Latest news with #HerculePoirot
Daily Maverick
22-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Maverick
Murder in Middle America — designed in the US, made in China
Part 4 in a five-part series. Read Part 1 here, Part 2 here and Part 3 here. In the denouement of Agatha Christie's classic crime novel Murder on the Orient Express, Detective Hercule Poirot concludes that ALL the suspects were guilty. It was similarly the case in the demise of the US manufacturing industry. Whodunnit? Almost everyone! In alphabetical order: consumers, mainstream economics, US Congress, US Federal Reserve, US Inc, US management consultants, US tax accountants, US retail sector, US Treasury, Wall Street… all these culprits played their part in the 'murder' of US manufacturing. And this is before one points a finger at the foreign accomplices… Prospects for the investment future of US Inc With two exceptions, I do not intend to call out these culprits. The first exception is US Inc as currently constituted. I do this more to highlight the headwinds that will now face foreign investors whose default allocation to equities globally has long – and rightly – favoured US Inc. As noted previously, in December 2024, US Inc's weight in MSCI's All Country World (equity) Index was 66%, twice the rest of the world combined. In 2000, that weight was a much lower 52%. In 2009, Rolling Stone Magazine did a cover story on Goldman Sachs. In it was a colourful quote. They likened the US investment bank to 'a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money'. The uncomfortable truth is that this would not be a wholly unfair description as to what US Inc became over the past two decades, especially as it has spread its tentacles worldwide. US Inc's profit margins: Hard to see them rising from here Profits for the US's S&P 500 companies as a share of US GDP averaged about 6% from 1960 to 2000, with a dip down to 3% in the 1980s. Since China's 2001 entry into the WTO, US Inc's profits as a share of US GDP have nearly doubled to 11%. Between 2000 and 2023, US Inc's share of the global profit pool also more than doubled, from 17% to 38%. Globalisation has been a boon for US corporations since they were able to grow profits much faster abroad than they could at home. Frequently they did this at the cost of foreign competitors by cashing in on the soft power appeal of American brands like Levi's Jeans and by outsourcing production of these 'American' goods to nations with low wage costs, as Levi's did with its products to textile manufacturers in China, Vietnam and Bangladesh. Or, as Apple has said of its iPhones: 'Designed in America, Made in China.' Finished products were imported back into the US at much higher profit margins than were previously available when these products were truly 'Made in the USA'. Indeed, sometimes even these profits made from selling foreign-made products back to US consumers were still retained in intermediate holding companies located in tax havens like Eire! Products made in low-cost foreign locations were also sold – with profits accruing in tax haven-located holding companies – mainly into foreign markets able to sustain higher prices like Europe, Japan and increasingly even China. In the period since 2000, when China's WTO entry constituted a positive(!) game-changer for US Inc, the overall average earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) margin for US firms increased from 10% to 11%. All this margin increase was driven from abroad as foreign margins rose from 10% to 14% while domestic margins stayed broadly flat over the same period. S&P 500 firms did especially well in this era: their foreign EBIT margins increased from 11% to 16% over 2000 to 2020 while less-agile non-S&P 500 firms rather saw their foreign margins decline from 9% to 7%. Domestic EBIT margins stayed flat for both S&P 500 and non-S&P 500 firms. Overall, the biggest gainers were – no surprise here! – US 'manufacturing' firms outsourcing production abroad, typically paying their foreign workers in owned subsidiaries 60% less than their US workers. Those US firms that used foreign contract manufacturing companies – like Apple used Foxconn – likely compressed the wage component in their final product sales price even more. A more hostile global tax environment Note that these foreign margin increases were all achieved before tax. Add to the above, US Inc followed the judicious use of offshore holding companies to shield profits from tax: practising transfer pricing, pursuing royalty 'farming', carrying out tax planning (of which the most infamous example was dubbed the ' Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich '), plus benefiting from the feature of the US Tax Code that allowed US corporations not to repatriate profits earned abroad and not pay tax on them