Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... - Newsweek.com

Wealth of Nations

SPONSORED BY
  • The West and the Rest

    Rana Foroohar | Mar 23, 2009 04:46 PM

    Maybe it’s time to resurrect the idea of economic decoupling. For those who don’t remember, that was the idea—much touted at the beginning of the financial crisis—that poor but up and coming nations like China, India, Brazil, and Russia (aka the BRICs) weren’t going to follow the US and Europe into recession. After all, their economies were red hot, and they were growing their own new middle class of aspirational consumers eager to compete head on with Americans for compact cars, flat screen TVs and iPods.

     

    Unfortunately, the idea lost its luster when emerging market stock indexes tanked 60 percent last year, and Cassandras like Morgan Stanley’s Stephen Roach pointed out that consumer spending in China, the world’s fourth largest economy, represents only a tiny fraction of the American consumer wallet. Translation: Don’t count on poor nations to save the world.

     

    That’s still true, but perhaps only in the short term. Fund manager Antoine van Agtmael, the guy who happened to invent the term “emerging markets” about 30 years ago, says that even as the US and Europe flounder, the recovery has already begun in emerging markets, in part because they’ve got their act much more together than we do over here (plenty of other smart people, like Goldman Sachs’ Jim O’Neill, agree with him – check out his guest essay this week). “China has a much bigger stimulus plan as a percentage of their economy than the U.S. does. Russia has plenty of reserves to deal with the over-leveraging of the oligarchs. India may have a budget deficit but it's far less dependent on exports, and Brazil is incomparably healthier than it was in the mid 1990s.” Van Agtmael, who has gotten very rich predicting the future of these markets, notes that these economies will soon account for 1/3 of global GDP – double their share a decade ago. While the U.S. and European economies will shrink about 3 percent this year, China is still growing at 7 percent, and India around 5 – not bad for a global downturn.

     

    What’s more, he says, investors who put their money in the emerging markets actually did a lot better than they think, even accounting for the crash. When emerging markets hit bottom after their 60 percent drop, investors lost only three years of returns. After the U.S. markets tanked, they lost 10 years worth, and in other rich countries they lost five. Since last October, emerging markets as a whole are up 20 percent. These little engines that could just keep going…

     

    ...and for more about that, check out my longer piece on the matter, posted here.


  • The Second World's Debutante Ball

    Katie Paul | Mar 23, 2009 11:41 AM
    The genesis of the G7 was a cigars-in-the-backroom kind of affair. Finance ministers from the US, Britain, France and Germany gathered in the White House Library one day in 1973 to discuss interest and exchange rates, flying so far under the radar they didn't even record minutes. (As their meetings became more regular, they dubbed themselves the "Library Group"). Two years later, the G7's first formal summit took place at an elusive country house, the Château de Rambouillet, located 30 miles outside of Paris. Rambouillet's guests concluded that such summits should never be "institutionalized" if they were to maintain their intent.

    So much for that idea. Next week's G20 is where the action's at, and it's as institutional as can be. The fun takes place at London's ExCel conference center, where the world's leaders will sit through plenary sessions, working meals, and press conferences chatting about plans their ministers already cooked up in private sessions weeks earlier. No wonder; the guest list adds up to about 3,500 people: 20 delegates from each country, 2,500 journalists, bodyguards, translators, and sundry other officials. In addition, the UN secretary general, the president of the European commisison, Thailand (as chairman of Association of South East Asian Nations), and Ethiopia (as chairman the New Partnership for Africa's Development) are also attending.

    That kind of representation is surely reason to celebrate. Put together, the G20 countries represent 90 percent of global GDP and 80 percent of world trade; why shouldn't they get a seat at the table? (Ahem, Security Council?). But there's more to it than that. As fellow blogger Rana Foroohar points out in her cover story for the international edition this week, compared to their old-money counterparts, the BRIC countries are doing just fine these days. And they're demanding a global economic system less dominated by America and its wealthy pals.

    See Exhibit A: China's decision to go on the offensive this week with calls for a brand new global currency to replace the U.S. dollar in the world's central reserves. While observers are dismissing the idea as positively zany, China's choice to put it out there two days before the summit is bold, to say the least. Rather than gentlemanly discussion of common interest, it looks like we're seeing a whole lot of posturing.

    So, sure, it's no shock that a bigger tent has its downsides. Too many voices in a room can create the kind of deafening cacophony that prevents very much from being accomplished--especially when those twenty voices belong to some of the most powerful and outspoken folks on the planet.

    But here's a sobering reality check about that inaction. I recently chatted with Laurie Garrett, who runs the global health section at CFR, about how the power shift affects her work. It ain't good. Back in the glory days of the G7, she said, summits consisted of a few rich countries that sat around trading expertise and guilt-tripping each other about poor countries. Adding countries like Brazil and India, which still retain some of the nastiest attributes of third-world poverty, has diluted the power of those centralized institutions. Now, the G20 holds the cards. But how much does India do about its own people's malnutrition, never mind the malnutrition of people in, say, Tanzania? For certain governments whose public health programs are almost entirely funded by donor contributions, that could be one heck of a problem.


  • Advertisement
  • Breakfast Buffet: Monday, March 23

    Katie Paul | Mar 23, 2009 08:06 AM

    Newsweek's daily serving of news and views on the economy from around the world.  

    Tim Geithner's Economic Elixir, Revealed: Timothy Geithner attempts to save face after a rough week with an editorial in the WSJ defending his various economic recovery programs. Details TK in an 8:45 a.m. briefing on the plan.

    Barack Obama, International PR Wizard: Barack Obama goes the global route, hitting up the op-ed section of 31 papers around the world as Geithner's wingman on the new proposal.

    The World Is Round, Once Again: CFR's Brad Setzer illustrates why the world's crumbling financial system is bringing an end to the "Chimerica" of Bretton Woods II. One stunning indicator of the scope of this monster: Lehman's collapse had a bigger impact on international money flows than did 9/11.

    The Wisdom of Continental Drift: James Surowiecki explains why Europeans are the new conservatives. Americans, by default, are the new wild-eyed leftists. And that may be exactly what the doctor ordered.

    Stiglitz & the UN Call for G20 Overhaul: A panel of 18 economists led by Nobel winner Joseph Stiglitz is proposing a new UN-based Global Economic Council to replace the G20. The group would have its own global reserve system and would better serve the developing world, they say.