Soros to Donate $100 Million to Rights Group

By STEPHANIE STROM
Published: September 6, 2010

George Soros, the billionaire investor and philanthropist, plans to announce on Tuesday that he is giving $100 million to Human Rights Watch to expand the organization’s work globally.

Spencer Platt/Getty Images
The philanthropist George Soros said in an
interview that the gift to Human Rights Watch is the first in a series of large
gifts that he planned to make.

Pat Roque/Associated Press
Kenneth Roth, director of Human Rights Watch, which monitors rights abuses.

It is the largest gift he has made, the largest gift by far that Human Rights Watch has ever received, and only the second gift of $100 million or more made by an individual this year, according to the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. “We’re seeing noticeably fewer charitable gifts at the $100 million level from individuals reported than we did just a few years ago,” said Patrick Rooney, the center’s executive director. “Between 2006 and 2008, an average of about 13 gifts a year of that size by individuals was reported. In 2009, it dropped to six, and this year, we know of only one other.”

The largest known gift in 2010 was $200 million pledged by an anonymous Baylor University graduate, to be dispensed upon the donor’s death, for medical research at the university.

Uncertainty about the direction of the economy has made even the wealthiest individuals more cautious about making big philanthropic commitments, Mr. Rooney said.

Contrariness, however, is a hallmark of Mr. Soros, both as an investor and as a philanthropist. While others have held on to their money, he has made bigger gifts than ever. And he said in an interview that the gift to Human Rights Watch is the first of a series of large gifts that he plans to make.

“This is partly due to age,” said Mr. Soros, who celebrated his 80th birthday last month. “Originally I wanted to distribute all of the money during my lifetime, but I have abandoned that plan. My foundation should continue, but I still would like to do a lot of giving during my lifetime, and doing it this way, with such size, is a step in that direction.”

Last year, in the depths of the recession, Mr. Soros gave the Robin Hood Foundation, a charity that fights poverty in New York, a $50 million contribution that helped it raise significantly more than that amount. He also gave every family with children on welfare in New York State $200 to buy school supplies, a grant worth $35 million that enabled the state to gain access to some $175 million in federal money for which it would not otherwise have qualified.

So far this year, Mr. Soros has donated about $700 million to various causes, including the gift to Human Rights Watch. His hedge fund, Quantum Endowment, grew 29 percent in 2009, earning him $3.3 billion in fees and investment gains.

Human Rights Watch will use the gift to add about 120 staff members to its team of 300 around the world, expand translation of its reports and open new offices. The intent, said Kenneth Roth, the advocacy group’s executive director, is to increase its influence in emerging power centers. The group, which is based in New York, investigates and draws attention to human rights abuses around the world.

Mr. Roth said that South Africa had more sway in Zimbabwe than the United States and other Western powers. Similarly, India, China and Japan are more influential in Sri Lanka. “We need to try to generate pressure on those governments, those emerging powers, now, which means expanding our capacity to deploy our information,” Mr. Roth said.

Mr. Soros put it differently. “I’m afraid the United States has lost the moral high ground under the Bush administration, but the principles that Human Rights Watch promotes have not lost their universal applicability,” he said. “So to be more effective, I think the organization has to be seen as more international, less an American organization.”

He said the gift to the organization was “also from my heart,” an acknowledgment of the training in human rights issues and philanthropy that he received from the group when he was just starting to emerge as a major donor.

“Every Wednesday morning at 8 o’clock, a group at Human Rights Watch got together and discussed issues with the managers,” Mr. Soros recalled. “I was an active participant in that group, and human rights remains an important element of my foundation’s current activities.”

Mr. Roth said few people then knew who Mr. Soros was. “We were just trying to figure out what we were going to do that week and so on, and he was just a guy at the meeting,” he said.
The grant is structured as a challenge that asks the group to raise $10 million from new, primarily international sources, each year for the next decade, but Human Right Watch will receive the Soros grant regardless. Roughly 30 percent of its revenue comes from countries other than the United States, but less than 1 percent is from non-Western countries, where much of the organization’s work is focused.

Mr. Soros wants to see the organization raise more money in places like Brazil, Mexico, India and China, which will be challenging, Mr. Roth said. “This is a transformative grant in more than one way for sure,” he said.

./.

08/09 'Many failures' caused BP spill

8 September 2010 Last updated at 13:22 GMT

Eleven people were killed and 17 people were injured in the explosion

A "sequence of failures involving a number of different parties" was to blame for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, BP says.

An investigation carried out by BP said it was responsible in part for the disaster, but it also blamed other companies working on the well.

BP faces billions of dollars-worth of legal claims for compensation over the spill, the worst in recent US history.

US Oil SpillWho's to blame?
What we know so far
Biggest ever, but how bad?
Timeline: BP oil spill

An estimated 4.9m barrels of oil leaked into the Gulf after the blast.

The well was capped on 15 July, and an operation to permanently seal it is due to take place in the next few weeks.

In the 193-page internal report released on its website, BP said that decisions made by "multiple companies and work teams" contributed to the accident, which it said arose from "a complex and interlinked series of mechanical failures, human judgements, engineering design, operational implementation and team interfaces".

BP was leasing the Deepwater Horizon rig from Transocean, and its cement contractor was Halliburton.

'Bad cement'

The report, conducted by BP's head of safety, Mark Bly, highlighted eight key failures that, in combination, led to the explosion.

BP said that both BP and Transocean staff incorrectly interpreted a safety test which should have flagged up risks of a blowout.

“ It is in BP's recommendations for change that many will see the real story”
Robert Peston
Business editor, BBC News
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peston's picks: BP stands for Blame Placing

"Over a 40-minute period, the Transocean rig crew failed to recognise and act on the influx of hydrocarbons into the well" which eventually caused the explosion.

BP criticised the cementing of the well - carried out by Halliburton - and repeated previous criticism of the blowout preventer.

"To put it simply, there was a bad cement job and a failure of the shoe track barrier at the bottom of the well, which let hydrocarbons from the reservoir into the production casing," said outgoing chief executive Tony Hayward.

"The negative pressure test was accepted when it should not have been, there were failures in well control procedures and in the blowout preventer; and the rig's fire and gas system did not prevent ignition," he said.

The blowout preventer that failed was recovered from the Gulf of Mexico on Saturday and transported to a Nasa facility near New Orleans where it will be placed in the custody of the US Justice Department and examined.

Transocean and Halliburton have not yet commented on the report.

'Lessons for future'

BP's incoming chief executive Bob Dudley said the report proved that the explosion was "a shared responsibility among many entities".

The company said it had accepted all the recommendations in the report, and would implement them worldwide.

"We are determined to learn the lessons for the future and we will be undertaking a broad-scale review to further improve the safety of our operations... to ensure that a tragedy like this can never happen again," Mr Dudley said in a statement.

BP's shares rose after the report was published at 1100 GMT (1200 BST).

BP says dealing with the aftermath of the spill has cost $8bn (£5.2bn), and it has already paid out about $399m in claims to people affected by the spill.

The leak caused widespread disruption to jobs in the fishing and tourism industries along the US Gulf Coast.

A national commission is expected to submit a report to President Barack Obama by mid-January next year. A Congressional joint investigation will submit a report later than month.

The US Justice Department is also investigating the disaster, but its investigations will only conclude when lawyers and investigators have found evidence, or not, of criminal wrongdoing.


./.

07/09 Suicides cost Japan economy $32bn

The government in Japan says suicides and depression cost its economy almost 2.7tn yen ($32bn; £21bn) last year.

The figures refer to lost incomes and the cost of treatment. It is the first time Japan has released such figures.

Japan has one of the world's highest suicide rates, with more than 32,000 people killing themselves last year. PM Naoto Kan sees it as proof of an economic and emotional downturn.

The government is setting up a task force to try to reduce the rate.

From Friday, it will run a video clip of a footballer from the J-league on its website, urging people to be more aware of the problem.

Lost income
Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote
Decreasing suicides would be one way to build a society with a minimum level of unhappiness”
End Quote
Naoto Kan

Prime Minister of Japan
"Given that the number of suicides in Japan has been over 30,000 for 12 straight years, this is a problem that needs to be addressed by the entire nation," a health, labour and welfare ministry official said.

"We hope this study triggers stronger prevention measures."

The study showed that those who took their lives last year - 26,500 people in 2009 - when they were aged 15 to 69 would have earned 1.9tn yen had they worked until retirement.

Mr Kan has pointed to the suicide numbers as proof of what he believes is wrong with the country, with too many people suffering economically and emotionally.

"There are many causes of suicides. Decreasing them would be one way to build a society with a minimum level of unhappiness," he said.

But attitudes to depression in Japan arguably demand equally urgent scrutiny, correspondents say.

In a country in which stoicism and consensus are highly valued, many older people in particular view mental illness as a stigma that can be overcome simply by trying harder, they say.

The use of psychotherapy to treat depression has lagged behind North America and Europe, with Japanese doctors often viewing medication as the sole answer, they add.

05/09 Paul Krugman: 1938 in 2010

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Here’s the situation: The U.S. economy has been crippled by a financial crisis. The president’s policies have limited the damage, but they were too cautious, and unemployment remains disastrously high. More action is clearly needed. Yet the public has soured on government activism, and seems poised to deal Democrats a severe defeat in the midterm elections.

The president in question is Franklin Delano Roosevelt; the year is 1938. Within a few years, of course, the Great Depression was over. But it’s both instructive and discouraging to look at the state of America circa 1938 — instructive because the nature of the recovery that followed refutes the arguments dominating today’s public debate, discouraging because it’s hard to see anything like the miracle of the 1940s happening again.

Now, we weren’t supposed to find ourselves replaying the late 1930s. President Obama’s economists promised not to repeat the mistakes of 1937, when F.D.R. pulled back fiscal stimulus too soon. But by making his program too small and too short-lived, Mr. Obama did just that: the stimulus raised growth while it lasted, but it made only a small dent in unemployment — and now it’s fading out.

