Primeira Lei dos Economistas: Para cada economista sempre existe um economista igual e oposto.
Segunda Lei dos Economistas: Eles estão ambos errados.
*
Para cada conjunto finito de respostas sempre existirá um conjunto infinito de novos modelos.
*
Um economista é alguém que sabe 100 modos de se fazer amor, mas não conhece nenhuma mulher/homem.
*
Um economista (de alguma universidade) devagar estava andando e foi a uma pizzaria. O balconista perguntou se queria que cortasse a pizza em oito ou em seis pedaços. "Estou com bastante fome. Seria melhor cortar em oito pedaços."
*
No primeiro dia, Deus criou o sol, e como contrapartida, criou o queimado do sol. No segundo dia criou o sexo, e como contrapartida, o casamento. No terceiro dia, criou um economista. Depois de pensar muito em qual seria a contrapartida apropriada, Deus criou um segundo economista. (Cheer, 1993)
*
Um departamento de medicina anunciou que pararia de usar ratos em seus experimentos para usar economistas no lugar. Eles elencaram as razões da mudança:
1. Os assistentes tornavam-se muito envolvidos emocionalmente com os ratos, interferindo na pesquisa. Com os economistas não haveria risco de estabelecer tal ligação;
2. Economistas são mais baratos para cuidar e não haveria qualquer objeção da Sociedade Protetora dos Animais;
3. Existem coisas que nem os ratos fariam.
Além disto, é difícil extrapolar os resultados dos testes para seres humanos, quando se pesquisam os ratos.
*
Dizem que Cristóvão Colombo foi o primeiro economista. Quando viajou para a América, ele não sabia aonde estava indo. Quando chegou não sabia onde estava. E tudo isto foi feito com verbas do governo.
*
O professor perguntou a Joãozinho o que seu pai fazia. "Ele é médico", "Muito bem", exclamou o professor. Então perguntou a Mariazinha qual a profissão de seu pai, e ela respondeu "Carteiro, professor.", "Muito bem, exclamou mais uma vez o professor. Por último perguntou a Tiãozinho, "O que seu pai faz ?" Tiãozinho estufou o peito e respondeu: "Meu pai toca piano em um bordéu." Assustado com a resposta de Tiãozinho, o professor foi falar com seu pai, que explicou: "Professor, na verdade eu sou um economista. Como você queria que eu explicasse isto para uma criança de sete anos ?"
*
Dois economistas estavam andando pela rua. Um deles vê uma nota de $ 100,00 no chão e fala para o outro. "Claro que não é uma nota", responde o outro economista, "Se fosse uma nota alguém já teria pego.
*
Na escola, a professora conversava com Aninha. "Qual a profissão de sua mãe ?", perguntou, "Professora de Química.", respondeu Aninha. "Ah, que bom!", exclamou a professora. "e teu pai, o que ele faz ?" "Nada. Ele é um economista."
segunda-feira, 2 de junho de 2008
Estratégias...
A paixão do Bresser Pereira pelo Brasil é admirável e explica a sua recente campanha contra a alta dos juros. Ele, naturalmente, tem razão o juro é alto, mas resta saber o que fazer para derrubá-lo?
No artigo da Folha, desta segunda-feira, ele foi muito feliz em defender a necessidade de uma estratégia para resolver este problema. Ela incluiria “aumento temporário do ajuste fiscal e diminuição permanente do nível da taxa de juros, e, de outro, depreciação cambial permanente por meio de juros menos atrativos aos capitais externos, da neutralização da doença holandesa e de controles também temporários de entradas de capital até a taxa de câmbio atingir o nível de equilíbrio”. É uma longa lista e, como ele mesmo, reconhece ainda não existe uma coalização com força suficiente para transformá-la em agenda nacional.
A lista é interessante, mas permita-me fazer algumas correções. O ajuste fiscal, se mantido, por um período razoável de tempo, poderá ter o necessário efeito sobre a formação de expectativas dos agentes econômicos o que levaria a queda da taxa de juros. Algo semelhante ocorreu na Irlanda, mas é bom frisar: requer tempo. Já a doença holandesa ainda não parece ser uma doença e assemelha-se cada vez mais ao resultado da própria experiência que lhe deu este nome. Controle de capitais na entrada não me parece ser necessário se for implementado o ajuste fiscal adequado.
No artigo da Folha, desta segunda-feira, ele foi muito feliz em defender a necessidade de uma estratégia para resolver este problema. Ela incluiria “aumento temporário do ajuste fiscal e diminuição permanente do nível da taxa de juros, e, de outro, depreciação cambial permanente por meio de juros menos atrativos aos capitais externos, da neutralização da doença holandesa e de controles também temporários de entradas de capital até a taxa de câmbio atingir o nível de equilíbrio”. É uma longa lista e, como ele mesmo, reconhece ainda não existe uma coalização com força suficiente para transformá-la em agenda nacional.
A lista é interessante, mas permita-me fazer algumas correções. O ajuste fiscal, se mantido, por um período razoável de tempo, poderá ter o necessário efeito sobre a formação de expectativas dos agentes econômicos o que levaria a queda da taxa de juros. Algo semelhante ocorreu na Irlanda, mas é bom frisar: requer tempo. Já a doença holandesa ainda não parece ser uma doença e assemelha-se cada vez mais ao resultado da própria experiência que lhe deu este nome. Controle de capitais na entrada não me parece ser necessário se for implementado o ajuste fiscal adequado.
domingo, 1 de junho de 2008
Os conselheiros econômicos do Presidente
Leio na Folha que o Presidente esta ouvindo economistas fora do governo, mais precisamente o “bruxo”, “o palmeirense” e um não-economista, pagliaci. Entendo perfeitamente a escolha dos dois primeiros e surpreso com a escolha do terceiro conselheiro. Afinal pagliaci não é exatamente uma autoridade em questões econômicas: sua participação no Roda Viva é legendária pela demonstração de ignorância em questões básicas de macroeconomia.
O “bruxo” ainda carrega a mística do “milagre econômico”, que, apesar da repressão política, é, aparentemente, um período que ainda encanta alguns. Já o palmeirense, está associado ao quase-milagre do plano cruzado: um plano que ao fracassar condenou ao gueto da esquerda iletrada a produção acadêmica de uma certa escola da periferia paulistana. É verdade que o palmeirense tem brilho próprio e é um bom economista, mas...
O que podemos esperar destes conselhos? É bom lembrar que os dois são críticos empedernidos da política econômica que gerou o atual estado de bonança da economia brasileira.
O “bruxo” ainda carrega a mística do “milagre econômico”, que, apesar da repressão política, é, aparentemente, um período que ainda encanta alguns. Já o palmeirense, está associado ao quase-milagre do plano cruzado: um plano que ao fracassar condenou ao gueto da esquerda iletrada a produção acadêmica de uma certa escola da periferia paulistana. É verdade que o palmeirense tem brilho próprio e é um bom economista, mas...
O que podemos esperar destes conselhos? É bom lembrar que os dois são críticos empedernidos da política econômica que gerou o atual estado de bonança da economia brasileira.
sábado, 31 de maio de 2008
Where have all the thinkers gone?
Interessante entrevista com um famoso Cardeal belga.
Progressive Catholics might think that Belgian Cardinal Godfried Danneels, who is 75 next week, would be concerned that the Church is moving away from the ideals of Vatican II. But what really concerns him, he tells Robert Mickens, is the scarcity of intellectuals among bishops
Cardinal Godfried Danneels was taking no chances. Two weeks before celebrating his seventy-fifth birthday on 4 June, he had already sent his letter of resignation to the Vatican. "Because you never know if the Italian post is working," the cardinal tells me playfully - and knowingly. After all, he lived in Rome from 1956 to 1959 while earning a doctorate in theology at the Gregorian University. But as I laugh at his gentle dig at the Italian work ethic, the cardinal breaks in with a mischievous grin: "I am a polite man, so I wanted [the letter] to be on time." And there it is, in the very first minute of our hour-long visit: Cardinal Danneels' subtle and ironic humour or the "Danneels Code" as one of his admirers calls it.
It's Friday, 4 p.m., and I am in the old Flemish city of Mechlin (Malines in French) at the archiepiscopal residence, sitting at a table with one of the top intellectuals in the College of Cardinals. But the stately white "palace" is the only external sign to the unsuspecting visitor that Cardinal Danneels is a man of importance. It is certainly not evident in his dress or demeanour. As usual, he is wearing a simple black suit with clerical collar. The only thing that distinguishes him from a parish priest is the silver pectoral cross around his neck and the flat gold band on his right-hand ring finger. There are no priest attendants or secretaries fussing over him, no clerical entourage to announce his presence. There are only two laywomen - a receptionist and another who accompanies guests to the cardinal's study.
