Friday 10 October 2008

The markets and the Union

As fear takes over the stock markets completely, we cannot but wonder why we are so utterly unable to deal with the financial spirits we called years ago and loved so dearly for so long. The biggest problem though is that we don’t just lack the knowledge of how to deal with our ever-shrinking markets, but we don’t even know who should deal with it.
And it seems as though the market forces we created are now stronger than us. This sounds super apocalyptic, but it is true. The credit crunch became a financial crisis, which is now about to become a perpetual economic disaster. Whilst the stocks crash all across the continents and banks go bust, business owners are already forced to declare bankruptcy. Brokers are seen in tears outside the stock exchanges in London, Tokyo, New York and Frankfurt, even though the central banks cut interest rates like a baker cuts bread. This morning, the value of City shares fell by £200m and stocks in Frankfurt and Paris dropped by 8%, again. The Sun says a cold war started between Britain and Iceland, and the Telegraph thinks the markets will end in a “complete bloodbath”. To make the catastrophe worse, everyone has a cold.
And here the big question: Who can help us and our markets? God? Marxism? Suicide? – I don’t know, really. But it is interesting to see that the one and only big player in international economic cooperation is as quite as a dead person, since the crisis started.
And yes, I’m talking about the EU. For about 60 years we have given more and more economic sovereignty to our friends in Brussels and now we ignore them. We ignore the very institution that could maybe be the only rescuer in this awful situation.Even though it was first planned to try a EU move and centrally coordinate all emergency measurements; at least after the Merkel Move, it was clear that all countries would have to fight for themselves. Hours after a meeting with Gordon Brown, Nicolas Sarkozy and Silvia Berlusconi, promising a EU solution to the crisis, Merkel guaranteed all savings in German banks (the Economist reports that this pledge is worth more than €1 trillion). Those nations fearing that the German move might destroy their banking system (even more), copied the move quickly. Hours after Sweden followed the Merkel move (which actually was the Irish move, as they were the first to guarantee the money in their banks, but the alliteration Merkel move just sounds better in headlines) Swedish banks are said to have advertised in Finland that investors should bring their money quickly to Swedish banks to be save, thus forcing the Finnish government to react as well.
French Prime Minister François Fillon even thinks it’s “logical” that the nation states and not the überstate EU deals with the crisis. But the real reason for this nationalist approach to the crisis was put into words by German finance secretary Peer Steinbrück. He said: “We as Germans don’t want to pay into a big pot where we don’t have control and don’t know where German money might be used.”
He is right, there is this fear that some taxpayers in some countries will have to pay for the problems caused by other countries. For example, many people on mainland Europe strongly disliked the Turbo Capitalism of the City of London and are now scared that they would have to pay for it. In the same way as British taxpayers would not want to pay for the disastrous management of Icelandic banks.
However people feel about it, a EU-European approach would be the best thing at the moment, keeping in mind that we know that the EU has been great in dealing with economy for the last 60 years. Why would Brussels not be able to deal with this crisis?
We should give Europe a chance.
Schreiber

No comments: