Monday, October 22, 2012

Inflation & its Causes - Is the central government simply printing money to fund its brainless schemes?

In my previous blog, I have detailed out how the common man undergoes tremendous suffering due to persistently high inflation. Now I will try to present a case on why Inflation has been relatively high in the UPA regime.



We can clearly see that Inflation has been stubbornly high in UPA regime. The inflation during the last decade has been obtained from World bank database as I did in my previous blog.
Inflation is primarily caused by two kinds of shocks, supply side shocks and demand side shocks. In simple economic terms, Price is determined by the balance between supply and demand for a product. Hence prices rise when a) Demand for a product increases (eg: Roses on Valentine's Day) or b) Supply for the product drastically reduces (eg: Food grains during a drought)

Now let us analyse, What is the primary cause for Inflation for the past 7/8 years in India. Is it due to supply side effects or demand side effects?
Lets look at the supply side first. If supply side was truly the cause for the prolonged period of high inflation. Then a drastic fall in production and supply of a basket of important products would have been the main cause for such an event. But was there any event in the last 7/8 years that would suggest such as shock?? No, though rising oil prices could be classified to fall in the category of a supply side shock to the Indian economy, it could at the most explain 20/30% of the rise in inflation rates. At the same time food inflation has been in double digits for most of the time period, but there are no supply side events to explain the same. Barring the drought in 2008, India has recorded bumper crops year on year. In fact food grain production has increased by annual rate of 3.8% or cumulatively by 25% in the period between 2005 and 2011. This comes as a surprise, if the food grain production has increased and that too with bumper crops, grains were stored in the open ground due to lack of storage space, why has the food inflation been stubbornly high. Clearly supply side economics cannot explain the causes for high inflation.

Hence we can clearly state that inflation has to be driven by demand side economics. But first let me explain on how macro-economic fundamentals are actually responsible for inflation. The main culprit for inflation is persistently high current account deficits run by the central government.
We can clearly see that inflation seems to be inversely correlated with current account surplus, the more the deficit in an year, higher has been inflation in that year. In the year between 2001 to 2004, central government maintained a current account surplus and the inflation in the same period was well below 5%, Compare that, to the period between 2005 to 2010, deficits have progressively increased from -1.2% in 2005 to -3.1% in 2010, inflation has correspondingly increased from 6.1% to 8.9% in 2010. Clearly there seems to be a relation between current account deficits and inflation.

Now let me explain how, current account deficit creates inflation. I will explain the concept in simpler terms without using economic jargon's and technicalities. Current account deficit is the difference between what the government spends and what it earns. A current account deficit implies that government is spending more than what it earns and a surplus means that the government spending is well within what it earns.

If the government is spending more than what it earns, how does it bridge the gap. The government like any profligate individual, borrows money to cover the gap. In case of central government, it borrows from the public through a variety of mechanisms but primarily by issuing government bonds and selling it to PSU banks and other investors. But there is also one important buyer for government bonds and that is RBI. RBI is the lender of the last resort and also regularly buys and supports government bonds. If you are wondering how RBI  buys vast amounts of government bonds, well the answer is simple, it prints the money needed to buy the bond. Hence RBI finances the government by simple mechanism of printing more money. Though the actual mechanism of how government goes on about doing this is not quite simple. In fact, RBI need not print any extra money, but can achieve this by changing certain monetary policy mechanisms.

The government has utilized this extra money mainly for increasing the subsidy doled out to its electoral vote banks. Subsidy as share of total expense increased from 45% in 2004 to 60% in 2010. In naive sense, government has resorted to giving free money to people. The implication of this is very straight forward, as the money that people have increases, the demand for goods and services increases. Hence the rising dole outs increased the money supply to the common man, thus increasing the demand for all kinds of products and goods. Hence this clearly corroborates, how the present high inflation is purely demand side phenomenon driven by excessive spending by the central government.

If we need further proof for the same, foreign exchange market is clear indicator for the value of a currency. If the government increases the money supply, the value of the currency vis a vis other currency depreciates. The value of US dollar stood at INR 45 in 2004, while the value of US dollar stands at INR 52-53 today. The depreciation in the value of rupee w.r.t US dollar is a clear indicator of increased money supply.

Hence UPA government's excessive splurging in order to further it's own selfish interest of getting the "Prince" elected as PM and in pursuing pseudo socialistic policies has brazenly increased the money supply. By doling out money to garner votes, it has created a perception of creating wealth, while in reality UPA's macro-economic mismanagement has destroyed the wealth of majority of the people and only a few cronies have enriched themselves in last 8 years, all in the name of serving Aam Aadmi.




