by americandream » Thu 11 Aug 2011, 18:42:49
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smiley', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', 'O')nly the Anglo-Saxons refined the technique of extracting second, third, fourth and beyond tiers of estate from a primary estate using rules that are unwritten and inexact (flexible).
Well these instruments are a bit older than that, but indeed the Anglo-Saxons refined it. But I would say that the American type of capitalism only got its final form with the entry of Keynesian elements.
This part of the western economical models is unnatural or rather uncultural for Asians in general. In your rating example, the problem is not only that the Chinese have no track record in ratings, but more that the very nature of these markets is counterintuitive to them. Simply put they understand production, they understand trade, they understand debt and they understand investment. Anything that is not directly tied to tanglible assets or objectives is not worth pursuing.
Actually they might be better in rating then we because we put trillions in now worthless derivates while they kept clear
The Chinese would never try to emulate the Western financial systems, but they do seek to "bend" them to their own preferences. What is happening now is exactly playing in their hands. With the rating agencies limiting debt creation and debt flow, they effectively put a cap on the capitalists system.
Without the access to unlimited financial instruments, governments and companies have to compete on things like production, trade and such. That essentially puts the mercantilist nations on a level playing field.
You don't read, do you? I have no doubt that China will excel in mercantilism as has Japan and I am
disputing that. My point is that the financial services monopoly enjoyed by the UK and US is unassailable for as long as capitalism prevails. We will not go back to mercantilism. Mercantilism requires the skills of capital to turn its one mercantilist dollar into ten capitalised ones. Capitalism, with its unwritten common law heritage ensures that instruments are fabricated in a fashion that cannot be emulated in traditions historically bound by coded systems and with no roots in the unwritten, and to that extent the monopoly is safe. Clearly, were this not the case, then countries like Germany would have not only grown their mercantilism, they would been active in the front end of financial services. After all, who in their right mind is going to pass by an opportunty to turn a very profitable dollar and Germany as we know, has been an active mercantilist participant in capitalism from capitalism's early days.
All I can suggest is sit back and watch the role that China, India, Brazil as well as Russia assume in the world. It wont be unlike that enjoyed by Japan....the financial services heart of these mercantilists will still be either London or New York.....of that I have no doubt going by past evidence.