MacroScope

Our recent post on the End of Capitalism triggered much interest and comment.  There were plenty of diverse views, as one would expect. But one thread that came out was that what we are now seeing is not true capitalism (nor, of course, is it old-style communism). Ok, but what is it?

Anthony Conforti suggested in a comment that we need a name for what is happening,:

The first step in defining a new economic paradigm is coming up with the proper terms…new words to define a new economic environment. As words, “capitalism”, “communism”, “socialism” may now be inadequate to describe the emerging economic reality. We need new nomenclature. Any thoughts?

Here’s one suggestion. There seems to have been precious little capital building going on is the last few years, so even in a free market, capitalism sounds a bit inaccurate. How about “leverageism”? Borrowers of the world, unite. You have nothing  to lose but your shirts.

Time to pick up the challenge. What should we call the dominant economic system?

Hard to imagine with financial markets still buoyant and newspapers full of tales of bonus greed, but there is still the possibility that captialism will end.  At least there is according to prestigious investment consultants Watson Wyatt in their latest study called “Extreme Risks“.

The firm listed the demise of the system of private ownership as one of 15 threats to investors and the global economy that probably won’t happen but which it reckons are worth worrying about anyway. The idea behind the report is that such things as climate change, the break up of the euro zone and war are always worth being included in an investment risk management process.

As for the future of capitalism:

In our view, the most likely scenario is moving along from one end of a spectrum where market is king (minimum regulation) towards the other end, where we could see more onerous regulations and government intervention in, and control of, the economy. The extreme risk, however, is the demise of the capitalist system and the end of the market as the primary means of resource allocation.

Companies need to actively encourage dissent and aspire to heretical rather than consensus views if they want to avoid being as unprepared as they were for the financial meltdown.

Noreena Hertz, professor of finance, sustainability and globalisation at Erasmus University in the Netherlands, kicked off the CFA Institute's second annual European Investment Conference in Frankfurt with a wake up call for the assembled asset managers and bankers.

"This was not just a financial crisis - this was an existential crisis that exposed a faultline in the system," she said. "The way we thought about the world was profoundly flawed."

Brazil’s president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva lays out his views  today on how the world will work in the future. It’s part of a Financial Times blog on the outlook for capitalism:

“It will reward production and not speculation. The function of the financial sector will be to stimulate productive activity…. International trade will be free of the protectionism that shows dangerous signs of intensifying. The reformed multilateral organisations will operate programmes to support poor and emerging economies with the aim of reducing the imbalances that scar the world today. There will be a new and democratic system of global governance. New energy policies, reform of systems of production and of patterns of consumption will ensure the survival of a planet threatened today by global warming. But, above all, I hope for a world free of the economic dogmas that invaded the thinking of many and were presented as absolute truths.”