Credit spillovers from Eur banks to EM

Makes sense.

I always wondered how that loan demand was accommodated.
Never looked like the kind of lending US regulators would sanction.


Karim writes:

Interesting table from JPM.
Much larger dependence on credit from Eur banks for LATAM economies than from U.S. banks.
Poland/Russia not as surprising but still large!
Overall, domestic bank lending surveys in EM have also been moving towards a net tightening of lending standards.

Could be more severe credit contraction in those economies as a result of ongoing strains in Europe.

Euro area and US bank claims on EM
As of 2Q11
EUR Banks
US Banks
$ bn
% of dom cred
$ bn
% of dom cred
EM
1980.7
12.4
811.3
5.1
EM Asia
406.7
3.2
472.0
3.8
China
90.6
1.0
81.7
0.9
Korea
68.4
6.3
95.1
8.8
Latam
618.1
38.7
248.5
15.6
Brazil
285.0
23.1
97.6
7.9
Russia
113.5
16.1
23.8
3.4
Poland
249.0
95.6
14.4
5.5


Payrolls and a Fed rant

Utter failure of policy.

The Fed was certain it knew what Japan had done wrong and wasn’t going to make THOSE mistakes.

So it

Cut rates much more aggressively.

Said it would do whatever it takes.

Figured out how to do its job as liquidity provider after only 6 months of alphabet soup programs.

Did heaps of Quantitative Easing.

Did the twist.

And now, realizing its done about all it can do, says monetary policy can’t do it all.

And still fails to recognize publicly the actual problem is the budget deficit is way too small.

And doesn’t directly inform Congress that

there is no such thing as a solvency problem,

the Fed controls government interest rates, and not the market,

there is no long term deficit problem with regards to finance,

the only thing we owe China is a bank statement,

Quantitative Easing and rate cuts remove interest income from the economy, which allows the deficit to be that much larger,

etc.

as we continue to go the way of Japan.


Karim writes:

Some improvement around the edges but the larger narrative is employment rising only at a rate fast enough to keep the unemployment rate stable (not higher or lower)

  • NFP 80k with net revisions 102k
  • Unemp rate down to 9% from 9.1%
  • Average hourly earnings 0.2% and aggregate hours 0.1% barely ok for labor income once adjusted for inflation
  • Weather may have played a small role as construction employment turned from +27k to -20k
  • Diffusion index improved from 56.7 to 60.7; while encouraging in that the majority of industries are adding jobs, doesn’t say or mean they are necessarily adding jobs at an increasing rate
  • Other positives are median duration of unemployment falling from 22.2 weeks to 20.8 weeks and U6 measure falling from 16.5% to 16.2%
  • Don’t think this would have a big impact on the new Fed forecasts we saw the other day

Retail Sales and euro dynamics

Agreed.

Fundamentally, the 8%+ US federal budget deficit continues to support sufficient aggregate demand for modest GDP growth. Market participants don’t seem to understand this and were discounting a far higher probability of a recession than otherwise.

The strong euro/weak dollar strong stock dynamic continues, with the ECB continuing it’s strong euro policy of forced austerity in exchange for funding. However, this policy also slows growth in the euro zone, which tends to push deficits higher through softer tax revenues and higher transfer payments. At some point this means the ECB has to reconsider a policy designed to bring deficits down that is instead causing them to rise. The problem is they have no such alternative policy, and instead are looking for tight fiscal policy to drive exports. The problem with that is that without a policy of buying $US (the old German model), instead of exports rising, the euro rises to the point where trade stays relatively balanced, as has been the case since the inception of the euro.

Meanwhile, they seem to have responded adequately to the solvency issue with the ECB writing the check as needed. But with a slowing economy the checks the ECB must write get geometrically larger, which, while not an operational constraint, are a daunting political challenge that can quickly throw it all into even more disarray.


Karim writes:

  • Better than expected at 1.1% headline and 0.6% control group, and net +0.5% revisions to July and August control group.
  • Motor vehicles and parts clearly lifted in mid to late Q3 from end of supply chain disruptions
  • And lower gas prices also helping
  • These forces are looking to bring Q3 and Q4 growth near 2.5%, lower than the 3% plus that the Fed was looking for in Q2, but stronger than the post-debt ceiling debacle private sector consensus.
  • Also strong enough to delay need for ‘additional measures’ from Fed, though they will continue to be discussed in light of risks from Europe (via trade impact as well as financial conditions impact (fx, equities, bank lending,etc).