Cardinal Danneels is obviously well aware of the symbolism of all this. After all, before being named a bishop in 1977 he taught systematic and sacramental theology for 18 years, the last eight of those at the fabled University of Louvain. So I ask him to explain the significance of his modern-looking pectoral cross with its image of the risen Christ. "It is a risen Lord, not the dying Lord," he points out. And it is "very cheap ... something like half a euro in Rome", he says. But this is not because he lacks taste. On the contrary. Cardinal Danneels, in the best Belgium tradition, is a man of high culture and a patron of the arts, though he is not above relaxing to the Dixie sounds of New Orleans jazz. "But I like it very much because it is Christ who is rising on the Cross. It is typical Johannine," he stresses. "If you look at the Cross with the crucified Jesus it is exactly correct. But you look at what we have before the Resurrection. We are [living] after the Resurrection ... and for a long time already," he says, his voice rising slightly as if to suggest that perhaps too many people have forgotten that part.
Comments like this have earned Belgium's cardinal a reputation for being a progressive. But it is a label that he accepts only cautiously and with qualification. "I have never had the impression that I was a very ideological progressive," he says, though admits that he has been "a bit progressive". Not surprisingly he quotes his visionary predecessor, Cardinal Leo Joseph Suenens (1904-1996) and declares that he stands in "the extreme centre", for - after all - to be a "blind progressive is not very intellectual". Suenens, of course, was one of the key figures of the Second Vatican Council and the leading progressive voice in the immediate post-conciliar period. Cardinal Danneels tells me of his "great admiration" and "great affection" for his predecessor, pointing out that he had a good "instinct" for reading the signs of the times. "But," he says, exercising that qualifier, "it was another time."
It is a time that has deeply shaped Godfried Danneels. "I must say that the Second Vatican Council is very central in my life," the cardinal tells me with great seriousness. "My whole life has been the application of Vatican II, especially in liturgy, catechesis, the relationship between the Church and the world ..." His voice trails off. Then he reminds me that even before the council was convened in 1962 its teachings and ways of thinking were commonplace in Belgium. "It was not a surprise what was decided at Vatican II. All those things were known ... What was new was that the Church confirmed all that in a council," he says.
In more than 31 years as a bishop the cardinal has tried to encourage his priests and laity to "read the council" and to work together. Lay collaboration has become more and more essential with the declining number of new priests. Even though there are still more than 1,900 diocesan and religious-order priests officially listed as living in the Archdiocese of Malines-Brussels, many are already retired and the largest percentage will soon reach retirement age. Critics say that Cardinal Danneels has not attracted new priesthood candidates (only two were ordained in 2007) because he is, in a word, too progressive in a Church that is drawing more traditional men to service. This goes hand in hand with the criticism that he is overly optimistic about trends in society.
"From time to time they say that I see things as too rosy, but I think we have to give credit to the good that is happening," he says. "I have always had an immense respect for every feeling and every thought of every human being I have ever met," he tells me. Keeping an "open mind" and being "very hopeful" comes from a belief that "fundamentally the human being is a good being". He adds: "We need a therapy, but we can be healed."
Since this all sounds very much in the vein of Cardinal Suenens, I ask him what aspects of the Church of today would sadden his pre-decessor. Cardinal Danneels pauses for several seconds, obviously suspicious that the question is indirectly aimed at him. "Well," he begins, with a knowing look, "stupid progressivism." I smile at what seems to be one of those clever responses in the "Danneels Code". Cardinal Suenens would surely have been grieved as much or more by stupid conservatism, as well as by those who espouse it.
Cardinal Danneels, though he is open-minded and respectful, is distressed that there are not brighter men in the Church hierarchy. This point comes up as we speak about the Synod of Bishops. He has attended every assembly since 1980. "When I look at the synod assembly, so many good people are there with really pastoral hearts. They are good shepherds. But from time to time I think it would be good if 5 per cent of them were also thinkers, that don't lack hearts. We need among the bishops and cardinals some really intelligent people."
When I ask Cardinal Danneels if he would like to see some developments or changes from the Vatican he says, "I do not know the Vatican very well, I am here ..." This is despite the cardinal being a long-standing member of four Roman Congregations and a consultant to the Secretariat of State. However, he has publicly questioned the Vatican's intransigence on certain issues, such as denying the sacraments to divorced and remarried Catholics or speaking against the use of condoms as a means of preventing the spread of Aids. And there is also the infamous 1968 encyclical, Humanae Vitae. "It's a problem," Cardinal Danneels says when I mention the papal document. "We have concentrated the whole problem on the pill," he adds, pointing out that the encyclical has deflected people's attention from the other good things the Church has to say about marriage.
However, he accuses not only the Church as an institution, but also himself, for not having done enough for families. When asked what more he could have done, the cardinal says without hesitation that he could have "been much more positive to support and encourage" strong families rather than mostly focusing on broken families. "They feel like orphans and the Church sometimes forgets she is a mother," he pleads.
When Cardinal Danneels became Bishop of Antwerp in 1977 he wrote the first of what are now more than 50 pastoral letters, which are issued at Christmas and Easter. He speaks proudly of these pamphlets, which he says are widely read "outside the Church". He has covered a huge range; one of the latest focused on stress. But it is the first letter that seems to sum up the ideal he has tried to live. It was about the "ministry of encouragement".
Cardinal Danneels has always shunned talk about his his legacy, saying it is "better to remain humble". But he says there is a line from St Francis of Assisi that could be an epitaph for his life: "You should never let anyone leave your presence in sadness." Trying to follow these words is the only achievement the cardinal is willing to ponder. "When I am before the throne of God at the end of my life, the first thing I will say to God is, ‘Have compassion on me.' And he will probably say, ‘I have. Come in ... maybe a bit of Purgatory first ...'" The cardinal begins to laugh and finishes the thought, "‘... but it is just to get you acclimatised
Fonte: The Tablet, 31.05.08
Progressive Catholics might think that Belgian Cardinal Godfried Danneels, who is 75 next week, would be concerned that the Church is moving away from the ideals of Vatican II. But what really concerns him, he tells Robert Mickens, is the scarcity of intellectuals among bishops
Cardinal Godfried Danneels was taking no chances. Two weeks before celebrating his seventy-fifth birthday on 4 June, he had already sent his letter of resignation to the Vatican. "Because you never know if the Italian post is working," the cardinal tells me playfully - and knowingly. After all, he lived in Rome from 1956 to 1959 while earning a doctorate in theology at the Gregorian University. But as I laugh at his gentle dig at the Italian work ethic, the cardinal breaks in with a mischievous grin: "I am a polite man, so I wanted [the letter] to be on time." And there it is, in the very first minute of our hour-long visit: Cardinal Danneels' subtle and ironic humour or the "Danneels Code" as one of his admirers calls it.
It's Friday, 4 p.m., and I am in the old Flemish city of Mechlin (Malines in French) at the archiepiscopal residence, sitting at a table with one of the top intellectuals in the College of Cardinals. But the stately white "palace" is the only external sign to the unsuspecting visitor that Cardinal Danneels is a man of importance. It is certainly not evident in his dress or demeanour. As usual, he is wearing a simple black suit with clerical collar. The only thing that distinguishes him from a parish priest is the silver pectoral cross around his neck and the flat gold band on his right-hand ring finger. There are no priest attendants or secretaries fussing over him, no clerical entourage to announce his presence. There are only two laywomen - a receptionist and another who accompanies guests to the cardinal's study.
Cardinal Danneels is obviously well aware of the symbolism of all this. After all, before being named a bishop in 1977 he taught systematic and sacramental theology for 18 years, the last eight of those at the fabled University of Louvain. So I ask him to explain the significance of his modern-looking pectoral cross with its image of the risen Christ. "It is a risen Lord, not the dying Lord," he points out. And it is "very cheap ... something like half a euro in Rome", he says. But this is not because he lacks taste. On the contrary. Cardinal Danneels, in the best Belgium tradition, is a man of high culture and a patron of the arts, though he is not above relaxing to the Dixie sounds of New Orleans jazz. "But I like it very much because it is Christ who is rising on the Cross. It is typical Johannine," he stresses. "If you look at the Cross with the crucified Jesus it is exactly correct. But you look at what we have before the Resurrection. We are [living] after the Resurrection ... and for a long time already," he says, his voice rising slightly as if to suggest that perhaps too many people have forgotten that part.
