중국 한아이 정책이 공식적으로 끝나게 되었습니다. 종료가 아니라 포기가 맞겠네요. 그 동안 공산주의 사회에서 한 아이 정책이 적절했다고 생각되지만 그것을 시행하면서 여자 아이들이 버려진다거나 남녀성별 불균형등 사회문제도 많았지요. 성비가 깨진 사회는 자연의 재앙이니까요. 중국의 성비는 재앙수준입니다. 남자면 낳고 여자면 지우고, 여자애 나오면 저런 x이 나왔냐고 막말로 키우고 고추달고 나왔어야지 하는 구석기 시대 생각으로 21세기를 살수 있나요? 여자를 차별하는 나라치고 잘 되는 나라가 있을수 없습니다. 한국 너도 조심해라~


WSJ저널 기사를 보니... 사진도 이런 사진을 걸었는지, 클릭을 유도하는 미끼 사진이네요.

지금 중국은 경제가 너무 빨리 경착륙/연착륙 위험에 빠져있지요. 그동안 너무 빠르게 성장한 성장통을 크게 치르기는 할것 같습니다. 이 정책은 당장 이번년 보다는 10년 20년후의 강한 중국을 꿈꾸고 있는 지도부에서 내린 결정인것 같습니다.


개발도상국 치고는 너무 빨리 고령화 사회로 접어들고 있고, 일할 사람이 없이는 성장률을 어느 수준으로 유지할수가 없지요. 다만 대도시에서 2명씩 쫙쫙 낳아주냐가 관건이겠습니다. 출산률이 2에 가까워만 진다고 해도 성공적이겠지만, 아이는 낳으라고 한다고 낳는것이 아니지요.


어쨋든 저는 긍정적으로 보고 있고, 제가 만약 이 정책에 편승해서 사업을 한다면 지금 중국 대도시에 유아 보육시설을 짓고 몇년후에 사립학원/운동학원/컴퓨터학원을 짓고 또다시 몇년후에 유학원을 지어서 재벌이 될수 있을것 같습니다.


P.S 중국 인구가 이미 15억이 넘은것으로 알고 있는데 그래프는 상당히 보수적인 편이네요. 중국 통계자료가 지 멋대로 그렇겠죠.

P.S 중국의 1가구 1자녀정책은 중간중간 condition이 좀 있습니다. 시골/광산 같은 곳에서는 남자 노동력이 많이 필요하다 보니 첫째가 딸이면 하나 더 낳을수 있는 조건도 있습니다. 제 중국 친구가 누나가 있습니다. 광산지역에서 태어났다고 하며 이야기 해주더군요.

-------------------
China Abandons One-Child Policy

Limit on families is raised to two children, ending a 35-year-old policy that lead to myriad social and economic ills in China

-------------------

HISTORY OF THE ONE-CHILD POLICY

  • 1950: China’s population exceeds 500 million.
  • 1953: Chinese leaders suggest that the population should be controlled and approve a law on contraception and abortion, but the plan is stranded by political upheaval and the 1959-1961 famine.
  • 1970: China’s population exceeds 800 million. With the fertility rate at 5.5, the country implements policy to encourage people to marry later and wait longer between children.
  • 1975: China adopts the slogan “Later, Longer and Fewer” and urges urban couples to have no more than two children and rural couples no more than three.
  • 1979: The country’s fertility rate has dropped to 2.7 from 5.5 in 1970.
  • 1980: China implements one-child policy.
  • 1984: A change in the policy allows a second child for many families in rural areas.
  • 2000: Demographers join forces to advocate for relaxing the birth policy.
  • 2001: New laws allow local governments to impose fines for additional children.
  • 2004: Demographers file petition to the government saying the one-child policy was unnecessary.
  • 2013: An exemption allows two children if one parent came from a household without other siblings.
  • 2015: China’s Communist Party says all couples will be allowed to have two children, but doesn’t give a time frame.
-------------------




Posted by 쁘레드

미국은 법인세가 상당히 높습니다. 주마다 더 내야할것들이 있어서 주정부에만 낸다고 생각하고 계산하면 미국이 낮은것 처럼 보이기도 하지요.

미국 거대기업들은 미국뿐만아니라 전세계로 물건을 수출하거나 지적재산(IP)를 통해 수익을 내기때문에 해외에서 발생한 수익은 아일랜드법으로 적용되게하면 쉽게 세금을 피할수 있습니다. 버뮤다의 여러 섬들에서는 법인세가 0%인곳도 많다고 합니다. 뉴스타파에서도 한번 보도한적도 있고요.


다행인것은 한국 재벌들은 일부를 제외하고는 많이들 하고 있지 않는것 처럼 보입니다. 한국 재벌들이 도덕적이고 국민들을 위하기 때문일까요? 실제 한국에서 재벌들이 내고 있는 법인세를 조사해보면 답이 나오지요. 한국처럼 법은 높게되어있는데 실제 기업들이 내고 있는 법인세는 아일랜드 뺨치게 낮는 나라에서는 구지 아일랜드까지 갈 필요를 못느낀다고 보는게 맞겠지요.

----------------------

아일랜드12.5%라는 아주 저렴한 법인세를 자랑하고 있습니다. 따라서 전세계 많은 기업들이 아일랜드로 많이 몰려들어서 회사도 많이 생기고 고용시장도 상당히 좋아졌겠지요. 박리다매로 세금은 엄청나게 많이 벌었을 것으로 생각됩니다. 틈세시장을 이용해서 경제를 잘 살렸다고 생각됩니다. 부도덕하고 사악해서 그렇지요.

