Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

Debt Crisis Spells Doom for "Free Market" Consensus

By Seumas Milne, Comment Is Free. Posted December 16, 2007.


The credit squeeze is set to trigger the end of the boom that has shaped our times. Politics is going to change with it.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

New Labour has led a charmed economic life for the past decade. Britain's ejection from the European exchange rate mechanism in the early 1990s and a unique set of international conditions helped deliver a record that earlier generations of British politicians could only have fantasized about. Whatever other disasters and scandals they could be held responsible for, the economy was always Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's secret weapon: the "longest period of sustained economic growth since records began," low inflation, rapid job creation and a strong boost to public spending, all at the same time. The fact that it has also been a story of rising inequality, stubborn unemployment and ballooning levels of debt - and has depended on the international financial system's toleration of a huge trade deficit to sustain it - has until now barely shifted the perception of economic success. That has been the crucial backdrop to the me-too politics of recent years and the free market consensus that underpins it. It is also, of course, the record that finally propelled Brown into 10 Downing Street.

But there can now be no doubt that such halcyon days are coming to an end. What kicked off in the US earlier this year, in the shape of the sub-prime mortgage lending crisis, has now spread like gangrene across a deregulated global financial system, imposing a vice-like squeeze on the very credit cushion that has hitherto kept the US and British economies afloat. In Britain, it has already led to the collapse of Northern Rock and the first run on a British bank since the Victorian era. But the impact will certainly go much further, particularly in an economy so lop-sidedly dominated by the financial sector. Already, the house price collapse and prospect of mass repossessions is tipping the US economy towards full-blown recession. In Britain, which now has the highest level of personal debt of any industrial country - at £1.4 trillion, larger than national income - the expectation must be that the economy is heading in the same direction. As the full impact of the credit crunch makes itself felt, the house price bubble is bound to deflate further. That in turn will cut demand, bringing with it a painful economic slowdown at the very least.

The central banks have, of course, been busy cutting interest rates and pumping cash into the system to try to achieve the kind of soft landing that saw them through earlier international financial crises, in 1998 and 2001. Yesterday's coordinated announcement of billions in new loans to banks shows both how ineffective those earlier interventions have been and how serious the situation has become. But there are good reasons to believe that even this latest move is likely to prove too little, too late, to turn back the incoming tide. And for the first time since the 1970s, there is a growing risk of stagflation - the combination of recession and rising inflation - which makes sharp interest rate cuts particularly risky from the point of view of neoliberal orthodoxy. International oil, commodity and food prices are all currently on the rise, just at the point when the credit squeeze and emerging first-world debt crisis show all the signs of bringing the boom of the past 15 years to a juddering halt.

That long boom was made possible by the collapse of the Soviet Union and the opening of China (and to a lesser extent India) in the 1990s. The effect was to bring hundreds of millions of educated and low-waged workers into the framework of the international capitalist market - who, as the former US Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan put it, have "restrained the rise of unit labor costs in much of the world." Along with the wider weakening of organized labor, the deregulated expansion of international finance and a flood of cheap imports into the rest of the world, the result has been a corporate profits bonanza and power grab which has shaped the economic and political temper of our times.

The signs are, however, that some of these conditions are reaching their limits. Global growth is starting to press on natural resources, forcing up prices, most obviously in the case of oil. The evidence is growing that China's downward pressure on global prices may be coming to an end, as its economy overheats and inflation builds. Add to that the dizzying overreach of the credit-fueled casino that is the global financial system and the "corrections of imbalances" - as sharp falls in living standards and unemployment spikes are classified in the financial institutions and ministries - are likely to be very damaging indeed.

What is certain is that the end of the long boom will have a profound ideological impact. So long as market fundamentalists appeared to be delivering the goods - however unequally and insecurely - their political dominance was assured. That is now clearly no longer the case. As Martin Wolf, conservative doyen of British economic commentators, wrote in yesterday's Financial Times: "What is happening in credit markets today is a huge blow to the credibility of the Anglo-Saxon model of transactions-orientated financial capitalism." If the credit squeeze does indeed trigger a wider economic meltdown, that will certainly mean the end of the neoliberal consensus that has dominated politics for almost a generation.

But politicians have yet to wake up to the sea-change that is already under way. It's a measure of how tight the ideological straitjacket on British politics remains that it has been left to the acting leader of the Liberal Democrats, Vince Cable, to press the commonsense case for the nationalization of Northern Rock, while Labour ministers take any amount of punishment over the scandal to avoid so much as a hint that they might believe a private solution to be anything other than preferable in all circumstances, even in such a classic case of market failure. If, as now seems increasingly likely, the government is in fact forced to nationalize the bank to secure its own loans, that will at least help break the ludicrous ideological spell against public ownership.

For Brown, the man who promised the end of boom and bust, the growing economic dangers pose an unavoidable challenge. For someone so closely associated with the neoliberal agenda, it may be too late to change direction. But unless he and his already damaged government are prepared to adopt a more interventionist and radical approach to deal with the crisis head-on, the political backwash is likely to sink them all.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: workplace, sub-prime, debt crisis

Seumas Milne is a columnist and associate editor with The Guardian.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Pogo, one more time: The enemy: he is us.
Posted by: Sojourner on Dec 16, 2007 9:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The British perspective sounds familiar. There it is the Labour Party that decided to ride the debt-train to power. Here it has been the GOP plus all the Demos willing to kick the national debt limits in the teeth.

Those of us who have been grinding our teeth waiting for the housing bubble to burst now can do the same for the national debt/credit bubble. Along with it will come the bursting of the world population bubble. That's the one that will really hurt, because we are talking about people suffering and dying.

We're about to find out how well we do when the worst, and maybe only, enemy is ourselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

there was never a real consensus
Posted by: wli on Dec 16, 2007 7:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The "free market" nonsense was immediately recognized as a return to nineteenth century and earlier laissez faire, and hence suicidal. Those who adopted it were compelled to do so by force as with Pinochet and Suharto, or otherwise compelled to accept "conditionalities" for IMF loans under the duress of what should be called economic warfare.

The question is actually "whose consensus?" If you mean the imperial establishment and financial aristocracy, then the "free market" is indeed their consensus. If you mean actual people, something approximately equivalent to European-style democratic socialism is the consensus, barring certain right-wing enclaves in the US (though by no means all of them; many are merely deluded regarding their preferred candidates' platforms).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those who created the bubble should suffer
Posted by: lamar on Dec 17, 2007 9:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All we can hope is that the free markets bring housing prices back to Earth. While it really, really sucks that so many middle income and poor folks are getting jolted out of their homes, the truth is that this crazy housing market has been an illusion. I really think that free markets will bring prices back to reality. A "soft landing" is nothing more than the government trying to give a free ride to sleazy lenders who scammed a lot of people. I say there's no reason why corporate lenders shouldn't suffer as much as the common man.

Hate the free market all you want, much of it is justified. But when big lenders get a break when the common man has to suffer, I think we can all agree that sucks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We have become sheep
Posted by: mattehood on Dec 22, 2007 4:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Former Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon gave the rich 5 tax brakes because he felt the wealthy did not have to pay taxes. He shifted the burden of paying taxes from the wealthy to the non-wealthy who pay 85% of this nations taxes. The American people have become a slush fund to subsidize capitalism with corporate welfare so the Wealthy who supported Adolf Hitlers economic policy, can live like kings in America. Capitalism with out responsibility is the foundation for a dictatorship-fascism@!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement