We do not heat excuses to explain how we arrive at such simplistic thinking on a complex subject. Maybe a seasoned economist will be there to provide lighting, in which case we will gladly open our columns? Let's start ...
Assume first that the current overheating of the economy has nothing to do with a cyclical crisis, but actually good with an excess of speculation. Everyone has in mind the U.S. subprime crisis. Some developers have gone bankrupt, as well as smaller banks found themselves unable to pay their clients. This certainly explains the American situation, but not soaring global crisis. Indebted yesterday, the United States remain today, there is nothing new under the sun. Yet this is between the "bubble" as it calls it since it exploded around the new technologies of communication and information in 2000.
Oil and raw materials Food has become the investment declines all official and private financial institutions since the subprime. If the U.S. is safer, the old economic rule states to find alternative markets to invest ... And prices are so low that it will be good for African farmers ... This way, it is also good for companies that international food to compensate for a reduction in consumption of fruits and vegetables, rather than settle their products, increase their prices largely to safeguard their margins. Instead of systematically attacking the profits of Total, why our thinkers Eco will not look on that side?
This behavior is entirely consistent with the economic logic of time focusing on the shareholder. In a world based on consumption, however, brings a major contradiction. Indeed, the effects of rising oil and food prices will affect the brunt of consumer households that are supposed to absorb the production to 20% annual margin desired by shareholders. This is not India or China that they are waiting, it is in the Triad (North America, Western Europe and Japan)! However, in the absence of wage increase, that is to say injection power Buying by economic actors, that is to say the only businesses and the state-boss (in times of crisis, households hoard waiting for better days and reduce consumption to the basics: eat) how people could they cope?
Rising oil prices mean a surge in gasoline prices, the commodity prices that induces plant for consumption. Moving frantically is a phenomenon linked to our consumer society, but eating is a vital need. Yet it is the behavior of everyone who is affected differently Although according to the financial positions of each. But times are tough for everyone, rich and poor Americans, Europeans or Chinese. All are housed in the same boat, speculation is a global phenomenon.
Dropping household induces a reduction in their consumption of goods accessories, underpinning yet twenty years the growth of our economies. Declining sales produces reductions in personnel, relocations to countries with lower production shots (at the same time we export our pollution - but are decidedly ecologists?), Closures of industrial plants and trade, unemployment is rising ... Stagflation lurks: ie a slowing economy combined with inflation that continues to grow. All economic actors in doubt better days and brighter future (communism had it good, he did not had negatively affected)!
After Japan, the United States recently entered into a recession ... Europe is in the process of recognizing shyly. The economic model was not good. Policies have given up since the fall of the Berlin Wall their power to regulate the economy, believing that the "invisible hand" can restore the balance. But it is well known that competition time is never pure and perfect. So why would it be different for the natural regulation of the market? Ideologies have shown their limits, unbridled capitalism too. It should not be a genius to know that. But the greed of money has always avoided thinking too much. It may be that Al Qaeda and its bazaar thinkers have sought to make ourselves understood. The lack of reflection in action leads to fight eternally chimeras, without prejudging the effects that this will happen. Sancho Panza had already figured in the early seventeenth century. Britney Spears does not know who is Sancho Panza ...
That is the problem of speculators today and tomorrow ... But it is also a geopolitical problem.
0 comments:
Post a Comment