----------------------

If Ireland Is Not A Tax Haven, What Is It?

Ireland has a 12.5% corporate tax rate. That’s a big deal on its own. If a U.S. corporation builds a factory in Ireland that generates $10 million in profit, it pays $1.25 million in Irish tax instead of the $3.5 million that it would pay if it built the factory in Indiana, where the federal rate is 35%. But that’s only the beginning of tax benefits available for locating in Ireland. Lax U.S. transfer pricing rules allow the Irish factory to book inordinate profits that rightly should have been taxed in the United States. Suppose that in the example, the Irish factory books something like $30 million of profit in Ireland. It pays $3.75 million in Irish tax, but at the same time, because it shifts $20 million of profit from the United States to Ireland, it reduces its U.S. tax by $7 million. So the choice between locating a factory in Indiana or Ireland is the choice between pay $3.5 million of U.S. tax or net tax of negative $3.25 million (that is, $3.75 million of Irish tax minus $7 million of lower U.S. tax.) In effect, the U.S. Treasury is subsidizing investment in Ireland.

----------------------

애플이 법인을 아일랜드에 세워서 피한 세금. 추정금액이니 실제는 더 클것으로 보고 있습니다.
2012년에 $9B 이나 세금을 줄였다고 의심되고 있습니다. 한국돈으로 10조정도 되지요. 2012년에 비해 2015년에는 매출이 두배가 넘었으니 tax도 더 많이 줄였겠지요.


----------------------

Apple 세금회피 뉴스를 2013/2014/2015년 정보는 찾기어렵네요. 그래서 SEC에 Apple이 공개한 정보를 찾아봤습니다.

2015년 기준으로 26.4%에서 실제 법인세를 내고 있다고 합니다. 해외 매출을 여기에 넣지 않았다고 가정하고, 해외매출과 미국내 매출을 60:40으로 가정. 해외 매출을 여기에 넣는다면 법인세가 MAX 35%까지 올라갔을테니, 실제로 미국정부가 못걷은 2015년 세금은 $20B - $38B가량 된다고 보여집니다. 헐~ 주주는 땡잡는 것이고 미국 정부는 땅을 칠 노릇이죠.


Income Taxes

federal income tax rate (35% in 2015, 2014 and 2013)  

   2015   2014   2013 

Computed expected tax

  $  25,380    $  18,719    $  17,554  

State taxes, net of federal effect

   680     469     508  

Indefinitely invested earnings of

foreign subsidiaries

   (6,470   (4,744   (4,614

Domestic production activities deduction

   (426   (495   (308

Research and development credit

   (171   (88   (287

Other

   128     112     265  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Provision for income taxes

  $19,121    $13,973    $13,118  
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Effective tax rate

   26.4%     26.1%     26.2%  

http://www.sec.gov/index.htm



---------------

국내 대표적인 삼성전자도 스마트폰만 경쟁하는것이 아닌 법인세 안내기도 서로 지가 일등이라고 싸울것으로 생각하고 있고요, 삼성이 적으면 적었지 더 내고 있지 않을것으로 확신합니다.

2012년 선대인 연구소에서 조사한 기사가 있긴한데 최근것은 귀찮아서 찾아보기 싫네요. 한국은 기업하기 세계에서 젤 좋은 나라에요. 노조때문에 못하겠다고 어리광 부리는 애들은 해외로 나가시라고 하는게 맞겠지요.


"삼성전자 법인세율, 엑슨모빌 반도 안돼"

선대인경제연구소, 글로벌 12개 기업 실제 법인세율 비교해 보니

http://www.ohmynews.com/NWS_Web/View/at_pg.aspx?CNTN_CD=A0001790095


말이 되나 실효세율 삼성전자 12%, 중소기업 22%

법인세 비과세·감면 혜택 특정 대기업에 집중, 10대 재벌기업의 세금 부담이 더 적은 ‘역진성’… 네 차례 법인세율 인하한 MB ‘잃어버린 5년’, 실질적인 효과 나타나기 시작

http://h21.hani.co.kr/arti/cover/cover_general/35208.html

----------------------

애플뿐만아니라 구글, 페이스북등 왠만한 큰 회사는 아일랜드 또는 비슷한데서 다 하고 있다고 합니다. 세무사와 변호사가 합법적이라고 했으면 합법적일 것으로 생각됩니다. 하지만 국민들의 비난은 피할수 없지요.주주들은 좋아하겠지요.


하지만 이런 관행도 오래가지는 못할것 같습니다. 미국에서도 해외에 헤드쿼터를 두고 있는 회사라도 같은 법을 적용하려고 법을 개정중이고요, 아일랜드도 이런 loophole을 2020년까지는 없애겠다고 얘기하고 있습니다.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/10/14/6974857/ireland-closing-double-irish-tax-loophole

----------------------

이런 탈세가 젤 심한 곳은 IT기업이 아니라 제약회사들이지요

비아그라로 유명한 Pfizer가 보톡스 만드는 Allergan 이라는 회사를 인수하려 한다는 기사가 떴네요. 제약회사는 약하나 잘 개발해놓고 천문학적 돈을 벌고 있는데 미국에서 35%나 되는 세금을 내고 살기는 싫겠죠. 천박하고 국가관념도 없는 새끼들이라고 까고싶지만, 자본의 본질은 최대수익을 위해서라면 사악한짓도 저지르지요. 헤드쿼터 옮기는 것 쯤이야 껌이지요.
파이저는 2014년에도 AstraZeneca를 인수하려다가 그쪽회사가 돈이 너무 적다고 하는바람에 인수를 실패했지요. 결국 어떻해서든 미국의 법인세를 피해볼까하는데서 나온다고 하고요.

