S’pore escaping recession?

Govt reiterates 1%-3% GDP forecast for 2012 after smaller contraction

SINGAPORE: Singapore says it may avoid a recession despite the weak global economic outlook, after data showed the economy contracted less than expected in the last quarter of 2011 despite persistent weakness in electronics.

“The first month of trade numbers, export numbers are quite good,” Thia Jang Ping, a director at the Ministry of Trade and Industry, told a news conference.

“It's still too early to call, but our near-term indicators do not suggest an imminent danger of Singapore slipping very badly into a recession in the first quarter,” he added.

The economy shrank 2.5% in the fourth quarter from the preceding period on an annualised and seasonally adjusted basis, data showed yesterday.

Slowdown: Singapore’s port is seen through the downtown business district. The island nation says its trade and non-oil domestic exports are expected to grow by 3% to 5% this year, down from a rise of 8% and 2.2%, respectively, in 2011. — AP

 

The GDP data was better than an advance flash estimate of a 2.9% contraction, but worse than the median estimate for a 2.3 % decline by economists polled by Reuters.



From a year earlier, gross domestic product grew 3.6%. Singapore stocks and currency weakened yesterday although that was in line with the regional trend, with sentiment hit by a another delay in cementing a bailout package for Greece.

Singapore expects its economy to grow by 1% to 3% in 2012, down from last year's revised expansion of 4.9%, although it warned of risks to the forecast.

Asia is suffering the effects of slowing demand in the West, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) last month warned that Europe's debt crisis could tip the world economy into recession.

A recession is often defined as two consecutive quarters of contraction, and Singapore, whose trade is three times GDP, tends to feel the chills from a deterioration in global economic conditions faster than most countries.

“Specifically, a disorderly sovereign default in the eurozone could precipitate a global financial crisis, while an escalation of geopolitical tension in the Middle East could trigger a global oil price shock,” Singapore's trade ministry said in a statement.

On Wednesday, South Korea said January exports fell 7% from a year ago in the biggest annual decline since October 2009, while Australia said its leading index of employment dropped in February in a sign that jobs growth could fall.

Singapore also said yesterday its trade and non-oil domestic exports were expected to grow by 3% to 5 % this year, down from a rise of 8% and 2.2%, respectively, in 2011. - Reuters

Malaysia's GDP Growth 5.1% in 2011, pretty okay?

Malaysia's growth beats consensus

By FINTAN NG fintan@thestar.com.my

PETALING JAYA: Malaysia's gross domestic product (GDP) expanded by 5.2% in the fourth quarter of 2011 despite the challenging external environment as domestic demand continued to support growth.

Bank Negara said in a press statement that full-year growth came in at 5.1% after expanding 7.2% in 2010 as domestic demand conditions remained favourable supported by both private and public sector spending.

The fourth-quarter GDP figures came in slightly higher than the 4.8% median estimate in a Bloomberg survey while the full-year growth was largely in line with a separate survey, where the median estimate was 5% and in line with official estimates of 5% to 5.5% growth.

“Domestic demand expanded by 10.5% during the quarter, driven by the continued expansion in household and business spending, and public sector expenditure,” the central bank said.

Private comsumption increased by 7.1% supported by favourable income growth while public consumption rose by 23.6% following higher expenditure on emoluments and supplies and services.

Gross fixed capital formation, which measures the net increase of fixed or physical assets, increased by 8.5% supported by continued expansion in capital spending by the private sector and the non-financial public enterprises.

“The federal government development expenditure during the quarter was mostly channelled into the transportation, trade and industry sectors,” the central bank said.

The services sector grew by 6.4% for the quarter (6.8% for the year), manufacturing expanded by 5.2% (4.5%), construction rose 6.4% (3.5%), agriculture expanded by 6.9% (5.6%) while the mining sector's pace of decline narrowed compared to the third quarter, falling by 3.3% and declining 5.7% for the year.

The headline inflation rate, as measured by the annual change in the consumer price index, declined to 3.2% in the fourth quarter with inflation in the transport category ower at 3.2% reflecting the absence of further adjustments on prices of RON95 petrol, diesel and LPG in the quarter.



