Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

China Manufacturing PMI Contracts 4th Month, Employment Down 6th Month

Posted: 04 May 2014 09:35 PM PDT

The HSBC China Purchasing Managers' Index™ shows China Manufacturing PMI Contracts 4th Month.

Key Points

Output and new orders contract at slower rates
Staff numbers are cut for the sixth month in a row
Solid reduction in both input and output prices

Chinese manufacturers signalled a further deterioration in overall operating conditions during April. Both output and total new work declined over the month, albeit at weaker rates than those recorded in March. Fewer new orders led firms to cut their staffing levels at a modest pace, while purchasing activity fell for the third successive month. Meanwhile, both input costs and output charges fell markedly.

After adjusting for seasonal factors, the HSBC Purchasing Managers' Index™ (PMI™) – a composite indicator designed to provide a single-figure snapshot of operating conditions in the manufacturing economy – posted at 48.1 in April, down fractionally from the earlier flash reading of 48.3, and up from 48.0 in March.

This signalled the fourth successive monthly deterioration in the health of the sector. Production at Chinese manufacturers fell for the third consecutive month in April, though at a weaker pace than in March.

Weaker client demand was attributed by a number of survey respondents to deteriorating market conditions. Goods producers in China cut their staffing levels for the sixth month running in April, amid reports of company down-sizing policies which stemmed from lower production requirements. Moreover, the rate of job shedding accelerated from the previous month. Despite reduced workforce numbers, volumes of unfinished work fell for the third successive month in April. That said, the rate of backlog depletion was marginal.

China Manufacturing PMI 2004-Present

Note that China manufacturing has spent more time in contraction than expansion since Mid-2011. Those expecting China to lead a surge in global growth are mistaken.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Misrepresenting the Libertarian Position on Putin

Posted: 04 May 2014 11:34 AM PDT

Despite the complete failure of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, war-mongers and even self-proclaimed libertarians don't understand what is going on in the Ukraine, why it's none of our business, or even how the civil war in Ukraine started.

A friend sent me an article today from the site Conservatives for Liberty called Confused libertarians are Supporting Putin by Gabrielė Stakaitytė.

Supposedly the site is an "independent libertarian, free market and socially liberal campaign group".

It is difficult to judge a site on the basis of one article, but there is a difference between supporting Putin and saying Ukraine is essentially none of our business, the true libertarian position.

According to Gabrielė "From soap operas to ballet performances, the Russian government is doing everything to influence the cultural life of Eastern Europe, and to maintain a stranglehold on the mentality of the people."

Let's assume that is true. Here is an equally true statement "From soap operas to ballet performances, the EU is doing everything to influence the cultural life of all of Europe, and to maintain a stranglehold on the mentality of the people."

Here's another "The US is doing everything to everyone globally, and by military force where necessary, to maintain a hypocritical stranglehold on any country that dares go against the vision of the United States."

One can come up with all sorts of similar statements.

Just what did warmongers expect when the US broke promises and expanded NATO to the East? Did they expect Russia would sit back and do nothing? Did they want to start WW III?

The US fomented the overthrow of the last Ukrainian government and now does not like the result. Similarly, no one in their right mind is happy about the overthrow of the Shah of Iran decades ago, the lives lost in Vietnam, and the results of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Back to the point. This is not our battle. If those in Crimea want to join Russia, no one should care.

Gabrielė blasts the vote in Crimea.Was it rigged? Let's assume it was. Was it rigged to the point that an honest vote would have led to a different result. No it wasn't.

Gabrielė says "Another example of confused libertarians supporting Putin is calling the new Ukrainian government illegitimate, or even fascist, whatever that is supposed to mean. The Ukrainian government is no less legitimate than the first US government, having come to power after a popular revolution."

Good grief. Look at the irony! If the current Ukrainian government is no less legitimate than the first US government, one can say the exact same thing about Crimea!

By implication, if Gabrielė likes the result, the action is OK, if she doesn't, then it's not. That is essentially the hypocrisy of the US position in a nutshell.

I do not believe many libertarians are cheering Putin per se. Perhaps one can find a few self-proclaimed libertarians openly cheering Putin, but people can claim to be whatever they want, and to the point of blatant hypocrisy, Gabrielė does just that.

Finally, please note that Gabrielė offered no links or even quotes to support her claim. She asserts "confused libertarians support Putin". Can we have some examples please, something more than allegations?

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Home Refinance Calculator

Sunday, May 4, 2014

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

No comments:

Post a Comment