Wealth, an illusion?

An SMSF trustee perspective...
Those providing the resources through paying taxes, earning profits and efficiently producing goods and services see their capital being squandered or devalued. After all, why work when someone else can do it for you. Why resort to free market competition when you can lobby for assistance?

Unfortunately, decades of slowly increasing government intervention and paternal policies, which allow government control of money and credit, will not be permitted to recede easily. One must therefore ponder the potential actions of policymakers and the response these actions are likely to elicit from those impacted, as it is certain they will dominate the landscape for years to come.

Industries such as steel and aluminium are suffering from Chinese policies, which encourage new capacity to be built until profits disappear totally. They are proving successful in this profit elimination. Banking thrives on volume growth dictated by the extent to which central banks make credit available. Airlines are subsidised and manipulated the world over in the name of tourism.

Regulators set prices for utilities and telecommunications companies while governments allow toll roads to shut and prevent alternate routes to allow high tolls and upfront payments to governments. Land prices are influenced by government regulation on land release and house prices are distorted by credit availability, first home owners grants and negative gearing policies.

Lately we have artificial carbon tax policies making us uncompetitive versus countries without them and handouts back to those impacted by them. The idea is no-one feels the pain, how could this possible work.

So how should one invest in an environment of such intervention? Probably the first step is to ascertain where intervention has caused prices to divorce most significantly from fundamentals. There is little doubt that bond markets should be the centre of attention in this regard.

Regulatory reforms are forcing banks and insurers to become buyers of sovereign bonds, central banks using their own balance sheets in an effort to manipulate prices and the europeans desperately trying to create artificial buyers of government bonds to salvage insolvent governments, this has caused fundamental buyers to disappear, crowding instead into the corporate bond market. There has been a steady additional supply in this area, as corporates seek to dis-intermediate banks and secure longer-term funding, this process has prevented prices from reaching the ridiculous levels seen in sovereign bond markets.

Investors, quite rationally, are responding to a consistently reinforced message that they will not be offered the same protection as bondholders. Consistent outflows are the order of the day, and when any pool of assets sees the pool of money seeking to buy them contract, they fall.

What about gold?
Valuing gold is almost impossible. It has value only in so far as others accept as it having value in exchange. In this function it is obviously similar to money, but the fundamental issue with gold, is that it does not "generate" wealth.

If investors lose faith in the ability for wealth to be sustained with available assets, they will seek refuge elsewhere. Gold is looking like one of these "elsewheres".  But many see the gold as being manipulated just like the bond market, to ensure it does not become a "currency" outside of sovereign control.

Another outcome of tougher economic times which is causing many investors consternation is the strategy and remuneration in the face of mediocre operating performance.

When businesses generate unacceptably low returns on capital for extended periods, management and employees must take steps to improve inadequate performance. Similarly, the concept of resetting remuneration hurdles for highly paid management personnel that have cost shareholders large amounts of money through ill-considered acquisitions. When shareholder losses are permanent, financial costs for those responsible should not be fleeting.

Australia, via its forced superannuation "tax" has accumulated significant wealth, the concern is that governments are seeing this wealth as a means to support government policy. The continual tinkering with superannuation is growing, to a point where one must wonder at the ability for any trustee to make any long term decisions.

"Suggestions that the Federal Government intends tapping the superannuation industry and, particularly self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs), to bolster its promised Budget surplus, have raised the ire of the Self-Managed Super Fund Professionals' Association (SPAA)."

To date, investors have seen intervention in the form of monetary policy and stimulus as the panacea for improving market performance. As Mitt Romney noted in a CBS interview in relation to US stimulus, it "did not put Americans back to work, did not raise our home values, did not bring jobs back to this country or encourage small businesses to open their doors".

Within Australia, as individuals we have reduced debt, and moved our wealth to as low a rik as possible. See the effect of the Government bank guarantee, it decimated CMT's within Australia. During this time governments have accumulated significant debt for the next 20 years in our names.

The only tangable result of the Australian stimulas, almost every school has a new "shed", and most homes have a solar power station or pink bats. Would like to see the ROI for these investments.

So where do we go from here?



Disclaimer The contents of this site should not be understood to be accounting, taxation or investment advice but rather as general product related educational information, the persoanl views of the author, that may or may not relate to your specific requirements.