“Inflation in the food and non-alcoholic beverages category, however, rose to 5.3% during the quarter, mainly due to higher prices in the fish and seafood subcategory,” Bank Negara said.

Economists said the latest data confirmed earlier reports of the country's growth being on a slower trend largely due to the drop in external demand as global growth slowed.

They said this trend would continue into the first half of this year before recovering gradually in the second half as conditions globally improved with more clarity on the issues surrounding the eurozone sovereign debt crisis.

CIMB Investment Bank Bhd economic research head Lee Heng Guie told StarBiz that the main drag to growth in the fourth quarter and the whole year was the volatile external environment which resulted in stagnant demand for consumer electronics.

He said domestic demand would continue to sustain the economy although there was “a slight let-up” in consumer spending. “The question is how sustainable is consumption going to be and this will depend on key drivers such as commodity prices and income,” Lee said, noting that the Malaysian Institute of Economic Research consumer sentiments index was trending down.

“In summary, we see quite uneven growth in the first half of this year before the economy picks up in the second half,” he said, expecting full-year GDP to come in at 3.8%.

AmResearch Sdn Bhd director of economic research Manokaran Mottain said the latest data showed that the “fear factor” was rising with households becoming more cautious about spending.

However, he was more sanguine compared to his peers where exports were concerned, pointing to the export growth in goods and services (where the current account suplus, although narrowing in the fourth quarter, stood at RM22bil for the year) but said the data showed the economy was geared to domestic activity with government handouts playing a crucial role in supporting consumption.

“Going forward, well-crafted domestic strategies and the timely rollout of the Economic Transformation Programme projects will now be more urgent as they will create multiplier effects especially in the services sector,” Manokaran said.

He added that the data clearly showed that the economy, while experiencing moderating growth, was not “falling off the cliff” with full-year growth in 2012 coming in at 5%. “The worst-case scenario is global growth dropping to below 3% and project implementation delays at home, which means growth of around 4%,” Manokaran said.

Meanwhile Affin Investment Bank Bhd chief economist Alan Tan said growth this year would still be affected despite signs of nascent recovery in the United States and the improvement in global purchasing managers' indices.

“For this year, the first half will still show signs of moderation in exports as consumer electronics demand slows down,” he said, adding that growth for the full year would still be a healthy 4% considering the challenges.

For Bank Negara statements click here

Malaysia should do pretty okay

Making a Point - By Jagdev Singh Sidhu

THE report card for the economy in 2011 is out and by all accounts, Malaysia did pretty okay.

With the official forecast of growth at between 5% to 5.5%, there was much scepticism throughout 2011 whether that could be achieved. Who can blame the tea-leave readers out there whose job is to forecast where the economy is heading?

There was so much external fear with Europe on the brink, America seeing greater economic trouble and China teetering on a bubble bursting that expectations were slashed, and on average far less than what the Government had predicted.

As it turns out, maybe after the gravity-defying performance in the third quarter where the gross domestic product (GDP) expanded by 5.8%, people began to say “hold on. Maybe things aren't so bleak.”

As it turns out, they were mostly right when the GDP data was released yesterday.

The economy expanded by 5.2% in the fourth quarter and for the whole year, growth was 5.1%. There are numbers where things could be better. Industrial production and export growth isn't the best.

 

But what drove the economy upwards was domestic demand, basically what the Government, people and companies spend and invest.

Domestic demand jumped 10.5% in the fourth quarter compared with 9% in the third. Capital investments surged 8.5% compared with 6.1% in the previous quarter and higher investments will mean more production, jobs and better economic strength.

The troubles of Europe might have lost its fear factor and America appears to be repairing itself steadily. There are reasons to be more optimistic but the official tune has turned, surprisingly, a little sour.

Bank Negara in its statement said; “Growth prospects, however, have become increasingly uncertain with the emergence of greater downside risks.”

The warning calls for more caution but there is still enough policy measures to keep domestic demand intact.

There are policies of putting cash in the hands of the people through direct cash handouts. There is a base effect from the consumption boom to worry about and whether that can continue into 2012.