And just as some of us feared, the inadequacy of the administration’s initial economic plan has landed it — and the nation — in a political trap. More stimulus is desperately needed, but in the public’s eyes the failure of the initial program to deliver a convincing recovery has discredited government action to create jobs.

In short, welcome to 1938.

The story of 1937, of F.D.R.’s disastrous decision to heed those who said that it was time to slash the deficit, is well known. What’s less well known is the extent to which the public drew the wrong conclusions from the recession that followed: far from calling for a resumption of New Deal programs, voters lost faith in fiscal expansion.

Consider Gallup polling from March 1938. Asked whether government spending should be increased to fight the slump, 63 percent of those polled said no. Asked whether it would be better to increase spending or to cut business taxes, only 15 percent favored spending; 63 percent favored tax cuts. And the 1938 election was a disaster for the Democrats, who lost 70 seats in the House and seven in the Senate.

Then came the war.

From an economic point of view World War II was, above all, a burst of deficit-financed government spending, on a scale that would never have been approved otherwise. Over the course of the war the federal government borrowed an amount equal to roughly twice the value of G.D.P. in 1940 — the equivalent of roughly $30 trillion today.

Had anyone proposed spending even a fraction that much before the war, people would have said the same things they’re saying today. They would have warned about crushing debt and runaway inflation. They would also have said, rightly, that the Depression was in large part caused by excess debt — and then have declared that it was impossible to fix this problem by issuing even more debt.

But guess what? Deficit spending created an economic boom — and the boom laid the foundation for long-run prosperity. Overall debt in the economy — public plus private — actually fell as a percentage of G.D.P., thanks to economic growth and, yes, some inflation, which reduced the real value of outstanding debts. And after the war, thanks to the improved financial position of the private sector, the economy was able to thrive without continuing deficits.

The economic moral is clear: when the economy is deeply depressed, the usual rules don’t apply. Austerity is self-defeating: when everyone tries to pay down debt at the same time, the result is depression and deflation, and debt problems grow even worse. And conversely, it is possible — indeed, necessary — for the nation as a whole to spend its way out of debt: a temporary surge of deficit spending, on a sufficient scale, can cure problems brought on by past excesses.

But the story of 1938 also shows how hard it is to apply these insights. Even under F.D.R., there was never the political will to do what was needed to end the Great Depression; its eventual resolution came essentially by accident.

I had hoped that we would do better this time. But it turns out that politicians and economists alike have spent decades unlearning the lessons of the 1930s, and are determined to repeat all the old mistakes. And it’s slightly sickening to realize that the big winners in the midterm elections are likely to be the very people who first got us into this mess, then did everything in their power to block action to get us out.

But always remember: this slump can be cured. All it will take is a little bit of intellectual clarity, and a lot of political will. Here’s hoping we find those virtues in the not too distant future.

Indonesians Go Home, by the Millions

Irwin Fedriansyah/Associated Press. Many Indonesians return home at the end of Ramadan for a holiday they call Lebaran. In Jakarta, people waited on Friday to board a ship bound for the island of Sulawesi.

September 6, 2010
By NORIMITSU ONISHI
JAKARTA, Indonesia — The exodus happens every year.

During the last days of Ramadan, the Islamic month of fasting, tens of millions of Indonesians leave the country’s cities to return to their villages by motorcycle, train, bus and boat.

The mass homecoming is both a decidedly Indonesian interpretation of the Muslim holiday and one of the world’s great movements of people. On a road network whose capacity is strained at the best of times, travelers brave enormous jams, exhaustion and bandits to make it back home. Hundreds perish on the road each year.

New arrivals to the cities or those with strong roots to rural Indonesia lead the exodus, which is called “mudik,” meaning “going home.” In Jakarta, the capital, businesses shut down, construction sites are stilled and wealthy households overly dependent on domestic help check into hotels while their maids, nannies and drivers are away.

At a bus terminal here, Ria Handayani, 19, and Puji Erawati, 20, cousins working as assistants and maids in the same household, waited to catch a bus for a nine-hour ride to their hometown in Central Java Province. Both were going home for the first time since an uncle had found them jobs here last year.

“I like Jakarta,” Ms. Handayani said. “I’ve made a lot of friends. We go to the malls and hang out at the park. But I really miss my family. I miss my dad and mom. I have five younger brothers and sisters.”

Ms. Handayani, who had finished junior high school, was helping some siblings through high school. She had sent home all of her first month’s salary — $50 — she said with a serious look on her face. She had also sent money each month, but two months ago she finally splurged on herself by buying an Indonesian-made Taxco smartphone for $40. “I use it to communicate on Facebook with my friends in my hometown,” she said, cradling her red phone in her left hand.

About 30 million people are expected to travel this year, most of them in Java and Sumatra, the main islands in Indonesia, which has a population of nearly 240 million. In Jakarta, a quarter of the city’s 10 million residents are expected to leave for mudik.

The annual homecoming is an integral part of how Indonesians celebrate what they call Lebaran — the Muslim holiday at the end of Ramadan known around the world as Id al-Fitr — by reconnecting with families, renewing themselves spiritually and asking for forgiveness. But beyond culture and religion, lopsided economic development favoring cities has driven urbanization and the growth of mudik.

“Indonesia’s economy has improved a lot, but there’s no balance,” said Irwan Hidayat, the chief executive of SidoMuncul, a large manufacturer of herbal drinks. “There’s no balance between cities and rural areas, no balance between rich and poor. That’s why mudik keeps getting bigger every year.”

In the 1990s, SidoMuncul became the first company to sponsor organized mudik convoys for its employees. This year, said Mr. Hidayat, 63, the company had chartered about 300 buses to send home more than 20,000 vendors of its products.

The annual exodus serves as one way for money to trickle down to Indonesia’s villages. At bus terminals here, hawkers of crisp rupiah bills sidled up to travelers who, according to custom, will be expected to distribute them to nephews and nieces back home.

Fuad and Ani, a couple waiting for a bus along with their three children, said relatives from their village had “pre-ordered” gifts, mostly clothes, from Jakarta.

Mr. Fuad, 39, a construction worker who uses only one name like many Indonesians, said he was the only member of his family to have left his village. He came to Jakarta in 1990 and met his wife, Ani, 34, here.

“Yes, there’s a lot of pressure going back home for mudik,” Mr. Fuad said, explaining that the trip this year was costing him about $660, or the equivalent of six weeks’ work. The family went back for mudik only every other year, he said, adding: “It’s too expensive.”

The pressure to give — and, perhaps even more important, the pressure to show off one’s success to those back home — was fueling business for pawn shops throughout Jakarta.

At a branch in south Jakarta of Pegadaian, the state-owned chain of pawnbrokers, the manager, Agus Helmi, said this time of the year was the busiest, along with the back-to-school season. While people pawned belongings to take out loans for the beginning of the school year, they reclaimed belongings, mostly jewelry, before the start of mudik.

“They’ve just received their annual bonuses from their employers, so they can come and get their jewelry,” said Mr. Helmi, who has worked for the pawnbroker for 32 years. “They want to wear it in the villages.”

“It’s in our tradition that we want to show off what we have accomplished in the big city,” he added.

But after the end of mudik, Mr. Helmi said, the same people often come to pawn the same pieces of jewelry.

The same kind of pressure was partly behind the popularity of the motorcycle, a way to get back home and a symbol of material success.

As many as 1.6 million people are expected to travel out of Jakarta on their motorcycles, typically small models made for short trips, despite the authorities’ attempts to ban their use for long-distance trips. More than 400 travelers died last year, most of them in motorcycle accidents. Each year, local news organizations report on infants dying, sometimes squeezed between their parents as entire families ride on one motorcycle.

Yamaha Motor Kencana Indonesia, a distributor of Yamaha motorcycles here, is organizing a convoy for some 3,000 Yamaha owners. Buses will transport the owners and the families to Central Java, joined by trucks carrying their motorcycles.

Early Sunday morning, Maman, 39, boarded the Yamaha-sponsored bus with his wife and son. Last year, he rode his motorcycle to his village for 12 hours.

Paulus S. Firmanto, a manager at Yamaha, said that as motorcycle sales kept rising sharply along with Indonesia’s booming economy, it was natural that motorcycles became the favorite way to go home for mudik.

“By riding their own motorcycle home, it shows they made some money in Jakarta,” he said.

“In the past, a motorbike would last eight years before an owner got bored with it — now not even five years,” he added. “Some of them are even embarrassed to bring back the same motorbike next Lebaran.”


Muktita Suhartono contributed reporting.

07/09 EU ngừng tìm kiếm cơ chế giải quyết khủng hoảng

Kết thúc cuộc họp ngày 6/9 ở Brussels, Bỉ, các bộ trưởng tài chính Liên minh châu Âu (EU) đã tiến gần hơn tới thỏa thuận về biện pháp trừng phạt những nước vi phạm Hiệp ước ổn định và tăng trưởng của tổ chức này.

Tuy nhiên, EU cũng nhất trí ngừng các cuộc thảo luận tìm kiếm cơ chế lâu dài để giải quyết các cuộc khủng hoảng có thể xảy ra trong Khu vực đồng tiền chung châu Âu (đồng euro) trong tương lai.

Phát biểu sau cuộc họp, Bộ trưởng Kinh tế, Tài chính và Việc làm Pháp Christine Lagarde cho biết EU đã đạt tiến bộ về vấn đề trừng phạt những nước vi phạm, nhưng chưa đi đến kết quả quan trọng nào để công bố tại giai đoạn hiện nay.

Ủy viên EU phụ trách vấn đề kinh tế và tiền tệ Olli Rehn khẳng định trừng phạt là vấn đề không cần bàn cãi, giống như trong thi đấu bóng đá. Ông nhấn mạnh "sẽ chẳng ích gì nếu các cầu thủ tranh luận với trọng tài về luật chơi trước mỗi trận đấu."

