Spagna. 2020. Pil -9.1% anno su anno.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-31.

L’Instituto Nacional de Estatistica ha rilasciato il Report:

Quarterly Spanish National Accounts: main aggregates (Flash estimate). Fourth Quarter 2020.

– El PIB español registra una variación del 0,4% en el cuarto trimestre de 2020 respecto al trimestre anterior en términos de volumen.

– La variación interanual del PIB se sitúa en el −9,1%, frente al −9,0% del trimestre precedente.

– En el conjunto del año 2020 el PIB a precios corrientes se sitúa en 1.119.976 millones de euros, un 10,0% inferior al de 2019. En términos de volumen, el PIB registra una variación del −11,0% en 2020 respecto al año anterior.

– La contribución de la demanda nacional al crecimiento interanual del PIB es de −6,3 puntos, nueve décimas superior a la del tercer trimestre. Por su parte, la demanda externa presenta una aportación de −2,7 puntos, nueve décimas inferior a la del trimestre pasado2.

– El deflactor implícito del PIB aumenta un 0,7% respecto al mismo trimestre de 2019, siete décimas menos que en el trimestre pasado.

– El empleo de la economía, en términos de horas trabajadas, registra una variación intertrimestral del 0,5%. Esta tasa es de mayor magnitud en el caso de los puestos de trabajo equivalentes a tiempo completo (del 0,9%, lo que supone 15,1 puntos menos que en el tercer trimestre) debido a la reducción que se observa en la jornadas medias a tiempo completo (−0,4%).

– En términos interanuales, las horas trabajadas decrecen un 6,3%, tasa una décima inferior a la del tercer trimestre de 2020, y los puestos equivalentes a tiempo completo lo hacen en 5,4%, una décima más que en el tercer trimestre, lo que supone un descenso de 1.009 mil puestos de trabajo equivalentes a tiempo completo en un año.

– La variación interanual del coste laboral unitario se sitúa este trimestre en el 6,1%.

Italia. 2020. Previsione del pil a -8.8%. – Ref.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-31.

Il due febbraio Istat dovrebbe rilasciare il dato sul pil italiano 2020, annualizzato.

Il centro di ricerche economiche Ref stima tale macrodato a -8.8%.

*

---

Italia, Ref stima Pil 2020 in calo 8,8%, vede crescita 3,9% in 2021

L’Italia ha chiuso il 2020 con un calo del Pil dell’8,8% e la ripresa stenta a manifestarsi quest’anno, secondo il centro di ricerche economiche Ref che prevede nel 2021 una crescita del 3,9% e del 4,4% in 2022.

“La ripresa dell’economia italiana ha il passo del gambero. Dopo il balzo in avanti del terzo trimestre (+16 per cento), il Pil è arretrato nel quarto 2020 e nel primo 2021. Disegnando, così un andamento a W”, dice Ref in una nota.

“Alla fine di quest’anno il Pil pro-capite sarà ancora inferiore del 3 per cento rispetto ai livelli di fine 2019, mentre alla conclusione del biennio previsivo risulterà dell’1 per cento sotto i valori pre-pandemia”.

Il tasso di disoccupazione è visto salire dal 9,2% previsto per il 2020, all’11,1% nel 2021 e al 10% nel 2022.

“L’interrogativo cruciale è comprendere cosa accadrà quando la fase di emergenza finirà e scatteranno i tagli agli organici che già molte imprese hanno definito per adeguare la capacità produttiva al più basso livello della domanda”, dice Ref.

Il grosso impegno di finanza pubblica legato agli interventi di sostegno all’economia colpita dagli effetti della pandemia, produrrà una crescita del debito che in rapporto al Pil è visto al 156,9% nel 2020 per salire al 158% nel 2021. Nel 2022 il debito Pil calerebbe al 155,9%.

*

---

Alcuni macrodati recenti.

Italia. Banche. I crediti inesigibili sono il 21% di quelli europei.

Italia. 2020. Agricoltura -6.1%, Attività Agricole Secondarie -18.0%, anno su anno.

Italia. Novembre. Industria. Fatturato -12.4%, Ordinativi -11.3%, anno su anno.

Italia. Il dramma del debito sovrano. – Bloomberg.

Eurostat. Italia pietra dello scandalo. Una Tabella da incubo.

L’Italia è fondata su debito e cambiali. Debito pubblico salito a 2,501.374 mld.

Italia. Dicembre. Ristorazione -66.8%.

Bankitalia. Una tetra relazione sul primo semestre 2020.

Italia. Novembre. Produzione Industriale. Gen-Nov20 su Gen-Nov19 -12.1%. – Istat.

Italia. Novembre. Vendite al dettaglio. In valore -8.1%, -8.4% in volume, YoY.

Usa. Secondo smacco di Nancy Pelosi, incapace di imparare dai propri errori.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-31.

Una delle caratteristiche dell’ideologia liberal è quella di considerare gli avversari politici alla stregua di nemici mortali, i quali devono non tanto essere battuti nelle elezioni, quanto piuttosto essere eliminati, soppressi.