But there are indicators out there to suggest domestic demand might still do well but maybe not at the same breakneck speed.

First, there is the stock market. Yes, people might say its not a perfect barometer of what an economy is doing but it does show there is confidence in how corporate Malaysia might be performing.

With direct investments abroad by Malaysian companies jumping to RM14.4bil in the third quarter from RM12.9bil previously, it shows Malaysian companies are taking advantage of growth opportunities outside Malaysia. That can point to higher profits and maybe salaries in the future.

The other is property. We might have been cautious last year about property prices falling off the cliff at some point in 2012 but there is no indication that might happen. Prices might soften but if we were to see our neighbours down south, it might not freeze the market.

For January, Singapore registered the highest sales of private homes in the past 14 months, despite increasing clamps on foreigners buying homes there.

With jobs steady and likely to increase with more investments being made, the stock market doing alright and property prices holding firm, these are ingredients that will allow people to continue spending.

If the Private Sector Retirement Age Bill gets passed, that should create more consumption by people whose earnings lifespan will increase by a further five years. The mass rapid transit system which is kicking off will also boost construction and the GDP.

Economists do wonder if the growth forecast of 5% to 6% for 2012 will be maintained given the risks and challenges. There might be a revision downwards in March but whatever the case, Malaysia like last year, should do pretty okay.

● Deputy news editor Jagdev Singh Sidhu is lapping up the Linsanity! Jeremy Lin's play for the New York Knicks has been a fantastic story. Hope that continues until he meets the Detroit Pistons. 

Aspiring nations gain more from Internet

By JO TIMBUONG
bytz@thestar.com.my

 

Manuel: "Malaysia derives a lot of income from exporting equipment that 

allows people to connect to and use the Internet." 

 

KUALA LUMPUR: Aspiring countries like Malaysia are gaining more from the Internet than developed nations.

The Web helps these countries improve gross domestic product (GDP), better their small and medium enterprises, and boost the creation of new jobs.

Going online helped Malaysian industries contribute 4.1% of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) in 2010, making Malaysia one of the 30 fastest growing countries in the world.

Some of the other aspiring countries are Argentina, Hungary, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Taiwan, Turkey and Vietnam.

They were part of an online study - titled Online and Upcoming: The Internet's Impact on Aspiring Countries - by researchers McKinsey & Co.

McKinsey defines aspiring countries as those that are developing but are at the cusp of becoming a developed nation.



The study found that the Internet contributed US$9.75bil (RM29.7bil) out of a total GDP of US$238bil (RM723bil) for the aspiring countries in 2010. This is far more than what was contributed in the United States and China.

Nimal Manuel, principal at McKinsey, said a big chunk of the GDP contribution in Malaysia came from the IT industry.

"Malaysia derives a lot of income from exporting equipment that allows people to connect to and use the Internet," he said.

"The country will also see significant growth in the value that domestic activity on the Internet delivers to the nation."

Manuel was giving a briefing on the economic impact of the Internet on Malaysia.

Booster

Besides contributing positively to the country's economy, the Internet also helped its small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to make gains.

Manuel said the SMEs in Malaysia and the other aspiring countries that took their businesses online gained over 6% more in revenue than those with only brick-and-mortar stores.

"Thanks to the Internet, these businesses were able to reach new customers in different geographic locations. They also enjoyed a 10% increase in productivity (after embracing technology)," he said.

According to him, this increase in productivity (due to better efficiencies) does not mean decreased job opportunities in the aspiring countries.

"Our study found that for every job lost, 3.2 new jobs were created because of the Internet. And in comparison, for every job lost in developed countries, only 1.6 new ones were created," he said.

These aspiring countries must not rest on their laurels; they should be making an effort to improve their Internet ecosystems.

Manuel said they need to ensure a high quality and secure infrastructure to better capture the value of the Internet.

The governments need secure servers, in addition to basic infrastructure, such as electricity supply, as well as quality fixed and mobile Internet services, he said.