Comments like this have earned Belgium's cardinal a reputation for being a progressive. But it is a label that he accepts only cautiously and with qualification. "I have never had the impression that I was a very ideological progressive," he says, though admits that he has been "a bit progressive". Not surprisingly he quotes his visionary predecessor, Cardinal Leo Joseph Suenens (1904-1996) and declares that he stands in "the extreme centre", for - after all - to be a "blind progressive is not very intellectual". Suenens, of course, was one of the key figures of the Second Vatican Council and the leading progressive voice in the immediate post-conciliar period. Cardinal Danneels tells me of his "great admiration" and "great affection" for his predecessor, pointing out that he had a good "instinct" for reading the signs of the times. "But," he says, exercising that qualifier, "it was another time."
It is a time that has deeply shaped Godfried Danneels. "I must say that the Second Vatican Council is very central in my life," the cardinal tells me with great seriousness. "My whole life has been the application of Vatican II, especially in liturgy, catechesis, the relationship between the Church and the world ..." His voice trails off. Then he reminds me that even before the council was convened in 1962 its teachings and ways of thinking were commonplace in Belgium. "It was not a surprise what was decided at Vatican II. All those things were known ... What was new was that the Church confirmed all that in a council," he says.
In more than 31 years as a bishop the cardinal has tried to encourage his priests and laity to "read the council" and to work together. Lay collaboration has become more and more essential with the declining number of new priests. Even though there are still more than 1,900 diocesan and religious-order priests officially listed as living in the Archdiocese of Malines-Brussels, many are already retired and the largest percentage will soon reach retirement age. Critics say that Cardinal Danneels has not attracted new priesthood candidates (only two were ordained in 2007) because he is, in a word, too progressive in a Church that is drawing more traditional men to service. This goes hand in hand with the criticism that he is overly optimistic about trends in society.
"From time to time they say that I see things as too rosy, but I think we have to give credit to the good that is happening," he says. "I have always had an immense respect for every feeling and every thought of every human being I have ever met," he tells me. Keeping an "open mind" and being "very hopeful" comes from a belief that "fundamentally the human being is a good being". He adds: "We need a therapy, but we can be healed."
Since this all sounds very much in the vein of Cardinal Suenens, I ask him what aspects of the Church of today would sadden his pre-decessor. Cardinal Danneels pauses for several seconds, obviously suspicious that the question is indirectly aimed at him. "Well," he begins, with a knowing look, "stupid progressivism." I smile at what seems to be one of those clever responses in the "Danneels Code". Cardinal Suenens would surely have been grieved as much or more by stupid conservatism, as well as by those who espouse it.
Cardinal Danneels, though he is open-minded and respectful, is distressed that there are not brighter men in the Church hierarchy. This point comes up as we speak about the Synod of Bishops. He has attended every assembly since 1980. "When I look at the synod assembly, so many good people are there with really pastoral hearts. They are good shepherds. But from time to time I think it would be good if 5 per cent of them were also thinkers, that don't lack hearts. We need among the bishops and cardinals some really intelligent people."
When I ask Cardinal Danneels if he would like to see some developments or changes from the Vatican he says, "I do not know the Vatican very well, I am here ..." This is despite the cardinal being a long-standing member of four Roman Congregations and a consultant to the Secretariat of State. However, he has publicly questioned the Vatican's intransigence on certain issues, such as denying the sacraments to divorced and remarried Catholics or speaking against the use of condoms as a means of preventing the spread of Aids. And there is also the infamous 1968 encyclical, Humanae Vitae. "It's a problem," Cardinal Danneels says when I mention the papal document. "We have concentrated the whole problem on the pill," he adds, pointing out that the encyclical has deflected people's attention from the other good things the Church has to say about marriage.
However, he accuses not only the Church as an institution, but also himself, for not having done enough for families. When asked what more he could have done, the cardinal says without hesitation that he could have "been much more positive to support and encourage" strong families rather than mostly focusing on broken families. "They feel like orphans and the Church sometimes forgets she is a mother," he pleads.
When Cardinal Danneels became Bishop of Antwerp in 1977 he wrote the first of what are now more than 50 pastoral letters, which are issued at Christmas and Easter. He speaks proudly of these pamphlets, which he says are widely read "outside the Church". He has covered a huge range; one of the latest focused on stress. But it is the first letter that seems to sum up the ideal he has tried to live. It was about the "ministry of encouragement".
Cardinal Danneels has always shunned talk about his his legacy, saying it is "better to remain humble". But he says there is a line from St Francis of Assisi that could be an epitaph for his life: "You should never let anyone leave your presence in sadness." Trying to follow these words is the only achievement the cardinal is willing to ponder. "When I am before the throne of God at the end of my life, the first thing I will say to God is, ‘Have compassion on me.' And he will probably say, ‘I have. Come in ... maybe a bit of Purgatory first ...'" The cardinal begins to laugh and finishes the thought, "‘... but it is just to get you acclimatised
Fonte: The Tablet, 31.05.08
sexta-feira, 30 de maio de 2008
Fagundes e a distribuição de renda
Voltando para casa ontem a noite; observando a fila de carros , os canhões de luzes – do tipo que o Comissario Gordon usava para chamar o Batman - as arvores finas como pernas de saracuras, a nova ponte estaida, o vento frio, compondo o cenário perfeito para o gosto, não raro duvidoso, dos convidados para a inauguração do mais novo símbolo do novos ricos paulistanos; pensei na última grande declaração de Fagundes. Não, estou falando do grande ator, mas de um ator menor, que disfarçado, bate ponto na nossa Las Vegas.
Ah! mas você cara leitor, talvez, não conheça o Fagundes. Permita-me refrescar sua memória, ou, para os mais jovens, apresentá-lo:”Todos os momentos de sua existência são dedicados a enaltecer seu chefinho – para o desespero desse último. Ele, para Fagundes, será sempre o primeiro e único, a razão de sua existência”. Ele é uma das mais divertidas criações do Laerte.
Pois é, ..., segundo leio nos jornais para ele : "Há uma mobilidade social brasileira inexistente na maioria dos países. Na maioria, o que há é concentração de renda. Aqui, não há concentração. “. É esta ausência de concentração de renda, que explica o belo cenário ontem na marginal do rio pinheiros, uma demonstração, se ainda necessário, da mais perfeita distribuição de renda.
Ah! mas você cara leitor, talvez, não conheça o Fagundes. Permita-me refrescar sua memória, ou, para os mais jovens, apresentá-lo:”Todos os momentos de sua existência são dedicados a enaltecer seu chefinho – para o desespero desse último. Ele, para Fagundes, será sempre o primeiro e único, a razão de sua existência”. Ele é uma das mais divertidas criações do Laerte.
Pois é, ..., segundo leio nos jornais para ele : "Há uma mobilidade social brasileira inexistente na maioria dos países. Na maioria, o que há é concentração de renda. Aqui, não há concentração. “. É esta ausência de concentração de renda, que explica o belo cenário ontem na marginal do rio pinheiros, uma demonstração, se ainda necessário, da mais perfeita distribuição de renda.
quinta-feira, 29 de maio de 2008
The snow man
One must have a mind of winter
To regard the frost and the boughs
Of the pine-trees crusted with snow;
And have been cold a long time
To behold the junipers shagged with ice,
The spruces rough in the distant glitter
Of the January sun; and not to think
Of any misery in the sound of the wind,
In the sound of a few leaves,
Which is the sound of the land
Full of the same wind
That is blowing in the same bare place
For the listener, who listens in the snow,
And, nothing himself, beholds
Nothing that is not there and the nothing that is.
Wallace Stevens
To regard the frost and the boughs
Of the pine-trees crusted with snow;
And have been cold a long time
To behold the junipers shagged with ice,
The spruces rough in the distant glitter
Of the January sun; and not to think
Of any misery in the sound of the wind,
In the sound of a few leaves,
Which is the sound of the land
Full of the same wind
That is blowing in the same bare place
For the listener, who listens in the snow,
And, nothing himself, beholds
Nothing that is not there and the nothing that is.
Wallace Stevens
quarta-feira, 28 de maio de 2008
Lições da crise financeira de 2007
Abaixo o abstract da nova versão de um artigo do Buiter sobre a crise financeira de 2007. Como ja mencionado neste blog, ele é um dos melhores macroeconomistas, ainda, em atividade e sempre vale a pena ler os seus trabalhos.
Abstract
The paper studies the causes of the current financial crisis and on the policy responses by central banks and regulators. It also considers proposals for the prevention or mitigation of future crises.
