Tweet
The following is an excerpt from a recent opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal. For links to this and other writings, visit River Twice Research.
Soon enough, America’s financial crisis will wind down — maybe in a month, maybe in a year. Yet regardless of when, this crisis marks the beginning of a new era for the U.S. For more than six decades, from the end of World War II in 1945 until now, the U.S. was the hub of global capital and capitalism. In the years to come, it will remain a vital center, but not the center.
In 1945, after an exhausting three decades of exertion against Germany, the United Kingdom emerged militarily victorious only to see itself economically exhausted. A year later, it was bankrupt, unable to find capital and on the verge of collapse. It had nowhere to turn but the U.S., which then dictated terms that amounted to a withdrawal of Great Britain from the world stage. The U.S. is not yet in the position of Great Britain, and our creditors in China are not yet as we were then. But absent a more humble and realistic attitude toward capital in Washington, that is the path we’re headed down.
Zachary Karabell is an economist, author and President of River Twice Research.
1 Comment
Zachary, yes, the dominance of the U.S. is ending BUT the referenced article seems to be nothing more than a continued argument for capitalism as the only valid economic system.
And when I go to where you want others to go, ‘River Twice Research’, read the ‘About’ which states you are a Senior Advisor to the ‘Business for Social Responsibility’ organization, which has been in existence since 1992
(”Since 1992, Business for Social Responsibility (BSR) has helped companies of all sizes and sectors to achieve success in ways that demonstrate respect for ethical values, people, communities and the environment.) one has to wonder at the effectiveness and validity of such an organization as it certainly did nothing to ameliorate the greed that has brought about the current situation.
And putting Sarbanes/Oxley in the same category as the Patriot Act regarding “repelling legitimate investors” is disingenuous.
This from the BSR site “Understand the hurdles keeping environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria from gaining wide acceptance among mainstream investors, plus discover the potential solutions to overcoming the barriers preventing ESG progress in our latest report.” is shown to be hypocritical given the following from the referenced report:
“BSR maintains a policy of NOT ACTING as a representative of its membership, NOR does it endorse specific policies or standards. The views expressed in this publication are those of its author and DO NOT reflect those of BSR members.”
But thanks for the diary as it shows -IMHO- that there is still significant effort to “step in the same river twice”.