When Gordon Brown, the current Prime
Minister of Great Britain, announced that
his government’s response to the financial
crisis was to “recapitalize” British
banks by buying shares in them, while at
the same time extending deposit guarantees,
it amounted to a coup d’etat, or
more precisely, a coup du monde. Britannia literally ruled
the world for a moment—at least the world of finance.
As soon as Brown announced the plan, other governments
in Europe and elsewhere, and most notably here in
the US, all having previously announced very different
plans, fell over one another to announce that they would
do the same as Brown. The reason they did so is they
feared that if they didn’t, customers would take their
deposits out of all other banks and put them in Brown’s
British banks. That’s economics.
The reason they now all say Brown is a very smart person
is they would rather have us believe they were persuaded
than bullied. That’s politics.
The lesson we should draw from this is that we live in
one global financial community. There is no protection in
boundaries nowadays. Anyone watching the movements
on the stock exchanges would come to the same conclusion.
The indices of exchanges in the US, Canada, Mexico,
Brazil, Britain, Germany, Russia, Japan, China, Australia
and elsewhere move up and down with eerie synchronicity.
If they are not in synch, it is probably because they are
closed by the authorities.
The lesson is we need to think in terms of world government.
I’m not saying we should create one: we already
have one, ramshackle and ad hoc as it may be. Government
and business leaders coordinate with each other all
the time, in and outside the framework of global institutions
such as the IMF and the United Nations. There are
tacit understandings as well as frightened phone calls; and
of course there are formal agreements, such as the WTO.
Beyond trade promotion, these contribute to the standardization
of law, accounting and numerous other practices.
Maybe there should be a formally recognized and differently
structured world government; maybe not. That can be
debated another time. But beyond debate already now is that
we need to think in terms of world government as much as
we think in terms of global economy. The reason is that the
consequences of policies spread the world over. The current
financial crisis is global; the recession will be global; and any
policies to deal with financial institutions or the recession will
have to be global too. Gordon Brown just showed us why.
The global problem lurking behind both the financial
crisis and the recession is low wages. Here in the US, wages
stagnated during the past thirty years while output and productivity
grew. But the worst is not here; it is overseas in
China, India and elsewhere, where output grows faster with
production techniques rapidly modernizing, but where
wages are much lower and are growing only slowly. Modern
products efficiently produced using workers making around
$1 per hour: that is a recipe for huge business profits.
Huge profits cause no trouble when productively
invested or pleasurably consumed. However, when recipients
of profits choose to save the money instead, that presents
a challenge to the financial community. Of course the
challenge is welcome; that is how the finance industry
makes a living; it is a challenge nonetheless.
A central promise of capitalist finance is, if you earn your
money, your money will earn for you. So you work, borrow,
cheat, steal, or inherit: and now the financial community
has to take that money and get it to earn returns for you.
Think of brokers, bankers, financiers and all the rest as
matchmakers, trying to bring together your money and a
productive return-yielding project. If they get too much
money, they run out of good matches. But they don’t turn
away business, saying “sorry!” because that is bad for reputation
and earnings. Just like third world matchmakers
make any match for a bride that earns the fee, even to
pimps in far off lands, these financiers take your money to
less reputable ventures. One day it all comes out, that billions
or trillions are lost. And instead of too much investment,
there is suddenly too little, because everyone is
scared, suspecting there is still too much money floating
around for it to be safe.
You can complain about the corruption; it doesn’t help.
The real problem is not the human character; it is too
much money looking for investment opportunities.
Now suppose wages rise all over the world. There would
be more demand for products, so more good investment
opportunities. At the same time, there would be less profit,
so less money looking for investment opportunities. Investment
becomes straightforward, so the bloated finance
industry shrinks to a proper size. Everything will get better,
for quite a while. This would be good global policy.
Of course, with well-organized labor all over the world,
in China, India, Viet Nam, Nigeria, South Africa, Brazil,
Mexico, as well as of course in Europe, Russia, the US and
Japan—all enjoying good wages with benefits and a
healthy sense of entitlement—you can imagine things
eventually going too far: too many investment opportunities
and no profits left to invest. Stagflation and the bad old
70s return. Time to elect a new Reagan. But—Oh dear!—
where is the foreign cheap labor going to come from then?
Get Connected
Search Public i
Public i
Get Connected
Archives
- December 2024
- October 2024
- July 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- February 2024
- November 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- February 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- September 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- November 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- September 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- September 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- January 2016
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- July 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- November 2008
- October 2008
- August 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- June 2005
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- September 2003
- August 2003
- June 2003
- May 2003
- November 2002
- October 2002
- April 2002
- March 2002
- February 2002
- December 2001
- November 2001
- October 2001
- September 2001
- August 2001
- July 2001