Hello my friends, today is September 9th, my name is Joseph and this is Markets Weekly. This week we're going to talk about three things. First, we're going to talk a bit about the intersection between politics and central banking looking at Canada where recently a few prominent political leaders in Canada are attacking the Bank of Canada.
Secondly, staying on the topic of politics, let's talk a little bit about geopolitics and how there seems to be an economic war brewing with the most recent shot fired by China when it banned central government employees from using iPhones. And lastly, let's talk about the Fed. Now, Fed officials have been really clear that they're not going to hike in September, but they're keeping the door open to another hike later on.
Okay, starting with Canada. Now, before we begin, I think we need some background information. So, in Canada, house prices are very high relative to income. So when households go and buy a home, they have to take on a lot of mortgage debt. Now, mortgages in Canada functionally reset every few years. So in the US, if you buy a home, the interest rate is locked for 30 years. In Canada, it's usually about five years.
So as you recall, over the past few years, interest rates have gone up a lot. So now we have a lot of people in Canada who maybe borrowed one rates for 2% and now are having to renew their mortgage at rates five or 6%. And that obviously is causing a lot of pain. Their mortgage interest expense basically is doubling. So that is all filtering in into the concerns of local politicians.
This past week, Premier Ford of Ontario, a premier is like a governor, openly called on the Bank of Canada to not hike rates. The premier of BC did the same thing as did the premier of Newfoundland. Also note that Vancouver is in BC and Toronto is in Ontario and Vancouver. Our two cities in Canada have that experience enormous amounts of home price appreciation. So you can imagine that there are a lot of people there with a lot of mortgage debt who are feeling a lot of pain from the Bank of Canada's actions.
So we have prominent politicians in Canada openly telling the Bank of Canada, hey, can you stop hiking rates? And the Bank of Canada did not hike rates last week. Now, to be clear, the economic data in Canada is looking not as great. So it was totally reasonable for them to do that.
Now, in addition, after the Bank of Canada's decision, finance minister, Christina Freeland, released a statement saying that, you know, I'm glad the Bank of Canada didn't hike rates, totally affirm central banking independence. By the way, I'm going to work hard to make sure rates go low. So I think what you're seeing now is that more and more people, more and more in Canada are upset with the make of Canada. And they're putting on a lot of political pressure.
Now, the same thing happened in the US in the 1970s. In the 1970s, there's a lot of inflation in the US and feature at the time Arthur Burns was under a lot of pressure to not hike rates too much. Arthur Burns later said that he could have high-grates a lot any time he wanted and put an end to all this inflation. But he was also under a lot of political pressure, not to cause a lot of economic pain. And so he was constrained. He couldn't do what needs to be done.
In school, we think that we're taught that central banks are independent technocrats that do what needs to be done. But in practice, of course, they operate under political constraints. The saying is that central banks are independent within the central government, but not of the government. So whereas the central bank has more flexibility than government agencies, it still ultimately has to be responsive to public concerns.
Now, Canada, because of its mortgage structure, is feeling the pinch first. But I expect this to play out in many other countries as well. For example, in the UK and in Australia, they also have mortgages that have to be reset every few years. And I think more and more of their people are feeling a lot of pain. So I would be on a lookout going forward for more political pressure on the Bank of England, the Bank of Australia, and some degree on the European Central Bank to ease up a bit.
Now, this is going to put a constraint on what the central banks can do. But we won't really see that in the US, because in the US so far, despite all the rate hikes, the economy is still doing pretty well. And most households are insulated from it. But I think going forward, we're just going to have to take politics more to account when we look at central bank actions across the world.
Okay, the next topic we'll talk about are geopolitical concerns. So, in the market, in the world, the largest actors are political actors, central banks, central governments, for example. And these guys are not purely profit driven. They care about being elected, they care about strategy, they care about a whole bunch of other stuff that a private corporation doesn't care about. So, when we think about what's happening in the world, we obviously have to pay attention to what these political actors are doing. And of course, after all, they set the rules in many ways.
Now, what we've seen over the past few years is that there seems to be an economic war brewing across many domains. For example, let's look at oil. Now, over the past couple of years, the White House has been releasing a lot of oil out of its strategic petroleum reserve to basically push oil prices down. Inflation was high and they wanted to get inflation lower. And they saw that Russia was earning a lot of money from their oil sales and they didn't want Russia to earn lots of money. So, it was a political decision. And in response, we had OPEC, basically, led by Saudi Arabia and others to voluntarily cut production to try to boost oil prices higher. Again, they're acting under their considerations as well. So, there seems to be a little bit of an economic war going on in this domain. But of course, the economic war is much broader than oil.
Specifically, there's an economic war brewing between China and the US. The US has very overtly tried to prevent China from obtaining key technology. There's of course, a semi-kind dumpro ban for the highest bleeding-edge tech to go to China. And China has also retaliated by preventing the expert of some rare earths. Now, this has been brewing and this is happening across many domains. And of course, it seemingly began under the Trump administration where President Trump was very open and using tariffs to try to achieve his political and economic interests.