FOMC Statement(3 dissents)


Karim writes:

Pretty tepid response in light of the changed assessment of current conditions and outlook. No hike thru early 2013 was already priced, so stating that they are unlikely to hike thru at-least mid 2013 doesn’t buy them that much more in terms of taking out tightening. Also, didn’t apply ‘extended period’ to balance sheet nor say anything about balance sheet composition other than they will review (which they said last time as well). Made indirect reference to QE3 in last paragraph-saying ‘range of tools’ was discussed and they may be employed as appropriate.

Right, careful not to offend China.

New
Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in June indicates that economic growth so far this year has been considerably slower than the Committee had expected.

Yes, the first half was revised down which they didn’t expect.
But they did not indicate it has been improving quarter to quarter though Q1 and Q2 GDP and their forecast shows that.

Indicators suggest a deterioration in overall labor market conditions in recent months, and the unemployment rate has moved up. Household spending has flattened out, investment in nonresidential structures is still weak, and the housing sector remains depressed. However, business investment in equipment and software continues to expand. Temporary factors, including the damping effect of higher food and energy prices on consumer purchasing power and spending as well as supply chain disruptions associated with the tragic events in Japan, appear to account for only some of the recent weakness in economic activity. Inflation picked up earlier in the year, mainly reflecting higher prices for some commodities and imported goods, as well as the supply chain disruptions. More recently, inflation has moderated as prices of energy and some commodities have declined from their earlier peaks. Longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.

Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee now expects a somewhat slower pace of recovery over coming quarters than it did at the time of the previous meeting

Yes, seems their forecasts are a bit lower, but still higher than the actual Q1 and Q2 results.

and anticipates that the unemployment rate will decline only gradually toward levels that the Committee judges to be consistent with its dual mandate. Moreover, downside risks to the economic outlook have increased. The Committee also anticipates that inflation will settle, over coming quarters, at levels at or below those consistent with the Committee’s dual mandate as the effects of past energy and other commodity price increases dissipate further. However, the Committee will continue to pay close attention to the evolution of inflation and inflation expectations.

That implies the possibility of core moderating some, which Goldman has also forecast.

To promote the ongoing economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at levels consistent with its mandate, the Committee decided today to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent. The Committee currently anticipates that economic conditions–including low rates of resource utilization and a subdued outlook for inflation over the medium run–are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through mid-2013. The Committee also will maintain its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its securities holdings. The Committee will regularly review the size and composition of its securities holdings and is prepared to adjust those holdings as appropriate.

In line with their understanding with China and something closer to a strong dollar policy.

The Committee discussed the range of policy tools available to promote a stronger economic recovery in a context of price stability. It will continue to assess the economic outlook in light of incoming information and is prepared to employ these tools as appropriate.

Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman; William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman; Elizabeth A. Duke; Charles L. Evans; Sarah Bloom Raskin; Daniel K. Tarullo; and Janet L. Yellen.

Voting against the action were: Richard W. Fisher, Narayana Kocherlakota, and Charles I. Plosser, who would have preferred to continue to describe economic conditions as likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate for an extended period.
2011 Monetary Policy Releases

Old
Release Date: June 22, 2011
Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in April indicates that the economic recovery is continuing at a moderate pace, though somewhat more slowly than the Committee had expected. Also, recent labor market indicators have been weaker than anticipated. The slower pace of the recovery reflects in part factors that are likely to be temporary, including the damping effect of higher food and energy prices on consumer purchasing power and spending as well as supply chain disruptions associated with the tragic events in Japan. Household spending and business investment in equipment and software continue to expand. However, investment in nonresidential structures is still weak, and the housing sector continues to be depressed. Inflation has picked up in recent months, mainly reflecting higher prices for some commodities and imported goods, as well as the recent supply chain disruptions. However, longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.

Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The unemployment rate remains elevated; however, the Committee expects the pace of recovery to pick up over coming quarters and the unemployment rate to resume its gradual decline toward levels that the Committee judges to be consistent with its dual mandate. Inflation has moved up recently, but the Committee anticipates that inflation will subside to levels at or below those consistent with the Committee’s dual mandate as the effects of past energy and other commodity price increases dissipate. However, the Committee will continue to pay close attention to the evolution of inflation and inflation expectations.

To promote the ongoing economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at levels consistent with its mandate, the Committee decided today to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent. The Committee continues to anticipate that economic conditions–including low rates of resource utilization and a subdued outlook for inflation over the medium run–are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate for an extended period. The Committee will complete its purchases of $600 billion of longer-term Treasury securities by the end of this month and will maintain its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its securities holdings. The Committee will regularly review the size and composition of its securities holdings and is prepared to adjust those holdings as appropriate.

Claims/Durables/GDP

Karim says:

CLAIMS

  • Labor Dept cites delayed filings in 4 states (Georgia, Alabama, North and South Carolina) as cause for 51k back-up in claims.
  • Those states probably depressed prior number, so current level likely closer to 420k; consistent with 150-200k gains in payrolls

ORDERS

  • Core capital goods orders rise 1.4% in December after 3.1% gain prior month; running at 9% at a 3mth annualized rate
  • Core shipments up 1.7% after 1.4% gain
  • Core shipments and core orders both revised higher for October and November

GDP

  • See notable upside risk to Q4 GDP tomorrow. Consensus 3.5%.
    Focus appears too much on inventory drag (which will be large) and not enough on contribution from net trade and these capex revisions.
  • Could see 5% print tomorrow.

ISM-Strong

Karim writes:

* Headline came in as expected, but details strong.
* Gap between new orders and inventories (which declined sharply for both suppliers and customers) at highest since May 2010.
* Employment down modestly but still at high level.
* Prices paid remains elevated but appears of little consequence for inflation; Prices Paid ranged from 60 to 80 for most of 2010 and inflation slowed throughout the year.

Anecdotes:
* “Company outlook looks positive into 2011. Solid revenue growth across the globe driven by strong volume in Q3 and Q4 2010.” (Chemical Products)
* “We continue to see strong demand for our product in Europe and Asia.” (Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components)
* “The end of the year is surprisingly busy.” (Computer & Electronic Products)
* “Business remains slow, while vendors clamor for increases that should have no foundation in economics.” (Nonmetallic Mineral Products)
* “Strong pressure still exists on raw material prices in almost every area. It is unclear as to whether they can get them.” (Plastics & Rubber Products)

=====Dec 2010 | Nov 2010

Index ……………….57.0 56.6
Prices paid…………72.5 69.5
Production………..60.7 55.0
New orders………. 60.9 56.6
Inventories………..51.8 56.7
Customer inv…….40.0 45.5
Employment………55.7 57.5
Export orders……54.5 57.0
Imports……………..50.5 53.0

Data Recap from Karim

Karim writes:

The overall income numbers held up well for November despite the weak payroll number; momentum building for consumer spending; capex staged solid rebound

  • Personal income up 0.3%
  • Real disposable income (after inflation and taxes) up 0.2%
  • Personal spending up 0.3% and up 3.8% last 3mths annualized
  • Core PCE deflator 0.1% and 0.8% y/y
  • Capital goods orders ex-aircraft and defense rebound 2.6%; prior month revised from -4.5% to -3.6%
  • Initial claims drop 3k to 420k

Belgian Business Confidence survey chart attached-Considered a very good proxy for Euro-wide economic activity.

Interesting that unlike wobble after sovereign debt pressures picked up in May, activity has surged higher in Q4 (data just released was for December).

Bernanke speech


Karim writes:

  • Very substantive speech from Bernanke
  • Message is basically, ‘growth has slowed more than we expected’ BUT ‘conditions are ALREADY in place for a pick-up’ and if we are wrong, we are ready to take action, which contrary to some perceptions, will be effective


Yes, contrary to my opinion. This about managing expectations. With falling inflation and unemployment this high it makes no sense that they would be holding back something that could make a material difference.

  • To me, they lay out very credible factors for a pick-up in growth.