until they did. Thus, one can see why the foreign profits earned abroad by US Inc rose so markedly after 2000. Also note that, for the global operations of Big Tech companies, accruing profits for the latter where it was most tax efficient to do so was often done by the press of a button. Were this foreign operating 'digital environment' to become less friendly – and the EU, via its Digital Markets Act, is on a campaign to achieve precisely this end – US Big Tech would be negatively impacted. Meanwhile, in 2020, seven countries (Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Singapore and Switzerland) hosting but 6% of the foreign employees of US Inc, earned nearly half US Inc's foreign profits. At what point did profit morph into greed? Dylan's chorus again: Well, it's sundown on the union And what's made in the USA Sure was a good idea 'Til greed got in the way Granted, the American Bard (who also earned the nickname of 'The Voice of Protest') most likely used the word ' greed' for ' profit '. In US Inc's defence, in today's hypercompetitive world, it is hard to imagine that they would not pursue every opportunity to capture profit where they could, at home or abroad. However, Dylan implicitly raised the question – to echo a line used by General Motors in its heyday – ' whether what is good for US Inc is good for the USA?' Trump and his team are unequivocally answering 'no'. A rockier road that lies ahead for US Inc in its operations Looking forwards and from the perspective of equity investors worldwide in US stocks, how much of this post-2000 Golden Age for US Inc is sustainable in Trump's World? What might be the consequences of the seismic changes now taking place across today's investment landscape? How might global investors change their long-established behaviour? What do we know with some degree of certainty? The US dollar will, over time, likely continue to fall in value, especially against its Western DXY Index crosses: the euro, yen, pound, Canadian dollar, Swedish krona and Swiss franc. How the US dollar might fare against Asian and other emerging market currencies is less clear… though the recent strength of both the Taiwanese and Singaporean dollars may be portents of what lies ahead; Adding to this negative currency effect, inputs imported into the US now face tariffs and so will cost more. Not all of these duties will be passed on to US consumers so profit margins for many US companies will shrink. In addition, higher end prices will almost certainly curb consumption volumes, creating a negative volume gearing effect. This will weigh on profits; A product bearing an 'American brand' wherever made has heretofore usually attracted a premium price. This advantage is vanishing and may soon be a liability: think Tesla where, in February 2025, sales in Germany plunged by 76%, in Australia by 66% and in China by 49%; If inflation leaks into the US system and interest rates are forced to rise, the cost of capital to US Inc will rise too; Foreign consumers are becoming less welcoming of US products. For example, Canadians are boycotting US products; the Chinese are cooling towards Apple, Tesla, Boeing and Starbucks. EU nations meanwhile are tightening the 'freedom to operate as previously' on US Big Tech companies; and Globally, most countries are looking to rein in 'clever' corporate tax structures that have reduced their capacity to collect taxes from foreign companies using tax havens like the Cayman Islands. US companies would especially be hit were this campaign to succeed. Only eight nations remain opposed to a UN tax convention aimed at tightening up on these practices: the five 'Anglo Saxons' – the US, the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand – plus Japan, South Korea and Israel. Forty-three percent of 2023's estimated tax losses were attributed to companies operating out of these eight countries. Looking forward, it is hard to see the trend by which US S&P 500 companies grew their foreign EBIT margins from 11% to 16% over 2000 to 2020 continuing in Trump's World. Given that foreign margin growth contributed ALL of the overall corporate margin growth in this period, even if this trend merely stalled and did not reverse, it would put a huge dampener on the prospects for future profit growth and so future share price performance for many of the S&P 500's leading companies. Rocky road ahead for US Bonds too The above addresses the investment prospects for the asset class that draws the lion's share of market commentary: US equities. US Bonds – which attract twice as much foreign capital as do US equities – face even cloudier prospects. After a four-decade-long bull market, from 1981 to 2020, when bond yields fell from just under 16% to just over 2%, the US bond market has since hit a four-year 'bad patch'. Non-Western