La fotografia ben evidenzia la carica di odio rancoroso che Nancy Pelosi nutre nei confronti di Mr Trump: il suo volto è tutto un programma.

Adesso è la seconda volta che la Pelosi tenta un impeachment a Mr Trump, ed è la seconda volta che morde il marmo.

Una cosa è dire che una persona è stata imputata, ed una totalmente differente è che sia stata condannata.

* * * * * * *

«Forty-five Senate Republicans backed a failed effort on Tuesday to halt former President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, in a show of party unity that some cited as a clear sign he will not be convicted of inciting insurrection at the Capitol»

«Republican Senator Rand Paul made a motion on the Senate floor that would have required the chamber to vote on whether Trump’s trial in February violates the U.S. Constitution»

«The Democratic-led Senate blocked the motion in a 55-45 vote»

«But only five Republican lawmakers joined Democrats to reject the move, far short of the 17 Republicans who would need to vote to convict Trump on an impeachment charge»

«It’s one of the few times in Washington where a loss is actually a victory,…. Forty-five votes means the impeachment trial is dead on arrival»

«Paul and other Republicans contend that the proceedings are unconstitutional because Trump left office last Wednesday and the trial will be overseen by Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy instead of by U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts»

«The Constitution makes clear that impeachment proceedings can result in disqualification from holding office in the future, so there is still an active issue for the Senate to resolve»

«[Trump] was acquitted by the then Republican-controlled Senate last February on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress arising from his request that Ukraine investigate Democratic rival Joe Biden and his son»

«But reaching the two-thirds threshold required for conviction will be a steep climb»

«Trump remains a powerful force among Republicans and his supporters have vowed to mount election challenges to lawmakers in the party who support conviction»

«Although the Constitution calls on the chief justice to preside over presidential impeachment trials, a senator presides when the impeached is not the current president»

* * * * * * *

Quando una persona pensa ed agisce secondo ideologia ed è abbacinata dall’odio viscerale incorre spesso in errori anche severi. È scollata dal reale.

*

---

Senate Republicans unite behind failed effort to challenge Trump impeachment trial.

Washington (Reuters) – Forty-five Senate Republicans backed a failed effort on Tuesday to halt former President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, in a show of party unity that some cited as a clear sign he will not be convicted of inciting insurrection at the Capitol.

Republican Senator Rand Paul made a motion on the Senate floor that would have required the chamber to vote on whether Trump’s trial in February violates the U.S. Constitution.

The Democratic-led Senate blocked the motion in a 55-45 vote. But only five Republican lawmakers joined Democrats to reject the move, far short of the 17 Republicans who would need to vote to convict Trump on an impeachment charge that he incited the Jan. 6 Capitol assault that left five people dead.

“It’s one of the few times in Washington where a loss is actually a victory,” Paul later told reporters. “Forty-five votes means the impeachment trial is dead on arrival.”

Paul and other Republicans contend that the proceedings are unconstitutional because Trump left office last Wednesday and the trial will be overseen by Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy instead of by U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts.

Leahy, 80, was briefly hospitalized on Tuesday evening after not feeling well but was released after an examination, his spokesman, David Carle, said in a statement.

Some Republican senators who backed Paul’s motion said their vote on Tuesday did not indicate how they might come down on Trump’s guilt or innocence after a trial.

“It’s a totally different issue as far as I’m concerned,” Republican Senator Rob Portman told reporters.

The senators voted after being sworn in as jurors for the impeachment trial.

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who moved to thwart Paul’s motion, dismissed the Republican constitutional claim as “flat-out wrong” and said it would provide “a constitutional get-out-of-jail-free card” for presidents guilty of misconduct.

There is a debate among scholars over whether the Senate can hold a trial for Trump now that he has left office. Many experts have said “late impeachment” is constitutional, arguing that presidents who engage in misconduct late in their terms should not be immune from the very process set out in the Constitution for holding them accountable.

The Constitution makes clear that impeachment proceedings can result in disqualification from holding office in the future, so there is still an active issue for the Senate to resolve, those scholars have said.

‘MATTER OF POLITICAL CONSEQUENCE’

Fellow Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who has been critical of Trump, rejected Paul’s move.

“My review of it has led me to conclude that it is constitutional, in recognizing that impeachment is not solely about removing a president, it is also a matter of political consequence,” Murkowski told reporters on Tuesday.

She joined fellow Republicans Mitt Romney, Susan Collins, Ben Sasse and Patrick Toomey in opposing Paul.

Trump is the only president to have been impeached by the House of Representatives twice and the first to face a trial after leaving power, with the possibility of being disqualified from future public office if convicted by two-thirds of the Senate.

He was acquitted by the then Republican-controlled Senate last February on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress arising from his request that Ukraine investigate Democratic rival Joe Biden and his son.