Sunday, October 14, 2012

Can economics affect Indian election results - an analytical perspective


It is common knowledge in India, that elections are decided by more important factors of caste, regional and other identity based parameters. Does the state of the economy really matter when an ordinary voter is deciding on whom to vote?
The link between the economic performance of the government and the electoral performance of the ruling and opposition parties is a highly researched subject in the West, but till now the answer to the relation between elections and economics is still ambiguous in nature. But there is enough research literature to suggest that on a stand alone basis there is a high correlation between Real per capita GDP (RCGDP) growth rates and vote share of political parties.
Two papers with regard to the Indian context also hint at the existence of a similar correlation in India. A paper by Arvind Virmani (July 2004, ICRIER) on the 2004 National elections and another paper by Poonam Gupta and Arvind Panagariya (Columbia Program on Indian Economic Policies) on the 2009 National Elections do suggest that a part of anti and pro incumbency swings can be attributed to RCGDP growth rates.
Carrying on this interpretation, I have here tried to analyse how the present economic downturn in India will affect the fortunes of the ruling party.

I will elaborate on how I have calculated the relative swings that will manifest, when the elections are held in 2014.
The basic premise is that, electoral swings can be correlated with the relative swing in RCGDP growth rates during the incumbents reign in power.

Let us begin our analysis with the results of  the 2004 national elections. The weighted average RCGDP growth rate stands to be 4.10% for the period 1994-98 and 2.96% for the period 1999-2003. Hence the change in RCGDP growth rate is -1.14%. The electoral swings in 2004 national elections are given below,
 
NDA Swing-3.76%
UPA Swing7.10%
BJP Swing-3.39%
Congress Swing0.88%

Similarly, if we analyse the results of the 2009 national elections, the average RCGDP growth rates for the period 2004-2008 is 7.37%. The change in RCGDP turns out to be +4.40%. The electoral swings in 2009 national elections are given below,

NDA Swing-4.88%
UPA Swing3.96%
BJP Swing-3.36%
Congress Swing2.02%

We can clearly see that there is a correlation between the change in RCGDP growth rates and the electoral swings.

Now, let us forecast the possible electoral swings, when the national elections are held in 2014. I have utilized the latest IMF and World bank forecasts for the GDP growth rates in 2012 and 2013.
Year20122013
GDP Growth Forecast5%6%

The Weighted average RCGDP growth rate for the period 2009-13 comes out to be 5.16%. This is a decline of -2.2% as compared to that of the previous period average of 7.37%.
If we were to forecast the probable swings based on these numbers, they turn out to be,
NDA Swing1.68%
UPA Swing-6.53%
BJP Swing2.44%
Congress Swing-7.25%

(I have skipped on how these numbers have been calculated, but they are based on simple mathematical ratio analysis)

The actual vote shares turn out to be
BJP 20.33%
Congress22.60%
NDA 26.85%
UPA30.62%

The recent India Today Mood of the Nation  opinion poll suggests similiar vote shares and electoral swings.

NDA Vote Share27.50%
UPA Vote Share30.30%
NDA Swing1.80%
UPA Swing-5.40%
Source: India Today

The accuracy of this mathematical model's forecast seems to be decent based on the opinion polls results. Even if the quantum of the changes turns out to be different in 2014, we can safely say, that economic factors do matter in Indian elections.

Now consider, if the economy continues to go downhill, and the GDP forecasts turns out to be optimistic. Then the reverse electoral swing faced by this government will truly be historic in nature. Time for the government to wake up.

1998200320082013
Weighted Avg RCGDP growth Rates4.1%3.0%7.4%5.4%
Change-1.1%+4.4%-2.0%
NDA Swing-3.8%-4.9%+1.7%
UPA Swing+7.1%+4.0%-6.5%
BJP Swing-3.4%-3.4%+2.4%
Congress Swing+0.9%+2.0%-7.2%

Site say's it all

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Inflation: The Real scam on the salaried and the deposit holder


The most important parameter of an economy that a common man senses is the inflation rate of the economy. Ask any household what is the one thing they worry about from a macro economic perspective, they would reply that it is inflation. But as with everything else the UPA led central government performance on tackling inflation has been dismal.
Source: World Bank
Inflation is a very corrosive element that slowly chips away real wealth from the population. Inflation affects almost the majority of the population and only a few really gain from high inflation. But two set of people are really affected badly by persistent high inflation, they are a) Salaried, b) Deposit holders. Now, of course Inflation affects traders and businessmen but since they play on the margins of their products and services, they can relatively better adjust to high inflation levels with losing out in terms of real wealth.

