Larsson läser
Janerik Larsson
Janerik Larsson
Jag arbetade åtskilliga år nära Urban Bäckström (Skandia Liv, Svenskt Näringsliv) och det gjorde mig mycket nyfiken på den ekonomiska vetenskapens mysterier. Nyckelordet för mig är nog fortsatt nyfikenhet – dvs jag är knappast kapabel att tala om hur det egentligen ser ut i världsekonomin men jag fastnar lätt för texter som utmanar det samtida, konventionella tänkandet.
Nyligen läste jag en ledarkommentar i The Spectator som förde ett resonemang som jag inte stött på tidigare. Deflation är bra, var tesen. Här en del av det resonemanget:
Bouts of deflation were a regular feature of economic life throughout the 19th century, a period which saw an explosion in production and wealth on a scale never seen before. Between 1873 and 1896 wholesale prices fell by a third — and our cities continued to thrive and expand while living standards ratcheted upwards. What mattered was real incomes, which continued to increase.
Even without this historical perspective, it ought to be obvious that the pessimism of many economic commentators is overdone. If people really did put off purchases in the expectation of prices being lower in future then they would never buy electronic goods, which — regardless of high general inflation for some of the period — have been in deflation for 50 years. When inflation was nudging 30 per cent in 1975, the price of pocket calculators was falling sharply. Yet people continued to buy them, because they wanted them then, not in a year’s time — and Sir Clive Sinclair grew rich. And the deflation that Britain is now set to experience will be in food and fuel — both of which people cannot delay buying. So when they become cheaper, it is a moment for celebration.
The Economist har i decennier varit min absoluta favorittidskrift. Där hittar man alltid intressanta resonemang – t ex i avdelningen Free Exchange som just ägnas åt att popularisera ekonomisk vetenskap.
Banks have been boosting mortgage lending for decades, at the expense of corporate loans, var tesen i en artikel nyligen. Med tanke på de stora vinster de svenska storbankerna gör på just bostadslånen kanske det finns extra stor anledning för svenska politiker att fundera över detta perspektiv:
Bond investors tend to prefer large companies with proven track records over riskier small and medium-sized firms. That is worrying in a world of slow growth. Historically, smaller firms have had the highest growth rates. They are needed to drive technological innovation and improvements in productivity.
Subsidies and regulations that encourage mortgage lending, in short, have the unintended consequence of stemming the flow of capital to small firms, thereby holding back the economy as a whole. And yet last year America’s federal government announced that it would, in effect, expand its subsidies by insuring mortgages with downpayments as low as 3%. The British government, meanwhile, expanded a subsidy for those buying their first home. Such policies may yield political benefits, but their economic consequences are pernicious.