Pretty lame, isn’t it? I mean, pretty much everyone knows
that the price of food is already rising. It’s really quite a do-nothing
hypothesis when you think about it. “The price of food will rise”. Is that it?
Stating the obvious? Does that kind of statement make a guy some kind of
economic wizard? No. But I must say this, on the anniversary of Copernicus’
birthday: stating the obvious worked for him.
The reason why the simple statement “the price of food will
rise” is so important is not the statement itself. Saying “the earth rotates
around the sun” is not, in itself, earthshaking. It’s what follows thereafter.
All of a sudden the orbits of the inner and outer planets make sense. When you
see the obvious, sometimes other facts that are difficult to reconcile become
reconcilable.
The Price of Staples Will Rise
We all know that the price of food is rising, but we’re also
hearing about droughts causing crop losses in the US and now Russia is feelingthe pinch, too. With the world’s biggest corn producer and the world’s biggest
wheat producer putting out fewer crops, economists have already been able to
project that beef, for example, will likely be more expensive toward the middle
of this year due to the raising price of feed grain. With more droughts
happening lately, the pressure on staples will be constant, and while we can’t
necessarily say that the base price of staples will go up, it will fluctuate
higher and, on average, be more expensive. When this happens, the meat
downstream becomes more expensive by extension. Keep it in the back of your
mind now that Russia has shut its doors to grain exports – likely until June –
and many previously self-sufficient countries (I’m looking at you, China) are
no longer self-sufficient. India is another case where, while they appear to
have food under control, the per-person consumption of food calories is lower
than in many other food-importing countries and I fear that lowering these
calories-per-person is simply not something the Indian market can absorb.
Americans can stand to eat fewer calories. Indians may not be able to. Will
feed lots be profitable anymore if grain becomes too pricey? Perhaps there will
be a rise in grass-fed cattle, which will increase demand for range land.
Either way, the meat gets more costly and land gets more scarce. Mid-term result of grain no longer flowing from Russia? The Maghreb, one of the main importers of Russian grain, may have even more unrest to deal with. Watch Egypt.
Inflation Will Rise
The majority of the world spends the majority of its pay on
food. North Americans and Europeans are something of an anomaly that way. I’ve
already mentioned that inflation in China is on the rise, and when I left
China, inflation was high – until they changed the proportions of goods in the
grocery basket used to calculate inflation. In effect, inflation in China is a
shell game: they don’t want the official number to be too high, so they change
the make-up of the products it’s based on. The items they reduced in the basket:
food. Sadly for the central government, the people know what’s going on,
because they are spending most of their pay on just that. Salaries are going up
to cover food price increases. Workers would not go back to the factories after
the economic crisis for the same pay they worked for prior. Workers are
desperate for enough cash to pay for food – and I’ve already argued that food determines the base price of the workforce. If the cost of food goes up, the
cost of work goes up, and food-importing countries will be impacted more. This
is one place where the First World worker has the advantage: we can absorb a
price rise in food. Others cannot. In the long run, scarce food may start to
make us more competitive than we currently are.
Trade Imbalances Will Shift and Potentially Reverse
(eventually)
The Chinese have a long memory, and the Opium War is almost
a current event on the time scale of that ancient civilization. To oversimplify
the reasons China and England became embroiled in this one-sided conflict, we
can say that there was a massive trade imbalance between the two countries. In
effect, China grew tea and England bought it for gold. The natural problem
being that tea can keep growing forever and gold is finite. In order to reverse
the flow of bullion, England started assisting opium dealers in trading a
different plant product for precious metals. This made the Chinese angry, and
they started burning things. That gave the British the opportunity to go in and
blow things up, and make the Chinese take the opium – illegal or no. To sum up,
trade imbalances make people touchy. Currently, the Chinese hold a trade
imbalance against the US which – to a degree – works in both nations’ favour.
The Chinese are building an enormous pile of US dollars (not having learned
anything from the Opium War, I suppose), and the US gets cheap goods and an
endless supply of loans. Once food becomes more expensive, however, the flow of
those dollars will slow. This will not require gunboat diplomacy, drug running,
or any other kind of shenanigans. It will occur naturally as a consequence of
more expensive staples. While there will be volatility in the staples market as
the US and Russia have alternating bumper/poor crops (this hurts only the
farmers, though – everyone else is more or less unscathed, but farmers start
killing themselves when prices do this), eventually the average price of
staples will rise. China will be unable to increase its own internal staple
production to meet its needs due to overuse of chemicals, lack of groundwater,
and desertification. With the relaxing of restrictions on domicile imposed by
the hukou system, farmers will start moving to the city in droves. Who once
were productive farmers will become consumers in the food system, and leaving
large tracts of land to be turned into real estate deserts. I contend China’s
food production will never rise in a meaningful way unless a miracle happens
and they all of a sudden have a Green Leap Forward. Not bloody likely, but I
remain open to serendipity.
This means there are implications for Chinese productivity. Its
growth once predicated on cheap unskilled labour, the cost of hiring in China
will rise with the price of food. The same kind of production will become
untenable in China. Foreign investment – already seeking alternative places to
flow such as Vietnam and the Philippines – will threaten to dry up. What may
this mean? It may make China blink on monetary policy. One option would be to
allow the Yuan to float, the other option would be to unilaterally have the
Yuan to rise in value against the dollar. Trade imbalance is going to force
changes in monetary policy one way or the other, but this one thing I will say:
do not underestimate the power of the US dollar. While its value is more or
less based on the fact that it is the global fiat currency for petrol purchase
(and the reserve currency for many other international transactions), even in
an era of decreasing oil demand due to high price, the USD will retain value
because we’ll be buying grain with it – or at least the Chinese will be.
Will there be a grain war? A more exciting reporter than I
might say “maybe”. I say “no”. Will there be very boring high-level discussions
about monetary policy amongst the grand high mucky-mucks of the Chinese
Communist Party and Indian Cabinet? Yes. They may even get into heated
arguments. I know. Perish the thought. We live in such turbulent times.
And then There’s the Death and Famine
Oh yes, I forgot. The over billion people that live on
between one and two dollars a day will go hungry in droves. This will not have
an economic impact on you. I guess you can decide for yourself whether this issue
matters to you or not.
The Copernican Economic Shift
So once the economic shift begins, several bets are off. One
may be the direction in which trade imbalances begin to flow. Another will be
the ability of China to retain its growth in manufacturing centres. Will China
shift its monetary policy? Will arable land become a highly desirable asset class? I think there are strong chances of these things happening, if only
moderately, in the coming years. One thing I think is a certainty is the
increase in the cost of arable land due to interest not only from investors but
other states scrambling for the single most important strategic resource in any
nation’s arsenal: food. As the old yarn goes, “buy land – they ain’t making any
more of it”.
No comments:
Post a Comment