central banks have been diversifying away from US Bonds into, among other assets, gold. If US inflation were to rise, prompting the Fed to raise rates, and if the US dollar were to continue to see its value erode, foreign investors in the US Bond market might yet conclude it was losing its historic attractiveness. Were the US dollar's 'store of value' attributes to be compromised (and if the idea of Stephen Miran, chairperson of the Council of Economic Advisers, that foreign holdings of US financial assets should be taxed would do just that), this would further weaken its reserve currency status. Threatening to confiscate US dollar assets, as the US did to Colombia, will not help either. Any weaponising of the US dollar will detract from its 'store of value' attractiveness. Mea culpa: 'I' did it too! The other actor I must call out who played a part in the Murder of Manufacturing in America is… 'myself'… or at last the profession of which I am a part: economics and the mainstream thinking that it has proselytised after World War 2. This thinking has especially dominated Anglo Saxon practice and, as it is now becoming clearer, it has a lot to answer for. In a word, modern macroeconomic thinking has been shot through by what is called 'Keynesianism'… except that the current manifestation of the latter doctrine is not true to its academic origins. John Maynard Keynes would not have recognised the incontinence of the fiscal spending that is now the 'go to' solution for nearly all Western economic challenges. (Even previously more prudent Germany is now joining this club.) Yes, Keynes recommended unfunded fiscal spending, but only when times were bad: echoing David Hume, the matching bookend to his thinking was that once the economy improved, the prior borrowing that was needed to jumpstart the economy should be repaid. Keynes believed running the economic engine with the fiscal choke permanently pulled out would eventually flood that engine and make new economic growth much harder to achieve. Sound familiar in 2025? In 1962, Joan Robinson was the first to call out the twisted application of JMK's thinking, especially as it was manifesting itself in the universities of the US. She noted that 'the bastard Keynesian doctrine (that) evolved in the United States… (was) floating on the wings of the almighty dollar'. Her withering comment was made even before Valery Giscard d'Estaing's 1965 'exorbitant privilege' charge that the US was – by printing US dollars to cover its deficit spending, both current account and budget – living beyond its means, but still getting by courtesy of the kindness of foreign strangers/savers. In the 1960s, Britain – which mistakenly thought sterling still had reserve currency status – tried following this American example. Result? Periodic hiccoughs. The 1967 Sterling Crisis was followed by the pound's slide from 1972 to 1976 (which ended with Britain calling in the IMF) and then the sorry experience of UK currency going into (1987) and being ejected from (1992) Europe's Exchange Rate Mechanism. Together, these traumas underlined just how weak Britain's exorbitant privilege had become compared with that of the US. Still, by the 1990s, with free capital flows accepted as mainstream behaviour in much of the world, funding deficits in part by borrowing from abroad, became easier… even, by the mid-1990s, for Britain. Keynesianism as it had become was now one-sided demand management on steroids: never mind fiscal overspending if foreigners would help finance it. The demand side was all that mattered; little attention was paid to the supply side… which in any case, if regarded as industrial manufacturing, had from the 1980s rapidly migrated abroad anyway. Many Western governments paid no heed to that which was no longer there! Manufacturing was now treated as was agriculture: yesterday's focus. As Vaclav Smil was to bemoan, for the Anglo Saxons and especially the US, from now on it was to be all about services. And these services were often underpinned by government spending. In 2024, the US government provided more 'credit' (often interest free and non-repayable) than banks. Also in 2024, two-thirds of the US's 2.2 million jobs created were in healthcare and government; furthermore 80% of all post-Covid US jobs have been created directly by the US government or with its financial support. And despite claims to the contrary, those in services nearly always import far more than they can earn by selling their services abroad (even when tourism services are added in). Especially among the Anglo Saxons, as manufacturing declined and their service-oriented economies expanded, this meant they ended up running larger and larger current account deficits. DM
Times
08-05-2025
- Times
Jeremy Vine: Can an AI Agatha Christie help me to write a crime bestseller?
