Enlightened Economics

Economics for an Enlightened Age

Posts Tagged ‘environmental sustainability’

• Should we print money to fund green investments?

Posted by Ron Robins on January 13, 2015

“GQE [Green Quantitative Easing] builds on the logic of QE, but fundamentally changes its objectives. In a GQE programme, new money is created – literally out of thin air – and used to buy bonds, but in this case they would be bonds issued by [UK] government-owned Green Investment Bank, local authorities, housing associations and other similar organisations, such as drainage boards.”
— Why we should print money to fund green investments, by Richard Murphy, January 12, 2015, Finance, Guardian Sustainable Business, U.K.

Commentary: Ron Robins
What a provocative idea! It sounds wonderful in theory. But would it work in practice? So far, the effects of QE in the U.K. and the U.S.A. have been to save the financial system from an immediate collapse (though probably putting it off for a while) while spurring modest growth–if you can believe the weird changes in their statistical methodologies and seasonal adjustments. Furthermore, it’s probably only because of the massive debt in the system that has stopped it from galloping into an inflationary frenzy.

No numbers are mentioned in this article but I believe adding this GQE to the already existent QE could create a real danger of galloping inflation. For starters, most of the services and products required for such a massive increase in green development would be strained and could very easily develop significant inflationary pressures, impacting many other sectors of the economy.

Also, if GQE were to happen there would be many other groups (the National Health Service for one) demanding the same QE programme. So where would it stop? I can understand the feelings behind this move. We would all like to see a greener and sustainable world. But I believe the risks of the process getting out-of-control are too great. It could lead to another Weimar (German hyperinflation of the 1920s) experience. The German leaders of that period also believed they could control the inflationary process!

Additionally, also not considered in this article are the knock-on effects on exchange rates and interest rates. Effects, many known and unknown would rampage through the economy. In short, it’s a fascinating idea worthy of discussion. But, I for one, believe the risks are too great to adopt such a scheme on a large-scale.


Posted in Economics, Ethical Investing, Finance & Investing, Monetary Policy | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

• Free Markets Are Rare Indeed

Posted by Ron Robins on February 21, 2008

Most major markets influencing business and consumer decisions are not ‘free.’ They are manipulated by governments to varying degrees. Governments feel that it is for ‘social good’ that they intervene. Here is a brief list of key markets and descriptions of the government interventions. You can decide about the worthiness of these interventions yourself.

The world’s most important currency, the US dollar, does not really trade freely. The US Treasury established in 1934 the ‘Exchange Stabilization Fund’ specifically to ‘manage’ the US dollar exchange rate. Its dealings are secret. In 1987, 1998, 2003/4 and likely at many other times, the treasury departments and possibly central banks of the US, Japan, the EU and other countries collectively intervened to manipulate currency values. China has pegged its currency, the renminbi, to the US dollar for many years. As the US complains about Chinese currency manipulation, it needs to come clean about its own efforts first.

I suggest that currency traders and speculators should not be blamed for strong currency movements. They are nearly always reacting to bad or anti-market policies of governments and central banks and generally reflecting the ‘collective consciousness’ of the global financial community.

Stock markets
Stock markets are not free of government intervention either. After the 1987 US stock market crash, President Reagan established the Working Group on Financial Markets, (the ‘plunge protection team’), to effectively stop stock market crashes. How and when it operates is again secret. Journalists and others have tried for years to get information of the Working Group’s meetings and activities, but to no avail. On January 22, 2008, it was believed that the US Federal Reserve purposely reduced its Federal Funds rate by 0.75% just before the US Dow Jones Index was due to open 600 points (over 5%) lower! This move potentially saved the US stock markets from a major crash that day. Here we have a clear – and public case – of market intervention for the purported ‘public good.’

Interest rates
The US Federal Reserve, the EU Central Bank, Bank of Japan – in fact nearly all central banks regularly announce interest rate changes to short term securities. And through their buying and selling of government bonds, they also influence rates on all longer-term securities.

Unfortunately, a largely economically illiterate public clamours for manipulated, low interest rates. Central banks generally oblige, despite them supposedly being mostly ‘independent.’ Artificially induced low interest rates then create excessive borrowing, such as we have seen in housing. A housing bust follows and everyone blames the government – rather than themselves! (Question: who is really best able to set interest rate policy? Is it a country’s central bank or the free market?)

By controlling over 40% of global oil production, OPEC (the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries), stage-manages global oil production and prices. Not only do they control production levels, but they have been free to cite their oil reserves’ data with no independent verification of what they do actually have in the ground. And there are many reasons – as Matt Simons, eminent oil analyst, suggests – why we need to be sceptical of the Gulf States oil reserve numbers. Again, with the reserves being unaudited by any reputable international agency, OPEC is able to abnormally influence oil prices.

Governments influence agricultural markets to a massive degree. Annual agricultural subsidies in the EU amount to about $75 billion; in the US $55 billion. These subsidies with those of many other countries dramatically distort global agricultural production and prices. The Doha round of World Trade Organization (WTO) free-trade talks floundered largely because developing countries demanded that agricultural trade distorting practices be reduced and eliminated. The developed countries resisted and the trade talks collapsed. For much of the developing world the one area where they could compete – and potentially bring them out of poverty – is with agricultural exports, even with today’s significantly increased transportation costs.

Ethanol and biofuels is another area where government intervention to support markets has caused dramatic negative market dislocations. Food cropland and food crops now going towards the production of ethanol and biofuels has resulted in significantly increasing food prices around the world. In numerous developing countries it has contributed to food shortages and riots.

Two final thoughts…
Unfair economic or financial advantage is often gained by those who have inside knowledge of where and when governments intervene. Indeed, they can ‘front-run’ the governments’ actions and make huge fortunes without the public ever knowing what is going-on. This probably occurs especially in stock markets, where it might be welcomed by the governments who see it aiding their efforts to manipulate markets.

This discussion demonstrates that society does not have, nor apparently really believes in, wholly free markets at this time. Why? It feels that individuals cannot be trusted to do the ‘right’ thing. Yet, as we see here, governments frequently do not do the right thing either! In other posts I demonstrate that high consciousness individuals are much more likely to do the’ better’ thing. Such individuals will allow truly free markets to function and will create affluence, environmental sustainability, and fulfillment, beyond anything envisaged today. To turn things around and to begin to understand how free markets with higher consciousness individuals can work, see these posts Free Markets Need ‘High Consciousness’ Individuals and The Missing Ingredient in Economics – Consciousness!


© Ron Robins, 2008.

Posted in Economics | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments »

%d bloggers like this: