Wer diese Analyse liest, wundert sich nur, weshalb man sich über das Wahlergebnis wundert

Martin Wolf von der FT hat diesen Kommentar geschrieben, als er wohl noch wie die meisten dachte, Hillary Clinton wäre die nächste Präsidentin. Umso mehr fasst er gut zusammen, was für Probleme die USA schütteln. Untertitel seines Beitrages: „The US system has its strengths but still shows scars from the Great Recession.” – bto: genau meine Meinung. Die Eiszeit ist noch nicht überwunden.

 Seine Argumente:

  • “The US economy (…) has recovered from the Great Recession, with unemployment low and real incomes rising. It also possesses abiding supremacy in new technologies.” bto: wobei die Erwerbsbeteiligung deutlich zurückgegangen ist.
  • “Nevertheless, the next administration will take over a country with mediocre growth of productivity, high inequality, a growing retreat from work and a declining rate of creation of new businesses and jobs.” bto: und eine immer noch hohe Abhängigkeit von Vermögenspreisen sowie hohe Schulden.
  • “(…) real gross domestic product per head had reached its trough by the second quarter of 2009 and recovered to pre-crisis levels by the final quarter of 2013. Similarly, the unemployment rate peaked at 10 per cent in October 2009 but is now back to 4.9 per cent. The financial sector is also in far better health than during the crisis.” bto: Ohne Zweifel stehen die USA besser da als Europa. Dennoch ist es die schwächste Erholung seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg.
  • “(…) the Great Recession could have been another Great Depression. It took bold action by the Federal Reserve, the administration of George W Bush and that of Barack Obama to turn the economy around so quickly.” bto: Ja, sie haben die große Depression verhindert, doch dafür die Depression in Zeitlupe bekommen. Was man an den folgenden Punkten sieht, die Wolf anführt.
  • In the second quarter of 2016, real GDP per head was still only 4 per cent above its pre-crisis peak, almost nine years before. Labour productivity has grown slowly since the crisis, by historical standards, largely as a result of weakened investment.” bto: und ohne Produktivitätswachstum wird das nichts.
  • One study estimates US potential output is 7 per cent below levels suggested by pre-crisis trends. Yet average growth of US labour productivity, albeit slowly subsiding, has exceeded that of other leading high-income economies over the past 15 years.” bto: Es ist ja auch eine weltweite Eiszeit.
  • Real median household income increased by 5.2 per cent between 2014 and 2015. But it remains below pre-crisis levels. Indeed, it is below levels reached in 2000 and has even fallen relative to real GDP per head consistently since the mid 1970s. This performance helps explain the tide of disillusionment, even despair, revealed so starkly by this grim election.” bto: weshalb man sich auch nicht über das Ergebnis der Wahl wundern darf.
  • Between 1980 and the most recent period, the share of the top1 percent in pre-tax income jumped from 10 per cent to 18 per cent. Even after tax, it rose by a third, from 8 to 12 per cent. (…) The US has the highest inequality of any high-income country and has seen the fastest rise in inequality among the seven leading high-income economies.” bto: was aber nicht an der Regel von Piketty liegt, sondern am Geldsystem und immer höherem Leverage.
  • “(…) decline in the share of labour in GDP from 64.6 per cent in 2001 to 60.4 per cent in 2014. Workers have not only suffered from declining shares of the pie. Just as significant is the steady rise in the proportion of men aged 25 to 54 neither in work nor seeking it from about 3 per cent in the 1950s to 12 per cent now. (…) The proportion of US women in this age category in employment is now among the lowest of all the members of the OECD.” bto: Klarer kann man den Niedergang nicht beschreiben.
  • No less disturbing is a decline in economic dynamism. The rate of creation of new jobs has slowed markedly (…) the rate of entry of new businesses into the marketplace has also been falling (…), business fixed investment has been persistently weak.” bto: alles klassische Eiszeit-Symptome! Das billige Geld verhindert die schöpferische Zerstörung und schadet der Erholung.
  • That it was not thought worth raising in the US presidential debates is astounding.” bto: oh ja!
  • For all its strengths, the US economy could do better. In addition to the trends identified above, deteriorating infrastructure, worsening relative educational performance and a terrible tax code are challenges.” bto: Komischerweise kommen einem als Deutschen diese Punkte nicht so unbekannt vor.
  • Halting immigrants and imports would be an act of self-harm. The US must build on its historic strengths of an open and dynamic economy, together with government provision of infrastructure, research, education, and balanced tax and regulatory policies.” bto: Wer weiß, vielleicht ergreift Trump die Chance?

bto: klare Analyse der Lage in den USA. Wenn man sie heute liest, wundert man sich nicht, weshalb Trump es geschafft hat. Schließlich saß ein Demokrat seit acht Jahren auf dem Präsidentenstuhl.

→ FT (Anmeldung erforderlich): “New president has an economic in-tray full of problems”, 9. November 2016