The crisis is the product of a ‘perfect storm’ bringing together a number of microeconomic and macroeconomic pathologies. Among the microeconomic systemic failures were: wanton securitisation, fundamental flaws in the rating agencies’ business model, the procyclical behaviour of leverage in much of the financial system and of the Basel capital adequacy requirements, privately rational but socially inefficient disintermediation, and competitive international de-regulation. Reduced incentives for collecting and disseminating information about counterparty risk were a pervasive feature of the new financial world of securitisation and off-balance sheet vehicles. So was lack of transparency about who owned what and about who owed what and to whom. In many ways, the crisis can be seen as a failure of the transactions-oriented model of financial capitalism favoured in the US and the UK. Proximate local drivers of the specific way in which these problems manifested themselves were regulatory and supervisory failure in the US home loan market.
Among the macroeconomic pathologies that contributed to the crisis were, first, excessive global liquidity creation by key central banks and, second, an ex-ante global saving glut, brought about by the entry of a number of high-saving countries (notably China) into the global economy and by the global redistribution of wealth and income towards commodity exporters that also had, at least in the short run, high propensities to save. Very low risk-free long-term real interest rates and unprecedently low credit risk spreads of all kinds together with the ‘great moderation’ – low and stable inflation and stable global GDP growth – prompted an increasingly frantic ‘search for yield’.
In the UK, failures of the Tripartite financial stability arrangement between the Treasury, the Bank of England and the FSA, weaknesses in the Bank of England’s liquidity management, regulatory failure of the FSA, an inadequate deposit insurance arrangement and deficient insolvency laws for the banking sector contributed to the financial disarray and the failure of a medium-sized home-loan bank, Northern Rock. In the US, the balkanised and incoherent structure of regulation of financial institutions and financial markets, even at the Federal level, meant that too many regulators are involved but none is ever in charge or responsible.
Despite this, since the excesses were confined mainly to the financial sector and, in the US and some European countries, the household sector, it should have been possible to limit the spillovers over from the crisis beyond the financial sector and the housing sector without macroeconomic heroics. Measures directly targeted at the liquidity crunch should have been sufficient. The macroeconomic response of the Fed to the crisis - 325 basis point worth of cuts between September 2007 and May 2008 and a 75 basis point cut in the discount window penalty – therefore seem excessive and create doubt about the Fed’s commitment to price stability.The liquidity-enhancing policies of the Fed, and its bailout of the investment bank Bear Stearns, were effective in dealing with the immediate crisis. They also were, quite unnecessarily, structured so as to maximise moral hazard by distorting private incentives in favour of excessively risky future borrowing and lending. The cuts in the discount rate penalty, the extraordinary arrangements for pricing the collateral offered to the Fed by the primary dealers through the TSLF and the PDCF, the proposals for bringing forward the payment of interest on bank reserves, the terms of the Bear Stearns bail out and the ‘Greenspan-Bernanke put’ rate cut on January 21/22 2008, 75 bps at an unscheduled meeting and out of normal hours, are most easily rationalised as excess sensitivity of the Fed to Wall Street concerns, reflecting (cognitive) regulatory capture of the Fed by Wall Street.
The macroeconomic stability records of the Bank of England and of the ECB have been superior to those of the Fed. After climbing a quite steep liquidity learning curve in the early months of the crisis, the Bank of England is now performing its lender of last resort and market maker of last resort roles more effectively. It would be desirable to have the information in the public domain that is required to determine whether the ECB (through the Eurosystem) is pricing illiquid collateral appropriately. There is reason for concern that the ECB may be accepting collateral in repos and at its discount window at inflated valuations, thus joining the Fed in boosting future moral hazard through the present encouragement of adverse selection.
The Fed, unlike the ECB and the Bank of England, is also a banking sector regulator and supervisor. This gives it an informational advantage. The downside to the Fed’s position is the risk of regulatory capture. I believe that what I call ‘cognitive regulatory capture’ of the Fed by Wall Street has occurred during the past two decades. The net result is that both as regards macroeconomic stability and as regards future financial stability, the Fed has performed worse during this crisis than the ECB and the Bank of England.
Future regulation will have to be base on size and leverage of institutions. It will have to be universal (applying to all leveraged institutions above a certain size), uniform, countercyclical and global.
Financial crises will always be with us.
Para ler o artigo: here
Abstract
The paper studies the causes of the current financial crisis and on the policy responses by central banks and regulators. It also considers proposals for the prevention or mitigation of future crises.
The crisis is the product of a ‘perfect storm’ bringing together a number of microeconomic and macroeconomic pathologies. Among the microeconomic systemic failures were: wanton securitisation, fundamental flaws in the rating agencies’ business model, the procyclical behaviour of leverage in much of the financial system and of the Basel capital adequacy requirements, privately rational but socially inefficient disintermediation, and competitive international de-regulation. Reduced incentives for collecting and disseminating information about counterparty risk were a pervasive feature of the new financial world of securitisation and off-balance sheet vehicles. So was lack of transparency about who owned what and about who owed what and to whom. In many ways, the crisis can be seen as a failure of the transactions-oriented model of financial capitalism favoured in the US and the UK. Proximate local drivers of the specific way in which these problems manifested themselves were regulatory and supervisory failure in the US home loan market.
Among the macroeconomic pathologies that contributed to the crisis were, first, excessive global liquidity creation by key central banks and, second, an ex-ante global saving glut, brought about by the entry of a number of high-saving countries (notably China) into the global economy and by the global redistribution of wealth and income towards commodity exporters that also had, at least in the short run, high propensities to save. Very low risk-free long-term real interest rates and unprecedently low credit risk spreads of all kinds together with the ‘great moderation’ – low and stable inflation and stable global GDP growth – prompted an increasingly frantic ‘search for yield’.
In the UK, failures of the Tripartite financial stability arrangement between the Treasury, the Bank of England and the FSA, weaknesses in the Bank of England’s liquidity management, regulatory failure of the FSA, an inadequate deposit insurance arrangement and deficient insolvency laws for the banking sector contributed to the financial disarray and the failure of a medium-sized home-loan bank, Northern Rock. In the US, the balkanised and incoherent structure of regulation of financial institutions and financial markets, even at the Federal level, meant that too many regulators are involved but none is ever in charge or responsible.
Despite this, since the excesses were confined mainly to the financial sector and, in the US and some European countries, the household sector, it should have been possible to limit the spillovers over from the crisis beyond the financial sector and the housing sector without macroeconomic heroics. Measures directly targeted at the liquidity crunch should have been sufficient. The macroeconomic response of the Fed to the crisis - 325 basis point worth of cuts between September 2007 and May 2008 and a 75 basis point cut in the discount window penalty – therefore seem excessive and create doubt about the Fed’s commitment to price stability.The liquidity-enhancing policies of the Fed, and its bailout of the investment bank Bear Stearns, were effective in dealing with the immediate crisis. They also were, quite unnecessarily, structured so as to maximise moral hazard by distorting private incentives in favour of excessively risky future borrowing and lending. The cuts in the discount rate penalty, the extraordinary arrangements for pricing the collateral offered to the Fed by the primary dealers through the TSLF and the PDCF, the proposals for bringing forward the payment of interest on bank reserves, the terms of the Bear Stearns bail out and the ‘Greenspan-Bernanke put’ rate cut on January 21/22 2008, 75 bps at an unscheduled meeting and out of normal hours, are most easily rationalised as excess sensitivity of the Fed to Wall Street concerns, reflecting (cognitive) regulatory capture of the Fed by Wall Street.
The macroeconomic stability records of the Bank of England and of the ECB have been superior to those of the Fed. After climbing a quite steep liquidity learning curve in the early months of the crisis, the Bank of England is now performing its lender of last resort and market maker of last resort roles more effectively. It would be desirable to have the information in the public domain that is required to determine whether the ECB (through the Eurosystem) is pricing illiquid collateral appropriately. There is reason for concern that the ECB may be accepting collateral in repos and at its discount window at inflated valuations, thus joining the Fed in boosting future moral hazard through the present encouragement of adverse selection.
The Fed, unlike the ECB and the Bank of England, is also a banking sector regulator and supervisor. This gives it an informational advantage. The downside to the Fed’s position is the risk of regulatory capture. I believe that what I call ‘cognitive regulatory capture’ of the Fed by Wall Street has occurred during the past two decades. The net result is that both as regards macroeconomic stability and as regards future financial stability, the Fed has performed worse during this crisis than the ECB and the Bank of England.
Future regulation will have to be base on size and leverage of institutions. It will have to be universal (applying to all leveraged institutions above a certain size), uniform, countercyclical and global.
Financial crises will always be with us.
Para ler o artigo: here
terça-feira, 27 de maio de 2008
Resultados do setor externo
O resultado negativo da CC, provavelmente, vai roubar algumas noites de sono da turma que se passa por economistas em Barão Geraldo e Perdizes. Crise externa a vista, é uma questão de tempo, e outras tolices do gênero definem a retórica desta turma. Contudo, para a infelicidade deles, não parece que será desta vez que a crise final, o “derrumbe”, nos atingirá.