In response to the recommendations, Datuk Mohamed Sharil Tarmizi, chairman of the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), said the Government is championing the quality of Internet services in Malaysia.

"This is an entry-point project under the Economic Transformation Plan, and that shows how serious the Government is on broadband services and issues," he added.

MCMC is the communications and multimedia industry regulator.

Putting finance to work

Tweet

 The financial sector must be transformed and serve the real economy

THINK ASIAN By ANDREW SHENG

FINANCE is a service industry, but in the past three decades it seems to have gone its own way.

The functions of the finance sector are to protect property rights for the real sector, improve resource allocation, reduce transaction costs, help manage risks and help discipline borrowers. Financial intermediaries are agents of the real sector. Bankers were traditionally among the most trusted members of the community because they looked after other peoples' money.

The divide between bankers and their customers (the real sector) is epitomised by a recent report which said that the mantra of a large British bank is about “increasing share of wallet of existing customers”. It recalls Woody Allen's joke that the job of his stockbroker was to manage his money until it was all gone. And despite what bankers say, a lot more would have gone between 2007 and 2009 without massive bailouts from the public purse.

The heart of the problem is the principal-agent relationship, where trust is everything. The real sector (the principal) trusts the finance sector to manage its savings, and the banks, as agents, have a fiduciary duty to their customers. Agency business is a big public utility because the intermediary does not take risks, which are those of his customers. All this changed when the drive for short-term profits pushed banks more and more into proprietary trading for their own profits. All this was in the name of capital efficiency, a misnomer for increasing leverage.

In the past 30 years, with growth in technology and financial innovation, finance morphed from a service agent to a self-serving principal that is larger than the real sector itself. The total size of financial assets (stock market capitalisation, debt market outstanding and bank assets, excluding derivatives) has grown dramatically from 108% of global GDP in 1980 to over 400% by 2009 . If the notional value of all derivative contracts were included, finance would be roughly 16 times the size of the global real sector, as measured by GDP. The agent now dwarfs the real sector in economic and, some say, political power.

Can finance be a perpetual profit machine that makes more money than the real sector? In the US, finance's share of total corporate profits grew from 10% in the early 1980s to 40% in 2006. Since wages and bonuses make up between 30% to 70% of financial sector costs, there are tremendous incentives to generate short-term profits at higher risks, particularly through leverage.



The key thrusts of the post-crisis reforms in the financial sector are - caps on leverage, strengthened capital and liquidity, more transparency in linking remuneration with risks, and a macro-prudential and counter-cyclical approach to systemic risks. What the current reforms have not addressed is the increasing concentration of the finance industry at the global level and increasing political power that may sow the seeds for another Too Big to Fail (TBTF) failure in the next crisis.

In 2008, the 25 largest banks in the world accounted for US$44.7 trillion in assets equivalent to 73% of global GDP and 42.7% of total global banking assets . In 1990, none of the top 25 banks had total assets larger than their “home” GDP. By 2008, there were seven , with more than half of the 25 banks having assets larger than 50% of their “home” GDP.

Post-crisis, the concentration level has increased as there were mergers with failed institutions. With this rate of growth and concentration, the largest global financial institutions simply outgrew the ability of their host nations and the global regulatory structure to underwrite and supervise them. Such concentration of wealth and power is a political issue, not a regulatory one.

Finance is not independent of the real sector, but interdependent upon the real sector. It is a pivotal amplifier of the underlying weaknesses in the real sector that led to the financial crisis over-consumption, over-leverage and bad governance. In the past 30 years, the finance sector has helped print money, encouraging its customers and itself (particularly through shadow banking) to take on more leverage in the search for yield. Instead of exercising discipline over borrowers and investors, it did not exercise discipline over its own leverage and risks.

Unfortunately, there was also supervisory failure. To bail out the financial sector from its own mistakes, advanced countries, already burdened by rising welfare expenses, have doubled their fiscal deficits to over 100% of GDP.

In spite of these trends, we should not demonise finance or blame the regulators, but examine the real structural and systemic issues facing the world and how finance should respond. The greatest opportunity for finance is the rise of the emerging markets.

