The future of global capitalism _the_

Document Sample
The future of global capitalism _the_ Powered By Docstoc
					The future of global capitalism (the)
The future of global capitalism (the)
By Martin Wolf 2009-03-09
Another ideological god has failed. The assumptions that ruled policy and politics
over three decades suddenly look as outdated as revolutionary socialism.
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are:
'I'm from the government and I'm here to
help.'?" Thus quipped Ronald Reagan, hero of US conservatism.
The remark seems ancient history now that governments are pouring trillions of
dollars, euros and pounds into financial systems.
"Governments bad; deregulated markets good": how can this
faith escape unscathed after Alan Greenspan, pupil of Ayn Rand and predominant
central banker of the era, described himself, in congressional testimony last October,
as being "in a state of shocked disbelief" over the failure of the
"self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders'
In the west, the pro-market ideology of the past three decades was a reaction to the
perceived failure of the mixed-economy, Keynesian model of the 1950s, 1960s and
1970s. The move to the market was associated with the election of Reagan as US
president in 1980 and the ascent to the British prime ministership of Margaret
Thatcher the year before. Little less important was the role of Paul Volcker, then
chairman of the Federal Reserve, in crushing inflation.
Yet bigger events shaped this epoch: the shift of China from the plan to the market
under Deng Xiaoping, the collapse of Soviet communism between 1989 and 1991 and
the end of India's inward-looking economic policies after 1991. The death
of central planning, the end of the cold war and, above all, the entry of billions of new
participants into the rapidly globalising world economy were the high points of this
Today, with a huge global financial crisis and a synchronised slump in economic
activity, the world is changing again. The financial system is the brain of the market
economy. If it needs so expensive a rescue, what is left of Reagan's
dismissal of governments? If the financial system has failed, what remains of
confidence in markets?
It is impossible at such a turning point to know where we are going. In the chaotic
1970s, few guessed that the next epoch would see the taming of inflation, the
unleashing of capitalism and the death of communism. What will happen now
depends on choices unmade and shocks unknown. Yet the combination of a financial
collapse with a huge recession, if not something worse, will surely change the world.
The legitimacy of the market will weaken. The credibility of the US will be damaged.
The authority of China will rise. Globalisation itself may founder. This is a time of
How did the world arrive here? A big part of the answer is that the era of liberalisation
contained seeds of its own downfall: this was also a period of massive growth in the
scale and profitability of the financial sector, of frenetic financial innovation, of
growing global macroeconomic imbalances, of huge household borrowing and of
bubbles in asset prices.
In the US, core of the global market economy and centre of the current storm, the
aggregate debt of the financial sector jumped from 22 per cent of gross domestic
product in 1981 to 117 per cent by the third quarter of 2008. In the UK, with its heavy
reliance on financial activity, gross debt of the financial sector reached almost 250 per
cent of GDP (see charts).
Carmen Reinhart of the University of Maryland and Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard argue
that the era of liberalisation was also a time of exceptionally frequent financial crises,
surpassed, since 1900, only by the 1930s. It was also an era of massive asset price
bubbles. By intervening to keep their exchange rates down and accumulating foreign
currency reserves, governments of emerging economies generated huge current
account surpluses, which they recycled, together with inflows of private capital, into
official capital outflows: between the end of the 1990s and the peak in July 2008, their
currency reserves alone rose by $ 5,300 bn.
These huge flows of capital, on top of the traditional surpluses of a number of
high-income countries and the burgeoning surpluses of oil exporters, largely ended up
in a small number of high-income countries and particularly in the US. At the peak,
America absorbed about 70 per cent of the rest of the world's surplus
Meanwhile, inside the US the ratio of household debt to GDP rose from 66 per cent in
1997 to 100 per cent a decade later. Even bigger jumps in household indebtedness
occurred in the UK. These surges in household debt were supported, in turn, by highly
elastic and innovative financial systems and, in the US, by government programmes.
Throughout, the financial sector innovated ceaselessly. Warren Buffett, the legendary
investor, described derivatives as "financial weapons of mass
destruction". He was proved at least partly right. In the 2000s, the
"shadow banking system" emerged and traditional banking was
largely replaced by the originate-and-distribute model of securitisation via
constructions such as collateralised debt obligations. This model blew up in 2007.
We are witnessing the deepest, broadest and most dangerous financial crisis since the
1930s. As Profs Reinhart and Rogoff argue in another paper, "banking
crises are associated with profound declines in output and employment".
This is partly because of overstretched balance sheets: in the US, overall debt reached
an all-time peak of just under 350 per cent of GDP - 85 per cent of it private. This was
up from just over 160 per cent in 1980.
Among the possible outcomes of this shock are: massive and prolonged fiscal deficits
in countries with large external deficits, as they try to sustain demand; a prolonged
world recession; a brutal adjustment of the global balance of payments; a collapse of
the dollar; soaring inflation; and a resort to protectionism. The transformation will
surely go deepest in the financial sector itself. The proposition that sophisticated
modern finance was able to transfer risk to those best able to manage it has failed. The
paradigm is, instead, that risk has been transferred to those least able to understand it.
As Mr Volcker remarked during a speech last April: "Simply stated, the
bright new financial system - for all its talented participants, for all its rich rewards -
has failed the test of the marketplace. "
(To be continued)
The future of global capitalism (the)
British "Financial Times" commentator Martin Wolf, chief
economic affairs (Martin Wolf) 2009-03-09
(The financial crisis sweeping the globe, hit the European banking system, but also
shaken the long-dominant Western concept of free market economic thinking.
