Page added on March 11, 2016
Something weird is going on with the global economy. It’s been going on since at least 2007. Economic growth has been slow, financial markets have been volatile and economic policy makers have often been at a loss.
We tend to focus on the problem of the moment — the subprime crisis, the euro crisis, the China slowdown, the oil bust. But surely these events are connected. What threads link them? I’ve been collecting possible story lines for a while now. I make no claim that the eight here are an exhaustive list. Together, though, they paint an interesting picture, if not a clear one.
Global Financial Crisis and Aftermath: There was an international bad-debt crisis that started in 2007 and really got interesting in 2008, and the global economy is still dealing with its aftermath. Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff tell the basic story in “This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly:” These debt crises happen from time to time, and they always leave an economic hangover. This crisis was especially large, so the hangover has been especially long and painful.
Great Deviation: Economist John Taylor defined this in a 2011 paper as “the recent period during which macroeconomic policy became more interventionist, less rules based, and less predictable” (emphasis his). The deviations from good policy started in 2003 with the Federal Reserve’s decision to keep interest rates lower than dictated by the monetary guideline known as the Taylor rule (yes, same Taylor), and have continued through various bailouts and monetary easings and fiscal stimuli in the U.S. and Europe. Taylor’s specific diagnosis of policy failure has been much disputed, but the sentiment that government and central-bank errors have let us down is widely shared.
End of the American Century: Since the 1940s the U.S. has been the dominant force in the global economy and the dollar the de facto global currency. In recent years this dominance has waned, but no other country or global institution is ready to take over. The result is continuing uncertainty and unrest in geopolitics, economics and financial markets. And there’s no sign of that ending anytime soon.
End of Inflation: Since the 1200s, historian David Hackett Fischer wrote in “The Great Wave: Price Revolutions and the Rhythm of History,” the world has seen four long periods of rising prices. The first three were followed by economic and political turmoil and then a long period of price stability. The fourth, which in Fischer’s telling began in the late 1890s and was still going when he published his book in 1996, may now be in its death throes. If history is any guide, those could go on for a while, and spark multiple financial crises. Even if you don’t believe that history moves in long waves, it’s clear that after the Great Inflation of the 1960s and 1970s and the Great Disinflation (another Taylor phrase, meaning a long period of declining but still above-zero inflation) that followed, central bankers are at something of a loss as deflation spreads.
Great Stagnation: Economist Tyler Cowen was referring specifically to the U.S. when he popularized this term, but it’s a good name for the more global phenomenon of a slowdown in technology-driven productivity growth and a waning of the conditions (big untapped export markets abroad, big untapped labor supply at home) that allowed developing countries to make great economic leaps forward in recent decades.
Technological Revolution: On the other hand, maybe the productivity slowdown is just the prelude to a boom. Major new technologies take time to make their impact felt, technology scholar Carlota Perez argued in her book “Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages.” With each past technological revolution there have been missteps, uncertainty and serious financial turmoil before a “golden age” in which businesses, consumers and governments figure out how to take full advantage of the new possibilities. Perez dates what she calls the information and communications technology revolution to 1971, and has speculated that the 2007-2008 financial crisis might mark the beginning of a transition to a new golden age. She doesn’t say how long that transition will take, though.
Population Plateau: In the latest issue of Foreign Affairs, Morgan Stanley’s Ruchir Sharma argues that declining fertility rates around the world have put a major damper on economic growth. There was a time when many people worried that unchecked population growth would destroy the planet, so in most ways the population slowdown is a really good thing. But modern capitalism arose and thrived during a long era (starting around 1350) of continuous population growth. If the global population is nearing a plateau, capitalism will have to adjust.
Peak Resource Use: The world may be nearing a decoupling of economic growth and natural-resource consumption, the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental think tank, argued in a report this past fall. Per-capita use of wood, water and farmland is already falling worldwide, and while per-capita carbon emissions are still rising globally, they’re flat in the developed world. Together with the population’s plateauing, this decoupling could bring a new era of sustainable, environment-friendly growth. As the McKinsey Global Institute proposed in a recent report, global trade may also be evolving away from flows of physical goods and toward flows of information. These shifts seem necessary and welcome for the world as a whole. But if your income or your country’s economy depends on selling commodities or manufactured goods that the world needs less of, the transition won’t be easy.
Put these all together, and what do you get? A Great Muddle, perhaps. Some stories overlap. At least two of them contradict each other. They don’t all add up to any kind of consistent narrative. I’m temperamentally most sympathetic to the last three, though, and those do add up to something. They describe a world economy that’s going through a painful but necessary transition from the industrial age to something that might be much better. We’re in the pupal stage, basically. So how about we call it the Great Metamorphosis?