Allergan, Pfizer could be biggest M&A deal of 2015
Wall Street is getting excited about a potential takeover deal between drug company Pfizer and Botox-maker Allergan that could be worth well over $100 billion

----------------------

나무위치 법인세

https://namu.wiki/w/%EB%B2%95%EC%9D%B8%EC%84%B8

Posted by 쁘레드

미국은 넓은 땅덩어리에도 트럭으로 물류를 운반하고 배송하는 비율이 상당히 높습니다. 이해안되기는 하지만, 2008년 이후에 경제가 빠르게 회복하면서 물류량은 늘고 트럭 운전사는 부족한 상황이 심화되고 있습니다. 어느 곳에서는 연봉으로 7만 3천불씩 주고 있다고하니 정말 인력난이 심하긴 한것 같습니다.


저도 트럭 드라이버 좀 해보는 것이 꿈이긴 한데, 좀 험한 일이기도 하지만 몇개월만 하고 그만둔다그러면 고용도 안하겠지요. ㅎㅎㅎ


-------------

Truck drivers wanted. Pay: $73,000

America needs a lot more truck drivers.



http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/09/news/economy/truck-driver-shortage/index.html

-------------

Drivers Ride High on Trucking Boom

Average pay is up 17% in less than two years as freight haulers fight to meet hiring needs

http://www.wsj.com/articles/drivers-reap-benefits-of-trucking-boom-1444728780

-------------

Posted by 쁘레드

한국에서는 최경환 같은 어디서 굴러먹다 왔는지 알지못하는 장관이 어떻게 해서라도 TPP에 가입하겠다라고 말하는가 하면(완전 초보자며 국가의 이익을 좀먹는 정치인이라고 막박에다 써 붙여야 겠습니다), 그동안 우리는 뭐하다가 여기에 못들어 갔냐며 7년이나 늦은 뒷북을 치고 있는 상황이지요.


그리고 미국과 일본 주도로 이루어진 이 TPP협상을 미국 정치인들은 일제히 반대를 하고 나서고 있습니다. 자유무역에 대체로 호의적은 공화당 정치인들도 반대 목소리가 높고 오바마와 비슷한 색깔로 보였던 클린턴 마져도 대놓고 반대한다고 말하고 있습니다.


여러 이유가 있겠지만, 여기에 몇가지 이유가 있습니다.

  1. 오바마가 잘하는 것은 무조건 싫다. 무조건 반대하고 본다. 클린턴 입장에서는 갈참인 오바마와 선을 긋는것이 좋겠지요.
  2. 미국의 경제적 이익이 별로 없다. (아래 예측자료 참고)
  3. 미국이 이득을 볼 분야가 있고 손해를 볼 분야가 있을텐데 손해볼 분야의 표가 더 많다고 판단

-------------

이번 TPP(Trans-Pacific Partnership) trade deal로 미국이 얻는 이득은 거의 없는 것으로 나타나고 있습니다. 지적재산권과 금융에서 분명히 챙길것이 많을거라 예상되지만 농업이나 자동차 등에서 잃을것이 많을거라고 보기 때문인것 같습니다.


가장큰 이득은 베트남과 말레시아가 가져갈 것으로 보고 있고, 수치상은 별로 안좋지만 일본도 좋은 위치를 차지했다고 보여집니다. 


12개국으로 세계경제의 40%를 차지한다고 하니 엄청난 크기의 딜이긴 하네요. 한국과 몇개 나라를 향후 몇년내에 추가할수 있다면 50%도 넘기겠습니다.

Although the TPP currently has 12 members, encompassing 40% of the world’s economic output, the smaller members are likely to be standout performers.

-------------

미국 입장에서는 단순한 FTA 성격만이 아니라, 중국을 봉쇄하고 미국의 우방국들과의 관계를 공고히 하는데 더 큰 포석으로 생각하고 있다고 보여집니다.

달라화 기축통화 지위도 더 단단히 하고요.

-------------

Posted by 쁘레드

폭시바겐 자동차 사태로 폭스바겐 자동차 주가가 떨어지는것은 물론 관련 자동차 산업 전체가 내려가고 있고, 연관된 부품업체도 추락하고 있습니다.

플래티넘 가격이 폭락한다고 해서 읽어보니 디젤 엔진에 플레티넘이 많이 들어간다고 하네요. 헐~




Update: 6개월간 주가가 반토막 됐네요. 아래 그림은 폭스바겐 몇달동안 주가 그래프와 토요타와 비교

전체 자동차 섹터가 이번 사태로 떨어지고 있습니다. 밥맛떨어졌으니 다들 밥먹고 싶은 생각이 없는거지요.

예전에 삼성 갤럭시폰이 성능을 조작하려고 벤치마크 프로그램이 돌때는 클락을 올려는 치팅을 하다가 걸렸지만 신뢰성은 또 타격입었지만 주가가 반토막 된다든지 큰 별일없었지요. 사실 모든 업체들이 그런 보이지 않는 치팅에 대해서 연구를 하는데 폭스바겐은 이번 치팅이 소비자를 우롱한것과 환경에 치명타를 줬다는 것, 관련법규를 어겼다는 것 때문에 리콜/벌금 비용이 상상을 초월할듯. 그래서 50%주가하락에도 짧은 시간에 회복되기가 싶지 않을것 같네요.



---------

LONDON—The price of platinum, widely used in diesel car engines, could fall below $900 a troy ounce for the first time since the financial crisis in the wake of the emissions scandal at VolkswagenAG, according to some metals investors and analysts.

Spot platinum fell heavily on Tuesday and hit a near seven-year low on Wednesday at $929.08 a troy ounce, before recovering slightly to $932.25, as some questioned whether the affair would have a lasting effect on demand for diesel cars.

Investors are worried that car buyers will switch from diesel engines to gasoline or electric cars, hitting demand for platinum, said David Govett, head of precious metals trading at Marex Spectron. Gasoline engines typically don’t use platinum.

Posted by 쁘레드

계속 감소하는건 좋아보이지만 한국 경제 침체때문이 주요 이라고 합니다.



나무위키에 좋은 글들이 많이 있네요, 한일관계.

https://namu.wiki/w/%ED%95%9C%EC%9D%BC%EA%B4%80%EA%B3%84



Posted by 쁘레드

놀랍지도 않은 내용인데,

이전에 정리한 data와 같은것이었네요. 2015년이라 update됐나했더니.

--------------

http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm

http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=HEALTH_STAT

--------------

한국 자살률 29.1명..OECD 단연 '최고'"주관적 건강상태 양호" 35.1% 뿐..OECD 최저

주관적 건강상태 양호" 35.1% 뿐…OECD 최저

(서울=연합뉴스) 서한기 기자 = 우리나라는 경제협력개발기구(OECD) 회원국 중에서 자살에 의한 사망률이 가장 높고, 스스로 건강하다고 여기는 비율은 가장 낮은 것으로 나타났다.

30일 OECD '건강 통계 2015'(Health Data 2015)를 보면, 2013년 기준으로 OECD 회원국의 자살로 인한 평균 사망률은 인구 10만명당 12.0명이었다.

한국(2012년 기준)은 이보다 훨씬 많은 29.1명으로 OECD 회원국 가운데 최고였다. 자살 사망률 상위권에는 2위 헝가리(19.4명), 3위 일본(18.7명), 4위 슬로베니아(18.6명), 5위 벨기에(17.4명) 등이 포진해 있었다.

자살 사망률이 가장 낮은 국가는 터키(2.6명)였다. 그리스(4.2명), 멕시코(5.0명), 이탈리아(6.3명), 이스라엘(6.4명) 등도 자살률이 낮은 국가에 속했다.

1985년부터 자살률 추이를 살펴보면 OECD 국가 대부분은 점차 줄어들지만, 한국은 2000년을 기점으로 오히려 급증하는 현상을 보이고 있다. 일본도 자살률이 높은 수준이긴 하지만 2010년 이후에는 감소세를 나타내는 것과 대비된다.

게다가 우리나라 국민은 다른 OECD 회원국 국민보다 자신의 건강상태도 좋지 않게 여기고 있었다.

주관적 건강상태 양호 생각 비율은 한국이 35.1%로 OECD 회원국 중에서 가장 낮았다. OECD 평균은 68.8%였다. 국민 스스로 건강하다고 생각하는 사람이 가장 많이 있는 국가는 뉴질랜드(89.6%)였다.

대부분 OECD 국가들에서 15세 이상 성인 인구의 흡연율은 꾸준하게 감소하는 추세다. 2013년 기준 한국의 성인인구 흡연율은 19.9%로 OECD 평균 19.8%와 비슷했다. 흡연율이 가장 높은 나라는 그리스(38.9%)였고, 칠레(29.8%), 헝가리(26.5%), 에스토니아(26.0%), 프랑스(24.1%), 아일랜드(24.0%), 스페인(23.9%) 순이었다.

흡연율이 가장 낮은 나라는 스웨덴(10.7%)이었다.

한국의 15세 이상 성인의 음주량(ℓ)은 8.7리터로 OECD 평균(8.9리터)과 유사한 수준이었다.

2013년 기준 OECD 가입국 중에서 주류 소비량이 많은 나라는 오스트리아(12.2리터), 에스토니아(11.8리터), 체코(11.5리터), 룩셈부르크(11.3리터), 프랑스(11.1리터), 헝가리(11.1리터), 독일(10.9리터), 폴란드(10.8리터) 등이었다. 반면, 터키(1.4리터), 이스라엘(2.6리터)은 음주량이 매우 낮았다.

전체 인구에서 차지하는 과체중 또는 비만 인구의 비율은 OECD 회원국 중에서 한국이 31.5%로 일본(24.1%)에 이어 두 번째로 낮았다. OECD 평균은 57.2%였다.

2013년 기준 한국의 영아사망률은 신생아 1천명당 3명으로, OECD 평균인 4.1명보다 낮았다. 영아사망률이 가장 낮은 국가는 핀란드와 아이슬란드로, 두 나라 모두 1.8명이었다.

http://m.media.daum.net/m/media/society/newsview/20150830060108056

------------------------

같은 통계를 인용하는 바람에 보나스,OECD통계보다는 헬조선이야기가 더 맞을것 같은 이야기들.

미국 테크형 억만장자 - 혁신형 경제, 러시아 권력형 억만장자 - 정경유착 경제, 한국 상속형 억만장자 - 상속형 경제















Posted by 쁘레드

중국의 위안화 절하로 경제주체들의 손익계산이 분주합니다. 환율전쟁의 시작이라고 하기도하고, 중국의 위완화 절하로 망하는 나라나 회사가 있을거라고 예상하기도 합니다.