The House approved a single article of impeachment – the equivalent of an indictment in a criminal trial – on Jan. 13, accusing him of inciting an insurrection with an incendiary speech to supporters before they stormed the Capitol. A police officer and four others died in the melee.

But reaching the two-thirds threshold required for conviction will be a steep climb. Trump remains a powerful force among Republicans and his supporters have vowed to mount election challenges to lawmakers in the party who support conviction.

Some Republicans have criticized Trump’s false claims of voting fraud and his failed efforts to overturn Biden’s Nov. 3 election victory. But no Senate Republicans have said definitively that they plan to vote to convict him.

Although the Constitution calls on the chief justice to preside over presidential impeachment trials, a senator presides when the impeached is not the current president, a Senate source said. First elected to the chamber in 1974, Leahy is the most senior Democrat in the chamber and holds the title of Senate president pro tempore.

The nine House Democrats who will serve as prosecutors set the trial in motion on Monday by delivering the article of impeachment to the Senate.

Texas. Corte Distrettuale Federale blocca la moratoria di Joe Biden.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-30.

I fatti sono semplici.

Joe Biden can quickly reverse many of Donald Trump’s immigration policies, experts say. Others will be more complicated.

Biden administration pauses deportations for 100 days and suspends “remain in Mexico” policy for asylum seekers

Ken Paxton files lawsuit challenging Biden administration’s pause on deportations

With a Democrat back in the White House, Texas Republicans prepare to go on offense

Federal judge temporarily blocks Biden’s 100-day deportation moratorium after Texas sues administration.

*

Nei quattro anni della passata Amministrazione, i giudici federali distrettuali liberal si son dati un gran da fare per bloccare sistematicamente i provvedimenti che erano stati emessi. Poi, dopo più di due anni, una Corte superiore aveva annullato le loro sentenze, ma l’effetto politico era stato raggiunto.

Cambiati i suonatori, la musica resta la stessa, ed i repubblicani hanno anche avuto modo di imparare dai liberal democratici come si conduce una simile guerra legale.

*

---

Cnbc. Federal judge temporarily blocks Biden’s pause on deportations after Texas challenge.

– A federal judge on Tuesday put a two-week hold on President Joe Biden’s effort to pause deportations from the U.S. for his first 100 days, delivering an early legal setback to the new president’s immigration agenda.

– U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton sided with the state of Texas, which argued that a Jan. 20 memorandum issued by acting Homeland Security Secretary David Pekoske freezing deportations is unlawful.

– Texas’ lawsuit is being led by the state’s attorney general, Ken Paxton, who has vowed to aggressively challenge the Biden administration in court. ….

U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton sided with the state of Texas, which is arguing that a Jan. 20 memorandum issued by acting Homeland Security Secretary David Pekoske freezing deportations is unlawful.

In an 18-page order, Tipton wrote that the Biden administration’s memorandum likely exceeds the administration’s authority, and that it may violate federal laws governing administrative procedure. ….

The memorandum, he wrote, “not only fails to consider potential policies more limited in scope and time, but it also fails to provide any concrete, reasonable justification for a 100-day pause on deportations.”

*

---

Federal judge temporarily blocks Biden’s 100-day deportation moratorium after Texas sues administration.

The deportation moratorium was part of a package of immigration-reform measures the new administration proposed on Inauguration Day.

A federal judge in Texas has temporarily blocked the Biden administration’s 100-day moratorium on deportations of some undocumented immigrants.

Federal Judge Drew Tipton on Tuesday issued the order after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued President Joe Biden’s administration late last week alleging the moratorium is unconstitutional and violates an agreement between the Department of Homeland Security and Texas.

“Within 6 days of Biden’s inauguration, Texas has HALTED his illegal deportation freeze,” Paxton tweeted after the order. “*This* was a seditious left-wing insurrection. And my team and I stopped it.”

Tipton’s restraining order is effective for 14 days as the state’s case against the moratorium continues.

Paxton argued the state would face financial harm if undocumented immigrants were released into the state because of costs associated with health care and education, and said the moratorium would also lure others to come to Texas. Tipton, an appointee of former President Donald Trump who took the bench last year, agreed.

“Texas argues that ‘the categorical refusal to remove aliens ordered removable will encourage additional illegal immigration into Texas,’ thereby exacerbating its public service costs. Such injury is not, as a legal matter, purely speculative,” he wrote. “The Court finds that the foregoing establishes a substantial risk of imminent and irreparable harm to Texas.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, who filed a brief urging Tipton to deny Paxton’s request, decried the ruling in a statement and argued Biden’s move was legal.

“Paxton sought to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election by attempting to baselessly suppress votes; now he is attempting to force the Biden administration to follow Trump’s xenophobic policies,” said Kate Huddleston, attorney for the ACLU of Texas. “The administration’s pause on deportations is not only lawful but necessary to ensure that families are not separated and people are not returned to danger needlessly while the new administration reviews past actions.”

