Quinta-feira, 28.06.12

Richard Layard (London School of Economics) e Paul Krugman criaram um manifesto para expor o essencial da forma como os policy makers têm interpretado erradamente a natureza desta crise, confundido as causas com efeitos, e respondido de forma a tornar a situação ainda pior. O manifesto está disponível online para ser assinado por economistas e não só: http://www.manifestoforeconomicsense.org/

 

A Manifesto for Economic Sense

 

More than four years after the financial crisis began, the world’s major advanced economies remain deeply depressed, in a scene all too reminiscent of the 1930s. And the reason is simple: we are relying on the same ideas that governed policy in the 1930s. These ideas, long since disproved, involve profound errors both about the causes of the crisis, its nature, and the appropriate response.

These errors have taken deep root in public consciousness and provide the public support for the excessive austerity of current fiscal policies in many countries. So the time is ripe for a Manifesto in which mainstream economists offer the public a more evidence-based analysis of our problems.

  • The causes.Many policy makers insist that the crisis was caused by irresponsible public borrowing. With very few exceptions - other than Greece - this is false. Instead, the conditions for crisis were created by excessive private sector borrowing and lending, including by over-leveraged banks. The collapse of this bubble led to massive falls in output and thus in tax revenue. So the large government deficits we see today are a consequence of the crisis, not its cause.
  • The nature of the crisis.When real estate bubbles on both sides of the Atlantic burst, many parts of the private sector slashed spending in an attempt to pay down past debts. This was a rational response on the part of individuals, but - just like the similar response of debtors in the 1930s - it has proved collectively self-defeating, because one person’s spending is another person’s income. The result of the spending collapse has been an economic depression that has worsened the public debt.
  • The appropriate response.  At a time when the private sector is engaged in a collective effort to spend less, public policy should act as a stabilizing force, attempting to sustain spending. At the very least we should not be making things worse by big cuts in government spending or big increases in tax rates on ordinary people. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what many governments are now doing.
  • The big mistake. After responding well in the first, acute phase of the economic crisis, conventional policy wisdom took a wrong turn - focusing on government deficits, which are mainly the result of a crisis-induced plunge in revenue, and arguing that the public sector should attempt to reduce its debts in tandem with the private sector. As a result, instead of playing a stabilizing role, fiscal policy has ended up reinforcing the dampening effects of private-sector spending cuts.

In the face of a less severe shock, monetary policy could take up the slack. But with interest rates close to zero, monetary policy - while it should do all

 

 



publicado por Mais Um Economista às 18:27 | link do post | comentar | ver comentários (3)


Posts recentes

A Manifesto for Economic ...

Mais Um Economista

Subscreva para receber os posts no seu email

Posts mais comentados
comentários recentes
Apesar de ser expectável que as previsões não este...
Não era de esperar que as previsões falhassem?
"O que está em causa não é o tamanho exagerado do ...
Este homem é tão burro!
subscrever feeds
Outubro 2012
Dom
Seg
Ter
Qua
Qui
Sex
Sab

1
2
3
4
5
6

7
8
9
10
11
12
13

14
15
16
17
19
20

21
22
23
24
25
26
27

28
29
30
31


Tags

todas as tags

links
arquivos

Outubro 2012

Agosto 2012

Julho 2012

Junho 2012

Maio 2012