26.12.2014 Views

1qGLG9p

1qGLG9p

1qGLG9p

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Discussions 99<br />

In response to Laurence Boone’s comments regarding non-financial<br />

corporations, Lucrezia Reichlin indicated that she is aware of the difference<br />

between the report’s numbers and those presented by the ECB. The report looks<br />

at non-consolidated debt in both the US and the Eurozone, while the ECB might<br />

not be using the non-consolidated debt measure. The difficulties in comparing the<br />

data mean that the focus should be on adjustment. On this measure, differences<br />

remain. In the US, non-financial corporations have behaved in a very cyclical<br />

manner. In the Eurozone, non-financial corporations have adjusted to a certain<br />

extent, through an accumulation of liquidity and excess savings similar to that<br />

which happened previously in Japan.<br />

Of course, the Eurozone could not have done what the US has done. The<br />

question is the price that has been paid for this, and the answer should inform<br />

institutional reform and the need for tools to allow the ECB to navigate the<br />

protracted low inflation environment. On the other hand, it is not certain that<br />

Treasury guarantees on government bond risk are an issue.<br />

Regarding demographics, Reichlin mentioned the potential importance of<br />

immigration. Demographics have been a big problem for Japan, and might also<br />

be a problem for the Eurozone.<br />

Luigi Buttiglione reiterated that policy sequencing has proven to be very<br />

difficult in the Eurozone. The UK fared better by tackling the medium-term needs<br />

of the public sector balance sheet without killing the economy in the short term.<br />

This was possible thanks to better institutions and politics, but also through<br />

currency depreciation. Regarding Edmond Alphandéry’s comments about US<br />

policy and its global effects, he agreed that the excessive expansion of leverage<br />

was, ex post, the wrong policy in the US between 2004 and 2008. In response to<br />

Richard Portes, Buttiglione pointed out that the ratio of debt to GDP has either<br />

gone up or at best stabilised during periods of very low interest rates. The low<br />

interest rate environment has not been used to achieve deleveraging and this is<br />

a source of fragility.<br />

Regarding China, he noted that immigration from the countryside to the cities<br />

is slowing down quite a lot. This is perhaps by design and it is unclear what<br />

will happen in the future. Published data show a combination of an accelerating<br />

debt-to-GDP ratio and decelerating nominal GDP. This is a pretty poisonous<br />

combination.<br />

Large Chinese foreign reserves are considered a source of strength, but one<br />

needs to qualify this. The rotation from investment to consumption, from the<br />

demand to the supply side, or from manufacturing to services or wages to profits,<br />

may lead to more stable growth but also to less growth. This may well be the<br />

right thing to do, but what about the existing high level of debt, which was<br />

contracted when expectations about future investment and output growth rates<br />

were higher It is not encouraging to see where the new debt has gone. This is<br />

the reason why the new debt has not been translated into an acceleration of the<br />

growth rate. To the contrary, the acceleration of the debt growth rate has gone<br />

hand-in-hand with a deceleration in the output growth rate.<br />

Summarising, Benoît Coeuré observed a consensus that leverage cycles<br />

matter enormously. It was also agreed that understanding past leverage cycles is

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!