  • 수입물가 증가로 중국 내수가 위축받을 것이라 하고
  • 오일은 급락했고
  • Meta & Mining, commodities들도 약세
  • Apple도 급락 - 중국 비중이 높다고 생각하는듯. 위안화 절하는 큰 영향없을듯 보이고 Apple의 새로운 Iphone 출시전 이라 play하기 좋은 상황으로 가고 있음
  • 중국수출주들은 폭등, Lenovo, Foxconn
  • 중국 수출기업과 경쟁하는 반도체 업체들 약세
  • 중국에서 수입해오는 업체들은 강세, 월마트
  • KFC(모기업 Yum Brands)는 중국 매출이 반이라 폭락
  • Air China는 유가 폭락에도 불구하고 달러화 debt가 많아서 폭락
  • Hyundai Mobis도 최대피하자 될듯
한국 시장을 보니 현대자동차 주가가 폭등했던데, 폭등할 정도는 아닐것 같은데 잘 못판단하는듯. 위안화가 원화대비 약세로 갈텐데 결국 한국의 수출기업이 타격을 입게될테니 자동차도 오히려 내려가야할 상황이 될듯. 달러대비 원화가 약세가 되기때문에 얻는 이득이 미미할듯.

--------------------

Cheaper Chinese Currency Has Global Impact

By devaluing yuan, Beijing is turning to a controversial growth-boosting tactic whose effects reverberate far and wide






Devalued Yuan Set to Take Bite Out of Apple, Give Boost to Chinese Rivals

Weakened currency means reduced China revenue when converted to dollars, while local firms will enjoy lower costs


1. January 1994

China consolidates its competing exchange rates into a single one pegged to the U.S. dollar. Before that, China had an official rate and a rate offered domestically at what were known as swap centers. It comes amid a slew of other reforms intended to shake up the country’s underperforming state-owned enterprises and make the economy more market-focused.

2. July 1994

Unsatisfied with China’s reform effort, the U.S. Treasury Department labels China a currency manipulator – a move that would lend itself to ongoing disputes over exchange rates between Washington and Beijing for the next two decades. It argues that Beijing was using the exchange system to give its companies an unfair political advantage. Though the U.S. has moderated its stance on China’s currency as it has risen against the dollar, the Treasury Department continues to keep that label on China.

3. December 2001

China joins the World Trade Organization. The move, coming after more than a decade of difficult and sometimes testy negotiations, lowers trade barriers for China’s exporters and offers the promise of more foreign investment in the fast-growing economy. But it also requires China to lower trade barriers, including some restrictions on currency exchange.

4. July 2005

China says it will peg the yuan to a basket of currencies rather than just to the U.S. dollar and allow the yuan to trade within a narrow band. It simultaneously lets the currency strengthen by 2.1% against the dollar. The moves follow steady pressure from the U.S. to let the currency strengthen. Though it lets the currency move up and down in a small way, it still leaves the yuan’s fate under the watchful eye of Beijing.

5. July 2008

China puts a stop to the yuan’s rise. With an eye on the still-developing global financial crisis, China informally re-establishes the currency’s peg to the dollar. The move comes as money is flooding into its economy, adding to broader fears about rising inflation. The currency’s rise is also hurting its exporters.

6. June 2010

China says it will let the yuan move again – but with caveats. The announcement follows protests by the U.S. and other G-20 countries that China’s informal peg is putting them at a disadvantage. It also comes as China begins to again explore ways to empower its growing consumer class – something economists say it needs to do to ensure long-term growth, as a stronger currency gives consumers more purchasing power. But China says any moves would be gradual. It was true to its word: The next trading day, the currency strengthens by 0.4% against the dollar.

7. April 2015

The IMF changes tack on the yuan, saying the currency is fairly valued. It cites steady increases in the yuan and financial measures that show the currency is close to its appropriate trading-range. The decision follows several steps that Beijing has taken in recent years to free up the yuan, such as widening the range at which it can trade on a daily basis and providing more ways for the currency to move across borders. Beijing’s ultimate goal is to get the IMF to include the yuan in its basket of reserve currencies.

8. Aug. 11, 2015

China devalues the yuan by nearly 2% amid softening economic growth and weakness in its key export sector. China’s central bank says it made the move as part of an adjustment to how it values the yuan that will make it more sensitive to market sentiment. That echoes calls from many economists that China needs to open up its economy to more market forces. But the timing raises questions about China’s commitment to economic reform, and whether it is moving to liberalize its currency or simply help constituents at home.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/cheaper-chinese-currency-has-global-impact-1439336422?mod=trending_now_3

--------------------


--------------------

China Takes Its Debt-Driven Growth Model Overseas

Banks have ramped up lending to Chinese companies for projects abroad

http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-takes-its-debt-driven-growth-model-overseas-1438882687

---------------------

China Trade Numbers Further Pressure Commodity Prices

Prices of crude oil, aluminum and copper extend declines as Chinese demand looks set to stay weak



Posted by 쁘레드

commodities가 하락을 급하게 하고 있기때문에 내린다에 배팅하지 않았다면 나중에 오를때쯤에는 오른다에 베팅할 준비를 해야겠지요.

언제 오를지 아무도 모르지만 당분간 계속 내릴 확률은 높은것 같고, 역시나 오를때는 빠르게 오를것으로 생각됩니다. 





----------------------------

It’s time to consider commodities. While the Standard & Poor’s 500, Nasdaq Composite, and other key equity indexes are near record levels, commodity stocks, including energy shares, are way below their peaks. Commodities are probably the most out-of-favor industry group in the stock market.

Photo: shotbydave/iStock

“The commodities space represents great value versus the rest of the market,” says Roland Morris, a commodity strategist and portfolio manager at Van Eck Global, a New York firm with most of its investments in commodity-related stocks. “There has been no place to hide -- gold, industrial metals, and energy have all been weak. The underperformance versus the broader market has been dramatic. Unfortunately, he adds, “that doesn’t tell you when it will change.”

Energy giants such as ExxonMobil (ticker: XOM), Chevron (CVX), and Royal Dutch Shell(RDSA) now trade at multiyear lows. Chevron has been hit hard after a disappointing earnings report in July. Down 24% this year, to a recent $85, it is the worst-performing stock in the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

OIL HAS TUMBLED 25% since late June, to $45 a barrel, and is off 55% in the past year. Gold has dropped below $1,100 per ounce, down 8% this year and 43% below its 2011 high of $1,900 an ounce. Silver, copper, iron ore, and natural gas all are in bear markets, with “Dr. Copper” -- so-called because of its predictive value for the economy -- hitting a six-year low of $2.30 a pound last week. Iron ore, at about $55 a ton, is down 70% from its 2011 high. The energy-heavy S&P GSCI commodity index is less than half of its 2011 peak, and the Bloomberg commodity index is below its 2009 low.

The consensus view is that there is no rush to buy because commodity prices will be “lower for longer.” Reduced production costs are cutting break-even prices, and demand is being dampened by slowing economic growth in China and much of the rest of the formerly commodity-hungry developing world.

A strong dollar is helping commodity producers outside of the U.S., because their revenue is usually in dollars and their costs are in local currencies. Many say commodities won’t rally until the dollar weakens and the U.S. economy’s stronger performance compared with other developed countries makes the prospect of a dollar decline less likely.

WHILE CALLING A BOTTOM is dangerous, we think it’s prudent to start adding commodities to your core portfolio at these prices. And we’re not alone in saying it’s time to lean against the wind.

“Investors finally appear to be capitulating on energy for the first time since energy prices started falling,” says Gina Adams, equity strategist at Wells Fargo Securities. “Investors had been trying to time a bottom and found themselves riding a steep downward slope.” She says the recent selloff could be a sign that a bottom is near. She also cites fund flows into energy and resources mutual funds, which have turned negative in recent weeks after steady positive flows earlier this year.

Says Scott Colyer, chief executive of Advisors Asset Management in Monument, Colo. “Now is the bottom of the commodity cycle. Nearly every central bank in the world is stimulating and trying to create inflation. That suggests it’s time to be a buyer of the asset class and not a seller.”

Others aren’t so certain. Goldman Sachs commodities analysts, who were correctly bearish earlier this year, remain cautious, writing in a report last month that what they call “the 3Ds” would likely keep a lid on prices: deflation in costs “following a decade of investment in commodity productive capacity”; divergence in growth between a stronger U.S. and the rest of the world, which lifts the dollar and pressures commodity prices; and deleveraging, as emerging economies focus more on balanced economic growth than on commodity-heavy expansion pegged to areas such as infrastructure spending and housing.

“We have remained firm that long-term surpluses in most commodity markets require prices to remain lower for longer to balance both the near-term physical supply and demand,” the analysts wrote.

The counterargument is that pain is being felt by commodity producers, and supply will be constrained. “We’re in the process of a meaningful supply response across most commodities, but that takes time. This sets the stage for the next cyclical rally,” says Morris of Van Eck.

U.S. oil production may finally be set to decline after a relentless, multiyear rise due to the shale boom. Most oil production isn’t profitable at current prices. Global oil demand, meanwhile, is estimated to have risen this year by more than a million barrels a day owing to lower prices. Morris is encouraged that most commodities are below what he calls their sustaining cost, which reflects operating expenses and capital investment.

The integrated oil companies are the largest and most defensive energy investments because their commodity exposure is balanced by other businesses, including refining and chemicals, that tend to benefit from lower energy prices. But sharply lower oil prices are overwhelming other factors.

That has served to push dividend yields to levels rarely seen relative to the overall market. ExxonMobil yields 3.7%; Chevron, 5%; Royal Dutch Shell, 6.4%; and BP (BP), 6.7%. The S&P 500 yields just 2%.

Dividends paid by the majors could be vulnerable to reductions -- with the probable exception of industry leader ExxonMobil -- if current energy prices persist. The integrated companies aren’t currently generating sufficient free cash flow to support them.

Barron’s has written frequently about commodities and energy stocks in the past nine months. We had a well-timed article early this year (“Big Oil Stocks Are Still Too Pricey,” Feb. 16), when the integrated stocks were 10% to 30% above current levels, but we were wrong with a bullish article on commodity exchange-traded funds last fall (“Commodities: Buy When the World Is Selling,” Nov. 3) and a bullish cover story last winter (“Five Oil Stocks to Buy Now,” Dec. 22).

THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS to play energy and other commodities (see tables below). They include the major energy stocks; U.S. exploration specialists like Anadarko Petroleum (APC) and EOG Resources (EOG); Canadian oil sands producers such asSuncor Energy (SU); diversified global miners like BHP Billiton (BHP); and now-hated gold miners such as Barrick Gold (ABX), Newmont Mining (NEM), and Goldcorp (GG).

