I once issued a definitive proclamation regarding Peter Tasker, a founding partner of Arcus Investments.
It turns out I was wrong.
In his latest opinion piece for the Financial Times, Mr. Tasker has nothing interesting to say (Link).
It seems that sometimes even the best just phone it in.
For a better look at the short-term and mid-term consequences of the consumption tax legislation, read this Bloomberg report (E). Ignore the title (titles on wire service reports are too often misleading) and concentrate on what the analysts are saying about 2013, the election year. The looming threat of a tax rise in April 2014 will likely increase consumption over 2013, stimulating overall economic growth, as companies and individuals pick up big ticket items before the 3% jump in prices. The likelihood that consumers will shell out for goods and services at current prices, staring as they are at whalloping, regressive tax rise in 2014, will likely stabilize prices, nullifying, even if only temporarily, the long-term deflationary trend. Whether the halt in deflation triggers a spike in equities investments, given the sudden crash in real returns on bonds, is a question best put to Naomi Fink, a.k.a the Smartest Person In Tokyo, of Jefferies.
I am not as sanguine as Adam Richards (E), I certainly cannot be convinced that in a world where every country's bond yields are low -- some even lower than Japan's -- and a rock hard yen that is killing exporters, that a tax rise taking a first stab at stabilizing the nation's fiscal health is a really bad idea.
Papua New Guinea stumbles to an election
3 hours ago