Biden’s proposed moratorium was signed just hours after he took his oath of office and was one of several immigration-related orders, which included a stop to border wall construction. The pause in removals was part a review and reset of enforcement policies within Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agencies as the Biden administration “develops its final priorities,” according to a statement from the Department of Homeland Security.

The moratorium was to exclude any immigrant “suspected of terrorism or espionage, or otherwise poses a danger to the national security of the United States.” Those who entered after Nov. 1 and those who have voluntarily waived any rights to remain in the country, according to a DHS memo.

Paxton had also challenged the moratorium on the grounds that it violated an agreement signed by the Trump administration and Texas. The agreement requires the DHS to give notice to states before changing any immigration polices. The Biden administration questioned the validity of the agreements, which was signed just weeks before former President Trump left office.

“The federal government has plenary power over the enforcement of federal immigration law, and an outgoing administration cannot contract away that power for an incoming administration,” the federal attorneys said in a filing. But Tipton said his decision wasn’t based on those contracts.

“The issues implicated by that agreement are of such gravity and constitutional import that they require further development of the record and briefing prior to addressing the merits,” Tipton wrote.

During a hearing last Friday, the Biden administration indicated it would consider an immediate stop from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals if the restraining order was granted, Huddleston said.

The Biden administration also inherited a pending legal challenge from Paxton’s office over an Obama-era program that has shielded tens of thousands of Texas’ undocumented immigrants from deportation. The 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, grants some undocumented immigrants a renewable, two-year work permit and a reprieve from deportation proceedings. Trump announced an end to the program in 2017 but the program has survived several legal challenges, including a 2020 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that ruled the administration did not properly wind down the policy. But Paxton’s lawsuit, filed in 2018, is a separate challenge that questions the legality of the program.

Despite Tuesday’s setback for Biden, his administration is reportedly planning to issue more executive orders on immigration this week on family reunification and the federal “public charge” rule for immigrants where a person could be denied a visa or green card if they received a government benefit.

Singapore. Dicembre. Produzione Industriale +14.3% anno su anno.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-30.

Singapore ottiene a dicembre una Produzione Industriale anno su anno del +14.3%.

Sia Singapore sia tutto il sud-est asiatico, ora unito nel Rcep, Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, stanno evidenziano una ripresa senza precedenti dei loro sistemi economici.

*

Singapore. Q2. Pil -42.9% QoQ, -13.2% YoY.

Singapore. Giugno. Vendite al Dettaglio -27.8% anno su anno.

Singapore. Q2. Pil Trimestrale -41.2%, Annuale -12.6%.

Singapore. Produzione Industriale -9.3% anno su anno.

Singapore. Esportazioni non-petrolifere -8.10% yoy.

Singapore. Produzione industriale -8% anno su anno.

Crisi globale del debito. Chi avesse pensato di scapolarsela avrebbe duri risvegli.

Cina. Rcep. Non enfatizzato, il vero obiettivo è il controllo del mondo.

Asia. Firmato l’Accordo Rcep. Nasce il più grande mercato libero mondiale.

The world’s largest trade deal could be signed in 2020 — and the US isn’t in it

*

Solo per comparazione, la produzione industriale della eurozona era stata stimata essere il 13 gennaio -0.6%.

Produrre è possibile, solo che lo si voglia.

Kremlin. Durissima risposta diplomatica all’occidente.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-30.

«Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said»

«our Western partners, who are so worried about democracy in Russia, [should] concentrate on the settlement of their own problems»

«We paid attention to orchestrated and issued practically simultaneously, as if carbon copied, statements from Western politicians about the situation with illegal rallies held in our country, as well as about some other domestic issues»

«We offer our Western partners, who are so worried about democracy in Russia, to concentrate on the settlement of their own problems, – since you have a heap of them, …. “Take care of your own nationals and domestic democracy»

«It is strange to hear such statements from the countries where police do not hesitate to use riot control weapons to disperse protests»

«These are by no means just batons, but also tear gas, water cannons and rubber bullets used against civilians who have taken to the streets to express their democratic protest, be it a rally of ‘yellow vests’, a march on the Capitol, not to mention numerous clashes when local police disperse members of civil society for demonstrating against coronavirus restrictions, practically in all European countries»

«Dispersal of illegal demonstrations seems to be regarded as brutal only east of the European Union»

* * * * * * *

A nome del Kremlin, Mrs Maria Zakharova fa presente alcuni punti.

– Occidentali, pensate piuttosto ai fatti vostri.

– Occidentali, chi autorizza ad esprimere giudizi tranchant voi, che reprimete con le armi e la violenza le sommosse che avvengono in quasi tutti gli stati occidentali, per non menzionare l’assalto al Campidoglio?

*

Il vizietto di voler fare la morale agli altri è tediosa caratteristica dei liberal socialisti. Ma quelle accuse trovano credito solo nell’enclave occidentale liberal, che avviandosi alla sua irrilevanza mondiale.

