Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 215

What happened in the last Korean War?

As the drums of war beat ever louder in Korea, many people have asked me about what happened to share prices during the last Korean War. It is a fascinating story as the 1951-52 stock market fall in Australia was the only instance of a major sell-off here that was not accompanied by a fall in the US market. At all other times, we follow the US market up and down.

Australian and US markets diverge

Share prices surged during the early stages of the War but then the Australian market fell by 36% from 7 May 1951 to 29 September 1952 and then rose only very weakly in 1953-54. In contrast, the US market remained strong throughout the War, pausing only briefly at the end of the war in 1953 before surging strongly again in 1954.

Here is a daily chart of the Sydney All Ordinaries Index (green) and the US Dow Jones (red) from the middle of 1949 to the end of 1954.

Please click on image to enlarge.

It was feared that the Korean War may start World War III but it ended in a stalemate in mid-1953 with Korea divided in two, as it remains today. The prelude was Mao Zedong declaring the People’s Republic of China on 1 October 1949, and the US sending the first war ships and planes as a show of force against China in May 1950, before sending in troops in September. Australia supported the US by also sending in troops.

Other global events

In addition, there were a number of other cold war skirmishes around the world at the time, with the Soviets brutally suppressing uprisings in Eastern Europe, the French losing the first Indochina war, the Anglo-Persian dispute in May 1951, the Kashmir dispute in July 1951 that threatened to reignite the India-Pakistan war, and the start of the Cuban revolution.

The US was testing atom bombs and H-bombs in the Pacific while Australia was allowing the UK to test nuclear bombs here on our flora, fauna and aboriginal population. The threat of communism drove domestic politics in Australia and the US. In Australia, Chifley was trying but failing to nationalise the banks, and was defeated by Menzies. In the US, Truman was trying and also failing to nationalise the steel industry, replaced by Eisenhower. In Australia, we had the Petrov defection and the Soviet espionage affair, and the US had McCarthyist witch-hunts for suspected communists. Everywhere there were union agitation and strikes that were quickly branded as communist inspired.

Why was the Australian market so weak?

Why did Australian share prices fall while US shares powered through it all? The answer is inflation (shown in the chart as orange bars) and the War was only partly to blame. Inflation in Australia was already running at 9% in 1949 and 1950 but shot up quickly to 25% by the end of 1951. It was partly due to the surge in post-WW2 demand as war-time price controls were lifted, but it was made much worse by our centralised wage fixing system that increased wages as prices rose, creating an inflationary spiral. The 30% devaluation of the Australian pound in 1949 (when Sterling devalued and we stuck with Sterling not the US dollar) did not help.

Another major factor was the trebling of the price of wool (our main export earner) as the US bought up all of our wool (and many other commodities) in advance for the War effort, leading to a surge in export revenues. The banks were also to blame, ignoring the regulator’s various attempts to rein in their profligate post-war lending boom. Runaway inflation was only brought back below 5% in 1953 by a combination of savage sales tax hikes, tariff hikes, spending cuts and lending controls.

The differences between Australia and the US were mainly in our domestic policy responses to inflation, not the War itself. The US also had an inflation spike in 1951 but it peaked at 9% and fell to very low levels again (below 2%) by 1952 as the Fed raised interest rates. The Korean War hyperinflation episode in Australia and the deflationary recession that followed in 1953 provided much of the impetus that led to the formation of the Reserve Bank and the short-term money market in 1959 that would allow credit and economic activity to be controlled via short-term interest rates as it was in the US.

What might the future hold?

First, war is usually a disaster for investors on the losing side – their assets are generally confiscated, their debts are repudiated, companies are expropriated and ownership rights in shares, bonds and property are confiscated. Examples include: the Paris Bourse after the Waterloo loss, Confederate bonds and shares after the American Civil War, St Petersburg stock market after the Russian Revolution, the Shanghai stock market after the Chinese Revolution, Berlin and Tokyo shares after WW2, Saigon shares after victory by North Vietnam, etc. The victors take everything and impose their own new laws.

So, if you believe the next Korean War will lead to Australia being invaded, occupied and subsumed by China with all privately-owned assets confiscated (as Mao Zedong did when he won the revolutionary war in China in 1949) then you should probably sell all your assets while there is still a free market for them. But the chance of Australia being invaded and absorbed into a greater Communist China any time soon is approximately zero. Even when China absorbed Hong Kong in 1997 and Macau in 1999, private commercial interests were retained and indeed flourished.

Otherwise, wars and rapid military build-ups are generally good for business. Commodities prices skyrocket because demand suddenly accelerates as the government buys up everything for the war effort. Governments often control prices (and perhaps share prices) to prevent excess profiteering. Even in Australia’s darkest year in WW2, 1942, with Japanese bombs raining down across Northern Australia after the fall of Singapore and with Sydney Harbour bombed by Japanese subs, Australian shares returned 18%, or a healthy 9% after inflation.