Simeon Lee was my first murder victim. He died brutally. He had — foolishly, in my view — invited members of his family to his country estate. A controlling and domineering man, he told his relatives he was rewriting his will. They seethed with resentment. He went to his study and locked the door. Then there was a loud racket, the sound of struggle in the room. When the door was forced open, Lee lay dead in a huge pool of blood. The only clue was a small piece of rubber on the floor. I didn't kill him. He died in Agatha Christie's novel Hercule Poirot's Christmas. If you were hooked by the first two paragraphs of this article, you have the makings of an
Telegraph
15-03-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Ed Miliband has to go – before his net zero obsession wipes out our factories
Taxes were pushed up too much in the Budget. Global stock markets have been rattled by Donald Trump. And business and consumer confidence has collapsed. There were plenty of different factors that could explain the unexpected 0.1pc drop in Britain's GDP reported on Friday. And yet, you hardly need to be Hercule Poirot to figure out who the real culprit is: the climate-obsessed Ed Miliband, our Energy Secretary. The decline was led by a massive drop in manufacturing production. In reality, the collapse of Britain's industrial base is turning into a national emergency – and Miliband has to go before he wipes it out completely. According to Rachel Reeves, Donald Trump was to blame for the disappointing and unexpected fall in output reported this week. Without naming the US president directly, she argued that 'the world has changed, and across the globe we are feeling the consequences' – as she attempted to deflect the blame away from the government she is a part of.
South China Morning Post
07-02-2025
- South China Morning Post
Want the best Nile River cruise? 14 tips for a fantastic trip
Published: 11:15am, 7 Feb 2025 Cruising leisurely down the Nile River is one of the most popular tourist activities in Egypt. You can see ancient and remarkable temples with almost no effort. You can see miles of countryside without leaving your deck chair. But a cruise might not be as much fun as you think if you ignore these tips. 1. Do not start the cruise in Cairo Those first couple of days cruising down to Luxor seem a bit of wasted time that could be better spent. Definitely get yourself a good private Cairo guide, which is very affordable, and see the pyramids in Giza and the spectacular museums, but then hop on a plane to Luxor and take your cruise from there. Or go to Aswan and do it backward. 2. If you have got the money and you love history, consider travelling on a dahabiya Dahabiyas are wooden sailing vessels like the one fictional detective Hercule Poirot sailed on in Death on the Nile .
Chicago Tribune
05-02-2025
- Chicago Tribune
17 tips for having a great cruise down the Nile River in Egypt
Cruising leisurely down the Nile River is one of the most popular tourist activities in Egypt. Yes, you can see ancient and remarkable temples with almost no effort. Yes, you can see miles of countryside without leaving your deck chair. But a cruise might not be as much fun as you think if you ignore these tips. 1. Don't start the cruise in Cairo. This is only my opinion, but those first couple of days cruising down to Luxor are a bit of wasted time that could be better spent. Definitely get yourself a good private Cairo guide, which is very affordable, and see the pyramids in Giza and the spectacular museums, but then hop a plane to Luxor and take your cruise from there. Or go to Aswan and do it backward. 2. Nearly all cruise boats go back and forth between Luxor and Aswan. Be aware that the first day of a cruise from Luxor involves just staying in port. You get off the ship to go visit the Valley of the Kings and the Temple of Karnak in Luxor, then get back on to sleep. Most cruises are five days from Luxor to Aswan, or four days from Aswan to Luxor (because you're sailing with the current, not against it.) 3. If you've got the money and you love history, consider traveling on a dahabiya. These are wooden sailing vessels like the one fictional detective Hercule Poirot sailed on 'Death on the Nile.' This is a costly option, though. Sailings can cost $1,100 to $10,000, depending on the length of time and luxury of the boat. You will feel like you're traveling back in time. The boats are smaller and typically would have only a dozen or so cabins, eliminating the crowd factor. Smaller vessels can also go places that the big boats cannot. 4. On the topic of money, this is not a time to cheap out. Book the nicest ship you can afford. You're going to be stuck on it most of your trip, so make sure you'll be happy with the food and amenities. Do shop around, though, because there are bargains to be had. A typical cruise at this writing between Luxor and Aswan would run $500 to $2000 per person or even more, depending on how luxurious you want to go, whether or not it's high season and what type of cabin you book. A travel agent in Egypt who specializes in cruise ships can give you the best advice. Also, note that a '5-star' cruise is not as luxurious as you might think. It's just a nice boat with good amenities–it's not going to feel like the Ritz. 5. Get a balcony cabin, if you can afford it. If not, choose a ship with a cabin with a big picture window, so you can watch the Nile float past easily from your room. 6. If you have mobility issues, take note: There aren't many Nile cruisers out there with elevators, so make sure you find one of them. Otherwise you'll be traipsing up and down flights of stairs several times a day. Go online and make sure about the elevator before you plop down any money. 