Agreed.

  • The risk of either an undesirable rise in inflation or of significant further disinflation seems low-THIS LINE ARGUES AGAINST ANY NEAR-TERM ACTION


Again, if they did have anything that would substantially increase agg demand they’d have done it.

  • When listing available options for further action if needed, he clearly favors further ‘credit easing’ relative to the other choices. He states why they reinvested in USTs vs MBS.


Yes, and, again, it’s doubtful lower credit spreads will do much for the macro economy but would shift a lot of credit risks to the Fed for very little gain.

  • Selected excerpts in italics, with key comments in bold.

FRB: Bernanke, The Economic Outlook and Monetary Policy

At best, though, fiscal impetus and the inventory cycle can drive recovery only temporarily.

That is not correct. Fiscal adjustment can sustain demand at any politically desired level.

For a sustained expansion to take hold, growth in private final demand–notably, consumer spending and business fixed investment–must ultimately take the lead. On the whole, in the United States, that critical handoff appears to be under way.

Agreed that hand off is slowly materializing and private sector debt expansion will then drive additional growth. But sustained expansion could come immediately from a fiscal adjustment as well.

However,although private final demand, output, and employment have indeed been growing for more than a year, the pace of that growth recently appears somewhat less vigorous than we expected.

Agreed.


Among the most notable results to emerge from the recent revision of the U.S. national income data is that, in recent quarters, household saving has been higher than we thought–averaging near 6 percent of disposable income rather than 4 percent, as the earlier data showed.

Non govt net savings of financial assets = govt deficit spending by identity, and with foreign sector savings relatively constant, the majority of the increase is in the domestic economy, either businesses or households.

That means in general household savings goes up with the deficit regardless of the level of consumer spending.

However, when household savings does start to fall, it’s due to household credit expansion, at which time, if the deficit is unchanged, the savings of financial assets is shifted to either the business or the foreign sector.

And, as growth accelerates, the automatic fiscal stabilizers- increased federal revenues and falling transfer payments- reduce the deficit and therefore reduce the growth in the total net savings of the other sectors.

So the hand off process is usually characterized by the federal deficit falling as private sector debt expands to ‘replace it.’

This continues until the private sector again necessarily gets over leveraged, ending the expansion.

3 On the one hand, this finding suggests that households, collectively, are even more cautious about the economic outlook and their own prospects than we previously believed.

At best his means that he thinks with this much savings households would start leveraging more.


But on the other hand, the upward revision to the saving rate also implies greater progress in the repair of household balance sheets. Stronger balance sheets should in turn allow households to increase their spending more rapidly as credit conditions ease and the overall economy improves.

Yes, as I explained. He seems to understand the sequence of the data but doesn’t seem to be quite there on the causation.

Going forward, improved affordability–the result of lower house prices and record-low mortgage rates–should boost the demand for housing. However, the overhang of foreclosed-upon and vacant housing and the difficulties of many households in obtaining mortgage financing are likely to continue to weigh on the pace of residential investment for some time yet

Yes, which is a traditional source of private sector credit expansion, along with cars, that drives the process.

Generally speaking, large firms in good financial condition can obtain credit easily and on favorable terms; moreover, many large firms are holding exceptionally large amounts of cash on their balance sheets. For these firms, willingness to expand–and, in particular, to add permanent employees–depends primarily on expected increases in demand for their products, not on financing costs.

I couldn’t agree more!
Employment is primarily a function of sales as discussed in prior posts.

Bank-dependent smaller firms, by contrast, have faced significantly greater problems obtaining credit, according to surveys and anecdotes. The Federal Reserve, together with other regulators, has been engaged in significant efforts to improve the credit environment for small businesses. For example, through the provision of specific guidance and extensive examiner training, we are working to help banks strike a good balance between appropriate prudence and reasonable willingness to make loans to creditworthy borrowers. We have also engaged in extensive outreach efforts to banks and small businesses. There is some hopeful news on this front: For the most part, bank lending terms and conditions appear to be stabilizing and are even beginning to ease in some cases, and banks reportedly have become more proactive in seeking out creditworthy borrowers.