Capitalism going? From today, the British "Financial Times" FT
invite global opinion leaders and commentators, Talk about "the future of
global capitalism." Martin Wolf's comments is the first article in
this series, readers were invited participate in the discussion ftchinese.editor @
- editor)
God has a failed ideology. In the past 30 years dominated the policy and political
assumptions, suddenly looked like a socialist revolution as outdated.
U.S. conservative hero, former President Ronald Reagan (Ronald Reagan) have
ridiculed: "The English of the most frightening nine words is:
'I'm from the government, I come to help.'"
In the Western governments to financial system into the tens of trillions of dollars,
euros and pounds the occasion, these words seem to have become distant history.
Greenspan "stunned"
"Government is a bad thing; market deregulation is a good
thing," how can this belief not against? Last year in October, Ayn Rand
(Ayn Rand) the disciples, a few years ago the central bank head of the mighty Alan
Greenspan (Alan Greenspan) said in testimony before Congress, the lending
institutions are not self-interest to protect shareholders equity, he is "an
incredible stunned state."
In the West, over the past 30 years, pro-market ideology, is the perceived failure of
Keynesian economic model the reaction mixture, this model has 50,60 and 70 in the
20th century's dominant. The shift to market models, and in 1980 Reagan
was elected U.S. president and the year before Margaret Thatcher (Margaret Thatcher)
was elected Prime Minister linked. In fact, the Fed (Federal Reserve) Chairman Paul
Volcker (Paul Volcker) the role of inflation in the cure is almost as important.
But there are more events in shaping the era: China under Deng Xiaoping from a
planned economy to market economy, the Soviet Union-style socialism in the fall of
1989 to 1991, and India in 1991 after the farewell inward-looking economic policies.
Death of central planning, the end of the Cold War, and (most importantly) the
billions of people to join a rapidly globalizing world economy, are the highlights of
that era.
Now, in the great global financial crisis and the simultaneous decline of economic
activities, the context, the world is again changing. Financial system is the brain of a
market economy. If it requires a price so high relief, then the Reagan despised the idea
of government functions and how valid? If the financial system has failed, people can
have much confidence in the market?
In such a turning point, we can not know where is heading. In the chaos of the last
century 70's, few people guessed that the next time things will occur:
taming inflation, the release of capitalism and communism died. Now what will
happen will depend on the choice made yet, the impact is still unknown. However, a
financial meltdown and a severe economic recession (if not a worse case) together, is
bound to change the world. The legitimacy of the market will be eroded.
America's credibility would be damaged. China's prestige will
increase. Globalization itself may be frustrated. This is a turbulent era.
How the world got to this point?
How the world got to this point? The answer is to a large extent, liberalization era
eventually led to its demise with the seeds: In that era, the financial industry scale and
profitability of a huge growth, financial innovation and competing burst, global
macroeconomic imbalances, continue to increase, domestic large-scale borrowing,
asset price bubble.
In the United States, the core of the global market economy and the current center of
the storm, the financial sector debt stock increased from 1981 22% of GDP, rising to
the third quarter of 2008 accounted for 117%. Heavily dependent on the financial
industry in the UK, the financial sector debt amounted to nearly 250% of GDP.
University of Maryland (University of Maryland) Carmen Reinhart (Carmen Reinhart)
and Harvard University (Harvard)'s Kenneth Rogoff (Kenneth Rogoff)
pointed out that the liberalization of the financial crisis era is the era of extraordinarily
frequent, since only 30 years since 1900 was not the case. Liberalization era, or the
formation of large asset price bubble era. Emerging economies, the government
lowered the national currency through intervention Yi exchange, and accumulation of
foreign exchange reserves, large current account surpluses generated Liao, where they
are surplus, Lian Tong private capital flows, recycling Cheng Guan Fang's
capital outflow: the late '90s last century to peak in July 2008 alone, an
increase of their foreign exchange reserves to 5.3 trillion U.S. dollars.
In addition to these large capital flows, there are a number of high-income countries,
the traditional surplus and surge in the surplus oil-exporting countries, all of which
eventually flow into the capital a few high-income countries, particularly the United
States. At its peak, the United States had absorbed the rest of the world's
surplus savings of 70%.
At the same time, in the United States, household debt-GDP ratio from 66% in 1997,
increased to 100% after 10 years. Britain's household debt rose appeared
more substantial. Surge in household debt, has been highly flexible and innovative
financial system, good support, in the United States received the support of the
government plan.
In the meantime, the financial sector innovation incessantly. Legendary investor
Warren Buffett (Warren Buffett) has the derivatives described as "weapons
of mass financial destruction." His words proved to be at least partly right.
In 2000, the "shadow banking system" emerged, the traditional
banking sector to a large extent by "generation - distribution"
model of securitization replaced by the structure of such mortgage debt obligations.
This model collapsed in 2007.
30 most dangerous since the financial crisis
We are witnessing since the 30s has been the deepest, broadest and most dangerous
financial crisis. Professor and Professor Luo Gefu as Reinhardt in another paper
pointed out, "the banking crisis and the depth of decline in output and
employment there is associated." This is partly because of them
over-balance sheet debt: In the U.S., total debt to GDP, slightly below the historical
peak of 350% (85% of private sector debt), slightly higher than 160% in 1980 .
This may impact the outcome include: a large external deficit countries to keep
demand for the large and persistent fiscal deficits back; lasting world recession;
ruthless world of international balance of payments adjustment; inflation soaring; and
recourse to the protection of States doctrine. Financial industry itself is bound to the
deepest level of change occurs. Advanced modern financial risk transfer to the ability
to manage risks to the most people, this proposition has not been established. On the
contrary, in this system, the risk is transferred to the least able to understand the risks.
As Volcker in a speech last April pointed out: "In short, shiny new
financial system, though there are so many talented participants, so rich returns, but
still can not stand the market test. "
Translator / wind