An additional one billion in the working population and middle class over the next two to three decades will have more to spend and more to invest. At the same time, the world needs to address the massive stress on natural resources arising from new consumption, which is likely to be three times current levels. Ecologically, financially and politically, the present model of over-consumption funded by over-concentrated leverage is unsustainable.

Indeed, to replicate the existing unsustainable financial model in the emerging markets may invite a bigger global crisis.

Sustainable finance hinges on sustainable business and on a more inclusive, greener, sustainable environment.

Financial leaders need to address a world where consumption and investment will fundamentally change.

To arrive at a greener and more inclusive, sustainable world, there will be profound changes in lifestyles, with greener products, supply chains and distribution channels.

Social networking is changing consumer and investor feedback so that industry, including finance, will become more networked and more attuned to demographic and demand changes.

As community leaders, finance should lead that drive for a more inclusive, sustainable future.

The greatest transformation of the financial sector is less likely to be driven by regulation than by the enlightened self-interest of the financial community.

Only when trust is restored, when finance cannot thrive independently of the real sector, will we have sustainable finance.

The incentive issues are very clear. If financial engineers are paid far more than green engineers, will a green economy emerge first or asset bubbles?

■ Andrew Sheng is president of the Fung Global Institute.

Greece is bankrupt !

Tweet

WHAT ARE WE TO DO By TAN SRI LIN SEE-YAN

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. In the case of Greece, default by any other name just stinks! The plain truth: Greece is bankrupt. Greece's sovereign debt crisis deepens daily as the gap in reality widens between politically driven “in denial” views of European Union (EU) leadership and market-place views as reflected in 5-year Greek bonds trading at a yield close to 20%; Standard & Poor cutting Greece's rating to triple-C (the lowest credit rating ever); and highest premiums payable on CDS (credit default swaps, used as insurance to protect investors against defaults) on Greek debt. Probability of default by Greece over the next 5 years has jumped to 86%.

Today, a CDS will cost US$2mil annually to insure US$10mil debt over 5 years. Markets have indicated for some time Greece suffers from a condition of bankruptcy rather than a crisis of liquidity (i.e. cash-short).

This simply means Greece cannot survive without significant debt relief and restructuring, combined with an overhaul of the ways its government collects revenue and expends. In essence, Greece has 2 major problems: it has too much debt and it cannot grow. I am afraid more and more of EU will get contaminated.

Trouble in Greece: A Greek flag at the Akropolis in Athens. Millions of Greeks participated in a strike to oppose new heavy austerity measures. — EPA
 

The Greek illusion

Greece should not have been into the euro in the first place. It failed to join in 1999 because it did not meet fiscal criteria. When it did so in 2001, it was through phony budget numbers. As Twitter R. Cohen wrote: “Europe's bold monetary union required an Athenian imprimatur to be fully European. So everyone turned a blind eye.” But Greece has had an awful history. The 1912-13 war wrested northern Greece from Ottoman control. Then came the massive exchange of 1923 where 400,000 Muslims were forced from Greece to Turkey and 1.2 million Greek Orthodox Christians, from Turkey to Greece.

A military dictatorship followed in the 1930s; brutal German occupation in 1941-44; and a civil war in late 1940s. There was the rightist dictatorship of 1967-74, not to mention the on-going conflict with Turkey over Cyprus. In “Twice a Stranger”, B. Clark wrote of Greece as a society “where blood ties are far more important than loyalty to the state or to business partners.”

It would appear EU membership provided some balm to Greek wounds. It detoxifies history. So Greece took to the EU as a passport to live on the never-never. The bottom line: a monetary union among divergent economies without fiscal or political union support has no convincing historical precedent. For a while, the easy-money, easy-lifestyle allowed everyone to overlook peripheraleconomies like Greece from becoming uncompetitive with the euro (with no drachma to devalue) and not showing any signs of “converging” (closing the gulf between strong and weak nations within EU), but amassing unsustainable deficits and debt. Greece remains a nation suspicious of outsiders and a place where state structures command scant loyalty.