7. Get your own guide. Cruise ships are familiar with this custom and will provide lodging. This will prove invaluable when a cruise ship lands and disgorges hundreds of passengers simultaneously, and you don't know where you're going. Your guide will lead you to the attraction at hand — invariably an ancient temple — and then tell you about it. This is a less expensive option than you think, and smart cruisers do it. 8. Shop around. Prices vary widely even for the same sailing of the same ship. Make sure you understand exactly what you're booking — how many days, how big is the cabin, what does it include, what costs extra and so forth. YouTube is a great source for looking up Nile cruisers, there's a good chance you'll find one or more videos of your ship. I found Egypt Joy travel ( online and was very happy with their attention and service. They were able to book the cruise I wanted at considerably less than the big travel agencies were offering. Tell Hatem, the manager, that I said hi. 9. Eat the Egyptian food on board. Since the passengers are nearly all foreigners, your ship will give you mostly Western food. (There were chicken fingers on my cruise. Ick.) There is little or no Egyptian food available on the inevitable mealtime buffet, but the crew downstairs is eating it. Can't hurt to ask if you can have some. And drink the red juice at breakfast. It's hibiscus juice and super good for your heart. Drink two of them. 10. Bring apples. If you like horses, snag a few fresh apples off your breakfast buffet, and bring them along on your next shore excursion. Ask the owners of the malnourished horses that pull the tourist carriages if you can give one to his horse. Typically, these caleche owners don't mean to mistreat their animals, they're just desperately poor and don't have enough money to feed them properly. Sometimes, I ask them, 'If I give you money for your horse, will you buy food for him with it? And nothing else?' They always say yes, and I can only hope they're being truthful. A tiny pittance will feed a horse for a day. 11. Generally, Nile cruises stop at three temples en route: The Temple of Esna dedicated to the ram-headed god Khnum, the Temple of Horus at Edfu and Kom Ombo — the temple of Sobek, the crocodile god. (Don't miss the museum if you want to see scores of mummified crocodiles.) 12. Prepare yourself emotionally for the crowds. Most if not all of the Nile boats cruising the same route stop at these temples at the exact same time. No, I don't know why, but what it means is a roiling mass of humanity all getting off their boats simultaneously. In fact, the boats park so close together that you have to walk through the other boats to get to the shore. If this image makes you cringe, just be waiting with your guide in the lobby for the first moment you can disembark, and quickly make it to shore and the temple. You might have a few minutes to enjoy before the others crowd in. If not, bring a cattle prod. (Just kidding.) 13. In Aswan, your cruise package may include the beautiful Philae Temple of Isis. Don't miss it. Also a look at an Unfinished Obelisk, which is surprisingly interesting. 14. If your cruise company offers you the chance to sign up for a hot air balloon excursion, think twice about it. You might be jammed onto a bus with a horde of others, maybe even separated from your friends, and then poured into balloons willy-nilly. Happened to my friend. There are much better balloon companies out there and you can find one. Especially check their safety credentials. 15. Give yourself at least one extra day, maybe more, in Luxor. The ancient history of this place deserves much more than a quick look. And there are many pleasant resorts and hotels. It's so nice that many people from the U.K. retire there. 16. Your cruise company is going to offer you a chance to visit Abu Simbel, where the temples of Ramses the Great reside. Yes, you want to go to Abu Simbel. It's remarkable. But going on the cruise excursion involves a four-hour drive through the Sahara each way, and of course that limits the amount of time you can spend there. A better choice would be to end your cruise in Aswan, and then take a short flight to Abu Simbel. Spend the night there and come back the next day. This gives you the chance to explore the temples without the thundering hordes, all of whom are generally gone by noon. It's on the banks of Lake Nasser and a pleasant place to visit. Well worth spending the night. And then you can see the Sound and Light show at the temples, too. The plot makes no sense, but the visuals are nice. 17. My final tip on the Nile Cruise is this: Just say no. You can actually do the identical route on shore, in a taxi, stopping at the temples on your own sweet time, when the cruisers have all departed. Sometimes you can find yourself the only one there. If your objective is to see the ancient temples, this is the best way by far. But of course you miss the cocktails on deck and the entertainment. Enjoy.
