-----Mensagem original----- De: lbo-talk-admin at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-admin at lbo-talk.org]Em nome de uvj at vsnl.com Enviada em: terça-feira, 23 de dezembro de 2003 22:00 Para: lbo Assunto: Re: [lbo-talk] Recent Growth & Bush's Economic Policy
I will combine the reply to Jim and Alexandre.-Ulhas
Devine, James wrote:
Roach says, "Over the 1995-2002 period, the United States accounted for 96% of the cumulative increase in world GDP - basically three times its 32% share in the global economy." This must be due higher relative growth rates in the US compared with growth rates in Japan and Europe. There is no evidence in Roach's analysis that the US has benefited at the cost of the rest of world.
Ulhas
-And how could they have financed the growing current account defict
withouth the
savings of the rest of world? And don´t remember that in that period many
3rd world
countries followed programs of financial liberalization that have resulted
in massive
wealth transfers to the central countries. Curiously, those countries which
remained
more or less immune to the recurrent crisis of peripheral capitalism were
those who
limited financial liberalization (India and China).
-On the other hand, I think there is something wrong with Roach analysis.
The US
economy grew by 3,5%/year from 1995-2002 (approximated). Multiply this to
32% and
you will have 1,12% yearly growth. If US growth was 96% of worldwide growth,
then
the world economy was growing by 1,16% an year? Certainly this is not true
and this
96% illusion is probably the result of the use of raw currency exchange
rates, and
as many countries in the world suffered currency devaluation (nominal
Brazilian GDP
in dollars fell by 60% from 1995-2002, despite a economic growth close to
20% in the
same period) this will have the false impression that US was responsible by
96% of
economic growth. A better estimate is close to 50%, I think. On the other
hand, much
of the superiority of economic growth of USA as related to Japan and Europe
is due
to demography. USA population grows faster, so it gives a higger economic
growth,
while per capita growth is only marginally superior to that from Europe.
> From my
point the better performance of USA economy is largely due to the dollar
hegemony
and withouth this it would be impossible to keep their current expansionist
monetary
policies. Is there any similarity with any other hegemonic power in the last
2000
years???
Alexandre
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.551 / Virus Database: 343 - Release Date: 11/12/03