Effect on Salaried Class

Let me explain how Inflation corrodes the purchasing power of salaried class. Let us take the case of typical IT employee who has just graduated from an engineering college. His typical annual salary would be around the range of 200,000 INR to 300,000 INR. Let us take as an illustrative example take two brothers who have graduated from the same college and landed up with similar jobs. But the elder brother graduated in 2009 and the younger in 2012. Now if the starting salaries in nominal terms have remained the same at 300,000 INR annually. Then it might appear that they are receiving similar wages but in fact the younger brother is being under paid in real terms. This is because the due to inflation, prices of majority of commodities would have increased and hence the purchasing power of 1 Rupee would be lesser in 2012 as compared to 2009.
To find out how much exactly, we need to discount the salaries to a common year, let us take 2009 as the base year. Then their salaries in terms of 2009 value stands to be
Person
Salary
Inflation adjusted salary (Base:2009)
Elder brother
300,000
300,000
Younger Brother
300,000
207,348
These numbers have been calculated using the inflation rates that persisted in India between 2009 and 2012. The relative drop in wages of the younger brother is whopping -31%. Hence we can clearly see that Inflation has robbed the younger brother’s purchasing power by ~31%. Thus in real terms his wages have actually been reduced and he is being underpaid as compared to his elder brother. In simpler words, if on 2009 the elder brother could buy 3000 Kgs of tomatoes priced at INR 100 per Kg, the younger brother would find that he could buy only ~2000 Kgs of tomatoes with the same salary, as the price of tomatoes have risen 44% cumulatively. This is exactly how inflation corrodes purchasing power of salaried people. Hence the present UPA government has been the real bane for salaried class. It has economically exploited their earnings ability and in real terms has made them poorer than what they were in the beginning of the UPA term. The cumulative drop in purchasing power during the entire term of UPA I & II of a regular private sector salaried employee turns out to be a whopping 51%. So effectively, the central government has halved the income earning capacity of regular Indians in its eight years of mismanagement of the economy.

Effect on Deposit holders

Every bank deposit holder earns interest on his deposit. This interest is to compensate him for two factors i) to compensate him for the loss of value of money over time due to inflation and ii) the other to compensate him for partaking his money now and receiving it at a later time. The nominal interest rate, hence is equal to the sum of inflation rate over the period and the real interest rate for the same period.
Rn = I + Rr
But ordinary deposit holders are not aware of this fact. They primarily are taken by the returns offered by the nominal interest rate, while in reality they should be worrying about the real interest rate their deposits are earning.

Real Interest Rate Rr = Nominal Interest Rate Rn – Inflation rate I
Let us look at what depositors have really earned in the eight years of UPA government.

 Source: RBI, World Bank
In the above figure, I have plotted the real interest rates for 1-3, 3-5 & >5 year deposit rates derived from the Nominal interest rates in the respective years. I have also mentioned the average Real interest rates during the NDA, UPA I and UPA II periods.
Average
Cumulative

NDA
UPAI
UPAII
NDA
UPAI
UPAII
1-3yrs
3.9%
-1.9%
-1.2%
21%
-9%
-4%
3-5yrs
4.9%
-1.5%
-1.1%
27%
-7%
-3%
>5yrs
4.8%
-1.5%
-0.9%
26%
-7%
-3%
We can clearly see that the real interest rates, in the entire UPA tenure have been negative, while in the NDA regime, it was positive. The implication of this is that, if you had deposited INR 1, 00,000 in 1999, at the end of 2004, you would have earned INR 1,27,000 during the NDA regime. On the other hand, if you had deposited INR 1,00,000 in 2004, today the real value of the deposit would have been INR 90,000. In other words you would have suffered a loss of INR 10,000 (10% of the value of the initial deposit) during the eight years of UPA I&II rule. The contrast is stark, during the NDA regime, wealth is created while during the UPA regime, wealth is systematically destroyed.
I have obtained the total deposits in banks and other financial institutions during the period 2004-12. 

INR Bn 
2004-05  
2005-06  
2006-07  
2007-08  
2008-09  
2009-10  
2010-11  
2011-12  
Demand
2870
4074
4776
5784
5887
7180
7229
7049
Term
15959
18931
23421
28620
35351
41134
48658
56250
Total
18829
23005
28197
34404
41238
48314
55886
63299

Source: RBI
Calculating the interest loss on these deposits based on the 1 year term deposit rates and prevailing Inflation rates, the cumulative loss on deposit holder in the UPA regimes comes out to be INR 3, 80,213 Crores. The loss in UPA I stand out to be INR 2, 67, 796 Crores and in UPA II, INR 1, 12, 417 Crores. This loss is bigger than the INR 1, 17, 000 Crores presumptive losses in 2G. Sadly no one seems to bother about this. The irony of the whole affair is that this loss on deposit holders is real, in terms of their wealth and income capacity while the loss in 2G and Coal-gate are nominal.
Hence the mismanagement the economy has really eroded the wealth of common citizen. Whatever the finance minister says, ordinary citizens have not gained from the so called economic growth witnessed in India. On the contrary, ordinary citizens have been at the receiving end of this corrupt and maligned government, whose sole purpose is to loot the wealth of the Nation through various scams and monetary dole outs to win elections. The loan waiver scheme is a prime example, where it solved nothing but only ensured UPA’s return to power. Hopefully people wake up, and rid themselves of this corrupt regime.