*

---

Diplomat urges West to focus on their problems instead of preaching democracy to Russia

Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that “our Western partners, who are so worried about democracy in Russia, [should] concentrate on the settlement of their own problems”.

MOSCOW, January 28./TASS/. The Western countries censuring Russia for unauthorized demonstrations in support of blogger Alexey Navalny should think about keeping democracy alive at home, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told a briefing on Thursday.

“We paid attention to orchestrated and issued practically simultaneously, as if carbon copied, statements from Western politicians about the situation with illegal rallies held in our country, as well as about some other domestic issues,” the diplomat said.

“We offer our Western partners, who are so worried about democracy in Russia, to concentrate on the settlement of their own problems, – since you have a heap of them,” she said. “Take care of your own nationals and domestic democracy,” Zakharova stressed.

It is strange to hear such statements from the countries where police do not hesitate to use riot control weapons to disperse protests. “These are by no means just batons, but also tear gas, water cannons and rubber bullets used against civilians who have taken to the streets to express their democratic protest, be it a rally of ‘yellow vests’, a march on the Capitol, not to mention numerous clashes when local police disperse members of civil society for demonstrating against coronavirus restrictions” practically in all European countries,” the diplomat added.

“Dispersal of illegal demonstrations seems to be regarded as brutal only east of the European Union,” she remarked.

Unauthorized protest rallies in support of arrested opposition figure Alexey Navalny were held in Moscow and other major cities across Russia on January 23. National law enforcement agencies warned about liability for participation in such rallies. According to a TASS medical source, 42 law enforcement officers sustained injuries of different severity, while some protesters were also injured.

Francia. 2020. Pil -8.3% anno su anno, Exports -16.7, Imports -11.6%. – Nises.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-29.

In sintesi.

– Over the full year 2020, GDP fell sharply (–8.3%, after +1.5% in 2019)

– Household consumption expenditure fell sharply as a result of numerous store closures: –5.4% in Q4 2020

– Household consumption was clearly moving away from its pre-crisis level (–6.8% year-on-year)

– Imports -11.6%

– Exports -16.7%

– Household consumption -7.1%.

* * * * * * *

Diamo atto all’Istituto di Statistica Francese di non aver imbellettato i dati del pil, tentazione cui molti istituti centrali non hanno saputo resistere.

La ripresa senza riforme strutturali sarà davvero molto difficile.

*

---

The National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies ha rilasciato il Report:

GDP declined in Q4 2020 (– 1.3%), marked by the second lockdown; over the year 2020, GDP declined by 8.3%.

In Q4 2020, GDP in volume terms fell back: –1.3% after +18.5% in Q3 2020. The loss of activity this quarter was marked by the lockdown in effect from the end of October to mid-December and by the curfews put in place during the months of October and December. Nevertheless, the total loss of activity was much more moderate than during the first lockdown in March-May 2020: in Q4 2020, GDP was 5.0% below its level a year earlier (year-on-year change), whereas the year-on-year decline was of 18.8% in the second quarter. Over the full year 2020, GDP fell sharply (–8.3%, after +1.5% in 2019). This first estimate of the annual decline in activity and of the rest of the annual aggregates, by sum of the four quarters, will be consolidated when the 2020 provisional annual account will be published at the end of May 2021.

The effects of the second lockdown were mainly reflected in household consumption expenditure, which fell back sharply (–5.4% in Q4 after +18.2% in the previous quarter). On the other hand, gross fixed capital formation (GFCF) continued its recovery (+2.4% after +24.0%). Overall, total domestic demand (excluding changes in inventories) fell again, contributing – 2.7 points to GDP growth this quarter after +19.4 points in the previous quarter.

Foreign trade also pursued its recovery. For the second quarter in a row, exports increased more than imports (+4.8% after +21.9% for exports and +1.3% after +16.2% for imports). Overall, the foreign trade made a positive contribution to GDP growth this quarter: +0.9 points, after +0.8 points in Q3 2020. Finally, changes in inventories made a positive contribution to GDP growth (+0.4 points after – 1.7 points).

Blocco Europeo. 2020Q3. Debiti pubblici sul Pil 97.3%.

---

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-29.

In sintesi.

– the government debt to GDP ratio in the euro area stood at 97.3%

– In the EU, the ratio increased from 87.7% to 89.8%

– the increases are due to two factors – government debt increasing considerably, and GDP decreasing

– The highest ratios of government debt to GDP at the end of the third quarter of 2020 were recorded in Greece (199.9%), Italy (154.2%), Portugal (130.8%), Cyprus (119.5%), France (116.5%), Spain (114.1%) and Belgium (113.2%), and the lowest in Estonia (18.5%), Bulgaria (25.3%) and Luxembourg (26.1%)

* * * * * * *

Un debito pubblico di 11,112.102 miliardi di euro, destinato a crescere nel corso del tempo, è quasi al limite del default.

* * * * * * *

---

Eurostat. Third quarter of 2020.Government debt up to 97.3% of GDP in euro areau p to 89.8% of GDP in EU.

