dinsdag 9 februari 2016

Yanis Varoufakis: Europe is sliding back into the 1930s and we need a new movement



Afbeeldingsresultaat voor logo  independent

Yanis Varoufakis: Europe is sliding back into the 1930s and we need a new movement

Former Greek finance minister says Europe is disintegrating, run by a cartel and in dire need of reform. 

Europe is sliding into “a modern 1930s” and authorities are “making it up as they go along”, Yanis Varoufakis has warned as he launches a new movement which he says will “democratise” the continent.
Speaking to The Independent as he outlined his vision of the DiEM25 (Democracy in Europe Movement 2025) project, the self-described “erratic Marxist” says he wants to remove power from an unaccountable, authoritarian elite and distribute it fairly to the continent’s citizens. 
Seven months after resigning as Greek finance minister, Mr Varoufakis outlined the “terrible” similarities between Europe now and the continent 80 years ago as it hurtled towards war  
“We don't have Nazis doing Kristallnacht in Berlin. [But] We have Nazis in Greece doing something similar in a suburb of Greece, where they are attacking in the middle of the night the shops and houses of migrants.”
“There are big differences, but from the perspective of an economist we have terrible similarities.”
Along with the rise of far-right parties across Europe, Varoufakis points to the high level of unemployment throughout the eurozone as a significant cause of the tensions that exist.
It is still at crisis levels, and is twice as high as in the US and the UK - who are now reaching what economists consider ‘full employment’.
“If unemployment was still 10-11 per cent in the UK or the US, the administration would have collapsed,” Varoufakis says. “But in Europe we have no democratic process!”
In Varoufakis’ mind, Europe is run by an elite that is more unaccountable than ever. The European Parliament is a toothless body, “a parliament in name only, a parliament that cannot legislate. It's the only parliament ever that can't.”
Major political decisions, like how to deal with debt or respond to financial crises, have been handed over to the Eurogroup (the 19 finance ministers whose countries use the euro) and the European Central Bank, the supposedly apolitical body that controls interest rates across these countries. 
Neither, he says, are properly scrutinised.
After spending five fraught months in negotiations over a financial bailout for Greece that, at its worst, threatened to bring down the euro, Varoufakis has now morphed into a whistle-blower, revealing what he says are the massive failings of the political process behind closed doors.  
He claims the role of national governments has become “extremely limited” and anyone that dares to criticise this “sinister process” is quickly smeared.
“As soon as you criticise, you are immediately cast out as anti-European,” he argues, while politicians who turned a blind eye towards this process were “mightily rewarded”, both with election funds and favourable treatment in the press.

Democracy in Europe

It is these beliefs that have provided the impetus to his new project, DiEM25.
His belief is that democrats in the 1930s should have tried to create a pan-European movement that crossed country borders and political parties. Given that he sees the seeds of the 1930s in today’s Europe, that’s what he’s going to try and do.
Without changes, Varoufakis believes the eurozone is “doomed”. 
“When the European Central Bank, which is based in Frankfurt, is incredibly unpopular in Germany; when Greece is a basket case; when France is finding it impossible to contain its budget while also containing unemployment… this is a European economy that's disintegrating.”
He is adamant that DiEM25 must be more than “just a think-tank and… an internet community” but he thinks the movement can be largely leaderless.
GettyImages-479534534.jpg
Varoufakis during his tenure as finance minister last summer
He’ll inevitably be its figurehead, but won’t be its chief, and there will be no official ‘steering committee’ or centralised body organising how it works.
So which comes first -  a mass of motivated people or the figures that lead them?
“It's true the anti-slavery movement had to have leaders, but at the same time it was founded on the moral indignation of common folks, who created circumstances for leaders to spring up.”
It was the same with the civil rights movement, he suggests. Malcolm X and Dr King “came after lots of anonymous people created a movement first.”
He hopes the “conversations” that come out of DiEM25, both online and through events like Tuesday’s launch in Berlin’s Volksbüene Theater, will eventually lead to a “basic consensus” on how to bring more democracy to the way Europe is run. Then they can fight elections.
DiEM25’s first steps towards transparency will be to demand that the Eurogroup allows cameras behind its closed doors and keeps minutes of its meetings.
Varoufakis thinks his struggle to strike a new deal for Greece last year would have been far easier if meetings had been filmed.
He relays how the German finance minister, Wolfgang Schauble, knew that the deal being offered to Greece was unpalatable – and admitted to Varoufakis he wouldn’t have been able to push such a deal through the Bundestag if they were in each other’s shoes.
GettyImages-501315362.jpg
Varoufakis says Schauble, Germany's finance minister, was more frank behind closed doors
It “would have changed the narrative completely” if that conversation had been on camera, Varoufakis says.
But who has the power to grant these wishes? 
“Well, it's an interesting question isn't it? The fact that we don't have that answer is part of the problem!” Ultimately he thinks these concessions will only come once “there is outrage surging through Europe.”

The Athenian Spring

The anger , he says, lies dormant across Europe at the moment.
The 450,000 Greeks who gathered in Syntagma Square before last summer’s referendum are ready to rally again, but momentum must be created across Europe before “reigniting that flame”.
GettyImages-479564354.jpg
Nearly half a million Greeks gathered during last summer's referendum
To his fiercest critics, Varoufakis is a dissembler who conjures up conversations, played poker with the Greek economy and crippled ‘trust’ among its creditors. 
To supporters, the account he offers is not just convincing but an invaluable source on the way power in Europe works in practice. And Varoufakis’ entire argument is that the elite running Europe crushes all critics, just as trial lawyers try to discredit witnesses.

The cartel running Europe

He rose to prominence crossing so-called ‘big finance’ and ‘big industry’, the “unholy cartel” he argues is the “main driver of EU policy.”
As we talk, Varoufakis offers another historical analogy. Aside from the 1930s, Europe could be thought of as being in 1981, and its Berlin Wall is going to come down before the end of the decade.
He says the ECB can’t keep propping this “cartel” by printing money through quantitative easing, saying: “Draghi is going to hit his limitations very soon. He knows it. He's in a state of acute anxiety.”
Italy, whose debt is held by all the major European banks, can’t sustain itself, he believes.
“Renzi knows this, that's why he's kicking and screaming,” he says.
“Everything that’s been done has been like giving cortisone shots to a cancer patient. You've stabilised the patients, you've improved their vital signs, and they look a bit perkier… but the cancer is eating away.”
“The authorities don't know what they're doing. They're making it up as they go along, just like in the 1920s and 1930s. When Hindenburg gave power to Hitler, he thought he could control him. There can't be a containment now either.”
GettyImages-461676366.jpg
One in four Greeks do not have job
For those to whom 25 per cent unemployment in Greece and periodic debt crises are nothing more than the natural vicissitudes of capitalism, Varoufakis’ account is yet to be proven.
He says he hopes his fears don’t actually come to pass. That’s the point of DiEM25 - to help change the course of Europe.
But while he confesses DiEM25 is “utopian”, he thinks it “a lot more realistic than trying to maintain the system as it is”.
Or, he adds, “…trying to leave.”
He doubts Britain can escape the clutches of the next Eurozone crisis, or leave in this summer’s likely referendum and still have access to the single market.
Whether you’re Greek or British, escape is, he says, impossible. Reform across Europe is the only option.
After the crushing of last summer’s ‘Athens Spring’, he confesses people in Greece are disheartened.
“Their quasi-depression is leading them to privatise their anxieties and fears and stay at home and watch reality television,” he laments.
Yet while the omens may not be good, Varoufakis is going to try.

maandag 8 februari 2016

BREAKING: Unit 8200 Hackers Investigated for Computer Theft

Tikun Olam תיקון עולם

What's holding back the world economy?

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor logo the guardian




Bundles of Japanese yen
 Quantitative easing, as used in the US, Japan, the UK and belatedly in the EU, has largely failed to support growth and investment. Photograph: Lee Jae-Won/Reuters
Seven years after the global financial crisis erupted in 2008, the world economy continued to stumble in 2015. According to the United Nations’ report World Economic Situation and Prospects 2016, the average growth rate in developed economies has declined by more than 54% since the crisis. An estimated 44 million people are unemployed in developed countries, about 12 million more than in 2007, while inflation has reached its lowest level since the crisis.
More worryingly, advanced countries’ growth rates have also become more volatile. This is surprising, because, as developed economies with fully open capital accounts, they should have benefited from the free flow of capital and international risk sharing – and thus experienced little macroeconomic volatility. Furthermore, social transfers, including unemployment benefits, should have allowed households to stabilise their consumption.
But the dominant policies during the post-crisis period – fiscal retrenchment and quantitative easing (QE) by major central banks – have offered little support to stimulate household consumption, investment, and growth. On the contrary, they have tended to make matters worse.
In the US, quantitative easing did not boost consumption and investment partly because most of the additional liquidity returned to central banks’ coffers in the form of excess reserves. The Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006, which authorised the Federal Reserve to pay interest on required and excess reserves, thus undermined the key objective of QE.
Indeed, with the US financial sector on the brink of collapse, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 moved up the effective date for offering interest on reserves by three years, to 1 October 2008. As a result, excess reserves held at the Fed soared, from an average of $200bn during 2000-2008 to $1.6tn during 2009-2015. Financial institutions chose to keep their money with the Fed instead of lending to the real economy, earning nearly $30bn – completely risk-free – during the last five years.
This amounts to a generous – and largely hidden – subsidy from the Fed to the financial sector. And, as a consequence of the Fed’s interest-rate hike last month, the subsidy will increase by $13bn this year.
Perverse incentives are only one reason that many of the hoped-for benefits of low interest rates did not materialise. Given that QE managed to sustain near-zero interest rates for almost seven years, it should have encouraged governments in developed countries to borrow and invest in infrastructure, education, and social sectors. Increasing social transfers during the post-crisis period would have boosted aggregate demand and smoothed out consumption patterns.
Moreover, the UN report clearly shows that, throughout the developed world, private investment did not grow as one might have expected, given ultra-low interest rates. In 17 of the 20 largest developed economies, investment growth remained lower during the post-2008 period than in the years prior to the crisis; five experienced a decline in investment during 2010-2015.
Globally, debt securities issued by non-financial corporations – which are supposed to undertake fixed investments – increased significantly during the same period. Consistent with other evidence, this implies that many non-financial corporations borrowed, taking advantage of the low interest rates. But, rather than investing, they used the borrowed money to buy back their own equities or purchase other financial assets. QE thus stimulated sharp increases in leverage, market capitalization, and financial-sector profitability.
But, again, none of this was of much help to the real economy. Clearly, keeping interest rates at the near zero level does not necessarily lead to higher levels of credit or investment. When banks are given the freedom to choose, they choose riskless profit or even financial speculation over lending that would support the broader objective of economic growth.
By contrast, when the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund lends cheap money to developing countries, it imposes conditions on what they can do with it. To have the desired effect, QE should have been accompanied not only by official efforts to restore impaired lending channels (especially those directed at small- and medium-size enterprises), but also by specific lending targets for banks. Instead of effectively encouraging banks not to lend, the Fed should have been penalizing banks for holding excess reserves.
While ultra-low interest rates yielded few benefits for developed countries, they imposed significant costs on developing and emerging-market economies. An unintended, but not unexpected, consequence of monetary easing has been sharp increases in cross-border capital flows. Total capital inflows to developing countries increased from about $20bn in 2008 to over $600bn in 2010.
At the time, many emerging markets had a hard time managing the sudden surge of capital flows. Very little of it went to fixed investment. In fact, investment growth in developing countries slowed significantly during the post-crisis period. This year, developing countries, taken together, are expected to record their first net capital outflow – totaling $615bn – since 2006.
Neither monetary policy nor the financial sector is doing what it’s supposed to do. It appears that the flood of liquidity has disproportionately gone towards creating financial wealth and inflating asset bubbles, rather than strengthening the real economy. Despite sharp declines in equity prices worldwide, market capitalization as a share of world GDP remains high. The risk of another financial crisis cannot be ignored.
There are other policies that hold out the promise of restoring sustainable and inclusive growth. These begin with rewriting the rules of the market economy to ensure greater equality, more long-term thinking, and reining in the financial market with effective regulation and appropriate incentive structures.
But large increases in public investment in infrastructure, education, and technology will also be needed. These will have to be financed, at least in part, by the imposition of environmental taxes, including carbon taxes, and taxes on the monopoly and other rents that have become pervasive in the market economy – and contribute enormously to inequality and slow growth.
The views expressed here do not reflect the views of the UN or its member states.
Joseph E Stiglitz is University Professor at Columbia University, a former senior vice-president and chief economist of the World Bank and chair of the US president’s Council of Economic Advisers under Bill Clinton.