Ichimoku Kinko Hyo is a purpose-built trend trading charting system that has been successfully used in nearly every tradeable market. It is unique in many ways, but its primary strength is its use of multiple data points to give the trader a deeper, more comprehensive view into price action. This deeper view, and the fact that Ichimoku is a very visual system, enables the trader to quickly discern and filter "at a glance" the lowprobability trading setups from those of higher probability.
FXデイトレード投資法
-thumb-512x251.gif)
2009年11月アーカイブ
The US economy grew less than previously thought in the third quarter, while home prices and consumer confidence crept higher, signalling a slow but steady emergence from the recession.
US gross domestic product grew at an adjusted annual rate of 2.8 per cent, the commerce department said on Tuesday, down from a previously estimated expansion of 3.5 per cent, but still breaking a dire stretch of four straight quarters of contraction.
The revision was in line with economists' estimates, reflecting weaker consumption, a rise in imports and slimmer non-residential investment. Consumer spending grew by 2.9 per cent, down from the 3.4 per cent that was originally reported.
FT.com
Why China resists foreign demands to revalue its currency
PRESIDENT Barack Obama, on his first visit to China this week, urged the government to allow its currency to rise. President Hu Jintao politely chose to ignore him. In recent weeks Jean-Claude Trichet, the president of the European Central Bank, and Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, have also called for a stronger yuan. But China will adjust its currency only when it sees fit, not in response to foreign pressure.
China allowed the yuan to rise by 21% against the dollar in the three years to July 2008, but since then it has more or less kept the rate fixed. As a result, the yuan's trade-weighted value has been dragged down this year by the sickly dollar, while many other currencies have soared. Since March the Brazilian real and the South Korean won have gained 42% and 36% respectively against the yuan, seriously eroding those countries' competitiveness.
Speculation about a change in China's currency policy increased in the week before Mr Obama's visit, after the People's Bank of China tweaked the usual wording in its quarterly monetary-policy report. It dropped a phrase about keeping the yuan "basically stable" and added that foreign-exchange policy will take into account "international capital flows and changes in major currencies". But exchange-rate policy is decided by the State Council, not the central bank. And many policymakers, notably in the Ministry of Commerce, do not favour a revaluation right now.
Indeed, Chinese officials have become bolder in standing up to Washington. "We don't think that it's good for the world economic recovery, and it is also unfair, that you ask others to appreciate while you depreciate your own currency," said a spokesman for the Ministry of Commerce on November 16th. The previous day Liu Mingkang, China's chief banking regulator, blasted Washington for its low interest rates and for the falling dollar, which, he claimed, was encouraging a dollar carry trade and global asset-price bubbles. He strangely ignored the fact that China's own overly lax monetary policy, partly the result of its fixed exchange rate, is fuelling bubbles in shares and property.
Foreigners argue that a stronger yuan would not only help reduce global imbalances, such as America's trade deficit, but would also benefit China. It would help China regain control of its monetary policy. By pegging to the dollar, it is, in effect, importing America's monetary policy, which is too loose for China's fast growing economy. A stronger yuan would also help rebalance China's economy, making it less dependent on exports, putting future growth on a more sustainable path.
If a stronger exchange rate is in China's own interest, why does it resist? Beijing rejects the accusation that its exchange-rate policy has given it an unfair advantage. It is true that other emerging-market currencies have risen sharply this year, but this ignores the full picture. Last year China held its currency steady against the dollar throughout the global financial crisis, while others tumbled. Since the start of 2008, the yuan has actually risen against every currency except the yen.
Beijing also argues that it has done a lot to help global rebalancing. Thanks to its monetary and fiscal stimulus, domestic demand has contributed an incredible 12 percentage points to GDP growth this year, while net exports subtracted almost four percentage points. Its current-account surplus has almost halved to around 6% of GDP from 11% in 2007. Chinese policymakers accept that the yuan needs to appreciate over the longer term, but say now is the wrong time, because exports are still falling, by 14% over the past 12 months.
Another reason for hesitation is that the theory that revaluing the yuan will allow Beijing to tighten its monetary policy is too simplistic. China's experience since 2005 shows that a gradual rise encourages investors to bet on further appreciation; hot-money inflows then swell domestic liquidity. A large one-off increase might work, as it would stem expectations of a further rise. But the sort of increase required--perhaps 25%--is politically unacceptable because it would put many exporters out of business overnight.
Some Chinese economists warn that the benefits to America from yuan revaluation are much exaggerated. In particular, a stronger yuan would not significantly reduce America's trade deficit. There is little overlap between American and Chinese production, so American goods cannot replace Chinese imports. Instead, consumers would simply end up paying more for imports either from China or other producers, such as Vietnam. This would be like imposing a tax on American consumers.
These arguments help explain why China is dragging its feet. Nevertheless, in the long run, a stronger yuan would benefit China's economy--and the world's--by helping shift growth from investment and exports towards consumption. It would boost consumers' purchasing power and squeeze corporate profits, which have accounted for most of the increase in China's excessive domestic saving in recent years. China will probably allow the yuan to start rising again early next year. This will not be the result of foreign lobbying--indeed, China is more likely to change its policy if foreign policymakers shut up. But by early next year China's exports should be growing again, its year-on-year GDP growth could be close to 10%, and its inflation rate will have turned positive. The arguments in favour of revaluation will then loom much larger.
Economist.com
Heiken-ashi Zero-lag Tema
Heiken-ashi Zero-lag Tema is Reliable Crossovers
Parameters :
iPerioda- first ZeroLag TEMA period (if <= 1 will not be shown on the chart)
iPeriodb - second ZeroLag TEMA period (if <= 1 will not be shown on the chart)
iPricea - first ZeroLag TEMA price type
iPriceb - second ZeroLag TEMA price type
price types :
0 - close
1 - open
2 - high
3 - low
4 - median (high+low)/2
5 - typical (high+low+close)/3
6 - weighted (high+low+close+close)/4
7 - Heiken-Ashi
Thanks Great work.
FXiGoR-(T_S_R) very effective Trend Slope Retracement system
The 2 slope lines with tomato color and dodger blue: gives us a picture on the big overall trend. Not nescassery that we trade according this trend. But if they are in same direction with the aqua and blue line the better or the more lickely we have a profitable trade.
The 2 Slope direction Lines (aqua and blue): gives us the trend that ONLY we trade accordingly. If these lines are aqua, we ONLY take long trades. If they are blue we ONLY take short trades. The steeper the angle of these lines the better. The steeper the angel of these lines the stronger the trend. We do not trade if these lines are more or less flat. We want to see them going up nicely or going down nicely.
The Signal line (green and red): If we take short positions this line has to be red. If we take long positions this line has to be green.On the smaller time frames this line wil trigger our exits.
The execute line (yellow and magenta): This is the line that will trigger our entrys. On the higher time frames it will also trigger our exits.
小泉政権の目玉だった郵政民営化の流れを、民主党政権は"逆向き"に大きく舵を切った。政府は10月20日、郵政民営化見直しをするための「郵政改革の基本方針」を閣議決定した。これは、郵便事業にとどまらず、貯金や簡易保険など金融サービスも全国一律の提供を義務付けるほか、郵便局ネットワークを地域の行政サービス拠点として活用することが盛り込まれたものとなっている。さらに日本郵政の社長だった西川善文氏を辞任に追い込み、代わりに起用したのが、こともあろうに元官僚の斎藤次郎・元大蔵事務次官（73歳）である。こうした動きを見て、民主党は「何を考えているのか」と問い詰めたくなるのはわたしだけではないだろう。
「天下りではない」と否定する民主党、14年経ったらよいのか？
斎藤氏を日本郵政の社長に据えたのは小沢人事であろう。斎藤氏は小沢幹事長とは「刎頸の交わり」というべき親しい仲である。二人はこれまでに水面下でいろいろ意見交換をしてきたのだろう。突然登場したにもかかわらず、記者会見で、斎藤氏は郵政問題についていろいろ考えを述べていたのがその証拠だ。官僚出身（だから「悪い」というわけではないが）の斎藤氏が日本郵政の社長に就いたことに国民が納得したかどうかは、本人の適性とは別の問題として考えなくてはいけない。何しろ民主党は、自民党政権時代に官僚の天下りを大々的に批判してきたのだから。2008年に日銀総裁を選ぶときのやりとりを記憶している読者も少なくないだろう。あのとき官僚出身（元財務事務次官）の武藤敏郎氏を打ち出した自民党に食ってかかり、最後まで認めなかったのは民主党ではないか。衆議院では武藤氏が認められたが、参議院では民主党の反対多数で否決され、ねじれ国会の弊害が話題になったものだ。結局、副総裁として認められていた白川方明氏が総裁に就任することになったわけである。ところがその民主党が今回、郵政のトップとして官僚出身の斎藤氏を連れてきた。それどころか、経営陣や取締役にもこれでもか、というくらいの官僚出身者を任命している。当然野党になった自民党は仕返しとばかりに「これは天下りではないか。あなた方がさんざん批判していた天下り、根絶すると断言してきた天下りを、自ら行うのはおかしくはないか」と問い詰めた。自民党がこんな批判をすること自体が「語るに落ちる」という気もするが、指摘そのものは妥当だろう。それに対して民主党は「官僚を辞めて14年も経過している人だから、天下りには当たらない」と、"斬新"な言い訳をした。皮肉を込めていうなら、民主党は「官僚を辞めてから14年以上経過したものは、天下りには含まれない」という新しい定義をしたのだ。これで、今後14年過ぎた場合は、天下晴れて堂々と天下りができる時代が到来したことになる。国民の大きな批判にさらされながら天下りを続けてきた官僚にとって、この新しい定義はさぞかし素晴らしい福音として響いたことだろう。
再国営化するゆうちょ銀行は「国債消化機関」になる
民主党が斎藤氏を連れてきた本当の理由は、おそらく政府が無駄遣いできるシステムを作り上げることだろう。これは「カネはいくらでもある。ドンドン使え」の亀井大臣にとっては首尾一貫した任命である、と見ることができる。その点で斎藤氏の任命は思いつきや偶然ではなく、必然であったのだ。前回の当連載でも言及したが、2010年度予算が概算要求段階で95兆円に膨らんだ。これはまさに無駄遣いの積み重ねだが、その巨費が何を意味するかと言えば、膨大な赤字国債の発行が不可避ということだ。そして、それを解消するために必要だったのが、「国債消化機関としてのゆうちょ銀行」だったのだろう。実際、民営化以前の郵便貯金というものは、まさに国債消化機関と呼ぶべきものであったのだから、その以前の姿を復活させようというわけである。民主党は、郵政改革の見直しは「民営化を否定するものではない」と言う。だが、民営化した金融機関に国債の買い取りを強制するわけにはいかないし、国の御用機関になることもできない。株主利益と相反することになるし、経営の自由を奪うからである。民主党は自由主義経済のイロハを知らないわけではあるまい。実際、今回の見直しは、経営形態の見直しではなく、民営化そのものの見直し、と考えるべきであり、方向性としては再国営化以外の何ものでもない。民主党は郵政民営化の流れに対して、歯車を逆に回す完全なるリバースギアをかけたのである。
前任の西川氏は、曲がりなりにも民営化の意図に沿って事業を進めてきた。例えば国債についても、資金の20％程度は国債以外のものを使って運用しようとやり始めていたのである。それは民営化するなら正しい方向だと評価できる。ところが今回の斎藤氏の就任で、西川氏の努力は水の泡となり、少なくとも追加的に50兆円、60兆円くらいの国債はゆうちょ銀行が買わされることになるだろう。藤井財務大臣は「赤字国債発行50兆円」と思わせる発言をしている。確かに、ゆうちょ銀行を国つまり政府が自由に動かし、運用をすべて国債にすれば実現可能な数字ではある。しかしそれは、たとえて言えば昔話の「舌切り雀」が食べてしまった糊（のり）のようなもので、後から世にも恐ろしい舌切り婆が出てくるのだ。今回の人事はそれを予感させるものではないか。
大騒ぎされた「かんぽの宿」問題は実は「ちょっとした失策」に過ぎない
郵政については、以前から細かい問題が大きく取り上げられてきた。例えばそれは、膨大な予算をかけて全国に作った「かんぽの宿」が二束三文で売却されることになった件だ。当時、日本郵政社長だった西川氏はマスコミから大きく叩かれたし、また自民党政権時代の鳩山邦夫総務大臣に強く批判されたが、結局、売却には至っていない。この「事件」はあまりに大きく取り上げられたので、大問題だと認識している読者も少なくないだろう。しかし、冷静に考えてもらいたい。郵政が抱えるさまざまな問題について全体の流れから見れば、かんぽの宿売却問題など「ちょっとした失策」といったレベルのことなのである。鳩山総務大臣（当時）は「あんな高い値段をかけて作ったものを、こんなに安く売るなんて」と批判したが、しかし数多くの宿泊施設の中で、二つ三つ非常に安く売却されるものがあったということが一体どれほどの問題だと言うのだろう。念のため申し添えておくが、わたしは税金の無駄遣いを是としているのではない。しかし今の不動産業界の実情を見てほしい。100億円かけて作った不動産が5億円で売られるというような例は、ザラにある。かんぽの宿の価格は、キャッシュフローベースできちんと評価できる能力のある人が計算して、それが正しい評価であれば文句を言う筋合いのものではない。入札参加者を巡って若干公平を欠いた点があったのかもしれないが、マイナーな問題に過ぎないのである。
節操もなく巨額の財政赤字と累積赤字を垂れ流してきた
郵政問題の本質は、運用能力を持たない国家が国民からお金を集めてしまうことにある。「国の補償があるから安心」といって国民のお金をかき集め、そのお金でそのまま国債を買って、借金による国家運営を支えてきた。運用能力どころか、貸し出しのための審査能力にも欠けるのだから、民間企業に融資するようなことができるはずもない。ゆうちょ銀行は民営化以前から運用・審査の経験がないし、法人貸出事業部などもない金融機関だった。西川氏はそれに挑戦し、法人貸出事業部も作ろうと努めてきた。しかし、斎藤氏の就任で民営化が逆戻りとなれば、もう期待はできない。「ゆうちょ銀行は（審査の要らない）国債を買うための機関」となり果てるだろう。つまり、郵政民営化の「時計の針」は10年以上前に戻ることになる。結局、ゆうちょ銀行のような都合の良い仕掛けがあるから、日本という国は節操なく巨額の財政赤字と累積赤字を垂れ流してきたと言える。民営化とはそれを食い止めるためのものだったはずだ。ところがこれが昔の状態に戻ることになれば、国民にとって極めてゆゆしき問題なのである。
経済が縮小しているとき、国営化と福祉に舵を切るのは正しくない
もともと小泉改革で郵政三事業の民営化を打ち出したわけであるが、私は当時からこの方向性は間違っている、と主張してきたし、本連載でも何度かその意見は述べてきた。それは、今回の議論以前の問題として、郵政三事業は歴史的意義を終わっており、民営化するのではなく、廃止すべきだ、という主張である。郵貯や簡保のような機能は今では銀行や農協などが全国津々浦々にあり、郵便局がなくなっても困るものではない。問題は大赤字の郵便事業であるが、これは今までの仕掛けでは儲かっている金融事業が赤字を補填する形で辻褄を合わせてきた。しかし、そもそもこの事業が赤字になったのは民間企業が台頭してきて、価格を下げたからである。つまり郵便事業そのものは、政府がやり続けるのではなく民間へ売却し、価格とサービスを競わせるのが国としての正しい決断であったはずだ。だから小泉内閣の郵政事業の民営化そのものが間違った諮問であり、それを民営化して一般株主が所有する、となれば、後戻りできなくなる。それが誤りである、というのが私の主張であった。今回の見直しはその限りにおいては「間に合って良かった」ということになるが、問題はその趣旨と背景である。つまり、存在理由のなくなった三事業を、まとめて国の御用機関とし、そういう恣意的な組織体を「民営化する（すなわち一般株主に所有させる）」と主張する民主党の感覚である。まともに思考している人々の言うこととは考えられない。マスコミもその言葉の持つ矛盾と恐ろしさに対して無口である。全体主義的な亀井大臣のやり方に手をこまねいているだけなのかも知れないが、ここは議論しなくてはいけない肝心の時である。民主党はJALに関しても実質国営化の方向を示しているし、厚生労働問題でもかなり重装備の福祉国家の方向に進もうとしている。経済のパイが拡大し、パイが大きくなっているときには、余力を福祉に回す、というのは正しいやり方だと思うが、経済も縮小し、税収も著しく減少しているときに国営化と福祉に舵を切る、というのはどう見ても正しい選択とは思えない。国民がそうしたことを承知の上で民主党を選択したのかどうか、再び問われる日もそう遠くないだろう。
金融機関は「産業の血液循環剤」として機能すべきだ
当面は大型の予算を組み、赤字国債を買い取る仕事をゆうちょ銀行に持たせ、見掛け上は辻褄が合う。しかし、対GDPで累積公的債務が200％にもなるのを目前にして、誰かが国債は本当に大丈夫か？と叫んだ途端に暴落する、という危機が刻一刻と迫っている。長期国債の利回りがジリジリ上がっているのは、その何よりの証拠だし、また他の先進国を見回しても日本のレベルまで国債を乱発しているところはない。普通の国ではいくら国債を出しても、買い手がいないからである。最悪なのは、日本の失われた15年、すなわち金融危機に際して公的資金を入れるなり、金融庁主導の合併吸収を繰り返してきた日本の金融機関が様変わりしていることである。つまり、国債の問題がゆうちょ銀行だけのことではない点だ。日本の銀行は「産業の血液循環剤」という銀行本来の機能を失い、いつの間にか、ゆうちょ銀行と同様に国債を買うための機関になってしまった。かつての都市銀行は、法人融資と個人融資に力を入れていたのだが、今はどうだ。ほとんどがそういう努力を放棄し、個人に対しては消費者金融を通じて高い金利で貸し出すのが主で、法人に対しては系列には甘く、中小企業にはほとんど貸し出さない。一方、金融庁の審査が甘くなるファンドを通じて法人へ貸し出す、などの異常なやり方が普通になってしまった。
この間、預金に対しては0.1～0.4％などという超低金利であったので、銀行はリスクの高い貸し出しをしなくてもひたすら国債を買えば、利ざやが１％以上稼げる。金利を3％払わなくてはいけない、となれば4％で借りてくれるところを必死に探さなくてはいけない。しかし、国債を買っていれば十分さやが抜ける、という現状では無理して貸し出すよりも、安易に国債を買った方が何かと都合がいいわけだ。かくして銀行はその三大業務（決済、預金、貸し出し）の中で、決済には（ATMや送金などで見られるように）高いフィーを取り、貸し出しを渋りながら、預金の多くで単純に国債を買うだけの怠慢な経営になってしまったのである。国の資本が注入された銀行は国ににらまれることを極端に恐れている。したがって巨大都市銀行は、国にとって都合の良いゆうちょ銀行と同じ機能に陥ってしまっているのだ。しかし、金融機関が「産業の血液循環剤」としてしっかり機能してくれないと、経済は停滞したままになる。そうなれば日本の将来は暗い。斎藤氏就任のニュースを一企業の社長交代劇だと単純に片付けるわけにはいかない。このまま進めば、ゆうちょ銀行も他の銀行も、すべては国策に沿って国債買い取り機構となり、「西部戦線異状なし」状態で何の不都合もなく財政赤字を消化する装置が出来上がる。そして国債の格付けが低下し、どこかで矛盾が露呈して、この良くできた仕掛けが破綻することになる。日本がアルゼンチンになる日である。
出所 大前研一の「産業突然死｣時代の人生論
nikkeibp.co.jp
RSI 14 and a deviation of 20 (bollinger band, volatility) and EMA5 all in one indicator window
THE 2009 LEGATUM PROSPERITY INDEX
Top 10 countries
- Finland
- Switzerland
- Sweden
- Denmark
- Norway
- Australia
- Canada
- Netherlands
- United States
- New Zealand
America and China need each other, but they are a long way from trusting each other, says James Miles
"OUR future history will be more determined by our position on the Pacific facing China than by our position on the Atlantic facing Europe," said the American president as he contemplated the extraordinary commercial opportunities that were opening up in Asia. More than a hundred years after Theodore Roosevelt made this prediction, American leaders are again looking across the Pacific to determine their own country's future, and that of the rest of the world. Rather later than Roosevelt expected, China has become an inescapable part of it.
Back in 1905, America was the rising power. Britain, then ruler of the waves, was worrying about losing its supremacy to the upstart. Now it is America that looks uneasily on the rise of a potential challenger. A shared cultural and political heritage helped America to eclipse British power without bloodshed, but the rise of Germany and Japan precipitated global wars. President Barack Obama faces a China that is growing richer and stronger while remaining tenaciously authoritarian. Its rise will be far more nettlesome than that of his own country a century ago.
With America's economy in tatters and China's still growing fast (albeit not as fast as before last year's financial crisis), many politicians and intellectuals in both China and America feel that the balance of power is shifting more rapidly in China's favour. Few expect the turning point to be as imminent as it was for America in 1905. But recent talk of a "G2" hints at a remarkable shift in the two countries' relative strengths: they are now seen as near-equals whose co-operation is vital to solving the world's problems, from finance to climate change and nuclear proliferation.
Choose your weapons
Next month Mr Obama will make his first ever visit to China. He and his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao (pictured above) stress the need for co-operation and avoid playing up their simmering trade disputes, fearful of what failure to co-operate could mean. On October 1st China offered a stunning display of the hard edge of its rising power as it paraded its fast-growing military arsenal through Beijing.
The financial crisis has sharpened fears of what Americans often see as another potential threat. China has become the world's biggest lender to America through its purchase of American Treasury securities, which in theory would allow it to wreck the American economy. These fears ignore the value-destroying (and, for China's leaders, politically hugely embarrassing) effect that a sell-off of American debt would have on China's dollar reserves. This special report will explain why China will continue to lend to America, and why the yuan is unlikely to become a reserve currency soon.
When Lawrence Summers was president of Harvard University (he is now Mr Obama's chief economic adviser), he once referred to a "balance of financial terror" between America and its foreign creditors, principally China and Japan. That was in 2004, when Japan's holdings were more than four times the size of China's. By September 2008 China had taken the lead. China Daily, an official English-language newspaper, said in July that China's massive holdings of US Treasuries meant it could break the dollar's reserve-currency status any time. But it also noted that in effect this was a "foreign-exchange version of the cold-war stalemate based on 'mutually assured destruction'".
China is exploring the rubble of the global economy in hopes of accelerating its own rise. Some Chinese commentators point to the example of the Soviet Union, which exploited Western economic disarray during the Depression to acquire industrial technology from desperate Western sellers. China has long chafed at controls imposed by America on high-technology exports that could be used for military purposes. It sees America's plight as a cue to push for the lifting of such barriers and for Chinese companies to look actively for buying opportunities among America's high-technology industries.
The economic crisis briefly slowed the rapid growth, from a small base, of China's outbound direct investment. Stephen Green of Standard Chartered predicts that this year it could reach about the same level as in 2008 (nearly $56 billion, which was more than twice as much as the year before). Some Americans worry about China's FDI, just as they once mistakenly did about Japan's buying sprees, but many will welcome the stability and employment that it provides.
China may have growing financial muscle, but it still lags far behind as a technological innovator and creator of global brands. This special report will argue that the United States may have to get used to a bigger Chinese presence on its own soil, including some of its most hallowed turf, such as the car industry. A Chinese man may even get to the moon before another American. But talk of a G2 is highly misleading. By any measure, China's power is still dwarfed by America's.
Authoritarian though China remains, the two countries' economic philosophies are much closer than they used to be. As Yan Xuetong of Tsinghua University puts it, socialism with Chinese characteristics (as the Chinese call their brand of communism) is looking increasingly like capitalism with American characteristics. In Mr Yan's view, China's and America's common interest in dealing with the financial crisis will draw them closer together strategically too. Global economic integration, he argues with a hint of resentment, has made China "more willing than before to accept America's dominance".
The China that many American business and political leaders see is one that appears to support the status quo and is keen to engage peacefully with the outside world. But there is another side to the country. Nationalism is a powerful, growing and potentially disruptive force. Many Chinese--even among those who were educated in America--are suspicious of American intentions and resentful of American power. They are easily persuaded that the West, led by the United States, wants to block China's rise.
This year marks the 30th anniversary of the restoration of diplomatic ties between America and China, which proved a dramatic turning point in the cold war. Between the communist victory in 1949 and President Richard Nixon's historic visit to China in 1972 there had been as little contact between the two countries as there is between America and North Korea today. But the eventual disappearance of the two countries' common enemy, the Soviet Union, raised new questions in both countries about why these two ideological rivals should be friends. Mutual economic benefit emerged as a winning answer. More recently, both sides have been trying to reinforce the relationship by stressing that they have a host of new common enemies, from global epidemics to terrorism.
But it is a relationship fraught with contradictions. A senior American official says that some of his country's dealings with China are like those with the European Union; others resemble those with the old Soviet Union, "depending on what part of the bureaucracy you are dealing with".
Cold-war parallels are most obvious in the military arena. China's military build-up in the past decade has been as spectacular as its economic growth, catalysed by the ever problematic issue of Taiwan, the biggest thorn in the Sino-American relationship. There are growing worries in Washington, DC, that China's military power could challenge America's wider military dominance in the region. China insists there is nothing to worry about. But even if its leadership has no plans to displace American power in Asia, this special report will say that America is right to fret that this could change.
Politically, China is heading for a particularly unsettled period as preparations gather pace for sweeping leadership changes in 2012 and 2013. Mr Hu and the prime minister, Wen Jiabao, will be among many senior politicians due to retire. As America moves towards its own presidential elections in 2012, its domestic politics will complicate matters. Taiwan too will hold presidential polls in 2012 in which China-sceptic politicians will fight to regain power.
Triple hazard
This political uncertainty in all three countries simultaneously will be a big challenge for the relationship between China and America. All three will still be grappling with the aftermath of the global financial crisis. Urban Chinese may be feeling relaxed right now, but there could be trouble ahead. Yu Yongding, a former adviser to China's central bank, says wasteful spending on things like unnecessary infrastructure projects (which is not uncommon in China) could eventually drain the country's fiscal strength and leave it with "no more drivers for growth". In recent weeks even Chinese leaders have begun to sound the occasional note of caution about the stability of China's recovery.
This special report will argue that the next few years could be troubled ones for the bilateral relationship. China, far more than an economically challenged America, is roiled by social tensions. Protests are on the rise, corruption is rampant, crime is surging. The leadership is fearful of its own citizens. Mr Obama is dealing with a China that is at risk of overestimating its strength relative to America's. Its frailties--social, political and economic--could eventually imperil both its own stability and its dealings with the outside world.
Economist.com
New figures suggest that America has at last moved out of recession
THE American government reported on Thursday October 29th that gross domestic product rose at an annualised rate of 3.5% in the third quarter compared with the second. This was the first increase since the second quarter of 2008. It backs up other evidence that the recession ended in the third quarter or just before, though the official decision, by the National Bureau of Economic Research, a group of academic economists, is still some way off. Robert Gordon, a member of this group, is confident that the recession, which began in December 2007, ended in June. But at 18 months that would still make it the longest since 1933.
Consumers are sceptical. Their confidence fell in October, according to the Conference Board, a research group. A poll for The Economist by YouGov found that 35% of respondents think the economy is getting worse; just 28% think it is getting better. Unemployment is still rising, and even a White House adviser, Christina Romer, predicts it will remain "severely elevated" throughout next year.
A lot of third-quarter growth was the result of temporary government stimulus. Consumer spending grew by 3.4%, the best since early 2007, largely because people were buying new cars in July and August with federal "cash for clunkers". Sales have since fallen back. Residential construction leapt by 23.4%, the first advance since the end of 2005, helped by an $8,000 tax credit for buyers of new homes. But new-home sales dipped by 3.6% in September, as the deadline to qualify for the credit passed.
Voters are more worried about the economy than anything else, YouGov found, and they disapprove of Barack Obama's handling of it by a margin of 47% to 43%. That has spurred Mr Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress to explore new stimulus measures. One would extend unemployment-insurance benefits by 14-20 weeks for some workers. Another would extend a subsidy for health insurance for those who lose it along with their jobs. These measures make sense; the recipients badly need the money and will probably spend every penny.
A more dubious proposal would prolong the new-home tax credit until next April and, reportedly, offer a smaller $6,500 credit to people who already own a home. Also, Mr Obama wants to send an additional $250 each to Social Security beneficiaries because they will get no cost-of-living increase next year. This is daft: benefits are flat because inflation is negative, so real benefits have actually risen.
Calls for a new round of stimulus look premature. Temporary effects aside, growth in the third quarter reflects the dynamics of a genuine recovery. Exports and equipment investment both rose. Companies ran down inventories at a slower pace, a contributor to growth that should continue for at least two more quarters. Construction is so low that, even with sales so depressed, the inventory of unsold new homes has hit a 27-year low. This suggests that construction should expand further. And Mr Gordon notes that employment is still falling because, following the pattern of recent recessions, firms have slashed costs deeply so that productivity has grown even as sales have fallen. Profits seem to have turned around already and Mr Gordon predicts employment will follow by the first quarter of 2010.
More stimulus now would add to an already dangerously high deficit. There may be greater need for it in a year's time, when the inventory boost will be waning and this year's $787 billion stimulus plan is about to expire. Even then, more stimulus should be considered only if a deficit-reduction plan is in place. In the meantime, monetary policy can assume the burden of safeguarding growth.
The markets expect the Federal Reserve to start raising interest rates by May, and there is speculation that at its policy meeting on November 3rd and 4th it will water down its current commitment to near-zero rates for "an extended period". Given downward pressure on inflation, the Fed could instead stay on hold all next year, providing a safety cushion for the economy and taking some pressure off the battered federal budget.
Economist.com
