Now, Hank Paulson is absolutely correct in pointing to the imbalances as a source of cheap credit that led to excessive risk-taking. But as my co-author rightly pointed out, it is almost as if Paulson is blaming a concept for the crisis, not unlike those who blame "globalization" for all the world's ills:
"Aha!," say the Americans, "it was those pesky imbalances that made us run huge national deficits and unsustainable personal debt." "It's not our fault either!," retort the Chinese, "those imbalances forced us to manipulate our currency in order to sustain a massive trade surplus." "Don't look at me!," says the investment banker, between Manhattans. "What did you expect me to do with all that cheap credit? Monitor who was holding all that risk?" "Why are we burning through cash at a rate of billions per month after operating for three decades with an unsustainable business model?" asks GM's CEO on conference call from his private jet, "Why, it was the, er... macrosomething imbalances!"
You get the idea. The reality is that the economic imbalances are the culmination of the decisions of governments and individuals over an extended period of time that were self-interested and ignored the bigger picture. The imbalances equation has a savings glut and investment drought on one side, and a collection of irresponsible financial incentives on the other. Ultimately, this situation has been brought on by the unwillingness of the world's major financial actors to take responsibility for the long run implications of their actions. A quote from The Economist:
"A sound international economic order cannot be built on the assumption that the rumbustiously richest country will go on borrowing unprecedented amounts at enormous interest rates from everybody else for ever.”And yet that's pretty much the model we've been working from (except with low, instead of high interest rates). Oh, and where did I take that quote from? The Economist's 1984 endorsement of Ronald Reagan for president. Twenty. Four. Years. Ago. These imbalances did not creep up on us, folks. We need coordinated action by the G20 economies to address the problem without resorting to protectionist measures. It's too bad we needed a recession to drive this point home to the Secretary of the Treasury, but there you have it.

2 comments:
Sorry, But Quantitative Easing Won't Work.
In a Liquidity Trap although Saving (S) is abnormally high investment (I) is next to 0.
Hence, the Keynesian paradigm I = S is not verified.
The purpose of Quantitative Easing being to lower the yield on long-term savings it doesn't create $1 of investment.
It does diminish the yield on long-term US Treasury debt but lowers marginally, if at all, the asked yield on savings.
This and other issues are explored in my tract:
A Specific Application of Employment, Interest and Money
Plea for a New World Economic Order
Abstract:
This tract makes a critical analysis of credit based, free market economy, Capitalism, and proves that its dysfunctions are the result of the existence of credit.
It shows that income / wealth disparity, cause and consequence of credit and of the level of long-term interest-rates, is the first order hidden variable, possibly the only one, of economic development.
It solves most of the puzzles of macro economy: among which Unemployment, Business Cycles, Stagflation, Greenspan Conundrum, Deflation and Keynes' Liquidity Trap...
It shows that no fiscal or monetary policy, including the barbaric Quantitative Easing will get us out of depression.
A Credit Free, Free Market Economy will correct all of those dysfunctions.
The alternative would be, on the long run, to wait for the physical destruction (through war or rust) of most of our productive assets. It will be at a cost none of us can afford to pay.
A Specific Application of Employment, Interest and Money
what troubles me is that while global finance, business and some economies are undergoing massive deleveraging, policymakers are not only avoiding, but actively preventing, the massive realignment ("balancing") that must take place in the global economy.
The parallel to globalization is perfect: blame a concept, ignore the reality.
Post a Comment