Colaborarea iresponsabila

Iata un articol foarte interesant, merita citit, de pe blogul lui Paul Krugman din The New York Times:

How Capital Went Into the GIPSIs

Voi reda acest articol integral pentru ca el descrie un fenomen economic de la care a pornit criza economica si financiara din Europa. Iata ce spune Dl. Krugman:

"A correspondent asks a good question: when I say that lots of money flowed into Spain and other peripheral economies during the bubble years, what kind of capital flow are we talking about?In brief, you should think of it as largely taking the form of bank-to-bank lending. E.g., German Landesbanken buying covered bonds issued by Spanish cajas, with the cajas in turn using the money to finance real estate purchases. Other forms of cross-border investment, like direct investment by corporations, were a fairly minor feature. That’s also why the flip side of those capital flows was a sharp rise in Spanish private-sector debt.I’d like to post a good chart, but I haven’t found a clean presentation of the data.

If anyone knows how to do this, let me know! But the basic story seems clear.

And by the way, this makes it quite clear that to the extent that you want to talk about irresponsible behavior, it was really a collaborative, trans-European project. German bankers knew what the Spanish banks were doing, and in fact took on quite a bit of the risk directly by accepting real estate as collateral."

Interesant, nu? Toata povestea asta are un talc... De observat ca fluxurile de capital catre Spania si alte economii periferice, during the bubble years, au constat in imprumuturi de la banca la banca, si Paul Krugman da un exemplu ce descrie cum s-au petrecut lucrurile. In felul asta s-au finantat tranzactiile de pe piata imobiliara. Insa e de remarcat faptul ca precizeaza ca alte forme de investitii transfrontaliere, cum ar fi investitii directe ale corporatiilor, au fost foarte mici, nesemnificative. Citind asta ma gandeam ca noi, Romania, tot vrem sa atragem investitii straine... FMI ne tot indeamna sa facem privatizari, eu asa am inteles... A fost foarte recent si o privatizare esuata, cea a Oltchim, nu? Dar, dupa cum se vede, interesul corporatilor, al marilor corporatii de a investi catre periferie nu prea... Nu prea e... Sa luam cazul Spaniei in bubble years (dar, de observat, ca nu numai al Spaniei): de ce nu au investit corporatiile din centru (catre periferie)? Probabil, foarte probabil ca nu au avut interesul s-o faca. Trebuie sa ma felicit: invat ceea ce stiam de multa vreme. N-as vrea sa par lipsit de modestie, dar lucrul asta il intuisem cu multa vreme inainte... E clar ca economiile periferice aveau si au nevoie de investitii ale unor firme puternice de la centrul Uniunii, centru dezvoltat economic. Au preferat, in schimb, un asa zis ajutor sub forma creditului care a dus la crearea bubble-lui. Iar astfel de fluxuri de capital au inceput sa se regaseasca in debitul sectorului privat...

"German bankers knew what the Spanish banks were doing, and in fact took on quite a bit of the risk directly by accepting real estate as collateral."

Cred ca e de luat aminte...