Another problem is that the regulators are forcing small banks to reduce what’s called ‘non core funding’ in a confused strategy to enhance small bank ‘deposit stability.’ Unfortunately, at the local level the regulators have interpreted the rules to mean, for example, it’s better for a small bank’s financial stability to fund, for example, a 3 year business loan with 1 year local deposits, vs funding it with a 5 year advance from the Federal Home loan bank. It’s also a fallacy of composition, as at the macro level there aren’t enough core deposits to fund local small businesses, as many larger corporations and individuals use money center banks and leave their deposits with them. The regulatory insistence on small banks using ‘core deposits’ rather than ‘wholesale funding’ recycled from the larger banks causes a shortage of local deposits and forces the small banks to pay substantially higher rates as they compete with each other for funding artificially limited by regulation.

In lieu of adding permanent workers, some firms have increased labor input by increasing workweeks, offering full-time work to part-time workers, and making extensive use of temporary workers.

Yes, and when you include this growth in employment the economy is doing better than most analysts seem to think.

Like others, we were surprised by the sharp deterioration in the U.S. trade balance in the second quarter. However, that deterioration seems to have reflected a number of temporary and special factors. Generally, the arithmetic contribution of net exports to growth in the gross domestic product tends to be much closer to zero, and that is likely to be the case in coming quarters.

Also, part of the hand off will be US consumers going into debt (reducing savings) to buy foreign goods and services, which increases foreign sector savings of financial assets.

Overall, the incoming data suggest that the recovery of output and employment in the United States has slowed in recent months, to a pace somewhat weaker than most FOMC participants projected earlier this year. Much of the unexpected slowing is attributable to the household sector, where consumer spending and the demand for housing have both grown less quickly than was anticipated. Consumer spending may continue to grow relatively slowly in the near term as households focus on repairing their balance sheets. I expect the economy to continue to expand in the second half of this year, albeit at a relatively modest pace.

Agreed.

Despite the weaker data seen recently, the preconditions for a pickup in growth in 2011 appear to remain in place.

Agreed.

Monetary policy remains very accommodative,

Yes, for many borrowers, but the lower rates have also net reduced incomes. QE alone resulted in some $50 billion of ‘profits’ transfered to the Treasury from the Fed that would have been private sector income, for example.

and financial conditions have become more supportive of growth, in part because a concerted effort by policymakers in Europe has reduced fears related to sovereign debts and the banking system there.

Agreed.

Banks are improving their balance sheets and appear more willing to lend.

Agreed, though via a reduction in interest earned by savers that’s gone to increased net interest margins for banks.

Consumers are reducing their debt and building savings, returning household wealth-to-income ratios near to longer-term historical norms.

Yes, ‘funded’ by the federal deficit spending.

Stronger household finances, rising incomes, and some easing of credit conditions will provide the basis for more-rapid growth in household spending next year.

Yes, and that basis is credit expansion.

On the fiscal front, state and local governments continue to be under pressure; but with tax receipts showing signs of recovery, their spending should decline less rapidly than it has in the past few years. Federal fiscal stimulus seems set to continue to fade but likely not so quickly as to derail growth in coming quarters.

Yes, and traditionally matched or exceeded by private sector credit expansion as above.

Recently, inflation has declined to a level that is slightly below that which FOMC participants view as most conducive to a healthy economy in the long run. With inflation expectations reasonably stable and the economy growing, inflation should remain near current readings for some time before rising slowly toward levels more consistent with the Committee’s objectives. At this juncture, the risk of either an undesirable rise in inflation or of significant further disinflation seems low. Of course, the Federal Reserve will monitor price developments closely.

The channels through which the Fed’s purchases affect longer-term interest rates and financial conditions more generally have been subject to debate.

With the debate subsiding as more FOMC participants, but far from all of them, seem to be coming to understand the quantity of the reserves per se has no consequences.

I see the evidence as most favorable to the view that such purchases work primarily through the so-called portfolio balance channel, which holds that once short-term interest rates have reached zero, the Federal Reserve’s purchases of longer-term securities affect financial conditions by changing the quantity and mix of financial assets held by the public. Specifically, the Fed’s strategy relies on the presumption that different financial assets are not perfect substitutes in investors’ portfolios, so that changes in the net supply of an asset available to investors affect its yield and those of broadly similar assets. Thus, our purchases of Treasury, agency debt, and agency MBS likely both reduced the yields on those securities and also pushed investors into holding other assets with similar characteristics, such as credit risk and duration. For example, some investors who sold MBS to the Fed may have replaced them in their portfolios with longer-term, high-quality corporate bonds, depressing the yields on those assets as well.

This is evidence Bernanke himself has come around to the understanding that the quantity of reserves at the Fed per se is of no further economic consequence.

We decided to reinvest in Treasury securities rather than agency securities because the Federal Reserve already owns a very large share of available agency securities, suggesting that reinvestment in Treasury securities might be more effective in reducing longer-term interest rates and improving financial conditions with less chance of adverse effects on market functioning.

Again, it shows the understanding that QE channel is price (interest rates) and not quantities.
This is a very constructive move from understanding indicated in prior statements.

Also, as I already noted, reinvestment in Treasury securities is more consistent with the Committee’s longer-term objective of a portfolio made up principally of Treasury securities. We do not rule out changing the reinvestment strategy if circumstances warrant, however.

In particular, the Committee is prepared to provide additional monetary accommodation through unconventional measures if it proves necessary, especially if the outlook were to deteriorate significantly. The issue at this stage is not whether we have the tools to help support economic activity and guard against disinflation. We do. As I will discuss next, the issue is instead whether, at any given juncture, the benefits of each tool, in terms of additional stimulus, outweigh the associated costs or risks of using the tool.

Notwithstanding the fact that the policy rate is near its zero lower bound, the Federal Reserve retains a number of tools and strategies for providing additional stimulus. I will focus here on three that have been part of recent staff analyses and discussion at FOMC meetings: (1) conducting additional purchases of longer-term securities, (2) modifying the Committee’s communication, and (3) reducing the interest paid on excess reserves. I will also comment on a fourth strategy, proposed by several economists–namely, that the FOMC increase its inflation goals.

In my humble opinion those tools carry no risk and provide no reward to the macro economy.

CPI

Can’t resist the temptation to repeat my suspicions that zero interest rate policy is deflationary from the supply and the demand side.

:)


Karim writes:

Great number for low for long camp; gives Fed ample cover to stay on hold.
Y/Y Core now at 34yr low of 0.9%; but likely to bottom around these levels as base comparisons begin to get a bit tougher.

Headline CPI -.07% m/m; Core +.05%
Trend variables stay on trend; volatile components offsetting

  • OER unch; medical 0.2%; education 0.2%
  • Apparel -0.7%; Lodging away from home +1.4%

ISM


[Skip to the end]

Agreed.

We could see positive growth for while without much improvement in final demand, supported longer term by government, exports, and investment.

Equity markets strong, better than expected earnings, with real estate to follow with a lag, and high unemployment keeping real wages/business costs down.

Real wealth continues to flow from the bottom to the top.

Risks include rising marginal tax rates next year and other possible demand drains from one time fiscal adjustments running their course. But that’s too far ahead for markets to discount.


Karim writes:

Details strong; anecdotes weak. Suggests an inventory restocking, but little to no improvement in final demand.

Consistent with Fed baseline of H2 restocking to lead to positive Q3 and Q4 growth but concern over next catalyst going into 2010.

Strength in orders vs inventories could well see headline rise above 50 next month.



July June
Index 48.9 44.8
Prices paid 55.0 50.0
Production 57.9 52.5
New Orders 55.3 49.2
Inventories 33.5 30.8
Employment 45.6 40.7
Export Orders 50.5 49.5
Imports 50.0 46.0

* “[There is concern about] overall health of strategic suppliers — continue to see new suppliers filing Chapter 7 or 11, posing significant risk to supply chain.” (Machinery)

* “We believe our inventories are now at the bottom of this cycle, driving stronger demand for raw materials.” (Paper Products)

* “While our aftermarket business has improved slightly, we are still awaiting an increase in OEM demand.” (Transportation Equipment)

* “No stimulus for manufacturing.” (Fabricated Metal Products)

* “Looking at another round of shutdowns to align supply with projected demands.” (Nonmetallic Mineral Products)


[top]