Since the GFC, every central banker in the world has been dreaming about how to revive inflation, and they are fully aware that military conflict is the only sure solution. As military build-ups escalate in China, the US, Japan and Russia, central bankers are likely to allow inflation to rise for a while before taking steps too little and too late to bring it back under control.

 

Ashley Owen is Chief Investment Officer at privately-owned advisory firm Stanford Brown and The Lunar Group. He is also a Director of Third Link Investment Managers, a fund that supports Australian charities. This article is general information that does not consider the circumstances of any individual.

2 Comments
ashley
August 17, 2017

hi warren,
Since the late 1970s central bankers had abandoned their Keynesian hard-wiring and instead re-taught themselves that inflation was bad and had to be attacked at the first sign. But the US in 2008-9 and Europe in 2010-1 raised the prospect of deflationary spirals like Japan in the 1990s and US/UK/Europe in the 1930s, and this turned them into pro-inflation champions once again. They lie awake at night salivating at the thought of high inflation and wondering how they might create it. With QE programs, negative interest rates and direct cash hand-outs they actively set out to create asset price inflation (in shares, property, bonds) in the misguided hope that it would trickle down to consumer price inflation and wages growth but it hasn't.
They are also aware that the last time a central banker was pro-active in fighting inflation (Greenspan in 1994) it led to big losses in bond markets, which in turn triggered hedge fund collapses, city government bankruptcies, etc. Today with bond prices at super-high levels and skinny credit spreads, they will err on the side of waiting and watching, for fear of a major sell-off triggering bankruptcies in the zombie European banks. Because of the lags in data collection, policy making, decision making, and flow-on effects, by the time they take corrective action it will be too little, too late, and that will probably mean big corrective steps that will cause economic relapses, job losses, etc. Lags and cycles will always beat attempts to smooth the ride.

cheers

ashley

Warren Brainard-Smith
August 17, 2017

Ashley, What exactly do you mean by this statementa:

Since the GFC, every central banker in the world has been dreaming about how to revive inflation, and they are fully aware that military conflict is the only sure solution. As military build-ups escalate in China, the US, Japan and Russia, central bankers are likely to allow inflation to rise for a while before taking steps too little and too late to bring it back under control.

Regards

Warren

 

Leave a Comment:


RELATED ARTICLES

Reality bites

Is 'The Great Australian Dream' a sham?

A banking crisis is here, the credit crunch may be next

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Vale Graham Hand

It’s with heavy hearts that we announce Firstlinks’ co-founder and former Managing Editor, Graham Hand, has died aged 66. Graham was a legendary figure in the finance industry and here are three tributes to him.

The nuts and bolts of family trusts

There are well over 800,000 family trusts in Australia, controlling more than $3 trillion of assets. Here's a guide on whether a family trust may have a place in your individual investment strategy.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 583 with weekend update

Investing guru Howard Marks says he had two epiphanies while visiting Australia recently: the two major asset classes aren’t what you think they are, and one key decision matters above all else when building portfolios.

  • 24 October 2024

Warren Buffett is preparing for a bear market. Should you?

Berkshire Hathaway’s third quarter earnings update reveals Buffett is selling stocks and building record cash reserves. Here’s a look at his track record in calling market tops and whether you should follow his lead and dial down risk.

Preserving wealth through generations is hard

How have so many wealthy families through history managed to squander their fortunes? This looks at the lessons from these families and offers several solutions to making and keeping money over the long-term.

A big win for bank customers against scammers

A recent ruling from The Australian Financial Complaints Authority may herald a new era for financial scams. For the first time, a bank is being forced to reimburse a customer for the amount they were scammed.

Latest Updates

Shares

Looking beyond banks for dividend income

The Big Four banks have had an extraordinary run and it’s left income investors with a conundrum: to stick with them even though they now offer relatively low dividend yields and limited growth prospects or to look elsewhere.

Exchange traded products

AFIC on its record discount, passive investing and pricey stocks

A triple headwind has seen Australia's biggest LIC swing to a 10% discount and scuppered its relative performance. Management was bullish in an interview with Firstlinks, but is the discount ever likely to close?

Superannuation

Hidden fees are a super problem

Most Australians don’t realise they are being charged up to six different types of fees on their superannuation. These fees can be opaque and hard to compare across different funds and investment options.

Shares

ASX large cap outlook for 2025

Economic growth in Australia looks to have bottomed, which means it makes sense to selectively add to cyclical exposures on the ASX in addition to key thematics like decarbonisation and technological change.

Property

Taking advantage of the property cycle

Understanding the property cycle can be a useful tool to make informed decisions and stay focused on long-term goals. This looks at where we are in the commercial property cycle and the potential opportunities for investors.

Investment strategies

Is this bedrock of financial theory a mirage?

The concept of an 'equity risk premium' has driven asset allocation decisions for decades. A revamped study suggests it was a relatively short-lived phenomenon rather than the mainstay many thought.

Vale Graham Hand

It’s with heavy hearts that we announce Firstlinks’ co-founder and former Managing Editor, Graham Hand, has died aged 66. Graham was a legendary figure in the finance industry and here are three tributes to him.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2024 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.