This does not abode well. We now see a Greece resentful of deep spending cuts, and of the sale of state assets meted out by technocrats from outside. They feel the poor and unemployed are paying for the errors of politicians, and a globalised system that punishes those left behind. Strikes and violence are a measure of a EU that now leaves most Greeks unmoved by the achievements of European integration.

Greece is insolvent

It is true a sovereign state, unlike a firm, has the power to tax. In theory, it can tax itself out of trouble. But there is a limit on how far it can tax before it becomes politically and socially unsustainable. Already, Greece has a debt/GDP ratio of 143% in 2010, rising to 150% this year. It is too high to convince creditors to continue lending.

In practice, the market expects Greece to reduce its debt ratio considerably before it can borrow again. This means it has to create a primary budget surplus (revenue less non-interest expenditure) in excess of 8% of GDP to be credit worthy again. Among advanced nations, none (except oil-rich Norway) has managed to attain a durable primary surplus exceeding 6% of GDP. Greece is insolvent.

This is a dire situation. Government bonds serve as a reference asset by setting the “riskless” rate of interest. So any doubts about its value can cause turmoil. Indeed, solvency of the Greek financial system is at risk. So are other European financial institutions. Equally vital is contagion with its sights set firmly on other debt-distressed nations notably Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Italy.

But it doesn't stop there. Top Europeans have warned contagion to EU members could spark off a crisis bigger than the Lehman Brothers collapse in Sept 2008. So, it is not difficult to understand the hard line taken by the European Central Bank (ECB) aimed primarily to protect European banks which need time to strengthen their capital base. For obvious reasons, it has rejected any sort of restructuring of debt raising the spectre of a chain reaction, and threatening to punish any restructuring (re-negotiation of the terms of maturing debt) by cutting banks' access to liquidity.

Moreover, credit rating agencies would deem any such action as a default (i.e. non-payment of due debt). With Greece insolvent, the EU has taken the narrow road of beefing up the financing for Greece (which can't refinance itself in the market), while using moral suasion to persuade private creditors to roll-over their bonds. It is buying breathing space.



More denial doesn't work just prolongs the agony. What's happening to Greece is distressful. Over the past 12 months: the number of unemployed rose by close to 40%; unemployment is above 16% among youths, it's a devastating 42%. IMF estimates showed its GDP contracted by 2% in 2009 and 4.5% in 2010 and will shrink by 3-4% this year.

Despite severe fiscal austerity, its budget deficit will improve only slowly: from -15.4% of GDP in 2009 to -9% in 2010 and -7% this year (and estimated at -6.2% in 2012). That's a long way to surplus! Greece has become so uncompetitive its current balance of payments deficit was -11% of GDP in 2009, -10% in 2010 and optimistically estimated at -8.2% this year (and at -7.2% in 2012). Truly, Greece is in “intensive-care” a solvency crisis, not just caught in a short-term cash crunch (yes, it also does not have cash to meet its next debt payment before July 15).

Even at today's low interest rates, Greece's government interest payments alone amounted to 6.7% of GDP, against 4.8% for Italy and considerably higher than all other major European nations and the United States (2.9%). Even Portugal's ratio is lower at 4.2%.

Political solution: slash and burn won't work

What Greece needs is deep economic reforms or fiscal transfers from the EU which help address deepening market concerns about sustainability of its huge debts. Without these, the crisis will simply be deferred.

The message is clear: Greece's debt load at Eureo 350 billion or 150% of its expected economic output this year, is simply too large for the EU troika's (plus ECB and IMF) strategy to succeed. Athens had accepted a package of Euro 110 billion of EU/IMF loans in May 2010. But it now needs a 2nd bailout of a similar size to meet financial obligations until end 2014 when it hopes to move seamlessly into the new ESM (European Stability Mechanism) bailout fund (which takes effect in 2013) to prop up fiscal miscreants.

Latest draw-down involves release of a vital Euro 12 billion very soon but carries a proviso that parliament passes on June 29 (which it did with a slim majority) Euro 28.6 billion in spending cuts and tax increases as well as Euro 50 billion from privatisation of state assets, in addition to continuing existing austerity policies.

