1qGLG9p
1qGLG9p
1qGLG9p
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