10 Comments on "explain global economic crisis"
sidzepp on Fri, 11th Mar 2016 5:06 pm
http://lad.nafri.org.la/fulltext/2042-0.pdf
Interesting article on the impact of rubber plantations in Laos.
Perhaps we should acknowledge that the fossil fuel based industrial revolution that has been on going for the last 250 years is still moving full throttle and will continue to make life on this planet more tenuous.
GregT on Fri, 11th Mar 2016 5:24 pm
This entire article is a ‘great muddle’. Much ado about nothing, and nothing to do with pretty much anything at all.
makati1 on Fri, 11th Mar 2016 7:42 pm
“explain global economic crisis”
Why explain it? We are living in it and it is only going to get worse, not better. Americans have been shielded from the worse as the ‘least dirty shirt’, but that is ending. Chaos is growing in the lower 48 + 2 as can be seen even in the propaganda soaked news sources of the Empire. So, buckle up and prepare for a new, less comfortable future. It’s already here.
Banal on Fri, 11th Mar 2016 10:04 pm
One of the real big silver linings to peak oil is that it will make mass migration almost impossible unless people are in near proximity to the place they want to go to.
This may end up saving Europe from going into the political upheaval abyss generated by foreign “tribes” moving in on territory owned by another “tribe”.
If we apply the concepts of the fall of Rome to the modern world, the comparison is quite eerie.
Declining demographics of the native populations are compelled in competition versus booming populations and resource hungry “barbarians” (of which is not a completely inaccurate slur for the ethno/religious groups of the middle east and central Asia) about to move in on their territory. Its good that Europe is starting to erect borders again and the insanity of the neo-liberal globalist left is starting to be drawn like poison from a wound within contemporary European politics.
Because of peak oils capacity to increase distances between peoples, we will need to treat Mexico like an emerging threat and take preventative action to start hedging our own declining “tribal” demographics relative to Latin America’s population boom to prevent and deter adversarial activity that will become increasingly attractive as our relative power declines and theirs increases; because, as one should know, politics is inherently tribal at its core.
In other words, Russia will be dealing with its own demographic malaise like Europe; and China, becomes really far away relatively, so it becomes the problem of countries nearby.
theedrich on Sat, 12th Mar 2016 3:16 am
“Peak Resource Use: The world may be nearing a decoupling of economic growth and natural-resource consumption, …. Together with the population’s plateauing, this decoupling could bring a new era of sustainable, environment-friendly growth.”
More pie in the sky. The internationally funded UNICEF foundation, among countless other bleeding-heart orgs aiming at White genosuicide, continues to broadcast ads soliciting White “charity” for underaged Afroids, hopeless Latino primitives, starving children from idiotic India, and other disease-ridden areas overpopulated with semi-humans seeking to become parasites on Whitey. As long as this heartstring appeal to Christianity-programmed zombies continues, there will be no such “decoupling.” Ever-intensifying natural-resource consumption is an absolute sine qua non for the support of such unevolved anthropoids. Forget unicornish “decoupling.” Due to their anti-biospheric, Christian religious background, White TV-hypnotizees will continue to undermine their own earthly existence while imagining a heavenly postmortem. Meanwhile the earth sinks further into a ThirdWorld hellhole from which it will never recover.
joe on Sat, 12th Mar 2016 3:43 am
Tech was supposed to drive us to new highs of wealth and money. We sit now communicating to each other, yet when most of us today were born, people still ‘hacked’ public telephones to get free calls, nerds were losers who spent all their time playing with clunky machines that made dots and squares move around screens. Oh times change.
Tech has lowered productivity because efficiency gains from tech have all been extracted as profit from value added by labour. So they have taken out all the benefits that technology offered. So now they either improve the tech more (A.I advancements and robotics entering the services sector) or they give workers more of the profits to stimulate organic demand. The first option will only provide temporary profit rises.
So at max efficiency ‘growth’ has to be slow.
makati1 on Sun, 13th Mar 2016 6:37 am
Banal, how close are the 100,000,000 plus Mexicans to the lower 48? I bet they can find a way to the US if they want to.
Davy on Sun, 13th Mar 2016 7:47 am
Banel, you make a good point. The global economy is going to be rebalanced to comparable 3rd world standards meaning the rich areas will not have the same draw they do now. That said desperate people will flee failed states, urban areas, and areas rendered uninhabitable from climate change. The range these people will have will be greatly diminished and the reasons to move reduced. People will just die in place because the risks and rewards of migration will not be there like now.
Alain Le Gargasson on Sun, 13th Mar 2016 9:14 am
relationship between energy and the economy in French
http://manicore.com/documentation/energie.html
Harquebus on Sun, 13th Mar 2016 8:03 pm
All fiat currencies have ended in disaster.