Austerity

This word could sound old fashioned but i think it is the only attitude that could save the world. If we go on living beyond our limits, producing and consuming too much we will soon destroy our planet.
Instead of talking of growth we should start thinking about a decrease of the economy, at least in the West.
This could be achieved with a cooperation among the States, not certainly through competition.
A well planned decrease to compensate the growth of poor countries.
Austerity should be the new style of living of the industrialized world. Mankind and Nature before profit.
Will we succeed? I think it is very difficult due to the greed of so many people. However we must try, otherwise there will be no future.
So, bring a bit of austerity in your life!

A new life style

Nowadays humankind faces two big problems: global warming and excessive growth of population.
They are related to each other because more people means more resources used.
Unless we radically change our life style we are bound to end in a catastrophe.
We should consume less and should live in a way which is compatible with the resources available.
That could lead to less production, less goods available and maybe less jobs. But if well planned by the State it could mean that the same number of people work less hours.
We could all benefit from that, having more free time, enjoy a more relaxing life, re-discover the importance of Nature.
The price to pay is that we would probably have less means and goods available. Are we ready for that?
If not we may pay a bigger price, the destruction of our planet.
The second problem is that we live in an overpopulated planet and the figures are dramatically raising each year in Africa and Asia. Every day an increasing number of migrants try to reach Europe. In the long term it will be unbearable unless there is a better distribution of wealth and a birth control plan in the developing world.

Should banks be more regulated?

In my opinion they should. Since the beginning of the financial crisis Governments, in many countries, have put a lot of money to save banks from bankruptcy and taxpayers will have to pay to cover the debts.
We have been told that banks cannot go bankrupt because it would cause the collapse of the whole financial system because banks have shares in other banks, pension funds have shares in banks too, and the failure of one institution would mean losses for some others too.
So, if the State must intervene to avoid the catastrophe, why should not the whole bank sector be under more strict regulation in the first place?
if the State garantee the deposits, and it is right to do, then there must be rules and limits for the banks to not jeopardize people's savings.

Ipocrisie sulla Cina

Nel suo articolo sul Corriere della Sera, Con gli occhi a Pechino, Piero Ostellino elogia la Cina per essersi aperta al mercato. La Cina non sarebbe piu’ una minaccia per l’Occidente democratico e liberale.
Ma la Cina non e’ un regime comunista dove i diritti umani vengono sistematicamente violati?
Evidentemente la liberta’ piu’ importante e’ quella di poter creare un’azienda e commerciare con il resto del mondo. Le altre liberta’, politiche, sindacali, di stampa, etc..., contano meno.
Di pseudo liberali che predicano ogni giorno su giornali e reti televisive se ne puo' fare tranquillamente a meno. Per loro l’unico valore e’ il Dio Denaro.
A sinistra poi ci sono quelli che pensano che la Cina sia un paese socialista. Io vedo solo un paese entrato completamente nel sistema capitalistico anche se c'e' un partito Comunista al potere e con ancora un forte controllo dello Stato.

The Dilemma Market-State

Some commentators and policy-makers think that financial markets, as we have known them so far, should be saved.
But it is exactly the excessive importance of the financial market and high private and public debts to have caused this international crisis.
The ideology of deregulation, has failed.
Paul Krugman, noble price of Economics, is one of the most important supporters of the idea that the financial system should be changed (The Market Mystique).
The State, no longer "the problem", should regulate the market.
However, people who are in charge and should set-up the rules, are the ones who have worked for financial institutions which have caused the disaster. This article by Michael Hirsh, ‘Government Sachs’ Is Back, is very enlightening and clearly explains how Goldman Sachs and other big Companies have always influenced the American Government policies and now one of their man is Treasury Secretary. Is he, with his team, going to change something?

Il dilemma Stato-Mercato

Nel suo editoriale sul Corriere del primo aprile, Non far morire i mercati, Francesco Giavazzi invita i politici e policy makers a non far morire i mercati.
Ma non e' stato proprio un eccessivo peso dei mercati finanziari e l'eccessivo indebitamento a portarci in questa crisi?
Non e' un problema di antagonismo tra Stato e Mercato. E' necessario che il primo stabilisca delle regole per il buon funzionamento del secondo. Non e' lo Stato che uccide il Mercato bensi' l'assenza di regole. Questa crisi ha sancito il fallimento del paradigma liberista per il quale il mercato si autoregola.
Il premio nobel per l'economia e opinionista del New York Times, Paul Krugman (foto a lato), e' uno degli esponenti di spicco della scuola neo-kenesiana e sostiene esattamente il contrario di Giavazzi: il mercato finanziario, cosi' come lo abbiamo conosciuto, non deve essere resuscitato (The Market Mystique).