Bộ trưởng Tài chính Slovakia Ivan Miklos tiết lộ EU hiện chưa thống nhất về thủ tục trừng phạt, cụ thể chưa khẳng định được liệu có cần sự đồng thuận giữa các bộ trưởng tài chính tổ chức này về mọi quyết định trừng phạt trước khi thực thi hay không.

Bộ trưởng Tài chính Đức kêu gọi các nước thành viên EU kiên nhẫn hơn sau khi đã đạt nhiều tiến bộ về khía cạnh ngăn chặn khủng hoảng trong Hiệp ước ổn định và tăng trưởng.

Về vấn đề cơ chế lâu dài để giải quyết khủng hoảng, các bộ trưởng tài chính EU nhất trí sẽ thảo luận vấn đề này trong tương lai với lý do Khu vực đồng euro nói riêng và EU nói chung đã có cơ chế hữu hiệu tạm thời là Phương tiện ổn định tài chính châu Âu (EFSF).

Theo các nguồn tin ngoại giao EU, các cuộc thảo luận về cơ chế lâu dài để giải quyết khủng hoảng bị gác lại do một cơ chế như vậy đòi hỏi EU phải thay đổi Hiệp ước EU, trong khi việc thương lượng lại văn bản có giá trị pháp lý cao nhất này sẽ dẫn đến các cuộc đàm phán kéo dài liên quan nhiều lĩnh vực, không chỉ là quản lý kinh tế hay phối hợp chính sách, và không chắc sẽ giành được sự tán thành của tất cả các nước thành viên EU.

Vấn đề đình chỉ quyền bỏ phiếu của các bộ trưởng tài chính thuộc những nước vi phạm cũng không ngã ngũ. Người đứng đầu nhóm các bộ trưởng tài chính Khu vực đồng euro cho rằng đề xuất này của Đức là phi thực tế nếu không thay đổi căn bản Hiệp ước EU. Trong khi đó, vấn đề đánh thuế mới nhằm vào các ngân hàng đang gây bất đồng giữa các nhà hoạch định chính sách EU và Chính phủ Anh.

Theo các quy định trong Hiệp ước ổn định và tăng trưởng, thâm hụt ngân sách của các nước thành viên EU không được vượt mức trần 3% GDP của mỗi nước và nợ nhà nước không quá 60% GDP. Những nước vi phạm nhiều lần sẽ phải chịu mức phạt lên tới 0,5% GDP của nước đó, nhưng việc áp dụng quyết định trừng phạt phải được tiến hành theo nhiều giai đoạn kéo dài tới hai năm.

Việc thu tiền phạt chỉ được thực hiện tại giai đoạn cuối cùng, khi khu vực tài chính công của nước vi phạm bị đe dọa và phụ thuộc vào quyết định tùy hứng của các bộ trưởng Khu vực đồng euro.

Trong bối cảnh một loạt nước EU vi phạm các quy định trong Hiệp ước ổn định và tăng trưởng, EU tháng Năm vừa qua đã bắt đầu thảo luận các quy định tài chính nghiêm ngặt hơn nhằm giúp các nước thành viên cân bằng ngân sách và đạt thặng dư.

EU đặt mục tiêu đạt đồng thuận về vấn đề này để trình lãnh đạo EU thông qua tại hội nghị thượng đỉnh của nhóm, dự kiến vào ngày 16/9 tới. Chính vì vậy, bế tắc trong kế hoạch cải cách thể thức quản lý kinh tế đang gây tâm lý thất vọng trong các nước thành viên EU./.


(TTXVN/Vietnam+)

＜1950年からの歩み＞日経平均、競争力映し60年

　日経平均株価はきょう９月７日、算出開始から60周年を迎えた。日本を代表する225社で構成する日経平均は、戦後経済の足取りと産業競争力の変化を日々刻んできた。足元では9000円前後で低迷し、日本経済の先行きへの不安と危機感を映し出している。再生に向けた課題は何か、採用銘柄の歴史や業績動向などから探った。


　戦後復興は繊維や海運が支え、高度成長はインフラ関連が主役。技術力と低コストで世界の頂点に立った後は不況に苦しみ、今は産業のリード役復活を待っている――。日経平均60年の歴史を採用銘柄の取引高で振り返ると、こんな日本経済の姿が浮かび上がる。

　株式の取引高は市場での人気を示す尺度。日経平均の算出が始まった1950年から20年ごとに、その年の採用銘柄の取引の多さを調べた。90年と2010年は売買代金、売買代金の正式なデータのない50年と70年は売買高を使った。




　算出を開始した50年は、朝鮮戦争の「特需」で日本経済が復興に向かった時期だ。国民生活の向上を先取りする格好で東洋レーヨン（現東）、日東紡績など繊維株の売買高が膨らみ、貿易拡大の期待で日本郵船などの海運株も商いを集めた。

　20年後の70年は高度経済成長期。外資流入規制の緩和が進み、日立製作所や東京芝浦電気（現東芝）などのハイテク株が活発に売買された。

　90年は日経平均が史上最高値を付けた翌年。株式相場は下り坂にあったが、バブル崩壊の影響はまだ色濃く出ていない。売買代金上位に目立つのはソニー、パイオニアといった家電メーカー。大量生産方式のモノづくりがまだ競争力を維持していた。




　算出60周年の今年は、年初から９月３日までの売買代金累計の上位10銘柄のうち、４つを金融が占める。増資に絡む思惑人気で取引が増えた。

　市場全体の商いが細る中で増資銘柄に売買が集中したのは、日本経済をけん引する産業の主役を探しあぐねている裏返しともいえる。金融以外で上位に入ったのは自動車と電機。海外企業との競争が激化する中で、次世代技術をテコにした中核業種の復活が日本株再生のカギを握る。

　産業構造の変化は、日経平均採用銘柄の移り変わりからも検証できる。60年間、継続採用されている企業は95社と全体の約４割で、約６割が入れ替わった。

　構造変化を端的に示すのがサービス業。算出開始時に13社あった採用銘柄は11社が入れ替わり、現在採用されるのは東宝と東京ドーム（旧後楽園スタヂアム）だけ。当初は松竹、日活など映画会社が多かったが、映画が大衆娯楽の主役から去り、株式市場での存在感は薄れた。今ではネット関連のヤフー、ゲームのコナミ、警備のセコムなど戦後生まれの企業が採用され、生活の多様化を映している。

　欧米の主要株価指数の銘柄入れ替えのスピードはもっと速い。

　米ダウ工業株30種平均は1896年に12社で算出が始まり、当時の採用企業で今も残るのはゼネラル・エレクトリック（ＧＥ）のみ。日経平均算出が始まった1950年からではＧＥ、化学のデュポンなど７社で、全体の約２割にとどまる。ウォルマート・ストアーズ、マイクロソフト、シスコシステムズなどの若い企業が次々と採用された。

　英フィナンシャル・タイムズ30種平均でも算出開始（35年）からの採用は機械のＧＫＮ、製糖のテート・アンド・ライルだけ。食品のキャドバリーが米クラフト・フーズに買収されて指数から外れたように、外国企業による買収などで入れ替わる例が多い。

　日本の場合、大企業の経営が長く安定し、豊富な資金や高い技術を原動力に大企業自身が新しい成長分野を取り込んでいった。起業や買収が活発な欧米と違う点だ。だが長い不況で新産業の「ふ化器」の役割を果たす余裕が大企業になくなってきた。産業の新陳代謝を活発にするには、企業や投資家がリスクを負いやすくする税制の手当てや一段の規制緩和が必要だとの指摘は多い。







◇


　日経平均60周年関連記事はすべて「特集」コーナーでご覧いただけます。

source: nikkei

Afloat on a Chinese tide

China’s economic rise has brought the rest of emerging Asia huge benefits. But the region still needs the West

Sep 2nd 2010

WITH markets still on edge after the worst financial crisis in decades, and fears of renewed recession stalking the West, this week seemed a poignant moment for China’s People’s Daily to detect a “golden age of development”, for Asia at least. Yet developing Asia, led by China itself, is booming. China’s GDP barrelled along in the first half of the year, growing by 11.1% compared with a year earlier. The newly industrialised little tigers—Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan—as well as most of South-East Asia seem to have fully recovered from the downturn. Even Thailand, mired in political turmoil, grew by 9.1% in the second quarter.

The dream is that this gilded future is now insulated from rich-world downturns: that China—now having, after all, officially overtaken Japan as the world’s second-largest economy—can drive growth for the whole region. One day, maybe. Not yet.

That the idea has currency at all reflects a remarkable transformation in itself. During the East Asian financial crash of the late 1990s, many in the region blamed China as a proximate cause of the debacle. Its emergence as a big competitor, the argument went, stalled the rapid export growth on which countries such as Thailand had come to depend, poking large holes in their current accounts, and precipitated the collapse of confidence.

Since then, and especially since the surge that followed its accession to the WTO in 2001, China’s economic clout has grown as fast—or faster—in its own region as anywhere. And with East Asia, unlike with Europe and America, China tends to run trade deficits. It is now the biggest trading partner for both Australia and India. It is the biggest export market for Japan, South Korea and Taiwan; the second-biggest for Malaysia and Thailand; the third-biggest for Indonesia and the Philippines, and so on.

Everyone is waking up to the potential of the Chinese market. Indian poultry farmers have learned that once-discarded chicken’s feet can actually be sold. Hoteliers in Bali grapple with night-classes in Mandarin.

Still, few are yet confident in the “golden age”. People’s Daily used the term in reporting the views of “many” taking part in the “Sixth Beijing-Tokyo Forum” in Tokyo. It seems unlikely the many included the Japanese contingent. The economic news at home was worrying—though it would have been grimmer still were it not for the healthy growth in recent years in exports to China. In this context, the report read rather like a young sports champion consoling the veteran whom he has just bested.

Even in much of young, vigorous developing Asia the boom seems too precarious for triumphalism. One reason for this is statistical. Growth figures in parts of Asia have been so spectacularly good partly because they were so spectacularly bad in the first half of 2009. Singapore’s extraordinary first-half GDP growth of 17.9% looks slightly less otherworldly against last year’s first-half contraction of 5.3%. In the depth of the crisis, as trade for a while seized up, the region, as one of the most trade-dependent in the world, saw growth plummet.

That trade dependence is another reason for sobriety. Outside of China and India (which this week reported 8.8% second-quarter growth compared with a year earlier), developing Asia remains heavily dependent on external demand. And despite the heady growth of sales to China, the most important sources of demand remain the “G3” of America, Europe and Japan.

Asian exports to China fall broadly into three categories. Industrialised countries, notably Japan and South Korea, have found a big market for capital goods. Countries such as Australia and Indonesia have fed China’s growing appetite for commodities and raw materials such as coal, iron ore and palm oil. But many Asian exporters have been selling components, as part of globalised supply chains in which “made in China” often means “assembled in China from bits produced all over the place”.

.It is hard to work out from published trade figures where components imported to China from, say, Malaysia, end up. But Malaysian officials believe that some 60% of their exports to China are destined for the G3. (By contrast, less than 30% of Indonesia’s exports to China are re-exported.) A recent study of such “global production sharing” in East Asia by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) concluded that it has played a pivotal role in the region’s dynamism and growing interdependence. But it has not lessened the region’s dependence on the global economy.

Other studies have also found that China has already had quite a big positive impact on growth in other countries in the region. Besides providing an export market, it is a source of tourists, investment opportunities and demand for services. And, less measurably, it is a source of economic optimism: a boost to consumer and business sentiment.


Not quite the rising tide that lifts all boats

Its economy, however, for all its three-decades-long boom, still only accounts for 8% of global GDP in current dollars; domestic private consumption, though growing fast, remains a small part of national GDP by global standards (36%). This will grow as China reforms its economy to give a bigger share to household income, for example by lifting wages for China’s factory workers. On August 29th Wen Jiabao, China’s prime minister, must have enjoyed lecturing Japanese visitors on the need to tackle the problem of “relatively low wages” at Japanese factories in China.

This “rebalancing”, though, could take decades. In the short term the high-speed growth much of the rest of the region has enjoyed will moderate. Growth will not be measured against the worst of the slump; and faltering recovery in the G3 will dent exports, however well China does. The golden age is not here yet.





A list of sources used in this article can be found at

Economist.com/blogs/banyan/

Comparing This Recession to Previous Ones: Job Changes

By CATHERINE RAMPELL

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. Chart by Amanda Cox.

Horizontal axis shows months. Vertical axis shows the ratio of that month’s nonfarm payrolls to the nonfarm payrolls at the start of recession. Note: Because employment is a lagging indicator, the dates for these employment trends are not exactly synchronized with National Bureau of Economic Research’s official business cycle dates.



The economy lost 54,000 jobs in August, driven primarily by the elimination of 114,000 temporary Census Bureau positions. Additionally, state and local governments eliminated 10,000 jobs last month.

In the private sector, payrolls increased by 67,000 in August, a modest gain over total private payrolls in July.

The chart above shows job changes in this recession compared with recent ones, with the black line representing the current downturn. The line has risen since last year, but still has a long way to go before the job market fully recovers to its pre-recession level. Since the downturn began in December 2007, the economy has shed, on net, about 5.5 percent of its nonfarm payroll jobs. And that doesn’t even account for the fact that the working-age population has continued to grow, meaning that if the economy were healthy we should have more jobs today than we had before the recession.

The unemployment rate (measured by a different government survey, and based on how many people are without jobs but are looking for work) was relatively unchanged at 9.6 percent in August, from 9.5 percent in July.

In Ireland, Dangers Still Loom

September 2, 2010, 6:00 am

In Ireland, Dangers Still Loom
By SIMON JOHNSON AND PETER BOONE

Peter Boone is chairman of the charity Effective Intervention and a research associate at the Center for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics. He is also a principal in Salute Capital Management Ltd. Simon Johnson, the former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, is the co-author of “13 Bankers.”

Is the global economic recovery still on track? The mainstream view is: yes, without a doubt. But increasingly, there are reasons to fear another financial disruption — particularly given the latest developments in Ireland.

The consensus among officials and most of the international banking community is that the global economy has stabilized and is now well down the road to recovery. The speed of this recovery is proving disappointing — as seen in the revised second-quarter growth estimate for gross domestic product in the United States, with annualized growth down to 1.6 percent. But, according to this view, easy monetary policy and still-loose fiscal policy around the world will keep sufficient momentum going.

Never mind that Japan, the United States and most of Europe are running unsustainable fiscal policies, while the Federal Reserve chairman, Ben Bernanke, is fretting over how to prevent deflation with a limited tool box, and Jean-Claude Trichet, president of the European Central Bank, is calling for more fiscal tightening. To enjoy this rosy global picture, we are also told to ignore the plight of heavily indebted peripheral euro-zone nations still suffering from uncompetitive wages and prices, and concerns over default, that strangle their credit markets and growth.

An essential part of this relatively positive view is that the euro-zone economies have stopped the series of “financial runs” that, earlier this year, took intense market pressure from Greece to Portugal and Ireland and threatened to move on to Spain and potentially almost everywhere else (except, presumably, Germany). A collapse was averted in large part by the euro-zone countries’ agreeing to rescue one another — meaning that the Germans agreed to support Greece and other weaker countries — with some additional cash resources provided by the International Monetary Fund.

However, let’s be clear: Europe’s headache remains large, and this should concern all of us. Just look at Ireland to see how misunderstood and immediate the remaining dangers are. Ireland’s difficulties arose because of a huge property boom financed by cheap credit from Irish banks. Ireland’s three main banks built up loans and investments by 2008 that were three times the size of the national economy; these big banks (relative to the economy) pushed the frontier in terms of reckless lending. The banks got the upside, and then came the global crash in fall 2008: property prices fell more than 50 percent, construction and development stopped, and people stopped repaying loans. Today, roughly one-third of the loans on the balance sheets of major banks are nonperforming or “under surveillance”; that’s an astonishing 100 percent of gross national product, in terms of potentially bad debts.

The government responded to this with what are currently regarded as “standard” policies in Europe and the United States. It guaranteed all the liabilities of banks and began injecting government funds to keep these financial institutions afloat. It bought the most worthless assets from banks, paying them government bonds in return. Ministers have promised to recapitalize banks that need more capital. Despite or perhaps because of this therapy, financial markets are beginning to see Ireland as Europe’s next Greece. In the last few weeks, the perceived probability of default by Ireland (as traded in credit-default swap markets) has shot up, so that markets now price a 25 percent risk that Ireland will default within five years.

Until very recently, Ireland was seen as Europe’s poster child of prudent reforms. Mr. Trichet himself highlighted Ireland as an example that Greece and other financially stricken nations should follow. His message was simple: If only Greece or Portugal or Spain would cut public wages, reduce the budget deficit and make structural reforms as Ireland had done, then growth could occur and default could be prevented.

But it is now apparent that Ireland has not done enough to stem its march toward further crisis. The ultimate result of Ireland’s bank bailout exercise is obvious: one way or another, the government will have converted the liabilities of private banks into debts of the sovereign (that is, Irish taxpayers), yet the nation probably cannot afford these debts. According to the Royal Bank of Scotland, Irish banks have debt worth 26 billion euros, or one-fifth of Ireland’s national income, coming due in the month of September alone. Ireland’s third-largest bank just announced it was likely to need 25 billion euros in total capital injections from the government (19 percent of G.N.P.), while Standard & Poor’s argues that this figure is too low. In total, the debts of Irish banks could easily result in a charge to government debt equal to one-third of G.N.P.

These debts need to be added to the fiscal deficit, which also remains dangerously out of control. This year, the government will run a deficit of 15 percent of G.N.P., and with nominal G.N.P. falling, it could well remain that high next year, even if the government cuts spending by the 2 to 3 percent of G.N.P. currently envisaged.

The government is gambling that growth will recover to more than 4 percent a year starting in 2012, in order to make all this spending and debt affordable, and officials insist that growth is already under way. Ireland’s gross domestic product did grow in the first quarter of 2010, but that was not the good news that many news media and officials claimed.

This misunderstanding stems from Ireland’s success as a tax haven. Many years ago, Ireland cut corporate taxes to attract business. This created one of Europe’s most impressive tax havens — it is possible to set up a corporation in Ireland, channel sales through that head office (with some highly complicated links to offshore tax havens in order to avoid paying Irish tax) and then pay a minuscule corporate profits tax. Ireland boasts a large industry of foreign “tax minimizers” that do this, but these tax minimizers hardly employ any people. Nearly one-quarter of Irish G.D.P. comes from the profits of these ghost corporations.

The likes of Google, Yahoo, Forest Labs and many others helped Ireland’s exports grow in the first quarter, but the domestic economy (when excluding their profits, as measured by G.N.P.) actually contracted, and so did Ireland’s tax revenues and employment. Today, Irish unemployment is estimated at 13.8 percent, up from 13.1 percent at the start of the year.

Ireland, simply put, appears insolvent under plausible possibilities with current policies. The idea that Ireland, Greece or Portugal can cut spending and grow out of overvalued exchange rates with still large budget deficits, while servicing all their debts and building more debt, is proving — not surprisingly — wrong. Such policies leave nations burdened with large debt overhangs that effectively tax businesses and borrowers — because interest rates must stay high to reflect risk.

Investors must wonder whether businesses and homeowners can afford these higher interest rates, so banks and investors cut credit lines and reduce lending. This strangles economies, even when the fiscal authorities take tough steps needed to cut deficits.

Ireland had more prudent choices. It could have cut the budget deficit while also acknowledging insolvency and requiring creditors to share some of the burdens. But a strong lobby of real estate developers, the investors who bought banks’ bonds and politicians with links to the failed developments (and their bankers) prefer that taxpayers, rather than creditors, pay. The European Central Bank, the European Union and the International Monetary Fund share some responsibility; they advocate these unlikely programs so that European and global banks, which provided the funds to the Irish banks, do not suffer losses from such bad lending decisions.

The Irish government plan is — with good reason — highly unpopular, but the coalition of interests in its favor seems strong enough to ensure that it will proceed, at least until it either succeeds and growth recovers, or ends in failure with the default of banks or the nation itself.

Under the current program, we estimate that each Irish family of four will be liable for 200,000 euros in public debt by 2015. There are only 73,000 children born into the country each year, and these children will be paying off debts for decades to come — as well as needing to accept much greater austerity than has already been put into force. There is no doubt that social welfare systems, health care and education spending will decline sharply.

Watch for renewed emigration from a famously footloose population. If current policies continue, the calamity of the Irish banking system will lead to a much deeper recession and the consequences will be felt for decades. Watch also for further global financial disruption as this kind of deal starts to fall apart.

02/09/2010 Bernanke Says He Failed to See Financial Flaws

By SEWELL CHAN
WASHINGTON — Ben S. Bernanke, who told Congress in 2007 that the subprime mortgage crisis was “likely to be contained,” said Thursday that he had failed to recognize flaws in the financial system that amplified the housing downturn and led to an economic disaster.

Under pointed but polite questioning from members of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, Mr. Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, signaled that the central bank was eager to embrace its expanded powers under the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory law that President Obama signed in July.

Mr. Bernanke spoke favorably of forcing huge banks to hold much more capital, particularly if they were systemically important — so much capital that being big would be costly. He declared that “for capitalism to work,” executive pay had to be linked to performance. And he said Americans were justifiably angry that bankers “who drove their companies into a ditch walked off with lots of money.”

He reiterated that the Fed could not have prevented Lehman Brothers from declaring bankruptcy on Sept. 15, 2008, the financial crisis’s nadir moment. But he said he might have unwittingly “supported this myth that we did have a way of saving Lehman,” by failing to make it clear to Congress at a hearing shortly after the bankruptcy that the Fed did not have other options.

“This is my own fault, in a sense,” Mr. Bernanke said, adding that he was worried at the time about contributing to panic in the markets. “I regret not being more straightforward there.”

Mr. Bernanke said that when he made his remarks in 2007 he thought the subprime problems were “manageable.”

“What I did not recognize was the extent to which the system had flaws and weaknesses in it that were going to amplify the initial shock from subprime and make it into a much bigger crisis,” he said.

While Mr. Bernanke stuck with his long-held stance that the Fed had not aided the housing bubble by keeping interest rates too low for too long in 2002-4, he embraced the view of Gary B. Gorton, an influential Yale finance professor.

Professor Gorton has compared the crisis to a classic bank run, but with the “banks” in this case being short-term wholesale financing markets — a loosely regulated, uninsured system known as shadow banking.

Mr. Bernanke offered an analogy of his own, likening the housing crisis to E. coli bacteria that can have deadly consequences when passed along through a vulnerable food safety system.

“E. coli got into the food system, and it created a much bigger problem,” he said. “There was an awful lot of dependence on short-term, unstable funding, which is analogous to the deposits in banks before the period of deposit insurance.”

Asked about the role of financial innovation in the economy, Mr. Bernanke, said that “innovation is not always a good thing.” Some innovations have unpredictable consequences, are used primarily “to take unfair advantage rather than to create a more efficient market,” and create systemic risks, he said.

In a 2002 speech when he was a Fed governor, Mr. Bernanke argued that central banks should not try to use monetary policy to pop asset bubbles. As part of his nearly three hours of testimony on Thursday, Mr. Bernanke held to that view, but said that at the time he had called for careful supervision and regulation to maintain financial stability.

“We didn’t do that,” conceded Mr. Bernanke, who became Fed chairman in 2006. “Going forward, we need to be able to do that.”

As he did in an address to the American Economic Association in January, Mr. Bernanke argued against the perspective that the Fed stood by passively, “not recognizing the obvious,” as housing prices soared.

“As of 2003 to 2004, there really was quite a bit of disagreement among economists about whether there was a bubble, how big it was, whether it was just a local or a national bubble,” Mr. Bernanke testified.

He added: “By the time it was evident that it was a bubble and that it was going to create risk to the financial system, it was rather late to address it through monetary policy.”

Mr. Bernanke said the most important lesson of the crisis was the need to end the “too-big-to-fail problem,” a view echoed by Sheila C. Bair, the chairwoman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, who also testified Thursday.

The Dodd-Frank legislation gives the Fed oversight over the largest financial institutions, including those that are not banks. It gave the Fed a prominent role in the Financial Stability Oversight Council, a body of regulators with the power to seize and break up a systemically important company if it threatens economic stability. The F.D.I.C. would manage that process, known as resolution.

In deciding which large companies will fall under its supervision, Mr. Bernanke said, the Fed will look at size, complexity, interconnectedness and degree of involvement in areas like payments and settlements systems.

He also said the Fed was overhauling how it supervises banks. Alongside traditional examiners, the Fed has assigned additional finance experts, accountants, economists and lawyers to work on oversight. “We really need to take a much broader, multidisciplinary approach,” he said.

Mr. Bernanke and Ms. Bair said it was also imperative that the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, an international coordinating body of regulators, impose tougher standards on how much and what kinds of capital banks must hold.

The increased capital requirements should include capital that is more aligned with risk and able to absorb losses more effectively, and that works in a countercyclical manner, so that banks have more of it during times of financial stress, he said.

Several European countries have expressed resistance to the Basel process, seeking either to weaken some of the requirements or to stretch out the period of time before the new rules will take effect.

A version of this article appeared in print on September 3, 2010, on page B3 of the New York edition.

03/09/2010 U.S. Lost Jobs in August, but Fewer Than Expected

By CHRISTINE HAUSER
Private job growth in the last three month was stronger than initially estimated, the government said Friday in its August report on unemployment.

Still, the economy lost another 54,000 jobs last month, mostly because of the loss of temporary Census jobs, and the unemployment rate rose to 9.6 percent from 9.5 percent.

Private companies, however, added 67,000 jobs in August, the Labor Department said, more than the 41,000 forecast. In July, the private sector growth was revised to 107,000 jobs, rather than 71,000, and the June number was revised upward to 61,000 in June from 31,000.

Over all, the government lost 121,000 jobs overall in August. State and local governments, many of them grappling with severe budget deficits, cut 1o,000 jobs, and another 114,000 temporary Census positions came to an end.

The numbers for prevous months were also revised to show a loss of 175,000 jobst in June rather than 221,000, and a loss of 54,000 in July, instead of 131,000.

The total number of unemployed people rose to 14.86 million in August from 14.59 million in July.

While the report continued to show that the pace of the recovery remains, it provided some reassurance the economy would not slipped into a double-dip recession. But concerns remain about the pace of economic growth.

President Obama on Monday said his administration was weighing new steps to bolster the economy, but any measures are likely to be small. His options are limited given that Congress has shown little appetite for more spending before the midterm elections in November, in which Republicans are hoping to reclaim both the Senate and the House.

Republicans have said that the unemployment rate remains high because the president’s stimulus spending as well as his overhauls of health care and the financial industry are a drag on the recovery. Mr. Obama and Democrats have been emphasizing that the recovery is moving in the right direction, albeit at a slow pace. The president has chided Senate Republicans for holding up a jobs bill that would offer tax breaks to small businesses and ease credit with a $30 billion initiative to channel loans through community banks.

In any case, the report on Friday provided the latest evidence that the recovery was proceeding slowly. Last week, the Commerce Department revised its estimate for growth in the second quarter down to an annual rate of 1.6 percent, from 2.4 percent. The consensus on the outlook for the second half of the year is growth of 1.5 to 2.5 percent, substantially less than what is needed for the recovery to pick up steam.

Earlier this week, the Conference Board released a monthly survey showing that consumer confidence improved slightly in August but indicated that Americans remained apprehensive about the economy and the job market. Other indicators showed that the housing market clearly slowed over the summer and that retail sales were weak in August. The crux of the problem is circular, economists said: consumer demand needs to pick up, but that is largely dependent on whether people have jobs.

And while corporate profits were generally robust in the second quarter, many companies had trimmed costs and jobs to achieve them, and many economists say corporations need actual revenue growth instead of making their earnings grow from cutting costs. Outlooks for the rest of the year were tepid.

Many economists have pinned hopes for job creation on manufacturing, but the Labor Department said that sector lost 27,000 jobs in August. An increase of about 10,000 jobs had been expected for manufacturing, but the report cited a decline in auto and auto-related jobs.

Despite the August numbers, Thomas J. Duesterberg, the president of the Manufacturers Alliance-MAPI, said the association forecast about 278,000 new jobs would be added by the end of the year, or about 15,000 to 20,000 new manufacturing jobs each month.

“We do think that manufacturing is going to continue to grow at a modest pace this year and next year,” he said. “So many jobs were cut in the previous two to three years that companies are very lean, and in order to ramp up levels of production, they are going to have to start hiring.”

Mr. Duesterberg, said that exports have continued to grow, and in fact, several industrial sectors — aerospace, basic chemicals, paper products and machinery — were running a trade surplus, which could encourage job creation. Companies are also holding back because of uncertainty over how future policies, including those for taxation and regulation, will impact their businesses and ultimately their hiring plans.

“It is very clear that there is this air of uncertainty from a policy perspective overhanging the business sector,” David A. Rosenberg, the chief economist for Gluskin Sheff, said.

The average number of hours worked in private sector was stable at 34.2 weeks, the report said. An increase would suggest that employers were asking more from their workers, a sign that could augur well for future hiring.

Average hourly earnings by workers on private payrolls edged up 6 cents to $22.66in August, from $22.60 in July, the department said.

The number of people out of work for 27 weeks or more declined by 323,000 to 6.2 million in August, from 6.6 million in July, while the median length of unemployment fell to 19.9 weeks in August, from 22.2 weeks in July.

The broadest definition of the unemployment rate, which includes the people who want jobs but did not search, rose to 16.7 percent in August, compared with 16.5 percent in July.

Some struggling with unemployment say they will settle for any work, even with pay cuts.

Susan Howard, a Leander, Tex., single mother with a master’s degree said she was laid off from her software-on-demand job in June and since then had been interviewing for jobs that would pay half her previous salary.

But with only $406 a week in benefits and some child support, she has stopped paying her mortgage, deferred her car payments, reached out to a ministry for help with utility bills and enrolled her son in a reduced-cost school lunch program.

“My résumé is posted on every career résumé site there is,” she said. “I have been called in for three interviews, but none of them have ever gotten back to me.”

中国、内陸経済は離陸するか（アジアＢｉｚ新潮流）

　中国の北京から山西省などを抜け、チベットにつながる全長3000キロ超の京蔵高速道路。そのうち山西省から北京に向かう区間で今年８月14日から約10日間、100キロにわたって車がまったく動かないという大渋滞が発生し、中国はもちろん欧米メディアで「史上最悪の大渋滞」と話題になった。高速道路上にとじ込められた車の大半はトラック。山西省から沿海部に向けた石炭やセメント、鉄鋼製品などの輸送用だ。


「史上最悪」と話題になった中国の８月の大渋滞（河北省）＝ＡＰ

　山西省は中国最大の産炭地だが、国内のエネルギー需要の急増で省内の炭鉱は国有石炭会社の大規模炭田から個人経営の中小炭鉱までフル稼働状態。財産を築いた炭鉱主は「煤老板（メイラオバン）」と呼ばれ、中国全土でマンションやオフィスビルを買いあさり、不動産投機の原因と言われるまでになっている。山西省などの内陸部は沿海部へのエネルギー、資源の供給地帯として成長の新たなステージに入っている。

　37％の企業が珠江デルタ脱出を計画し、そのうち63％が広東省から撤退する――。最近、香港工業総会が広東省に工場を置く香港企業にヒアリングした結果だ。深セン、広州、東莞などを中心とする珠江デルタは電子機器、家電、自動車など産業が発展し、世界トップクラスの産業集積だが、この１、２年深刻化した人手不足や賃金高騰で工場の脱出が加速している。移転先の中心は内陸だ。広東省の縫製、靴、帽子などの工場は湖南省、家電は安徽省、電子機器は四川省などに移転するケースが多い。その結果、内陸では新たな雇用が生まれ、関連産業や消費も活性化しつつある。

　これまで内陸の経済を支えてきた農業にも上向きの気配がある。中国政府の農産物買い入れ価格の引き上げ、農民への直接支払いで、農村の経済水準が底上げされつつあるからだ。2008年11月に打ち出された景気刺激策による内陸のインフラ整備の工事で農民の出稼ぎ場所が内陸に生まれたことも農村経済に追い風となっている。

　1978年にトウ小平氏が発動した「改革開放」政策30年で、高度成長を遂げたのは沿海部だ。今、起きている内陸の活況は「改革開放」の第２フェーズといえるだろう。だが、このまま内陸経済は離陸するのか？

　人類史上、沿海から離れて内陸に向け開発を進めた代表例に、北米大陸の西部開発とロシアのシベリア開発がある。ともに今の米国、ロシアの国家の枠組みを規定し、経済力を押し上げる契機となった。中国の内陸開発にも共通性があるが、ひとつ違う点がある。米国の「ＧＯ　ＷＥＳＴ」は太平洋に至り、カリフォルニアができあがった。ロシアのシベリア開発も太平洋岸に達し、東の不凍港ウラジオストクが建設された。だが、どこまで行っても海に至らない中国の内陸開発には当然、ゴールはない。それは単に物理的なゴールの不存在だけでなく、開発そのものがゴールのない政策になりかねない不安も暗示していよう。

source: nikkei

米国株、大幅高で始まる ダウ4日続伸し120ドル高、米景気の警戒後退

【ＮＱＮニューヨーク＝滝口朋史】３日の米株式相場は大幅高で始まった。ダウ工業株30種平均は午前９時40分現在、前日比120ドル04セント高の１万0440ドル14セントで推移している。朝方発表の８月の米雇用統計が市場予想ほど悪化せず、米景気の先行きに対する過度の警戒感が後退。景気動向に敏感な金融株や一般産業株など幅広い銘柄に買いが広がっている。ハイテク株の比率が高いナスダック総合株価指数は、３日続伸し同33.16ポイント高の2233.17で推移している。

　８月の雇用統計で非農業部門の雇用者数は５万4000人減と、減少幅は市場予想（約11万人減）に比べ小幅にとどまった。民間部門の雇用者数は６万7000人増と、２万8000人程度の増加を見込んでいた予想を上回った。米雇用環境の回復が鈍化し、個人消費の減少などを通じて米景気の重荷になるとの悲観的な見方が後退した。

　前日の通常取引終了後に発表した四半期決算が大幅な増収となり最終損益が黒字化したゲームソフト大手のテイクツー・インタラクティブ・ソフトウエアが14％以上の急伸。前日夕に次世代電力網（スマートグリッド）関連のＩＴ（情報技術）ベンチャーを買収すると発表したネットワーク機器大手のシスコシステムズも２％近く上げている。

　ダウ平均構成銘柄ではホームセンター大手ホーム・デポが約３％上昇し、上昇率首位。米銀大手バンク・オブ・アメリカやＪＰモルガン・チェースも買われている。航空機大手ボーイングや建機大手キャタピラーも高い。ダウ平均構成銘柄は全銘柄が上昇している。

　一方、朝方発表した四半期決算で売上高が市場予想に届かなかった食品大手のキャンベル・スープが２％あまり下落している。

米雇用者数、８月５万4000人減 市場予測より小幅

　【ワシントン＝御調昌邦】米労働省が３日発表した８月の雇用統計によると、非農業部門の雇用者数（季節調整済み）は前月に比べて５万4000人減った。マイナスは３カ月連続で、減少幅は前月の改定値と同じだった。前月に続き、米政府の国勢調査に伴う臨時職員が減ったことが影響した。市場で注目されている民間部門の雇用者数は前月比６万7000人増で、プラス幅は前月（10万7000人）より縮小した。全体の失業率は9.6％となり、前月に比べて0.1ポイント悪化。米景気は減速感が強まっており、雇用改善の動きは依然として鈍い。

　非農業部門の雇用者数の減少幅は市場予測の平均（約12万人減）よりも小さかった。民間部門のプラス幅は予測（４万4000人）よりも多かった。失業率については予想通りの結果だった。

　民間の雇用者数を業種別にみると、建設業が前月比１万9000人増となり、４カ月ぶりのプラスとなった。このほか教育・医療が４万5000人増となったのが目立った。一方、製造業は２万7000人減で８カ月ぶりに前月比マイナスとなった。

　失業率が上昇したのは今年４月以来４カ月ぶり。８月は雇用者が増えたが、それ以上の伸び率で失業者が増加したことが背景。これまで就職をあきらめていた失業者の一部が労働市場に戻ってきたとみられる。

03/09 欧州金利据え置き

　【ベルリン＝是枝智】欧州中央銀行（ＥＣＢ）は２日、フランクフルトで理事会を開き、金融緩和の継続を決めた。金融機関に対し、希望する資金を担保の範囲で全額供給する「無制限オペ」について、貸出期間１か月や１週間のオペを少なくとも来年１月まで、３か月物も今年１２月まで延長する。ドイツやフランスなどユーロ圏１６か国に適用する政策金利も過去最低の年１％に据え置いた。

　トリシェ総裁は理事会後の記者会見で、ユーロ圏の２０１０年の経済成長率の見通しを、前回６月の「０．７～１．３％」から「１．４～１．８％」に上方修正した。

（2010年9月3日 読売新聞）

Paul Krugman: This Is Not a Recovery

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: August 26, 2010

What will Ben Bernanke, the Fed chairman, say in his big speech Friday in Jackson Hole, Wyo.? Will he hint at new steps to boost the economy? Stay tuned.

But we can safely predict what he and other officials will say about where we are right now: that the economy is continuing to recover, albeit more slowly than they would like. Unfortunately, that’s not true: this isn’t a recovery, in any sense that matters. And policy makers should be doing everything they can to change that fact.

The small sliver of truth in claims of continuing recovery is the fact that G.D.P. is still rising: we’re not in a classic recession, in which everything goes down. But so what?

The important question is whether growth is fast enough to bring down sky-high unemployment. We need about 2.5 percent growth just to keep unemployment from rising, and much faster growth to bring it significantly down. Yet growth is currently running somewhere between 1 and 2 percent, with a good chance that it will slow even further in the months ahead. Will the economy actually enter a double dip, with G.D.P. shrinking? Who cares? If unemployment rises for the rest of this year, which seems likely, it won’t matter whether the G.D.P. numbers are slightly positive or slightly negative.

All of this is obvious. Yet policy makers are in denial.

After its last monetary policy meeting, the Fed released a statement declaring that it “anticipates a gradual return to higher levels of resource utilization” — Fedspeak for falling unemployment. Nothing in the data supports that kind of optimism. Meanwhile, Tim Geithner, the Treasury secretary, says that “we’re on the road to recovery.” No, we aren’t.

Why are people who know better sugar-coating economic reality? The answer, I’m sorry to say, is that it’s all about evading responsibility.

In the case of the Fed, admitting that the economy isn’t recovering would put the institution under pressure to do more. And so far, at least, the Fed seems more afraid of the possible loss of face if it tries to help the economy and fails than it is of the costs to the American people if it does nothing, and settles for a recovery that isn’t.

In the case of the Obama administration, officials seem loath to admit that the original stimulus was too small. True, it was enough to limit the depth of the slump — a recent analysis by the Congressional Budget Office says unemployment would probably be well into double digits now without the stimulus — but it wasn’t big enough to bring unemployment down significantly.

Now, it’s arguable that even in early 2009, when President Obama was at the peak of his popularity, he couldn’t have gotten a bigger plan through the Senate. And he certainly couldn’t pass a supplemental stimulus now. So officials could, with considerable justification, place the onus for the non-recovery on Republican obstructionism. But they’ve chosen, instead, to draw smiley faces on a grim picture, convincing nobody. And the likely result in November — big gains for the obstructionists — will paralyze policy for years to come.

So what should officials be doing, aside from telling the truth about the economy?

The Fed has a number of options. It can buy more long-term and private debt; it can push down long-term interest rates by announcing its intention to keep short-term rates low; it can raise its medium-term target for inflation, making it less attractive for businesses to simply sit on their cash. Nobody can be sure how well these measures would work, but it’s better to try something that might not work than to make excuses while workers suffer.

The administration has less freedom of action, since it can’t get legislation past the Republican blockade. But it still has options. It can revamp its deeply unsuccessful attempt to aid troubled homeowners. It can use Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored lenders, to engineer mortgage refinancing that puts money in the hands of American families — yes, Republicans will howl, but they’re doing that anyway. It can finally get serious about confronting China over its currency manipulation: how many times do the Chinese have to promise to change their policies, then renege, before the administration decides that it’s time to act?

Which of these options should policy makers pursue? If I had my way, all of them.

I know what some players both at the Fed and in the administration will say: they’ll warn about the risks of doing anything unconventional. But we’ve already seen the consequences of playing it safe, and waiting for recovery to happen all by itself: it’s landed us in what looks increasingly like a permanent state of stagnation and high unemployment. It’s time to admit that what we have now isn’t a recovery, and do whatever we can to change that situation.

02/09/2010 Paul Krugman: “Đây chưa phải phục hồi”

Kinh tế tăng trưởng chậm lại, thất nghiệp vẫn rất cao, nền kinh tế Mỹ trông giống như sắp sửa rơi vào suy thoái lần hai hơn.



Người viết bài này là nhà kinh tế đoạt giải Nobel năm 2008, ông Paul Krugman.

Trong bài diễn văn hôm 27/06, Chủ tịch FED Ben Bernanke vẫn nói nền kinh tế đang tiếp tục phục hồi, tuy có chậm hơn mong đợi.

Đáng buồn là điều này không đúng: đó không gọi là phục hồi, dù có hiểu theo bất kỳ nghĩa nào. Các nhà hoạch định chính sách nên làm bất kỳ điều gì để thay đổi sự thật đó.

Chút sự thật ít ỏi trong lời tuyên bố “kinh tế tiếp tục phục hồi” là GDP vẫn đang tăng: Mỹ đang không suy thoái kiểu cổ điển trong đó chỉ số gì cũng lao dốc. Nhưng thế thì sao?

Câu hỏi quan trọng là liệu tăng trưởng có đủ nhanh để hạ thấp tỷ lệ thất nghiệp cao khủng khiếp hay không.

Mỹ cần tăng trưởng khoảng 2,5% chỉ để giữ tỷ lệ thất nghiệp không tăng thêm và muốn giảm mạnh tỷ lệ ấy thì phải tăng trưởng nhanh hơn thế nhiều. Dù vậy tăng trưởng hiện đang ở mức 1-2% và nhiều khả năng sẽ còn tiếp tục chậm lại trong các tháng tới.

Nền kinh tế sẽ lần thứ hai thực sự rơi vào suy thoái khi GDP giảm xuống? Ai quan tâm?

Nếu thất nghiệp còn tăng từ nay tới hết năm, mà nhiều khả năng là như vậy, số liệu GDP có cao hơn hay thấp hơn con số 0 một chút cũng chẳng thành vấn đề.

Mọi chuyện đã rõ như ban ngày nhưng các nhà hoạch định chính sách vẫn muốn chối.

Trong cuộc họp bàn về chính sách tiền tệ gần đây nhất, FED ra tuyên bố họ “dự đoán [nền kinh tế] sẽ dần trở về với mức độ sử dụng các nguồn lực cao”, dịch ra “tiếng phổ thông” tức là họ nghĩ thất nghiệp sẽ giảm.

Tinh thần lạc quan ấy lại chẳng được số liệu kinh tế nào ủng hộ cả. Trong khi đó Bộ trưởng Tài chính Tim Geithner nói “chúng ta đang trên đà phục hồi.” Tiếc là không phải vậy.

Tại sao những người có nhiều thông tin lại cố che dấu thực trạng của nền kinh tế? Xin lỗi nhưng mọi sự đều vì họ muốn trốn tránh trách nhiệm.

Trong trường hợp của FED, thừa nhận nền kinh tế đang không phục hồi tức là đặt chính mình dưới sức ép phải “làm gì đó”.

Và ít nhất là cho đến nay, FED sợ mất mặt vì thử hỗ trợ nền kinh tế rồi thất bại nhiều hơn là sợ dân chúng khốn đốn khi họ khoanh tay đứng nhìn và thỏa mãn với một sự “phục hồi” chưa hề tồn tại.

Với chính quyền Obama, giới quan chức dường như miễng cưỡng phải thừa nhận gói kích thích đầu tiên quá nhỏ.

Thực tế, thế là đủ để hạn chế đà rơi của nền kinh tế, một nghiên cứu gần đây của Văn phòng Ngân sách Quốc hội cho thấy thất nghiệp có thể lên tới mức hai con số nếu không có gói kích thích, nhưng chưa đủ để giảm mạnh tỷ lệ thất nghiệp.

Dù có ở thời đỉnh cao uy tín như đầu năm 2009, TT Obama cũng không thể làm Thượng viện phê chuẩn một kế hoạch nào đó to tát hơn. Chắc chắn bây giờ ông cũng chẳng thể thông qua thêm một gói kích thích nữa.

Vì thế sau khi cân nhắc kỹ, giới quan chức chính phủ đã có thể đổ lỗi cho sự phá rối từ Đảng Cộng hòa. Nhưng thay vào đó, họ lại chọn cách gượng cười trước bức tranh u ám và chẳng thuyết phục được ai.

Kết quả bầu cử vào tháng 11 tới với chiến thắng thuộc về những kẻ phá rối sẽ làm tê liệt Quốc hội hàng năm trời.

Vậy chính phủ nên làm gì nữa bên cạnh việc nói lên sự thật về nền kinh tế?

FED có rất nhiều lựa chọn.

Họ có thể mua chứng khoán nợ dài hạn và chứng khoán nợ của khu vực tư nhân. Họ có thể hạ thấp lãi suất dài hạn bằng cách thông báo ý định giữ lãi suất ngắn hạn ở mức thấp.

Họ có thể tăng tỷ lệ lạm phát mục tiêu trong trung hạn, khiến việc giữ tiền mặt bớt hấp dẫn các doanh nghiệp.

Không ai biết chắc các biện pháp ấy hiệu quả đến đâu, nhưng tốt hơn là thử cái gì đó, dù cho có thể chẳng mấy tác dụng nhưng còn hơn đứng nhìn người lao động lao đao

Chính quyền hiện nay ít được tự do hành động vì họ không thể thông qua luật do sự cản trở của phe Cộng hòa. Nhưng họ vẫn còn các lựa chọn khác.

Họ có thể chỉnh sửa các kế hoạch hỗ trợ người mua nhà đang gặp khó khăn vốn chưa mấy thành công.

Họ có thể sử dụng các tổ chức cho vay được chính phủ bảo đảm như Fannie Mae và Freddia Mac để tính nước tái cấp vốn cho các khoản vay thế chấp mua nhà, thông qua đó mà trợ cấp cho các gia đình Mỹ.

Đúng là thể nào phe Cộng hòa cũng rít lên, nhưng đằng nào mà họ chả rít.

Cuối cùng họ có thể giải quyết nghiêm túc việc Trung Quốc “làm giá” đồng nội tệ: Trung Quốc phải hứa thay đổi chính sách bao nhiêu lần rồi bội ước mới là đủ để chính phủ quyết định đã đến lúc hành động?

Các nhà hoạch định chính sách nên theo đuổi những lựa chọn nào? Nếu tôi được quyền quyết, tôi sẽ chọn tất.

Tôi biết một số người cả ở FED lẫn trong chính quyền sẽ nói gì: họ sẽ cảnh báo về những rủi ro khi làm bất kỳ điều gì “không bình thường”.

Nhưng chúng ta đã thấy hậu quả của cầu an và đợi quá trình phục hồi tự đến là thế nào: nước Mỹ trông ngày càng giống như đang ở trong trạng thái trì trệ và thất nghiệp cao vĩnh viễn.

Đã đến lúc thừa nhận rằng chúng ta chưa hề phục hồi và làm mọi cách có thể để thay đổi tình thế hiện nay.

Minh Tuấn
Theo Economist

01/09/2010 中国上場企業、６月中間41％増益

　【重慶＝戸田敬久】中国の上場企業の2010年６月中間期の純利益は合計で7849億元（約９兆7300億円）と前年同期に比べて41％増加した。中国政府による景気対策を受け、家電や金属、自動車など内需関連が好調だった。ただ、銀行や石油関連など上位10社で純利益全体の５割強を占めており、中小企業は伸び悩んだ。６月末時点では、在庫など棚卸し資産が急増しており、今後の業績には不透明感も出ている。


中国では自動車販売が好調だ＝ロイター


　国営新華社系の上海証券報が集計した。上海と深センの株式市場に上場する企業のうち、31日までに６月中間期決算を発表し前年同期と比較できる1947社が対象。上場企業のほぼすべてが含まれている。

　業種別では、農村地区での優遇販売策が追い風になった家電など電子関連の純利益が同11倍に増えたほか、インフラ設備向けが順調だった金属関連も同10.5倍と大幅な伸びとなった。一方、人件費高騰などが響いた繊維関連は同11％の減益となり、ＩＴ（情報技術）関連も同９％減少した。

　好調な内需を反映してエアコン大手の広東美的電器が同56％の増益となったほか、鉄鋼大手の宝山鋼鉄は同12倍の大幅増益。自動車大手の上海汽車集団の純利益は同４倍になった。

　純利益の額では大型国有企業が上位に並ぶ。同28％増の846億元だった商業銀大手の中国工商銀行を筆頭に中国建設銀行、中国石油関連大手の中国石油天然気（ペトロチャイナ）などが続く。上位10社で純利益全体の５割強を占めた。

　一方、中小企業の業績は伸び悩んだ。昨年10月に深セン市場で開業したベンチャー企業向け市場「創業板（中国版ナスダック」に上場する105社の純利益は同26％増の30億元にとどまり、増益率は全体平均を下回る結果になった。

　上場企業全体の売上高は７兆9146億元と同42％増加した。赤字企業は247社と全体の13％で前年同期より５ポイント改善した。７～９月期には電子部品、自動車、医薬などを中心に396社が業績が前年同期に比べて改善するとの見通しを発表している。

　ただ、金融業を除いた1908社の６月末時点の棚卸し資産は合計で２兆3927億元と前年同月末に比べ39％増えた。中でも中国政府が取引抑制策を打ち出した不動産業は同48％増の7647億元となり、増加が目立つ。

　好調だった家電や自動車でも「景気対策疲れから、家電や小型車の在庫が積み上がり始めている」（外資系金融機関）との指摘が出ている。

01/09/2010 イラク米軍が戦闘任務終了

　【ドバイ＝太田順尚】米軍のイラクでの戦闘任務が31日、正式に終了した。約５万人の駐留米軍は2011年末の完全撤退を視野にイラク治安部隊の訓練、支援に特化することになり、イラク戦争は03年３月の開戦から７年５カ月を経て大きな節目を迎えた。マリキ首相は同日、「イラクは今日、主権と独立を得た」と述べ、今後の治安維持に自信をにじませた。ただ、宗派間の対立や過激派によるテロが続く中、新政権樹立は難航しており政情安定には課題が山積している。






31日、イラクを訪問したバイデン米副大統領(左)とイラクのマリキ首相（バグダッド）＝ロイター

　マリキ首相は「イラク治安部隊は米軍の任務終了後も治安を維持できる能力がある」とも強調。31日の式典出席のためバグダッド入りしたバイデン米副大統領も、イラクの治安について「まったく問題なくなるだろう」との見通しを示した。

　すでに米戦闘部隊は19日に撤収を完了。オバマ大統領は31日にテキサス州の米陸軍基地を訪問し、イラクから帰還した米軍兵士を慰労する。

　ただ、米軍が駐留した７年５カ月は、度重なる暴力とイスラム教シーア派とスンニ派による根深い対立が暗い影を落とした日々だった。北部のクルド人を含めた民族間の争いも激しさを増した。

　さらに開戦後には国際テロ組織アルカイダ系のテロリストらが流入し、治安が極度に悪化。06、07年には毎月２千人を超える市民が犠牲となり、内戦状態と形容されるほどの事態に陥った。開戦以来の民間人の死者は10万人に上り、4400人の米兵が犠牲となった。

　バイデン副大統領は31日、マリキ首相らと相次ぎ会談し、新政権樹立に向け難航する連立協議の進展を促した。７月に続く副大統領のイラク訪問は、米国が抱く米戦闘部隊なきイラクへの懸念の大きさを物語る。

　米軍の今後の任務は軍22万人、警察44万人からなるイラク治安部隊への助言や訓練などに移行。治安が急激に悪化した場合のみ、イラク治安部隊の戦闘を補佐するとしている。だが、米戦闘部隊撤退を見透かすように軍施設や警察署を狙ったテロが相次ぎ多くの市民が巻き込まれた。マリキ首相は治安部隊に厳戒態勢を指示したが、治安部隊の能力そのものへの懸念から、オバマ政権は戦闘任務の終了を急ぎすぎたとの声も出ている。

　治安活動を指揮すべき政治も、３月の連邦議会選後の連立協議が難航し、次期政権の枠組みがまだ見えていない。泥沼の宗派間抗争が続けば、06、07年の状況に逆戻りする懸念もある。イラク国民は、米国の戦闘任務の終了を、自立への期待と不安が入り交じる気持ちで迎えている。

05/07 Xinhua launches oil information service center in oil city of Daqing

English.news.cn   2011-07-05 15:16:20 FeedbackPrintRSS DAQING, Heilongjiang, July 5 (Xinhua) -- Xinhua News Agency on Tuesday held an inauguration ceremony for an oil and gas information service outlet in the city of Daqing in northeastern Heilongjiang Province. The outlet, Xinhua (Daqing) International Petroleum Information Center, is established in cooperation with the government of oil-rich Daqing as an important part of Xinhua 08, an Internet-based financial information service platform of the news agency, said Long Xinnan, vice president of Xinhua. Long said Xinhua would take advantage of the strong influence of Daqing in the oil industry to improve its oil information services through introducing over-the-counter (OTC) oil and gas quotations, oil and gas-related indices, global oil and gas data collecting and processing, rating service, and industrial forums and exhibitions. Meanwhile, the cooperation between Xinhua and Daqing is of great significance in enhancing China's influence on global oil market, Long said. The establishment of the center will also improve China's energy safety and promote integration among the country's petroleum, financial and cultural industries, Long added. Daqing Communist Party secretary Han Xuejian said the information center would help boost the economic and urban transformation of Daqing City and strengthen its core competitiveness. A string of agreements between the center and its partners, including PetroChina Daqing Oilfield Co., JCACHE Financial Information Co., China Mobile Daqing Branch, and Northeast Petroleum University, were inked at the ceremony. Also launched at the ceremony was the official website of the Xinhua (Daqing) International Petroleum Information Center, http://oil.xinhua08.com.  Editor: Deng Shasha

Related News • Xinhua Gallery photo exhibition launched in Pakistan • Xinhua launches sports photo exhibition in Seoul • Xinhua launches China's first cartoon news-commentary program

24/06/2010 Tỷ phú Soros: 'Đức có thể phá hủy eurozone'

Thứ năm, 24/6/2010, 11:43 GMT+7

Tỷ phú lừng danh George Soros đưa ra cảnh báo chính sách kinh tế Đức sẽ nhấn chìm các nền kinh tế trong khu vực đồng tiền chung châu Âu và làm tăng rủi ro sụp đổ đồng euro.

Soros cho rằng chính quyền Berlin cần phải chuyển đổi chính sách kinh tế từ những biện pháp hà khắc sang chương trình thúc đẩy tăng trưởng. Ông chỉ trích biện pháp giảm thâm hụt mạnh tay của châu Âu, đặc biệt là Đức – nền kinh tế lớn nhất châu Âu sẽ gây ra hiểm họa giảm phát và đẩy kinh tế toàn cầu rơi vào suy thoái lần 2.

Trong tháng qua, Thủ tướng Đức Angella Merkel đã công bố kế hoạch giảm thâm hụt ngân sách khổng lồ 80 tỷ euro (66 tỷ bảng Anh). AFP dẫn nhận xét của Soros rằng: "Thật không may là Đức không nhận ra họ đang làm điều gì".

The Guardian dẫn quan điểm của Soros trong bài diễn văn tại trường Đại học Humboldt tại Berlin rằng chính sách của Đức đang trở thành mối đe dọa cho châu Âu, nó có thể phá hủy dự án châu Âu. "Ngay lúc này, Đức đang kéo các nước láng giềng vào giảm phát, kéo dài giai đoạn tăng trưởng trì trệ. Không chỉ thế, những chính sách đó còn có thể dẫn tới chủ nghĩa dân tộc, bất ổn xã hội và bài ngoại. Dân chủ tự nó có thể tạo ra rủi ro", ông nói thêm.

Theo ông , với quan điểm bảo thủ về chính sách chu kỳ, Đức đang gây nguy hiểm cho Liên minh châu Âu. "Tôi thừa nhận đây là lời buộc tội khá nặng nề, nhưng tôi cho rằng nó phù hợp trong lúc này. Về cơ bản, thái độ của Đức đối với Liên minh châu Âu là sai", ông nói.

Không chỉ riêng Nam Âu, Anh cũng đang chới với với tình hình thâm hụt ngân sách quốc gia. Tuy nhiên điểm khác biệt giữa Anh với các nước Nam Âu là Anh có thể tự xoay sở để thoát thâm hụt bằng cách điều chỉnh chính sách tiền tệ yếu và giảm những rủi ro từ chính sách thắt chặt tài chính.

Văn phòng Quản lý Nợ (DMO) của Anh đang lên kế hoạch tăng vốn khoảng 4 tỷ bảng nhờ vào nguồn tài trợ từ các ngân hàng lớn như Barclays, Nomura, Morgan Stanley and Royal Bank of Canada. Tuy nhiên nhu cầu tăng vốn thực tế thì lớn hơn rất nhiều, DMO sẽ cần có 165 tỷ bảng Anh trong năm nay để chi trả cho “quả bóng” thâm hụt ngày càng phình lớn và thêm 170 tỷ bảng Anh trong năm sau. Đến giai đoạn năm 2014-2015 thì mức huy động sẽ giảm còn 87 tỷ bảng Anh, khi nền kinh tế phục hồi mạnh sau suy thoái.

Hai hãng đánh giá định mức tín nhiệm Moody's và Fitch đều cho rằng việc Anh cắt giảm thâm hụt ngân sách là thượng sách để cứu nước này không bị rớt hạng tín nhiệm từ mức Aaa. Mặt khác, Moody's cho rằng việc giảm thâm hụt ngân sách có thể tác động tiêu cực lên cầu nội địa, ngay cả khi tăng xuất khẩu ròng và giảm tiết kiệm.

Ngọc Ngân