At the end of the third quarter of 2020, still impacted by policy responses to the COVID-19 containment measures, which materialised in increased financing needs, the government debt to GDP ratio in the euro area stood at 97.3%, compared with 95.0% at the end of the second quarter of 2020. In the EU, the ratio increased from 87.7% to 89.8%. Compared with the third quarter of 2019, the government debt to GDP ratio rose in both the euro area (from 85.8% to 97.3%) and the EU (from 79.2% to 89.8%): the increases are due to two factors – government debt increasing considerably, and GDP decreasing.

At the end of the third quarter of 2020, debt securities accounted for 82.3% of euro area and for 82.1% of EU general government debt. Loans made up 14.5% and 14.8% respectively and currency and deposits represented 3.3% of euro area and 3.1% of EU government debt. Due to the involvement of EU Member States’ governments in financial assistance to certain Member States, quarterly data on intergovernmental lending (IGL) are also published. The share of IGL as percentage of GDP at the end of the third quarter of 2020 amounted to 2.0% in the euro area and to 1.7% in the EU.

                         Government debt at the end of the third quarter 2020 by Member State.

The highest ratios of government debt to GDP at the end of the third quarter of 2020 were recorded in Greece (199.9%), Italy (154.2%), Portugal (130.8%), Cyprus (119.5%), France (116.5%), Spain (114.1%) and Belgium (113.2%), and the lowest in Estonia (18.5%), Bulgaria (25.3%) and Luxembourg (26.1%).

Compared with the second quarter of 2020, twenty Member States registered an increase in their debt to GDP ratio at the end of the third quarter of 2020 and five a decrease, while the ratio remained stable in Estonia and the Netherlands. The largest increases in the ratio were observed in Greece (+8.5 percentage points – pp), Cyprus (+6.2 pp), Italy (+4.9 pp), Portugal (+4.8 pp), Lithuania (+4.6 pp) and Bulgaria (+4.0 pp). The decreases were recorded in Austria (-3.4 pp), Finland (-1.7 pp), Czechia (-1.5 pp), Belgium (-0.9 pp) and Ireland (-0.7 pp).

Compared with the third quarter of 2019, all Member States registered an increase in their debt to GDP ratio at the end of the third quarter of 2020. The largest increases in the ratio were recorded in Cyprus (+22.9 pp), Italy (+17.4 pp), Greece (+17.3 pp), Spain (+16.6 pp) and France (+16.5 pp).

Italia. Banche. I crediti inesigibili sono il 21% di quelli europei.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-29.

Gli Npl, Non Performing Loans, sono quei crediti ormai non più esigibili, verso soggetti in stato di insolvenza: non si tratta semplicemente di crediti scaduti, ma di quelli che non saranno più riscossi se non in minima parte.

Non a caso vengono chiamate sofferenza.

E il Npl ratio è il rapporto tra questi e il totale dei crediti ed è un numero decisivo anche per noi: per capire quanto le banche italiane siano in crisi

Nel 2015 il 34% di tutti i Non Performing Loans europei erano italiani, questa percentuale è scesa nel 2020 al 21%.

Sostanzialmente le banche hanno continuato a liberarsi di queste sofferenze vendendo a prezzo stracciato i crediti a società che si occupano appunto di questo, di recuperare il poco recuperabile liberando le banche dall’incombenza.

Se si è contenti che la situazione stia migliorando, questo macrodato non è per nulla rassicurante sul futuro.

*

Gli Npl delle banche italiane sono il 21% di quelli europei.

Nel 2015 erano il 35%. Anche le banche sono al centro della discussione sul Mes

Si parla del riforma del Mes ormai da settimane e ormai la partita politica ha fatto perdere di vista quello che, la riforma di questo Mes, contiene davvero. Ci sono cambiamenti nelle procedure, ma anche tanta sostanza. Tra le novità c’è anche il via dal 2022 al Fondo di Risoluzione Unico per le banche, il “Common Backstop” che dovrebbe intervenire per salvare le banche dal default le banche, anche italiane, in crisi qualora il bail-in, quindi l’uso delle risorse di azionisti prima e risparmiatori poi, non bastasse, e neanche il fondo già alimentato dalle banche. Questo Fondo di Risoluzione Unico doveva partire dal 2024, ma viene anticipato di due anni.

                         Come salvare le banche italiane in crisi.

Tra i motivi c’è è il fatto che lo stato di salute delle banche europee appare molto migliorato negli ultimi anni, anche e soprattutto quello delle banche italiane in crisi. E lo si nota da uno degli indici che più di tutti è stato usato per osservare la loro solidità, il Npl Ratio. Ma che cosa sono i Non performing loans? Sono sono quei crediti ormai non più esigibili, verso soggetti in stato di insolvenza, non si tratta semplicemente di crediti scaduti, ma di quelli che non saranno più riscossi se non in minima parte. Non a caso vengono chiamate sofferenza. E il Npl ratio è il rapporto tra questi e il totale dei crediti ed è un numero decisivo anche per noi: per capire quanto le banche italiane siano in crisi.

                         Banche in crisi: solo Grecia e Cipro peggio di noi.

Nel nostro Paese nel momento peggiore è arrivato al 18%, si è trattato di uno dei dati peggiori d’Europa dopo quelli di Grecia e Cipro, ovviamente la miccia per questa fragilità era stata la crisi economica precedente, che aveva gettato sul lastrico aziende debitrici o fallite o non più in grado di onorare i crediti ottenuti. Il lavoro di risanamento effettuato negli anni successivi e la pur flebile ripresa hanno però dato i propri frutti.

Dopo il picco del 2015 e l’inversione di tendenza del 2016 c’è stata un’accelerazione della riduzione dei Non Performing Loans, che nel 2019, alla vigilia dell’emergenza Covid, erano scesi al 7,2% del totale. Come si vede dalla nostra mappa si trattava comunque di un dato molto superiore di quello medio europeo, che era del 2,9%.

I Paesi più virtuosi erano la Germania e la Repubblica Ceca con 1,2%, e ancora più la Svezia, con 0,5%, mentre Grecia, Cipro e Portogallo, con rispettivamente 37,4%, 21,1% e 8,3%, rimanevano gli unici con performance peggiori di quelle italiane. Questi erano i numeri del settembre 2019. Dopo di allora il Npl ratio è diminuito proprio laddove era più alto, nonostante la pandemia, mentre è rimasto stabile quando ormai a un livello fisiologicamente bassissimo.

Così nel giugno 2020 in media in Europa era sempre dell’1,3%, esattamente come in Germania e nel Regno Unito, del 2,3% in Francia, in leggero calo dal 2,6% di nove mesi prima, e del 3% in Spagna, contro il 3,4% del settembre 2019. In Italia invece la riduzione di questo indice è stata più importante. È diminuito fino al 6,1%, con un calo dell’1,1%. Ancora meglio ha fatto la Grecia portandolo al 30,3% dal 37,4%, e il Portogallo, in cui è sceso dall’8,3% al 5,7%.

                         I crediti inesigibili italiani sono il 21% del totale Ue.

Questo andamento è stato importante soprattutto perché ha ridimensionato il ruolo delle banche italiane come miccia principale di un’eventuale crisi finanziaria europea: difatti se nel 2015 il 34% di tutti i Non Performing Loans europei erano italiani, questa percentuale è scesa nel 2020 al 21%. Una cifra ancora molto alta, superiore alla quota di Pil che il nostro Paese rappresenta, ma comunque non più così estrema.

Sostanzialmente le banche hanno continuato a liberarsi di queste sofferenze vendendo a prezzo stracciato i crediti a società che si occupano appunto di questo, di recuperare il poco recuperabile liberando le banche dall’incombenza. I timori ora sono per la formazione di nuovi NPL, in seguito alla fine di questo periodo in cui la crisi è in un certo senso congelata, tra sussidi straordinari e cassa integrazione, quando alcune sofferenze provocate dagli effetti della pandemia risulteranno più evidenti.

Usa. 2020. Pil -3.5% anno su anno. – Bea.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-01-29.

In sintesi. Tabella.

– Real GDP decreased 3.5 percent in 2020 (from the 2019 annual level to the 2020 annual level)

– The decrease in real GDP in 2020 reflected decreases in PCE, exports, private inventory investment, nonresidential fixed investment, and state and local government that were partly offset by increases in federal government spending and residential fixed investment. Imports decreased

– Current-dollar GDP decreased 2.3 percent, or $500.6 billion, in 2020 to a level of $20.93 trillion, compared with an increase of 4.0 percent, or $821.3 billion, in 2019

– Measured from the fourth quarter of 2019 to the fourth quarter of 2020, real GDP decreased 2.5 percent during the period

– Disposable personal income decreased $372.5 billion, or 8.1 percent, in the fourth quarter, compared with a decrease of $638.9 billion, or 13.2 percent, in the third quarter

– Real disposable personal income decreased 9.5 percent, compared with a decrease of 16.3 percent.

* * * * * * *

Solo per comparazione, il pil cinese 2020 è aumentato del +6.5% anno su anno.

*

---

Bureau of Economic Analysis. Gross Domestic Product, 4th Quarter and Year 2020 (Advance Estimate).

Real gross domestic product (GDP) increased at an annual rate of 4.0 percent in the fourth quarter of 2020 (table 1), according to the “advance” estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the third quarter, real GDP increased 33.4 percent.

The GDP estimate released today is based on source data that are incomplete or subject to further revision by the source agency (see “Source Data for the Advance Estimate” on page 4). The “second” estimate for the fourth quarter, based on more complete data, will be released on February 25, 2021.

The increase in real GDP reflected increases in exports, nonresidential fixed investment, personal consumption expenditures (PCE), residential fixed investment, and private inventory investment that were partly offset by decreases in state and local government spending and federal government spending. Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, increased.

The increase in exports primarily reflected an increase in goods (led by industrial supplies and materials). The increase in nonresidential fixed investment reflected increases in all components, led by equipment. The increase in PCE was more than accounted for by spending on services (led by health care); spending on goods decreased (led by food and beverages). The increase in residential fixed investment primarily reflected investment in new single-family housing. The increase in private inventory investment primarily reflected increases in manufacturing and in wholesale trade that were partly offset by a decrease in retail trade.

Current‑dollar GDP increased 6.0 percent at an annual rate, or $309.2 billion, in the fourth quarter to a level of $21.48 trillion. In the third quarter, GDP increased 38.3 percent, or $1.65 trillion (tables 1 and 3). More information on the source data that underlie the estimates is available in the Key Source and Data Assumptions file on BEA’s website.

The price index for gross domestic purchases increased 1.7 percent in the fourth quarter, compared with an increase of 3.3 percent in the third quarter (table 4). The PCE price index increased 1.5 percent, compared with an increase of 3.7 percent in the third quarter. Excluding food and energy prices, the PCE price index increased 1.4 percent, compared with an increase of 3.4 percent.

Personal Income

Current-dollar personal income decreased $339.7 billion in the fourth quarter, compared with a decrease of $541.5 billion in the third quarter. The decrease in personal income was more than accounted for by decreases in personal current transfer receipts (notably, government social benefits related to the winding down of CARES Act pandemic relief programs) and proprietors’ income that were partly offset by increases in compensation and personal income receipts on assets (table 8).

Disposable personal income decreased $372.5 billion, or 8.1 percent, in the fourth quarter, compared with a decrease of $638.9 billion, or 13.2 percent, in the third quarter. Real disposable personal income decreased 9.5 percent, compared with a decrease of 16.3 percent.

Personal saving was $2.33 trillion in the fourth quarter, compared with $2.83 trillion in the third quarter. The personal saving rate—personal saving as a percentage of disposable personal income—was 13.4 percent in the fourth quarter, compared with 16.0 percent in the third quarter. Additional information on factors impacting quarterly personal income and saving can be found in “Effects of Selected Federal Pandemic Response Programs on Personal Income.”

GDP for 2020

Real GDP decreased 3.5 percent in 2020 (from the 2019 annual level to the 2020 annual level), compared with an increase of 2.2 percent in 2019 (table 1).

The decrease in real GDP in 2020 reflected decreases in PCE, exports, private inventory investment, nonresidential fixed investment, and state and local government that were partly offset by increases in federal government spending and residential fixed investment. Imports decreased (table 2).

The decrease in PCE in 2020 was more than accounted for by a decrease in services (led by food services and accommodations, health care, and recreation services). The decrease in exports reflected decreases in both services (led by travel) and goods (mainly non-automotive capital goods). The decrease in private inventory investment reflected widespread decreases led by retail trade (mainly motor vehicle dealers) and wholesale trade (mainly durable goods industries). The decrease in nonresidential fixed investment reflected decreases in structures (led by mining exploration, shafts, and wells) and equipment (led by transportation equipment) that were partly offset by an increase in intellectual property products (more than accounted for by software). The decrease in state and local government spending reflected a decrease in consumption expenditures (led by compensation).

The increase in federal government spending reflected an increase in nondefense consumption expenditures (led by an increase in purchases of intermediate services that supported the processing and administration of Paycheck Protection Program loan applications by banks on behalf of the federal government). The increase in residential fixed investment primarily reflected increases in improvements as well as brokers’ commissions and other ownership transfer costs.

Current-dollar GDP decreased 2.3 percent, or $500.6 billion, in 2020 to a level of $20.93 trillion, compared with an increase of 4.0 percent, or $821.3 billion, in 2019 (tables 1 and 3).

The price index for gross domestic purchases increased 1.2 percent in 2020, compared with an increase of 1.6 percent in 2019 (table 4). The PCE price index also increased 1.2 percent in 2020, compared with an increase of 1.5 percent. Excluding food and energy prices, the PCE price index increased 1.4 percent, compared with an increase of 1.7 percent.

Measured from the fourth quarter of 2019 to the fourth quarter of 2020, real GDP decreased 2.5 percent during the period (table 6). That compared with an increase of 2.3 percent during 2019.

The price index for gross domestic purchases, as measured from the fourth quarter of 2019 to the fourth quarter of 2020, increased 1.3 percent during 2020. That compared with an increase of 1.4 percent during 2019. The PCE price index increased 1.2 percent, compared with an increase of 1.5 percent. Excluding food and energy, the PCE price index increased 1.4 percent, compared with an increase of 1.6 percent.

Source Data for the Advance Estimate

Information on the source data and key assumptions used for unavailable source data in the advance estimate is provided in a Technical Note that is posted with the news release on BEA’s website. A detailed Key Source Data and Assumptions file is also posted for each release. For information on updates to GDP, see the “Additional Information” section that follows.