저자: NourielRoubini · 외국인
요약 보기
글로벌 경제는 엔진 네 개짜리 비행기처럼 미국·영국만 비교적 괜찮고 유로존·일본·중국·신흥국은 취약하다는 진단이다. 중국은 과잉투자(부동산·인프라·산업설비)와 부실채권 증가로 급격한 둔화가 예상되며, 연착륙보다 거칠고 험한 착륙 가능성이 높다고 본다. 전면적 붕괴는 아니라는 입장이다. 유로존은 구조개혁 지연, 재정여력 부족, 남유럽(이탈리아·스페인·포르투갈·그리스) 높은 부채비율로 취약하다. 반유로 정당의 득세로 장기적으로 유로존 해체 위험이 완전히 배제되지 않는다고 경고한다. 일본은 소비세 인상 이후 경기가 약하고, 구조개혁이 진행되지 않아 추가 양적완화에 의존하는 상황이다. 영국은 성장이 가속되었으나 제조업·생산성 중심이 아닌 소비·주택·런던 금융 중심의 과거 성장모델로 회귀해 위험하다고 지적한다. 저임금 일자리 위주라 체감 불만도 크다. 소득·부의 불평등 심화가 노동소득을 자본으로 이전시켜 소비 여력을 약화시키고, 기업이 현금을 쌓아두고 설비투자를 하지 않는 '장기 정체(secular stagnation)'의 원인이라고 설명한다. 무역·글로벌화와 기술(자동화·AI·소프트웨어)이 블루칼라뿐 아니라 화이트칼라 일자리까지 대체하며, 혜택은 상위 20~30%에 집중되고 중산층 일자리는 사라질 것이라고 전망한다. 사회정책적 해법은 아직 없다고 본다. 결론적으로 세계 경제는 취약하며 중국 경착륙, 유로존 위기, 불평등·기술변화에 따른 사회 불안이 핵심 리스크다. 주요 자산 가격 방향에 대한 구체적 예측(목표가·기간)은 제시되지 않았다.
다듬은 글
now I've had to describe the global economy to me looks a bit like a airplane that has four engines us / United Kingdom eurozone Japan China and emerging markets if you look at this airplane is trying to take off and then gain escape velocity the only engine out of the four that right now looks like is working ok is the United States and the United Kingdom were right now growth rates are closer through three percent if you look at the eurozone that engine has told the eurozone is probably one shock away from outright recession and double deep or triple dip recession I was just in Japan were also the reforms of AB anomic installed the third hour of structural reform is not occurring the increase of the consumption taxes topped the colonies in Strax and that's why the Bank of Japan had to do additional quantity of easing to try to boost the stock market weaken the yen and economy so Japan hugs also fragile and China that is very sharp economic slowdown the only debate in China right now is right there it'll be a softer landing or a hard landing I think the Chinese landing is going to be bumpy and rough I don't believe in a total economic and financial meltdown but the idea that China can happily keep on growing seven half percent the way the consensus and the government says i think is far-fetched China's done too much over investment in real estate in infrastructure in industrial capacity the badasses of the banks and the shadow banks are rising the bad debts of the private and public sector arising and therefore the d sharp slowdown of China and the only question is can they rebalance their growth rate from investment towards consumption from capital intensive growth towards labor intensive growth as they were avoiding that hard landing in many ways the fundamental problems of the eurozone have not been resolved potential growth is low because structural reform are occurring slowly the actual economic recovery still dynamic because you don't have enough in fiscal stimulus many of this country have lost their competitiveness and they have not been able to restore it yet and the debt ratios of Italy Spain Portugal Greece and many of the other countries in the periphery are still high and rising both in the private and the public sector and therefore on a medium term basis those situation become kind of unsustainable but you know after two other years of knee recession and no job creation there is austerity reform fatigue in the periphery of the eurozone think what's happening these anti-euro party podemos is now calling first in the polls in Spain in Greece syriza the parties against against the troika and against austerity reform is maybe winning the election in France people said in the first round of the presidential election marine lepen might be getting the most votes and in Italy currency is failing to the reforms it's been in power for nine months and being able to do a single reform we promised one per month and if he failed Italy my go back to Berlusconi that is a disaster or go to grey loaded is another disaster don't know which one of those two disaster will worse for Italy so so throughout the eurozone periphery you see austerity bailout fatigue and in the core of the eurozone you see instead bailout fatigued by the core there are these anti-euro parties even in Germany that are now getting a significant amount of the votes so while in the short ram the eurozone is still sticking together over the medium-term the risk of a breakup is still there one that you cannot fully rule out the biggest problem in the eurozone is that while you need to do structural reform to booster potential growth there is also a problem of aggregate demand in eurozone is not just a matter of aggregate supply of that twelve percent unemployment rate the eurozone maybe seven eight might be structural but the twist three four percent of it is actually cycling up there is not enough aggregate demand so if you're not gonna have enough monetary easing if any other can I have enough fiscal easing the eurozone is going to be always borderline in deflation borderline in recession and eventually the risk is that one of these parties that are extreme parties of the right or the left my twin in those election and then one of these countries might eventually exit the eurozone you might start with Greece and eventually you'll have a snowball and that could be the beginning of the end of the eurozone now we're here in the United Kingdom and of course on a cyclical basis growth has accelerated in the UK that's positive but I will make their also a few caveats first of all for a while that you can try to go through the route of let's week in the currency let's have a net export growth let's have manufacturing growth and since the eurozone was in a crisis in the euro was weakening the UK give up on that different growth model and what they've done you've gone back to the same old growth model that yet before the crisis based on consumption and housing and of course an important role of London as a major financial center last time around that Grodd Molly didn't end very well there's already fraught eNOS for example in housing in parts of the country so the question is going back to the old growth model does it make sense or not i would say in the medium-term you want to invest into productivity into manufacturing in to be able to compete in a wide range of goods and services in the global economy not just in financial services secondly in spite of strong growth and growth of jobs there is still my lesson in the economy because of course most of the jobs created are low value-added low productivity in low wages and that's why the average voter says you're telling me the strong growth job creation but they are an epic and of course we don't know yet what are going to be the results of the general elections but clearly there is still a significant amount of economic dissatisfaction in terms of what's happening to the economy now when you talk about secular stagnation you might ask yourself what is driving it and I think that one important interpretation is to do with the rise of income and wealth inequality I don't want to enter into a discussion of whether inequality is fair and unfair but think about actually the economic consequences of a rise of inequality you are transferring income from labor to capital from wages to profits from houses to corporates and therefore you're redistributing income from those who have a high marginal propensity to spend workers how those consumers to those who have a lower marginal propensity to spend in a higher marginal propensity to save that our high net worth individuals and corporations so you are in a paradox today in advanced economies where corporates are flush with cash treasons of dollar cash that flush with profits but they're not doing capital spending and yet to ask yourself why now some people say is policy uncertainty some people say is regulatory uncertainty and certainly that might be part of the story but part of it is actually is that if labor income is not growing then lack of labor income growth because of rising equality means less consumption and if you don't have consumption and you have accessed capacity why a firm would want to invest into new capital stock when there is already excess capacity so the paradox is that what is rational at the level of individual firm you have to survive and thrive you have to make sure they achieve the earnings expectation of the city or Wall Street and therefore you have to cut your labor costs but your labor costs are somebody else's labor income in somebody else's labor income is their consumption and their consumption was drive demand and that leads firms that their profits to invest into capital rather than keep that stuff as cash or invested abroad or keep it abroad or give it back to shareholders already wealthy the doesn't generate consumption so leaving aside that any kind of value judgment normative about whether inequalities fair or not from an economic point of view is one of the reasons why there is not enough demand and you don't have enough consumption growth and whether it's the United States whether UK where there is in the eurozone in spite of economic growth in spite of job creation people say my real wages are not growing and that's why I'm unhappy certainly trade and globalization has led to challenges to the income and the jobs of those who are lost skilled workers and even semi-skilled workers initially blue collars but increasingly also white collar's right given the information technologies not only blue collar jobs have been outsourced to China and Asia but now many of the white collar jobs can be outsourced think about all these services that provided business services in places like India or the Philippine and so on so in the short term is trade in globalization that puts at risk jobs and incomes of those who don't have skills but over time there's a even more important role of Technology because increasingly technological innovation has become capital intensive skilled buyers and labor savings so today a radiologist in Mumbai can do the same job as their ideologies in New York or London for maybe one fifth of the salary but tomorrow should that be a piece of software is going to do the same job better of looking at your x-rays that any Radiology's in New York lon door Mumbai so the point is that we're thinking about a brave new future where technology is going to lead to a lot of productivity growth right if you talk to people in Silicon Valley say we're on the cusp of major innovation they're going to change the world we have et energy technologies like shale gas and oil BTW biotech biomedical research in therapy health care in unity IT information technologies like big data social media and all the rest mt manufacturing technologies like robotic automation nanotechnologies all these things are great there's an increase production they're going to increase profits they're going to benefit those who are owners of physical and financial capital they're going to benefit that top twenty thirty percent of the population with the skills and is the innovators who are creating those technologies but increasingly the jobs of everybody else middle class lower class lower skilled the middle skills that can be replaced by technology gonna disappear over time so I think that in terms of social policy that creates a lot of issues that we don't know how to address
Comments 0