Offshore Investments Directory

In the past
when analyzing the investment habits of most investors, it
was discovered that on average most people would invest
about 80 percent of their savings into what is commonly know
as fixed income investments (bonds, commercial paper, bank
certificates of deposit) and about 20 percent into
equities (stocks) or other kinds of investments
(commodities, gold, real estate, etc.). And of course
looking at the current world economy and the interest rate
environment, considering yields are so low in the so-called
more mature economies of Europe and North America, what has
been a recent phenomenon is the search for higher yields in
the emerging or developing markets. However, we tend
to think investors should think about the larger picture and
longer trends when it comes to investment strategies.
In addition, it is also important to understand why yields
are low in one place and higher in others in order to make
sound investment decisions for the long haul.
Economic Growth Factors Regarding Investment Choices
To start off with, it is important to understand
that all economies have a tendency to go through different
phases just as is the case with us in our life span.
In other words, we as humans have different phases of our
investing lives often generally described as the savings or
capital accumulation phase and then the period of our lives
when we are retired. Youth of course gives us the
energy and where with all to work hard and save whereas as
older age means that while we have accumulated knowledge
over the years, our bodies are not in the hyper energetic
state they were in the past. Economies also have a
natural tendency to go through growth and then mature as
well. Of course a country and local economy in any
country is perpetual in terms of it's own life, and the
economy must some how re-adapt and change if it ever is to
try and recapture growth again. In other words,
stagnation and decline are in the cards if political leaders
do not plan and act accordingly.
The world in 2014 is at the moment
experiencing a number of both economic and perhaps political
changes as well. There are countries that can be
considered to be in the mature or plateau phase whereas
others are in the the quickly growing stage of youth at the
moment. However, whereas almost all economies in the
past were agricultural based, the advent of technology and
the industrial revolution has transformed economic growth
away from farming and more towards manufacturing and
production of technological goods. Which is to say,
the economic growth for countries and economies over the
past 100 years or so has come from those cases whereby
nations became industrialized, whereby the agricultural
based economies were left behind. But, what we are now
seeing is the previous industrialized economies becoming
stagnant and encumbered by high wages, high taxes and slower
if any growth at all. The former agricultural
economies are now becoming industrialized with the benefit
of being able to offer LOW WAGES, LOW TAXES to compete and
take away production from the older, mature industrialized
nations.
The interesting thing about
this is that the new growing nations do not need to
start at zero as their mature predecessors had to do.
Instead, they can simply adopt and implement the new and
current technology as it exists, and build on top of
it. It is for this reason that countries such as China
has been able to do in 20 years what it took countries such
as the United States perhaps 80 years to accomplish.
Of course, in order to maintain this growth projectile and
lead, the emerging markets (such as China) have
intelligently pushed to have the research and develop within
their own borders as well and not just the manufacturing
component. The previous excuse or argument
regarding the US and Europe was that while the manufacturing
had moved to low labor cost nations (such as China) that
they had nothing to worry about because the R & D and
the innovation would stay in these older economies.
Well guess what? There are more patents now being
issued to Chinese citizens and or companies than any other
nationality. In addition, China and other nations
trying to mimic it (Vietnam) are spending heavily on
improvements in the educational sectors of their home
countries to guarantee they remain out front with research
and development. So, these newly industrialized
nations are trying to capture both the manufacturing and the
innovation, which leaves the previous European and North
American nations is a dire predicament.
offshore Investing Driven By Demographics
In terms of all the previously wealthy
industrialized nations, there are a number of things going
on to tell you where they are headed (not someplace good)
and mainly the issue is demographics coupled with shall we
say an attempt at social welfare and state central planning
created upon certain assumptions (the assumption of
unlimited demographic and economic growth, which is clearly
not the case today). In terms of the demographics we
think it is no secret that Western Europe, the United States
and Japan all face a lopsided phenomenon in terms of a huge
aging population. This was a direct result of the
so-called baby boom that occurred after World War II.
In a normal demographic distribution, in order to maintain
the nation's economic growth, you will usually see a much
larger number of births and young people coming into the
labor force in comparison to the older people and retirees –
and this is what you see in the emerging or developing
markets (minus China due to their one child policy).
However, in the US, Europe and Japan we have a much larger
number of older people and a relatively very small number of
younger people coming into the work force. If the
manufacturing and jobs have gone away (and less jobs to be
had) this is not a bad thing per say in terms of long term
employment (less jobs, but also less people to be
employed). But, it also means much LESS tax revenue
being collected and this is a serious problem with a welfare
state benefit system built upon a pay as you go paradigm
(also known as a Ponzi Scheme). Which is to say
the financial well being of the welfare state benefit system
hinges upon more and more younger people coming into the
work force, paying taxes and supporting the retirees.
But this is not the case with the US, Europe and Japan, and
thus the grave solvency problems with the finances of the
welfare benefits system today, and for the next 30 years or
so (assuming the Baby Boom generation retiring today will
certainly live and continue to collect checks from the
government retirement system for the next 3 decades, which
is not an unreasonable assumption).
We do have another story however in the up and coming
emerging or developing markets. First off is the high
number of births and demographic growth in terms of a much
larger younger population coming up behind a fairly small
retiree population. The challenge of course will be to
grow the economy in these countries to guarantee job or
employment growth for all these people, but there is no lop
sided statistics as we have in the US and Europe.
Second, much of the manufacturing from the former
industrialized nations has already gone to these low cost,
low wage jurisdictions. Third, and perhaps most
important over the long term, is the fact that many of these
emerging markets are starting to trade directly with each
other and cut out the middle man as they say. In other
words, many American and European brands are being
manufactured in these other countries via offshore company
subsidiaries. As such, the parent company can achieve
a tax savings back in the former high tax parent nation but
in reality, the manufacturing and sale is coming out of the
new low tax, low cost emerging market nation.
What Does This Have To Do With Offshore Investing ?
A well known US bank robber named
Willy Sutton appeared in court (for bank robbery of course)
and the presiding Judge asked Willy why he robbed
banks. The reply was: because that is where the money
is. Likewise, you need to invest where the growth and
income opportunities are, and or will be in the coming
years. And the where in the equation is the up and
coming emerging market nations that probably will dominate
the manufacturing, exports and overall growth in the coming
years.
In addition, aside from having a number of other advantages
on their side, one major benefit is that most of these
markets do not have bloated and extensive social welfare
benefit programs to manage. You might think such a
thing is terrible, but is it really? Full blown state
planning (Communism and or extreme cases of socialism) has
not worked. And for that reason, China is now more
capitalist than the US in some respects. Vietnam more
free market than Spain, and so on. What has improved
the social condition and has fueled what can be called a
growing middle class has been economic improvement, not
state hand outs. And so many of these emerging or
developing markets never had a social welfare program as it
exists in the US and Europe because they could not afford
it. Now that they are experiencing economic growth and
an ever increasing middle class, they might not need it.