That's not all. The new plan calls for private creditor's participation on a voluntary basis (meeting ECB's insistence to avoid even a hint of default) or “Vienna Plus”, a reference to the 2009 Vienna initiative where banks agreed to maintain their exposure to Eastern Europe.

For Greece, the brutal austerity plans call for enormous sacrifices; indeed, no end to their agonies. Today, the situation at Syntagma Square and in front of parliament is getting more strained, angry and confused, surrounded by riot police and clouds of teargas. The people are becoming frustrated at being always at the receiving end.

On the German side, however, voters are aghast at the prospect of a 2nd bail-out, which they regard as pouring good money after bad. Germans consider the Greek government as corrupt; its tax system operates on voluntarism; state railroad's payroll is 4 times larger than its ticket sales; many workers retire with full state pension at age 45; etc.

Be that as it may, the IMF in particular needs to learn from lessons of the Asian currency crisis, where it has since acknowledged its prescriptions at the time made matters worse in Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines, in the name of unleashing market forces to force adjustment and ignoring the adverse social and political impact of their policies.

I see them repeating the same mistakes again in Greece, paying too little heed to human suffering and adverse social impact to protect private sector creditors and pushing the end-game at breakneck pace. Germany's insistence to get private creditors share in the burden is a good soft step forward. Even so, the IMF seems too harsh.

Few options left

The fact remains Greece was outstandingly egregious in its fiscal profligacy and its lack of prudent economic governance. But Greece was not the only European economy that was living beyond its means and being pumped withill-conceived loans mainly from German and French banks. Greece is today insolvent. The EU's solution addresses only immediate funding needs, without offering a credible long-term resolution. It's just a stopgap. Frankly, Greece'spolicy options are limited: either a default, partial haircut (creditors taking losses on their investments), or a guarantee on Greek debt. Bear in mind Germany remains the biggest beneficiary of the euro-zone experiment. In 2010,

Germany recorded a US$185bil balance of payments surplus or 5.6% of GDP. No doubt, the EU has since pledged to stabilise the euro-zone economy, vowing to starve off a Greek default, and the ECB has categorically ruled out debt restructuring. That leaves Greece with only deflation, a lot of it.

As I see it, this will not work. First, in a democratic Greece, people are clearly not in the mood for deeper spending cuts and more austerity. Policies can be adopted but they can fail. Second, deflation had already made Greece's debt problem worse the debt is too large and the economy won't grow with continuing deflation. It can't just deflate its way to solvency.

The better option left is debt guarantee. Issuing guarantees (preferably partially backed by Greek assets) could help persuade creditors to exchange debt for new debt with longer maturities, effectively giving Athens more time to repay. As of now, only 27% of Greek debt is held by banks, 30% by ECB/EU/IMF, and 43% by other privates. Banks are already quietly resisting voluntary rolling-over unless offered incentives. EU has preferred to use moral suasion.

EU has also resisted haircuts. Mr Axel Weber, former Bundesbank governor, has since weighed in: “At some point you've got to cut your losses and restart the system,” drawing parallels between guarantee for Greek debt and steps taken by Germany and others during the financial crisis to backstop troubled banks.

The Greek problem “is a deep-rooted fiscal and structural problem that probably needs more than a 30-year time horizon to solve. The measures Europe need to adopt are much more profound than just short-term liquidity funds.” That, of course, raises the issue of “moral hazard”. EU has since pledged to stabilise the euro-zone, and starve off a Greek default in exchange for continuing Greek deflation and voluntary creditors' roll-over. Getting banks to share in the burden remains problematic. But, a narrow policy option is taken. It's another muddle-through created in response to politics. It offers no long-term way for Greece to resume growth.

I am told the political mood in Greece improves automatically in July and August as the urbans head en masse for family villages in the islands and mountains. Surely, for a little while, human woes will be eased by exposure to the beauty of the Agean.

Former banker, Dr Lin is a Harvard-educated economist and a British Chartered Scientist who now spends time writing, teaching and promoting the public interest. Feedback is most welcome at starbizweek@thestar.com.my