A situação do setor externo ainda não é preocupante, é preciso esperar para ver qual será o comportamento da remessa de lucros e dividendos. Se de fato é apenas uma realocação de recursos para cobrir prejuízos e, no caso do setor financeiro, se o valor atual destes prejuízos esta correto. Há também o impacto da greve dos auditores fiscais da receita. Enfim é preciso esperar.
O volume de investimento direto é um dado positivo, mas é preciso lembrar que no futuro, ele deverá gerar como contrapartida a remessa de lucros e dividendos. Digo pode, porque o resultado positivo deste investimento poderá ser reinvestido novamente no Brasil. Contudo, é razoável esperar que parte dele deverá sair sobre a forma de remessa de lucros e dividendos.
A situação do setor externo ainda não é preocupante, é preciso esperar para ver qual será o comportamento da remessa de lucros e dividendos. Se de fato é apenas uma realocação de recursos para cobrir prejuízos e, no caso do setor financeiro, se o valor atual destes prejuízos esta correto. Há também o impacto da greve dos auditores fiscais da receita. Enfim é preciso esperar.
O volume de investimento direto é um dado positivo, mas é preciso lembrar que no futuro, ele deverá gerar como contrapartida a remessa de lucros e dividendos. Digo pode, porque o resultado positivo deste investimento poderá ser reinvestido novamente no Brasil. Contudo, é razoável esperar que parte dele deverá sair sobre a forma de remessa de lucros e dividendos.
segunda-feira, 26 de maio de 2008
O relativismo bresseriano
Em interessante artigo publicado na FSP, no inicio deste mês, Bresser analisa a enorme dificuldade em governar países pobres, como é o caso de alguns países da America Latina: Venezuela, Equador e Bolívia . Ameaças de golpes e julgamento negativo dos seus governantes, definem o agir político da elites locais e constituem o pesadelo dos lideres políticos de países pobres.
O artigo, retoma temas caros ao autor, um nacionalista de esquerda da velha guarda , com uma certa dose de relativismo, como fica explicito nesta passagem do artigo : “ as elites do dois países[pobres e ricos] insistem em julgar esses líderes de acordo com critérios adequados a países desenvolvidos, em vez de compreenderem que os padrões mais baixos de desenvolvimento político exigem igualmente padrões menos rigorosos de avaliação”(FSP, 05.05.08, Pg.B2). Bresser assume uma relação de causalidade entre desenvolvimento econômico e desenvolvimento institucional, ou seja quanto mais pobre é um país “menos informada politicamente será sua população”. A tese não é nova e continua sendo controversa. Há países em que ela parece ser valida e outros que negam sua validade, o que reduz seu poder explicativo, assim como a sua utilidade.
Uma consequência obvia desta linha de argumentação é que ela serve como justificativa para praticas intervencionistas dos países ricos e, principalmente, para a tolerância com que são tratados ditadores em vários países pobres. Afinal nada se pode fazer, apenas esperar pelo desenvolvimento econômico, que resolverá os problemas institucionais destes pobres países. Ate la, melhor aceitar os Ditadores, afinal é isto que se espera dos países pobres.
O artigo, retoma temas caros ao autor, um nacionalista de esquerda da velha guarda , com uma certa dose de relativismo, como fica explicito nesta passagem do artigo : “ as elites do dois países[pobres e ricos] insistem em julgar esses líderes de acordo com critérios adequados a países desenvolvidos, em vez de compreenderem que os padrões mais baixos de desenvolvimento político exigem igualmente padrões menos rigorosos de avaliação”(FSP, 05.05.08, Pg.B2). Bresser assume uma relação de causalidade entre desenvolvimento econômico e desenvolvimento institucional, ou seja quanto mais pobre é um país “menos informada politicamente será sua população”. A tese não é nova e continua sendo controversa. Há países em que ela parece ser valida e outros que negam sua validade, o que reduz seu poder explicativo, assim como a sua utilidade.
Uma consequência obvia desta linha de argumentação é que ela serve como justificativa para praticas intervencionistas dos países ricos e, principalmente, para a tolerância com que são tratados ditadores em vários países pobres. Afinal nada se pode fazer, apenas esperar pelo desenvolvimento econômico, que resolverá os problemas institucionais destes pobres países. Ate la, melhor aceitar os Ditadores, afinal é isto que se espera dos países pobres.
domingo, 25 de maio de 2008
Um certo grilho falante
O grilho falante de um ex- Ministro da Fazenda do Governo Lula, levanta uma questão importante: o impacto negativo dos debates sobre a política econômica sobre esta mesma política econômica. Segundo ele “ na condução da política econômica, muitas vezes, silêncio e serenidade auxiliam mais do que ativismo e declarações sucessivas”( FSP, 25.05.08, pag.B5). Estaria ele defendendo o regime ditatorial? Afinal, em um regime democrático é normal a disputa, interna, sobre os rumos da política econômica. Ela esteve presente em vários governos brasileiros, como é o caso recente do Governo FHC e, em período mais distante, no segundo Governo Vargas. Política econômica, é acima de tudo Política, parece que nosso grilho falante confunde teoria econômica com política econômica. Erro fatal, ainda que recorrente, que não se esperaria de alguém de reconhecido talento e competência.
Em outra passagem ele argumenta que “ os anúncios ansiosos de que algo será feito( ainda que nada muito relevante, até agora, tenha ocorrido) aumentam a volatilidade dos preços dos ativos e reduzem a segurança para os investimentos de longo prazo”. O impacto sobre a volatibilidade é uma possibilidade real, mas é necessário compará-lo com os impactos de outras variáveis, para conhecermos sua relevância. Já a questão da segurança não parece ser muito convincente. Redução na segurança tem impacto sobre os investimentos de longo prazo, via aumento no risco de expropriação do retorno sobre este mesmo investimento. Caberia ao nosso grilho falante apresentar exemplos onde isto de fato ocorreu.
É ponto pacifico que Fagundes prestaria um grande serviço a nação com um emprego fora do Governo. Este, alias, parece ser, um dos objetivos do nosso grilho falante. Um segundo é criticar a posição, correta como já comentada em um post anterior, de um conhecido economista de esquerda com livre transito neste e em outros governos e que, aparentemente, estaria sendo ouvido pelo Presidente. Parece que nosso grilho falante não consegue ser ouvido e tem como único meio, um tanto desesperado, diga-se de passagem, a pagina de economia de um grande jornal.
Em outra passagem ele argumenta que “ os anúncios ansiosos de que algo será feito( ainda que nada muito relevante, até agora, tenha ocorrido) aumentam a volatilidade dos preços dos ativos e reduzem a segurança para os investimentos de longo prazo”. O impacto sobre a volatibilidade é uma possibilidade real, mas é necessário compará-lo com os impactos de outras variáveis, para conhecermos sua relevância. Já a questão da segurança não parece ser muito convincente. Redução na segurança tem impacto sobre os investimentos de longo prazo, via aumento no risco de expropriação do retorno sobre este mesmo investimento. Caberia ao nosso grilho falante apresentar exemplos onde isto de fato ocorreu.
É ponto pacifico que Fagundes prestaria um grande serviço a nação com um emprego fora do Governo. Este, alias, parece ser, um dos objetivos do nosso grilho falante. Um segundo é criticar a posição, correta como já comentada em um post anterior, de um conhecido economista de esquerda com livre transito neste e em outros governos e que, aparentemente, estaria sendo ouvido pelo Presidente. Parece que nosso grilho falante não consegue ser ouvido e tem como único meio, um tanto desesperado, diga-se de passagem, a pagina de economia de um grande jornal.
sábado, 24 de maio de 2008
Poder de persuasão
Interessante artigo sobre a participação da Igreja em debates na esfera política. A reflexão é feita a partir da experiência britanica, mas é útil, também, para o Brasil.
Does the Church have the right to try to influence political processes, such as the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill? And if so, how? A new report from a Christian think tank sets out how the Church should engage in modern politics
What is the easiest way to win an argument? You might choose to undermine your opponent's logic, discredit their facts or show how ghastly things would be if they had their way. But surely the easiest way is simply to deny them a voice in the first place.
It has been interesting to see how this tactic has been deployed in debates over the recent Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. Few use it quite that blatantly, of course, but if your opponents are religious, it is so much easier to deploy the "religion is private" card than actually to engage with their arguments.
Para ler o artigo completo:Powers of persuasion
Does the Church have the right to try to influence political processes, such as the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill? And if so, how? A new report from a Christian think tank sets out how the Church should engage in modern politics
What is the easiest way to win an argument? You might choose to undermine your opponent's logic, discredit their facts or show how ghastly things would be if they had their way. But surely the easiest way is simply to deny them a voice in the first place.
It has been interesting to see how this tactic has been deployed in debates over the recent Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. Few use it quite that blatantly, of course, but if your opponents are religious, it is so much easier to deploy the "religion is private" card than actually to engage with their arguments.
Para ler o artigo completo:Powers of persuasion
sexta-feira, 23 de maio de 2008
Boas notícias
O lançamento da revista “ Interesse Nacional” é um bom sinal. Ainda não tive a oportunidade de ler a revista, mas a lista de contribuidores para o número de lançamento é auspiciosa: diversidade de linhas e de filiação partidária é o que se espera de uma revista dedicada a este tema e é isto, justamente, o que encontramos no primeiro número. É esperar para ver ... e torcer para que ela possa romper a barreira que o tema ainda encontra nas Universidades de elite.
Uma segunda boa noticia é a suspensão do lançamento do Fundo Soberano. Segundo a Folha o Presidente ainda tem dúvidas “sobre o uso de recursos do superávit primário para formar seu caixa”. É mais uma decisão correta do Presidente, que poderia aproveitar a oportunidade e encontrar um outro emprego para Fagundes, o formulador de idéias exóticas. É sempre possível encontrar um emprego bem remunerado em algum canto do globo, principalmente na capital do Império. Por falar nisto, Walter Ego, continua implicando com o famoso Napoleão de Hospício, que justiça seja feita é um ótimo economista, enquanto o primeiro é um esforçado contador de histórias.
Uma segunda boa noticia é a suspensão do lançamento do Fundo Soberano. Segundo a Folha o Presidente ainda tem dúvidas “sobre o uso de recursos do superávit primário para formar seu caixa”. É mais uma decisão correta do Presidente, que poderia aproveitar a oportunidade e encontrar um outro emprego para Fagundes, o formulador de idéias exóticas. É sempre possível encontrar um emprego bem remunerado em algum canto do globo, principalmente na capital do Império. Por falar nisto, Walter Ego, continua implicando com o famoso Napoleão de Hospício, que justiça seja feita é um ótimo economista, enquanto o primeiro é um esforçado contador de histórias.
quinta-feira, 22 de maio de 2008
Dois poemas de Langston Hughes
I, Too
I, too, sing America.
I am the darker brother.
They send me to eat in the kitchen
When company comes,
But I laugh,
And eat well,
And grow strong.
Tomorrow,
I'll be at rable
When company comes
Nobody'll dare
Say to me,
"Eat in the kitchen,"
Then.
Besides,
They'll see how beatiful I am
And be ashamed -
I, too, am America
*
Island
Between two rivers,
North of the park,
Life darker rivers
The streets are dark.
Black and white,
Gold and brown -
Chocolate-custard
Pie of a town.
Dream withim a dream,
Our dream deferred.
Good morning, daddy!
Ain't you heard?
I, too, sing America.
I am the darker brother.
They send me to eat in the kitchen
When company comes,
But I laugh,
And eat well,
And grow strong.
Tomorrow,
I'll be at rable
When company comes
Nobody'll dare
Say to me,
"Eat in the kitchen,"
Then.
Besides,
They'll see how beatiful I am
And be ashamed -
I, too, am America
*
Island
Between two rivers,
North of the park,
Life darker rivers
The streets are dark.
Black and white,
Gold and brown -
Chocolate-custard
Pie of a town.
Dream withim a dream,
Our dream deferred.
Good morning, daddy!
Ain't you heard?
quarta-feira, 21 de maio de 2008
Mendonça de Barros e a política industrial
L.C.Mendonça de Barros, um dos melhores analistas da economia brasileira, apresentou, recentemente na Folha novos ( ou velhos?) argumentos em defesa da política industrial, no formato de três lições.
Ele inicia o artigo afirmando que “em primeiro lugar, quero dizer que acredito na necessidade de um país como o Brasil ter uma política industrial. Não concordo com os que negam que a articulação entre o setor privado e o governo seja um caminho eficiente para desenvolver o tecido industrial de um país em desenvolvimento.”
A história econômica brasileira e de outros países esta longe de comprovar a tese da eficiência. Mendonça de Barros menciona apenas um exemplo de fracasso, o da Cobra, e elogia, como era de se esperar, o sucesso da Embraer. Contudo, se levarmos em consideração o montante de recursos públicos investidos nesta empresa, a avaliação não será tão rósea quanto a do Mendonça. Ele esquece, também, de mencionar a Engesa e outros exemplos de eficiência da política industrial. Mesmo aceitando a tese dele, ela não se aplicaria ao Brasil, que esta longe de ser um país em desenvolvimento. Neste quesito, a avaliação do FHC ne parece correta.
“A primeira, e talvez a mais importante, é a de que nenhuma política industrial tem viabilidade se não respeitar o mercado. Em outras palavras, ela precisa ter as forças de mercado a seu favor e nunca andar na mão oposta”. É no mínimo curiosa. Qual seria, então sua razão de ser? Ela somente poderá respeitar o mercado e contar com o favor do mercado, se não assumirmos assimetria de informações. Sabemos que as informações do gestor e do mercado são diferentes e o que o grande erro da política industrial é achar que ela pode antecipar-se ao mercado.
“A segunda lição que a história nos ensina é que a política industrial deve acompanhar a evolução do capitalismo brasileiro.” O contrário é que não poderia ser. Mas, ele tem razão, no Brasil algumas obviedades, ainda são novidades.
“A terceira lição nos ensina que a política industrial deve responder às necessidades do setor privado, eliminando ou reduzindo os principais obstáculos estruturais ao seu desenvolvimento.” É correto, somente se aceitarmos que as necessidade deste setor, são as mesmas da sociedade como um todo. Convenhamos que é uma tese no mínimo heróica e, não raro, justificativa para a defesa de interesses de classe em nome do interesse nacional. Não estou negando a existência do interesse nacional, muito pelo contrário: ele existe e é importante, mas não pode ser confundido com o interesse de classe. Uma indicação da miséria intelectual brasileira é ausência de debates sobre o interesse nacional: presente em Universidades de elite mundo afora, por aqui ainda engatinha.
Ele inicia o artigo afirmando que “em primeiro lugar, quero dizer que acredito na necessidade de um país como o Brasil ter uma política industrial. Não concordo com os que negam que a articulação entre o setor privado e o governo seja um caminho eficiente para desenvolver o tecido industrial de um país em desenvolvimento.”
A história econômica brasileira e de outros países esta longe de comprovar a tese da eficiência. Mendonça de Barros menciona apenas um exemplo de fracasso, o da Cobra, e elogia, como era de se esperar, o sucesso da Embraer. Contudo, se levarmos em consideração o montante de recursos públicos investidos nesta empresa, a avaliação não será tão rósea quanto a do Mendonça. Ele esquece, também, de mencionar a Engesa e outros exemplos de eficiência da política industrial. Mesmo aceitando a tese dele, ela não se aplicaria ao Brasil, que esta longe de ser um país em desenvolvimento. Neste quesito, a avaliação do FHC ne parece correta.
“A primeira, e talvez a mais importante, é a de que nenhuma política industrial tem viabilidade se não respeitar o mercado. Em outras palavras, ela precisa ter as forças de mercado a seu favor e nunca andar na mão oposta”. É no mínimo curiosa. Qual seria, então sua razão de ser? Ela somente poderá respeitar o mercado e contar com o favor do mercado, se não assumirmos assimetria de informações. Sabemos que as informações do gestor e do mercado são diferentes e o que o grande erro da política industrial é achar que ela pode antecipar-se ao mercado.
“A segunda lição que a história nos ensina é que a política industrial deve acompanhar a evolução do capitalismo brasileiro.” O contrário é que não poderia ser. Mas, ele tem razão, no Brasil algumas obviedades, ainda são novidades.
“A terceira lição nos ensina que a política industrial deve responder às necessidades do setor privado, eliminando ou reduzindo os principais obstáculos estruturais ao seu desenvolvimento.” É correto, somente se aceitarmos que as necessidade deste setor, são as mesmas da sociedade como um todo. Convenhamos que é uma tese no mínimo heróica e, não raro, justificativa para a defesa de interesses de classe em nome do interesse nacional. Não estou negando a existência do interesse nacional, muito pelo contrário: ele existe e é importante, mas não pode ser confundido com o interesse de classe. Uma indicação da miséria intelectual brasileira é ausência de debates sobre o interesse nacional: presente em Universidades de elite mundo afora, por aqui ainda engatinha.
terça-feira, 20 de maio de 2008
O eterno retorno
“ A desvalorização cambial implica redução temporária de salários reais e um aumento tambem temporário da inflação”(FSP.19.05.08). Finalmente alguem reconhece os impactos negativos de uma alteração na taxa de cãmbio. Mais uma demonstração de coragem do Sr. Bresser Pereira. Resta, contudo, a questão: seria temporária? Na historia econômica brasileira encontramos varios exemplos de políticas que deveriam ter um impacto negativo, apenas, temporário sobre os salários reais e a inflação e que terminaram tendo um impacto permanente. Não é facil aceitar que desta vez seria diferente.
Uma outra questão deve ser lembrada: trata-se, também, da transferência de renda entre setores da economia brasileira. O setor vencedor, neste caso, seria, naturalmente o exportador. É o eterno retorno da velha pratica mercantilista com uma roupagem, aparentemente, moderna, mas , na verdade roto.
Uma outra questão deve ser lembrada: trata-se, também, da transferência de renda entre setores da economia brasileira. O setor vencedor, neste caso, seria, naturalmente o exportador. É o eterno retorno da velha pratica mercantilista com uma roupagem, aparentemente, moderna, mas , na verdade roto.
segunda-feira, 19 de maio de 2008
Inflation here, there and everywheree
Buiter é um dos melhores macroeconomistas da atualidade. Autor de um livro clássico de macroeconomia e artigos fundamentais em politica fiscal e monetária.
What is inflation?
Inflation is rising just about everywhere. Why is this and what can be done about it?
To get some basic concepts clear: inflation is a sustained rise in the general price level. Both the words ’sustained’ and ‘general price level’ are imprecise and in need of operationalisation. By general price level I mean a broad, representative index of consumer prices. That excludes the (headline) CPI in the UK because, like the other EU harmonised price indices, it excludes housing costs (that is, the rental cost of housing services or the imputed rental paid by owner occupiers). This makes the CPI/HICP indices unrepresentative, unless either the relative price of housing services and the goods and services included in the CPI/HICP remains constant or UK/EU citizens live in cardboard boxes provided free of charge by the Salvation Army. It may come to that, but not yet. The UK’s RPI and RPIX indices would be more representative.
I also exclude as unrepresentative various ‘core’ price indices, which exclude from the headline index such things as food, drink, energy and fuel. Among leading central banks, only the Fed has focused mainly on core inflation rather than on the headline index of consumer goods and services prices. Focusing on core inflation will be misleading unless either the relative price of core and non-core goods and services is expected to remain constant or Americans don’t eat , drink, drive cars and heat their houses or use air conditioning.
Para ler o artigo completo:http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/
What is inflation?
Inflation is rising just about everywhere. Why is this and what can be done about it?
To get some basic concepts clear: inflation is a sustained rise in the general price level. Both the words ’sustained’ and ‘general price level’ are imprecise and in need of operationalisation. By general price level I mean a broad, representative index of consumer prices. That excludes the (headline) CPI in the UK because, like the other EU harmonised price indices, it excludes housing costs (that is, the rental cost of housing services or the imputed rental paid by owner occupiers). This makes the CPI/HICP indices unrepresentative, unless either the relative price of housing services and the goods and services included in the CPI/HICP remains constant or UK/EU citizens live in cardboard boxes provided free of charge by the Salvation Army. It may come to that, but not yet. The UK’s RPI and RPIX indices would be more representative.
I also exclude as unrepresentative various ‘core’ price indices, which exclude from the headline index such things as food, drink, energy and fuel. Among leading central banks, only the Fed has focused mainly on core inflation rather than on the headline index of consumer goods and services prices. Focusing on core inflation will be misleading unless either the relative price of core and non-core goods and services is expected to remain constant or Americans don’t eat , drink, drive cars and heat their houses or use air conditioning.
Para ler o artigo completo:http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/
domingo, 18 de maio de 2008
Piadas sobre Economistas e Economia IV
Há duas classes de economistas que prevêem as coisas: Aqueles que não sabem e aqueles que não sabem que não sabem. (J.K. Galbraith)
*
Lei de Murphy da Política Econômica: Os economistas tem a menor influência na Política Econômica quanto mais sabem e mais concordam; tem a maior influência na Política Econômica quando sabem o mínimo e discordam veementemente. (Alan S. Blinder)
*
*
Um economista é um especialista que saberá amanhã porquê as coisas que previu ontem não acontecerem hoje. (Laurence J.Peter)
*
Um estudo de economia geralmente revela que a melhor época para comprar qualquer coisa é o ano passado.
*
Se todos os economistas fossem postos lado a lado eles não iriam alcançar uma conclusão. (George B. Shaw)
*
Se você coloca dois economistas em uma sala, você acha duas opiniões, ao não ser que um deles seja Keynes, quando você acha três opiniões. (W. Churchill)
*
Um economista é alguém que vê alguma coisa funcionando na prática e pergunta como funcionaria em princípios. (Stephen M. Goldfeld)
*
Há alguns anos atrás houve um desfile na União Soviética. Tanques, soldados, mísseis e aeronaves desfilaram. Depois dez homens vestidos de terno e gravata seguiram os pelotões.
— Aqueles são nossos espiões ?, perguntou Gorbatchev para o diretor da KGB.
— Não, são economistas. Imagine o estrago que vão causar nos Estados Unidos quando deixarmos com os americanos.
*
Uma maneira rápida de identificar se alguém é um economista. Pergunte ao sujeito qual a diferença entre ignorância e indiferença. Se ele responder "Eu não sei e não quero saber", pode estar seguro que é um economista. Agora resta a questão do que fazer com ele.
*
Se um economista e um advogado estivessem ambos se afogando e você pudesse salvar apenas um deles, você iria almoçar ou ler um jornal
*
Um estudo de economia geralmente revela que a melhor época para comprar qualquer coisa é o ano passado.
*
Se todos os economistas fossem postos lado a lado eles não iriam alcançar uma conclusão. (George B. Shaw)
*
Se você coloca dois economistas em uma sala, você acha duas opiniões, ao não ser que um deles seja Keynes, quando você acha três opiniões. (W. Churchill)
*
Um economista é alguém que vê alguma coisa funcionando na prática e pergunta como funcionaria em princípios. (Stephen M. Goldfeld)
*
Há alguns anos atrás houve um desfile na União Soviética. Tanques, soldados, mísseis e aeronaves desfilaram. Depois dez homens vestidos de terno e gravata seguiram os pelotões.
— Aqueles são nossos espiões ?, perguntou Gorbatchev para o diretor da KGB.
— Não, são economistas. Imagine o estrago que vão causar nos Estados Unidos quando deixarmos com os americanos.
*
Uma maneira rápida de identificar se alguém é um economista. Pergunte ao sujeito qual a diferença entre ignorância e indiferença. Se ele responder "Eu não sei e não quero saber", pode estar seguro que é um economista. Agora resta a questão do que fazer com ele.
*
Se um economista e um advogado estivessem ambos se afogando e você pudesse salvar apenas um deles, você iria almoçar ou ler um jornal
sábado, 17 de maio de 2008
Good will ethics
Ainda não li o livro, mas a resenha abaixo o recomenda.
Catholic Theological Ethics in the World Church, edited by James F Keenan, Continuum £16.99
These 18 articles are the result of the first meeting at Padua, in July 2006, of an international panel of 400 theological ethicists from 63 countries. It is the kind of book I have been waiting for a long time to be able to recommend and it deserves to be read widely by pedagogues, pastors and priests. This is Catholic theology at its best, challenging and embracing what it should not evade: that post-modern world which believes (unlike the traditional Catholic world) it has inherited no obligations or assumptions from the past. The four-day conference was marked by "so much good will and respect toward one another that we were able to challenge one another", writes the editor proudly. Three altercations summon up the spirit and breadth of the meetings. First: "When three senior ethicists concluded their remarks on the African continental panel, three African women ethicists took them to task for not mentioning anything about living in profoundly patriarchal settings." Secondly: "When a French scholar spoke of the primacy of the conscience, an Italian responded speaking about the competency of the Magisterium." Thirdly: "The most significant exchange came when, after the North American spoke at length about the military aggressiveness of the United States, several others asked 'were scholars from the States doing enough, in light of the impact such policies were having on their own countries?' "The content of the book is expertly arranged in three parts, each section with its own introduction, summary and conclusion. I found it very user-friendly. Part one asks how theological ethicists can respond to the world's needs - a very important consideration because it relates to one of the great unresolved problems of our time: the demands of authority versus the priority of conscience, with the former superseded by the latter as the foremost moral guide. Part two tackles moral theological attitudes in the five continents. Part three identifies the four central themes challenging Catholic theological ethics today: the interpretation of its sources, the sensus fidelium and moral discernment, pluralism, and globalisation and justice. This sounds extremely highbrow, a bit like a textbook in the extent of the information included, but unlike a textbook in that it is couched in the language of debate. The contents range from simple explanations to analysis in depth. The Italian Giuseppe Angelini, for example, gives the following exact and straightforward definition of the key words "ethics" and "morality". "Ethics is concerned with justice in societal relationships, not with my immediate neighbourhood; it has a fundamental interest in procedures. Morality ought to be concerned precisely with the relationships between neighbours, through which the individual acquires self-knowledge from the very beginning of his life. In these relationships, his identity is always involved."Or consider the clarity with which Maureen Junker-Kenny from Ireland opens her discussion on scripture and tradition. "The Christian truth is given by God. God's self-revelation is witnessed in - but not identical with - scripture, where we encounter it in an already interpreted form." In a few words she is able to establish that distinction which has plagued both Christian and Islamic theology: what is a direct revelation for God and what is created, opening the way for considerations of tradition and reason in establishing Christian ethics.Finally, Antonio Papisca, another Italian, takes on the burden of accepting or rejecting the notion of a bellum iustum (just war). His conclusions may be unacceptable to many, but the rapid way in which he establishes the inconsistencies and dishonesties of our present-day international position is impressive. "The time has come to bury this concept," he says. "The historical fact of the existence of a new international law, of the United Nations, and of other important international organisations means that it is no longer acceptable from an ethical point of view to justify war - not even a war of defence." This goes beyond a fashionable pacifism; it sounds very like the Christian gospel. Is not the idea of the Kingdom of Heaven going to war a somewhat ridiculous contradiction in terms? All this is a far cry from the status of ethics 50 years ago, when the subject was hardly taught in seminaries and certainly not in secondary schools. A final comment is that, for the advanced student of ethics, the extensive footnotes should prove a real bonus for updating opinion and knowledge. "It was a wonderful meeting. I believe these papers convey that," concludes Fr Keenan. They certainly do.
John Greenhalgh
Catholic Theological Ethics in the World Church, edited by James F Keenan, Continuum £16.99
These 18 articles are the result of the first meeting at Padua, in July 2006, of an international panel of 400 theological ethicists from 63 countries. It is the kind of book I have been waiting for a long time to be able to recommend and it deserves to be read widely by pedagogues, pastors and priests. This is Catholic theology at its best, challenging and embracing what it should not evade: that post-modern world which believes (unlike the traditional Catholic world) it has inherited no obligations or assumptions from the past. The four-day conference was marked by "so much good will and respect toward one another that we were able to challenge one another", writes the editor proudly. Three altercations summon up the spirit and breadth of the meetings. First: "When three senior ethicists concluded their remarks on the African continental panel, three African women ethicists took them to task for not mentioning anything about living in profoundly patriarchal settings." Secondly: "When a French scholar spoke of the primacy of the conscience, an Italian responded speaking about the competency of the Magisterium." Thirdly: "The most significant exchange came when, after the North American spoke at length about the military aggressiveness of the United States, several others asked 'were scholars from the States doing enough, in light of the impact such policies were having on their own countries?' "The content of the book is expertly arranged in three parts, each section with its own introduction, summary and conclusion. I found it very user-friendly. Part one asks how theological ethicists can respond to the world's needs - a very important consideration because it relates to one of the great unresolved problems of our time: the demands of authority versus the priority of conscience, with the former superseded by the latter as the foremost moral guide. Part two tackles moral theological attitudes in the five continents. Part three identifies the four central themes challenging Catholic theological ethics today: the interpretation of its sources, the sensus fidelium and moral discernment, pluralism, and globalisation and justice. This sounds extremely highbrow, a bit like a textbook in the extent of the information included, but unlike a textbook in that it is couched in the language of debate. The contents range from simple explanations to analysis in depth. The Italian Giuseppe Angelini, for example, gives the following exact and straightforward definition of the key words "ethics" and "morality". "Ethics is concerned with justice in societal relationships, not with my immediate neighbourhood; it has a fundamental interest in procedures. Morality ought to be concerned precisely with the relationships between neighbours, through which the individual acquires self-knowledge from the very beginning of his life. In these relationships, his identity is always involved."Or consider the clarity with which Maureen Junker-Kenny from Ireland opens her discussion on scripture and tradition. "The Christian truth is given by God. God's self-revelation is witnessed in - but not identical with - scripture, where we encounter it in an already interpreted form." In a few words she is able to establish that distinction which has plagued both Christian and Islamic theology: what is a direct revelation for God and what is created, opening the way for considerations of tradition and reason in establishing Christian ethics.Finally, Antonio Papisca, another Italian, takes on the burden of accepting or rejecting the notion of a bellum iustum (just war). His conclusions may be unacceptable to many, but the rapid way in which he establishes the inconsistencies and dishonesties of our present-day international position is impressive. "The time has come to bury this concept," he says. "The historical fact of the existence of a new international law, of the United Nations, and of other important international organisations means that it is no longer acceptable from an ethical point of view to justify war - not even a war of defence." This goes beyond a fashionable pacifism; it sounds very like the Christian gospel. Is not the idea of the Kingdom of Heaven going to war a somewhat ridiculous contradiction in terms? All this is a far cry from the status of ethics 50 years ago, when the subject was hardly taught in seminaries and certainly not in secondary schools. A final comment is that, for the advanced student of ethics, the extensive footnotes should prove a real bonus for updating opinion and knowledge. "It was a wonderful meeting. I believe these papers convey that," concludes Fr Keenan. They certainly do.
John Greenhalgh
sexta-feira, 16 de maio de 2008
What have we learned, if anything?
Um artigo muito interessante, de um dos melhores historiadores da atualidade e velho conhecido dos leitores da New York Review of Books. Recentemente saiu a edição brasileira de seu último livro: POS-GUERRA - UMA HISTORIA DA EUROPA DESDE 1945.
"The twentieth century is hardly behind us but already its quarrels and its achievements, its ideals and its fears are slipping into the obscurity of mis-memory. In the West we have made haste to dispense whenever possible with the economic, intellectual, and institutional baggage of the twentieth century and encouraged others to do likewise. In the wake of 1989, with boundless confidence and insufficient reflection, we put the twentieth century behind us and strode boldly into its successor swaddled in self-serving half-truths: the triumph of the West, the end of History, the unipolar Ameri-can moment, the ineluctable march of globalization and the free market.
The belief that that was then and this is now embraced much more than just the defunct dogmas andinstitutions of cold war–era communism. During the Nineties, and again in the wake of September 11, 2001, I was struck more than once by a perverse contemporary insistence on not understanding the context of our present dilemmas, at home and abroad; on not listening with greater care to some of the wiser heads of earlier decades; on seeking actively to forget rather than remember, to deny continuity and proclaim novelty on every possible occasion. We have become stridently insistent that the past has little of interest to teach us. Ours, we assert, is a new world; its risks and opportunities are without precedent." Para ler o artigo completo:What Have We Learned, If Anything?
Tony Judt
"The twentieth century is hardly behind us but already its quarrels and its achievements, its ideals and its fears are slipping into the obscurity of mis-memory. In the West we have made haste to dispense whenever possible with the economic, intellectual, and institutional baggage of the twentieth century and encouraged others to do likewise. In the wake of 1989, with boundless confidence and insufficient reflection, we put the twentieth century behind us and strode boldly into its successor swaddled in self-serving half-truths: the triumph of the West, the end of History, the unipolar Ameri-can moment, the ineluctable march of globalization and the free market.
The belief that that was then and this is now embraced much more than just the defunct dogmas andinstitutions of cold war–era communism. During the Nineties, and again in the wake of September 11, 2001, I was struck more than once by a perverse contemporary insistence on not understanding the context of our present dilemmas, at home and abroad; on not listening with greater care to some of the wiser heads of earlier decades; on seeking actively to forget rather than remember, to deny continuity and proclaim novelty on every possible occasion. We have become stridently insistent that the past has little of interest to teach us. Ours, we assert, is a new world; its risks and opportunities are without precedent." Para ler o artigo completo:What Have We Learned, If Anything?
Tony Judt
quinta-feira, 15 de maio de 2008
The Hollow Men
I
We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats' feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar
Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion;
Those who have crossed
With direct eyes, to death's other Kingdon
Remeber us - if at all - not as lost
Violent souls, but only
As the hollow men
The stuffed men.
T.S. Eliot
We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats' feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar
Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion;
Those who have crossed
With direct eyes, to death's other Kingdon
Remeber us - if at all - not as lost
Violent souls, but only
As the hollow men
The stuffed men.
T.S. Eliot
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)