Investors also can buy ETFs tied to equity and commodity indexes. There’s the Energy Select Sector SPDR (XLE), which owns the energy stocks in the S&P 500 index, and theMarket Vectors Gold Miners ETF (GDX), which holds the leading gold producers. Open-end equity funds include Vanguard Energy (VGELX), run mostly by Wellington Management, and Van Eck Global Hard Assets (GHAAX). There also are resource-oriented equity closed-end funds like Adams Natural Resources (PEO) and BlackRock Resources & Commodities Strategy Trust (BCX), which trade at double-digit discounts to their net asset value.

The largest ETF in the group is the SPDR Gold Trust (GLD), whose assets, at $23 billion, are down 70% from their 2011 peak, reflecting investor redemptions and the weak gold price. The PowerShares DB Commodity Index fund (DBC) is one of several ETFs keyed off commodity indexes. The energy-heavy PowerShares ETF is off 16% this year, to $15, and is at its lowest price since its inception in 2006. Investors who want direct exposure to energy can buy the U.S. Oil fund (USO), which has fallen 27% this year, to $15, or U.S. Natural Gas fund (UNG), now around $13.

THE BULL CASE on the integrated companies is that they’re now investing heavily in long-lived projects, such as gigantic liquefied natural-gas facilities, which will have useful lives of 20 years or more. That capital, now unproductive, is weighing on returns but ultimately will yield paybacks despite weakness in oil and global LNG, which usually is linked to oil prices.

“The oil majors have between 30% and 40% of the capital on their balance sheets tied up in projects that aren’t producing revenues,” says Matthew Quigley, an analyst with Pzena Investment Management in New York. “When these projects start up in the next three years, we expect them to be accretive to cash flow and return on capital independent of the energy price.”

Pzena holds Exxon, BP, and Royal Dutch. “Exxon stands to benefit from a prolonged oil-price decline because of its relatively unleveraged balance sheet and its ability to acquire attractive assets at a discount,” he says. Pzena’s firm called Royal Dutch a “compelling investment opportunity” in a recent report, noting it is “poised for a surge in cash flow and improved returns as a recent wave of capital spending comes on-line.”

Chevron isn’t covering its dividend from free cash. Reflecting this, it passed on a dividend increase earlier this year and has eliminated its stock-buyback program.

Morgan Stanley analyst Evan Calio, who has argued that the major oil companies need to change their business models to address falling production and rein in capital expenditures, projects that Chevron won’t come close to covering its dividend in 2016, based on an assumption of $60 Brent crude, the international benchmark.

Chevron shares, however, may be near a bottom. They yield 5%, and the company still is projecting a 20% rise in energy output by 2017 as new projects come on-stream. Management also sees moderating capital expenditures. All this should ease pressure on the dividend.

Exxon’s second-quarter earnings of $1 a share were about a dime below the consensus. With its triple-A-rated balance sheet, Exxon is the only oil major repurchasing stock, but its buyback program continues to get scaled back, dropping to a projected $500 million in the current quarter from $1 billion. This underscores the unfortunate tendency of big oil companies to repurchase stock when earnings are strong and stock prices are high, and cut back or eliminate buybacks when stock prices are low and earnings depressed.

CALIO PREFERS WELL-RUN U.S. independents like Anadarko over the major integrated oils, because the independents have been more aggressive in cost reduction and therefore are making themselves more competitive in a world of low oil prices. The independents are achieving 20% to 30% reductions in drilling costs while the majors are lucky to be getting 10%. “Being an independent makes these companies feel the stress of commodity prices more palpably,” he says. U.S. shale oil producers have some of the lowest production costs in the world.

Anadarko, for instance, is drilling double the number of wells in the Wattenberg region of Colorado with the same number of rigs as a year ago. Calio calls Anadarko a “best-in-class operator” in both offshore drilling and shale formations in the U.S. Its shares are down 8% this year, to $76. Anadarko, like other exploration-and-production companies, looks rich based on adjusted earnings, which were just a penny in the latest quarter, but more reasonable based on cash flow and asset value. The company owns a stake in two limited partnerships it created -- Western Gas Equity Partners (WGP) and Western Gas Partners (WES) -- that is worth about $25 a share. Anadarko has long been rumored to be a potential takeover target for Exxon, which doesn’t have scale in U.S. shale.

EOG Resources “has the best suite of onshore assets” with holdings in two of the best oil-producing regions, the Bakken in North Dakota and the Eagle Ford in Texas, says Jeff Hales, a portfolio manager with Alignvest Capital Management in Toronto. EOG was early into both regions and controls some of the best acreage.

Suncor is the largest Canadian integrated energy company and the biggest producer of crude in Alberta’s oil-sands region. It also has sizable refining operations that balance its crude business. Suncor’s recent earnings release cheered investors and prompted a 12% rally in its shares, to $28. JPMorgan analyst Phil Gresh wrote that the earnings handily beat Street estimates as the company “raised production guidance, cut capex, increased the dividend, and reinstituted a $500 million share buyback.” Suncor’s operating costs are low at about 30 Canadian dollars ($23) a barrel, giving it staying power with its long-lived reserves. The stock yields 3%.

GOLD-MINING STOCKS have been crushed, with the Market Vectors Gold Miners ETF -- whose largest holdings are Goldcorp and Newmont Mining -- down 27% in 2015 and 80% from a 2011 high. Former industry leader Barrick, at $7, is off almost 90% from its 2011 peak and is back where it stood in the early 1990s, when it was a much smaller company and gold stood at a third of the current price of $1,100 an ounce. The stocks have underperformed the metal in recent years, reflecting dubious capital allocation, resource nationalism in the developing world, and a preference of many investors for the metal or gold ETFs.

“Investors are shell-shocked,” says John Bridges, the precious-metals analyst at JPMorgan. “We’ve lost the generalist investors.” Most holders are specialists such as gold funds, which have been seeing redemptions.

One negative: Unlike other commodities, gold is seldom consumed. The above-ground supply of the metal is estimated at 170,000 metric tons, or six billion ounces, and new production adds 1.5% a year to the total. As a result, the price, which is still above the all-in cost of production, could fall further.

Still, the amount of new gold pales in comparison with the amount of money being printed by global central banks.

Bridges favors Goldcorp and says the company has “gone for quality over quantity” with low-cost mines mainly in Canada and Mexico. It is known as a “growth gold,” with production rising 40% in the latest quarter. He carries an Overweight rating on the stock and a $25 price target, 92% above the current quote of $13. Barrick is a turnaround story, as it sells mines to cut debt and lower operating expenses. Under a new CEO, Barrick is being run in a more entrepreneurial fashion with fewer layers of management. It may have the most leverage to higher gold prices among the major miners.

From energy to gold, prices are down across the board -- and so are the stocks. Now may be a good time for investors to get in.

----------------------------

Barron's Recap: Time to Buy Commodities

Barron's Recap: Time to Buy Commodities
Related BDX
US Stock Futures Flat Ahead Of Jobless Claims
Becton, Dickinson Posts Upbeat Q3 Earnings, Lifts Outlook
Company News for August 07, 2015 - Corporate Summary(Zacks)
Related CAT
World Tour: Australia's Service Economy & Commodities
International Truck To Introduce New Line Of Premium Vocational Trucks As Navistar, Caterpillar Conclude Severe Service Truck Agreement
3.3% To 5% Yields For Top 10 Dow Dividend Dogs As Of August 5 (Seeking Alpha)

This weekend in Barron's online: the case for jumping into commodities now, the inaugural Income Investing Roundtable, as well as the prospects for Caterpillar, Becton Dickinson, Hertz, PICO and more.

Cover Story

"Time to Buy Commodities" by Andrew Bary.

The harsh sell-off in oil, gold and other commodities has begun to look like capitulation, says this week's cover story in Barron's. So now is a good time to add beaten-down commodities back to a core portfolio. See which analysts are calling a bottom and which remain cautious. And see where the opportunities are, as well as how six funds and six exchange traded funds can help investors build a position in this oversold sector.

See also: Berkshire Hathaway Reported To Engage In Its Biggest Deal Ever For Precision Castparts

Feature Stories

In "Income Hunters: Where to Invest When Rates Rise" by Amey Stone, the four members of Barron's inaugural Income Investing Roundtable discuss their strategies for bonds, real estate investment trusts (REITs), master limited partnerships (MLPs), preferreds and dividend-paying stocks.

"The Cat Will Snap Back" by Jack Hough takes a look at how Caterpillar Inc. CAT 0.22% has used the mining and oil drilling downturns to prep for the rebound -- which could begin next year. See why Barron's thinks the shares could reach $90.

Lawrence C. Strauss's "A Bigger Becton Dickinson Looks Like a Buy" suggests that shares ofBecton, Dickinson and Co. BDX 0.85% could post healthy gains over the next two years, helped by the its acquisition of medical-equipment maker CareFusion.

Litman Gregory has been long known for its ability to choose top-notch money managers to manage portions of its mutual funds, says "Managing the Managers" by Sarah Max. Its newest fund focuses on alternative strategies.

In Leslie P. Norton's "Hertz Shares Could Offer a Nice Ride," see why Uber is no threat as Hertz Global Holdings Inc HTZ 2.45% cuts costs, improves fleet management and spins out or sells noncore assets. Could it be worth almost twice its current stock price?

See "PICO Holdings Boasts Lots of Liquid Assets," in which David Englander takes a look at how the sale of the sluggish PICO Holdings Inc PICO 1.15% canola-processing business is highlighting the attractiveness of the company's other assets.

An army of "zombie funds" are stalking Wall Street, according to Penta article "Private Equity: Beware of Zombie Funds." With private equity valuations again hitting historic peaks, it is time to reflect on the excesses of the last go-around.

"Reforming Medicare and Medicaid" is an editorial commentary by Thomas G. Donlan that says U.S. health care offers unpalatable options: too much government, too much individual responsibility or too much spending.

Follow-up article "Walt Disney's Prospects Are Bright, Despite Cable Weakness" indicates thatWalt Disney Co DIS 0.74% shares could rise 50 percent after the recent sell-off, but also that a big drop in the share price Zillow Group Inc Z 1.95% should not tempt buyers.

In Barron's Asia: "ComfortDelGro Has Got Your Ticket to Ride" by Daniel Shane makes the case that Singapore's blue-chip transport stock is just the ticket, with the bus, taxi and car rental company's expansion abroad and its nationalization back home.

See also: The Historical Correlation Between Biotech Stocks And Interest Rates

----------------------------

Posted by 쁘레드

미국같이 넓은 곳은 cable TV를 통해서 모든 방송이 배포되었는데, 요즘 세상에 누가 cable TV를 돈주고 볼까요. 그런데 cable TV회사들이 internet망도 잡고 있다는건 함은정. 그러니까 아직까지 안망하고 있었지요. 이중에서 망할회사와 더 잘 나갈 회사로 나뉠거라고 생각.

 

When Wall Street Meets Cord Cutters, Investors Lose $60 Billion

Disney's disappointing results triggered a two-day slump in media and entertainment stoc

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-06/when-wall-street-meets-cord-cutters-investors-lose-60-billion





Posted by 쁘레드