Now, this past week, we had some new developments where China now is banning central government officials from using iPhones. And that hurt the soft price of Apple because it suggests that maybe, maybe this economic war is spilling over into consumer electronics and Apple is highly dependent on China, both as a market for its products, but also because a lot of iPhones and other things are manufactured in China. So, when we think about economic wars, obviously, it's common sense to think about supply chains and companies that are heavily dependent upon markets that are not super friendly. But I think it's also useful to think about just what kind of tools other countries have to retaliate against the US.
Now, what's very obvious to me when I think about this, it is, of course, China's huge holdings of Treasury Securities. So, China has over $3 trillion in foreign reserves and it's reportedly, although, of course, the exact compensation is not clear, reportedly a lot of it is held in Treasuries and Agency MBS. And, of course, I'm sure that China is aware with what happened with Russia's foreign reserves when there was a war between Russia and Ukraine. So, if you think about things from a Chinese perspective, obviously, they're going to have to reduce their exposure to US Treasuries as much as possible. It's not easy, but it's something they have to be done, especially since, you know, we all see going forward that there may be conflict that revolves around Taiwan.
Now, just for some background history, before the Russian-Ukraine war started, Russia was very clear that, you know, Ukraine cannot join NATO. That's a red line for them. Now, China is very clear that Taiwan is a red line for them. They think that Taiwan is part of China. And it's also very clear that Western leaders have been approaching Taiwan, some of them thinking that, hey, Taiwan is an independent country. And, of course, Washington has over the past couple of years sent a lot of prominent politicians over to China to basically hug their leaders. So, going forward, it's very clear that this is something that is going not going away and it is going to play out in the coming months or years.
Now, if you are China, you're going to have to prepare yourself for that. And you don't want to be caught flat-footed the same way that Russia was. And I think Russia was surprised by the strong reaction that the US and the European powers had. So, when you're thinking about Treasury yields going forward, it's not just supplying, it's not just inflation expectations or the potential of changing the inflation target. But you also have to think about these geopolitical concerns.
And I wonder, and I don't know if that's true, if this is another factor between the relentless bond-to-bearer market that's played out over the past few weeks, to be totally clear, there's a chart floating out showing that China has sold a lot of surgeries. Now, that's not true because that chart is based on market values and there's a tremendous bear market in Treasury's last year. So, of course, a lot of that is just simply decreases in market valuation.
Now, the last thing we'll talk about is what's happening with the Fed. So, this past week, we had some good species from a couple prominent Fed members. We had Governor Waller give an interview with CNBC and we had President Williams of the New York Fed give an interview with Bloomberg. Now, Governor Waller was a well-known hawk and who has done a really good job over the past cycle is very open in saying that he's happy with what he's seeing with the data and he strongly suggests that we don't have to do anything right now, we can just wait and see for more data. Let's listen to what he actually said. Yeah, thanks Steve for having me on. Yeah, that was a hell of a good week of data we got last week and the key thing out of it is it's going to allow us to proceed carefully as Chair Powell said to Jackson Hole. There's nothing that is saying we need to do anything imminent anytime soon so we can just sit there, wait for the data, see if things continue. The biggest thing is just inflation. We got two good reports in a row, can wait and see what a third one looks like and see whether this low inflation is a trend or it was just an outlier fluke.
Okay, at the same time we have President Williams who also gave an interview and President Williams is also pretty happy with what he's seeing but he's also seeing that the economic data has come in a lot stronger than his expectations. Now, the New York Fed themselves unleashed, unveiled this past week, a new GDP now cast and their GDP now cast is showing that economic growth is accelerating and also comfortably above trend. Now, this must be very confusing to Williams because he was thinking that they would high-grade a lot and then growth with slow and inflation will come down, unemployment would go up. Now, that hasn't happened and so this is what he's thinking about now. Now, there's a second test of there's kind of the are we restrictive and the second is are we sufficiently restrictive to really make sure that we're bringing inflation sustainably down to 2% and getting the job done. So, I think it's pretty clear we're restrictive. Still an open question as we go forward and how we got sufficiently restricted to achieve that.
So, of course, he's open to more rate hikes because it looks like things are not evolving to what he thought they would. If growth continues to accelerate, then we can have another hike and that's my expectation as well. I think we'll probably have one more hike later on in the year simply because the economy is so resistant and the Fed from a risk management perspective would rather hike a bit more to make sure inflation is under control because if, for example, the hike is too much, they can easily, easily cut rates to ease things a bit. So, from their perspective, I think it makes a lot more sense to hike one more time.
Okay, so that's all I've prepared for today. If you're interested in hearing more of my thoughts on the markets, check out my blog at FedGuy.com or if you're learning more about the markets, check out my online courses at CentralBanking101.com and, of course, remember to like and subscribe. Talk to you all next week.