The current global finance is preposterous

Aaachetez my paper! It is beautiful, beautiful my paper! There is no expensive! Hurry, there will not be not for everyone! For fifteen years now, America sells its paper, i.e. financial assets, with the rest of the world to fill a huge current account deficit (857 billion dollars last year,) or 6.5 of GDP. A "finance new century" which seemed solid until a small grain of sand that bears the same name: "New Century Financial". In the very next days, this American Bank specializes in real estate credit to some creditworthy households should announce its bankruptcy. This is the evidence that the US housing market lead creditors in its downward spiral. However the American housing market plays a central role in the huge pump to "phynances" that flood the capital of the world to America. Indeed, investors want to buy bonds that the US Treasury is unable to produce in sufficient quantity, despite a meritorious public deficit. At the time, they buy that there is abundant on the market: housing credit to households properly repackaged bonds by the miracles of modern financial technique. It is so beautiful, my paper...

It should be recalled once again... The current global finance is preposterous. Every hour, the richest country in the world borrows $ 100 million to countries far poorer than him. China's exchange reserves exceeded 1,000 billion last year. Never in the history of the planet, disorders were also dramatic. A single point of comparison: in 1987, when the concern on the accounts of the United States had unscrewed Wall Street by 23 in one day, the US current account hole was only 160 billion. Five times less than today ' today!

How global finance fall on his feet The question obsession experts. In dozens of conferences, seminars, round tables organised on topics sometimes very distant, the debate is invariably on the subject. It is true that thousands of billions are at stake... With the mystery, economists have demonstrated boundless imagination to try to find explanations, in hundreds of research papers. But each time the sequence of events has scanned them.

In the 1990s, experts began by explaining that investors preferred to buy shares of American companies, because they are more efficient and a more open market ("it is beautiful my paper...") ). But the year 2000 Internet crash put an end to the rhetoric. Private investors have suddenly dropped their purchases. Their withdrawal has been offset by public institutions as Asian central banks, buying mainly of bonds. And when foreigners tried to buy shares of oil companies (Unocal) or ports, Washington refused.

Then came "excess saving" ("savings glut"). According to this thesis defended by Ben Bernanke, became President of the reserve Federal American, the world goes beyond money and America provides service to the rest of the world by providing a haven to this excessive savings. But, as explained by Economist Nouriel Roubini (1), global savings has not risen in recent years. On the other hand, global investment, he declined. In other words, America's pump capital no doubt, that could be invested elsewhere. Other works show another facet: the financial circuits in Asia are not strong enough to absorb the huge mass of capital from trade surpluses of the region in recent years.

Economists have also explored other ways. The US economy has become more regular than before, with a lesser magnitude of cycle boom-bust. Economic policy for example very quickly erased the mini-récession of 2001. Investors would welcome a country has become more predictable. But the growth is also less volatile in many other developed countries. Another explanation: "dark matter". Despite strong growth in external debt, the United States receive more financial income that they pay. There would, therefore, the "dark matter", of hidden abroad US assets that would offset the debt. Las! over the past year, the balance of financial income was also deficit...

Ultimate explanation, hit her in the corner of pragmatism: the current imbalance would in fact be a balance. The Chinese lend money to the Americans that they buy their products. After the monetary accords of Bretton Woods from 1946 through fixed but adjustable exchange rates, we would have a Bretton Woods II (2), with a fixed but adjustable link between the dollar, the renminbi and other Asian currencies. This situation could last two decades, the time that hundreds of millions of Chinese peasants switch in industry and services. But other works have reduced this horizon in ten years and then in four years. And this system is actually marginal. According to Andrew Rose (3), the University of Berkeley, the system international monetary required today is inflation targeting, where central banks do more than the exchange rate. Rose explains that it is "Bretton Woods upside down", with floating exchange rates, capital moving freely and the rate of interest focused on the control of inflation in each country. The link fixed dollar-yuan is exception.

The massive fiscal imbalance is a détraquement, and not a new balance. The alternative is simple. Either there will be "an international effort to persuade each country give proper part to an overall policy allowing adjustment without interrupting global growth", as requested by a team of economists led by Jean Pisani-Ferry, Bruegel (4) Institute. Either the end of the story will be accompanied to a procession of painful failures and painful reimbursements. History is already written, long, since this is the Apocalypse: "the first angel sounded the trumpet." And he there had hail and fire mingled blood, which were thrown on the Earth; and a third of the land was burned...