 in 2021. Often, you’re paying extra fees for actively managed funds without getting any additional return in exchange.

5. The Average Length of a Bear Market (14 Months)

One drawback to investing is that your returns are not guaranteed. In some years you’ll earn a lot. In others, your portfolio could lose money. It’s not fun to lose money, but during this stretch, remind yourself that the market will turn around eventually.

The average historical bear market, a period when stocks are losing value, has lasted 14 months. On the other hand, the average historical bull market, when stocks go up in value, has lasted five years.

The market will go through cycles of gains and losses. Remember that the positive stretches last longer than the negative ones.

6. The Number of ‘Best Investing Days’ That Can Turn a Positive Portfolio Negative If Missed (20 Days Over Two Decades)

When the market crashes, you might feel tempted to cash out and wait until things start picking up again. This is one of the most expensive mistakes investors make.

Why is that? Because so much of the stock market’s long-term returns come from single-day gains. The market sometimes shoots up by 5%, 7% or even 10% in a single day. Those days are impossible to predict. And they often occur at the start of a rally.

Individual retail investors often miss those explosive, unexpected upturns because they cashed out or moved to bonds amid the market’s earlier downturn.

A JPMorgan report found that if investors missed the top 10 best days of investing over a two-decade period from January 1999 to December 2018, it cut their portfolio return in half. If investors missed the top 20 best investing days, their return turned negative, meaning that they lost money over that two-decade period. Don’t try to time the market. Stay invested for the long term for the best results.

7. The Monthly Investment Needed to Reach $1 Million If You Start at Age 25 vs. Age 45 ($350 vs. $1,650)

The earlier you start investing, the more time you have to build wealth. This makes it easier to hit your long-term financial goals.

Let’s say you want $1 million in your nest egg for retirement at age 67. You expect to earn 7% a year, a reasonable return for a portfolio of stocks and bonds. If you start at age 25, you would need to save about $350 per month. If you start at age 45, you must save around $1,650 a month.

If you’re still early in your career, consider ways to save more money. Even a little extra today will make reaching your future financial goals easier. Don’t get discouraged if you are later in your career. You may wish you had started earlier, but anything you put aside now will help you once you retire. As the saying goes, perhaps the best time to start was years ago, but the second-best is now.

8. The Number of People With a Workplace Retirement Plan (44%)

A workplace retirement plan, like a 401(k), can help you invest. Those plans let you save money and defer yearly tax on growth in your investments inside your account. With a traditional 401(k), you also get a tax deduction for the money you kick into your account. In most cases, your employer also contributes to your account.

Only 44% of American workers have access to a workplace retirement plan. If you have one, study how it works to take full advantage.

The majority of workers, 56%, do not have a retirement plan at their job. Consider an individual retirement account, or IRA, if you are in that situation. It offers similar tax advantages for your retirement savings and investment goals.

9. The Expected Life Expectancy of Males and Females Turning 65 (82 and 85 Years)

The top reason most people invest is to save for retirement. And retirement might last a lot longer than you expect. The typical male turning 65 today is expected to live until 82, while females are expected to live until 85, according to the Social Security Administration.

That is a retirement lasting an average of nearly two decades. Some people will live even longer, reaching 90, 100 or even older. This is why saving and investing regularly is important—to build extra savings to fund your retirement lifestyle.

10. The Average Baby Boomer 401(k) Balance ($230,900)

Fidelity measured the average 401(k) balance by age of its customers. This can give you an idea of where your savings stack up against your peers:

  • Gen Z: $9,800
  • Millennials: $54,000
  • Gen X: $165,300
  • Baby Boomers: $230,900

This represents investments in a 401(k). People may have more money in an IRA or other investment account. Still, those figures show that the typical person does not retire with $1 million. Therefore, you shouldn’t feel behind if you’re just starting to save for retirement. Do what you can to beat these averages and grow your portfolio.

Hopefully, these statistics help shed some light on the importance of investing and investing wisely. Consider meeting with a financial advisor to discuss your portfolio for more advice.

Looking For A Financial Advisor?

Get In Touch With A Pre-screened Financial Advisor In 3 Minutes

Looking For A Financial Advisor?

Get In Touch With A Pre-screened Financial Advisor In 3 Minutes

Find A Financial Advisor

Via Datalign Advisory

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Deutsche Bank's Investment Bankers Step Up as Rate Boost Fades – Yahoo Canada Finance

Published

 on

By


(Bloomberg) — Deutsche Bank AG relied on its traders and investment bankers to make up for a slowdown in income from lending, as Chief Executive Officer Christian Sewing seeks to deliver on an ambitious revenue goal.

Most Read from Bloomberg

Fixed income trading rose 7% in the first quarter, more than analysts had expected and better than most of the biggest US investment banks. Income from advising on deals and stock and bond sales jumped 54%.

300x250x1

ADVERTISEMENT

Revenue for the group rose about 1% as the prospect of falling interest rates hurt the corporate bank and the private bank that houses the retail business.

Sewing has vowed to improve profitability and lift revenue to €30 billion this year, a goal some analysts view with skepticism as the end of the rapid rate increases weighs on revenue from lending. In the role for six years, the CEO is cutting thousands of jobs in the back office to curb costs while building out the advisory business with last year’s purchase of Numis Corp. to boost fee income.

“We are very pleased” with the investment bank, Chief Financial Officer James von Moltke said in an interview with Bloomberg TV. The trends of the first quarter “have continued into April,” he said, including “a slower macro environment” that’s being offset by “momentum in credit” and emerging markets.

While traders and investment bankers did well, revenue at the corporate bank declined 5% on lower net interest income. Private bank revenue fell about 2%. Both units benefited when central banks raised interest rates over the past two years, allowing them to charge more for loans while still paying relatively little for deposits.

With inflation slowing and interest rates set to fall again, that effect is reversing, though markets have scaled back expectations for how quickly and how deep central banks are likely to cut. That’s lifted shares of Europe’s lenders recently, with Deutsche Bank gaining 25% this year.

“Deutsche Bank reported a reasonable set of results,” analysts Thomas Hallett and Andrew Stimpson at KBW wrote in a note. “The investment bank performed well while the corporate bank and asset management underperformed.”

–With assistance from Macarena Muñoz and Oliver Crook.

(Updates with CFO comments in fifth paragraph.)

Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek

©2024 Bloomberg L.P.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending