Una ripresa trainata dall'high tech? Aggiornamento al 16 ottobre 2009

Le trimestrali di Intel, IBM e Google hanno battuto le aspettative degli analisti e il New York Times si interroga se la ripresa potrà essere duratura e trainata da un'ondata di innovazione tecnologica con relativo aumento della produttività. Secondo John T. Chambers, il CEO di Cisco le cose dovrebbero andare proprio così: he was even more bullish recently, predicting a substantial increase in productivity at American companies driven by investments in Internet software and hardware. “I think we are entering a period very similar to 1997 to 2004, where you’ll see a decade run of productivity increases,” he said in an interview.


Nel frattempo mercoledì scorso l'indice Dow Jones ha nuovamente superato quota 10000, un valore che aveva superato per la prima volta nel marzo del 2009.
Tutti a Wall Street hanno celebrato anche se l'economia USA rimane in grande affanno e l'indice ha poi chiuso la settimana di poco sotto quota 10000, fermandosi a 9995.91. In una intervista alla BBC Nouriel Roubini has warned we are already "planting the seeds of the next crisis". Secondo Roubini il rally dei mercati azionari (definiti bubbly and frothy) li sta allontanando da un'economia reale nella quale i consumatori sono asfittici e appesantiti dai debiti. La crisi non è finita: "I see an economy where the consumers are shopped out, debt burdened, they have to cut back consumption and save more.
"The financial system is damaged... and for the corporate sector I don't see a lot of capital spending because there is a glut of capacity."

Nel frattempo il dollaro si indebolisce sempre di più: per un'analisi informata e autorevolissima (!) delle prospettive del dollaro consiglio di dare ascolto a Fabius Maximus .

Buttonwood invece si interroga sul futuro del debito pubblico: ...the sheer scale of government deficits that seems to have triggered the change. Both Britain and America have shortfalls of more than 10% of GDP, a level seen only during world wars. Beyond saying that such a deficit is unsustainable, however, it is not obvious when a crisis point will be reached. How about a total government-debt level of 100% of GDP? Measured by gross financial liabilities (excluding the assets that governments might own) that level has already been surpassed by five OECD countries—Belgium, Greece, Iceland, Italy and Japan. Iceland aside, economic life in those countries seems to carry on.

There are three main fears about excessive government deficits. First, that the need to divert savings into buying public-sector debt will “crowd out” private-sector investment. Second, that servicing the debt will be a burden on future generations. And third, that governments will therefore be tempted into inflation or devaluation as a way of softening the blow.

(...)

Eventually, of course, the high levels of British and American public debt will create problems with both countries’ creditors. But it is very hard to say when.

(...) in the medium term the British and American public sectors will still have big deficits to finance and may not want to depend on the kindness of sovereign-wealth managers. The temptation will be to lean on the banks. (...)

Like two drunks leaning against each other to stay upright, this leads to an odd symbiotic relationship in which governments have stepped in to rescue the banks, only for the banks in turn to finance the government. In the long run the danger is that this cosy relationship means lending is diverted away from productive private-sector projects and into government spending. Economic growth will be slower as a result.

Ecco l'aggiornamento al 16 ottobre.