In the second quarter, the German economy grew by 2.2 percent - and experts and government officials falling over themselves formally with optimistic forecasts.
Whether Federal Minister Rainer Brüderle, regarding the of the second quarter of "growth XL" and said now in 2010 a value of well over 2 percent as possible keeps (1) whether economic research institute, which now want to raise all their forecasts significantly and banks - Commerzbank has about their Forecast raised for 2010 from 2.5 percent to 3.25 percent (2) or the Bundesbank, the current count for this year with 3 percent growth, compared to only 1.9 percent more in June (3) - all seem now to still lower growth forecasts against each other to try to beat. The latest "bid" comes from the German Industry and Commerce (DIHK), which raised its forecast for 2010 from the current 2.3 percent to 3.4 percent. (4)
In the weekly cycle, it seems, are once again changing forecasts. This time, however - in contrast to the period after the bankruptcy of investment bank Lehman Brothers on 15 September 2008 - up.
The question is, what all these optimistic forecasts are really worth? Economists have now learned to understand financial markets and economy better and explain? If their forecasts become more reliable?
skepticism seems appropriate. A similar forecast was chaos, not least in the first Great Depression. (5) And what are these "economic experts", which was read as "surprised" by the economic development (in the second quarter) and "stunned" to be? (6) What would you think of a doctor who tells you after the treatment, he was surprised that they were healed? An economic development of the "economist surprised" - that is a contradiction in terms.
What increases the skepticism is that the reactions of experts, politicians and, yes, even by managers to the relatively high growth in the second quarter as the mirror-image of the situation at the height of the Crisis after the Lehman bankruptcy will appear.
A look back:
On 15 May 2008 headlined Jörg Krämer, chief economist at Commerzbank, in its economic commentary in the online edition of the Handelsblatt: " German Q1 GDP: from crisis no trace". In the text, it leads to - in the wake of the summer of 2007 began in U.S. housing crisis and its German runners - do the following: (7)
"In the first quarter, the German economy over the last three months of 2007, a surprisingly strong growth of 1.5%. The entrance to the year 2008 was so well that we are raising our growth forecast for the year from 1.8% to 2.4%. While early indicators show the falling out that growth should slow in the coming months. . But everything points to a soft landing of the German economy "
After September 15, 2008, the day the Lehman collapse, this prediction was only waste - just like the others by all economists and . Economic Research Institutes Almost on a weekly basis, the growth forecasts for the German economy was still before the bank had been quite optimistic, revised down - it was a Überbietungswettlauf down .
example, had the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW) or predicted in mid-November 2008 for the fourth quarter of 2008, a growth of 0.2 percent over the previous quarter. In early December, it corrected the value to minus 0.3 percent down. The same happened with the forecasts for 2009. In September 2008, around the Rhine-Westphalia Institute for Economic Research (RWI) for 2009, with GDP growth of 0.7 percent was expected in early December it expected a decline of 2 percent - and was more pessimistic than many other economic researchers . (8) put the Ifo Institute in Munich with a decline of 2.2 percent after. (9)
A similar picture was also chaotic in the economic expectations of the banks: for example, expected in early December 2008, Commerzbank, the German economy could shrink in 2009 more than the previously projected 1.2 percent, while the former chief economist of Deutsche Bank, Norbert Walter, the head of the pessimists, and even put a drop in gross domestic product (GDP) of up to 4 per cent predicted. (10) was In comparison, almost optimistic at this stage, the growth forecast by the Bundesbank, which counted for 2009, but still with a downturn in the 70s. out in numbers suppressed, this meant a decline in GDP of 0.8 percent - still in June 2008 it was predicted for 2009 GDP growth of 1.4 percent. (11)
the same time, it was reported in the press about a Regierungsmemo, therefore, consider the Federal Ministry of Economics and an economic slump of 3 percent in 2009 for "not unrealistic". (12)
The forecast chaos finally led the DIW President Klaus Zimmermann to the helplessness of the economists' term-making proposal to give some time to entirely on economic forecasts. (13) But also broke out again only new dispute among economists. Not (14)
only that all these forecasts proved in retrospect to be wrong - the German economy shrank by 5 percent in 2009, ultimately. It was because of the wrong predictions, but above all due to the language of economists and confusion regarding the causes and dealing with the crisis, the politicians with the problems largely alone and let them seek their salvation in experimenting (15 ) to a Debattein the media (16) , blogs (17) (18) , especially but also in economics itself (19) . This debate shook the very foundations of economics in and it continues today, even if it receives in the media and blogs for months, not nearly the same attention as in the recent heyday of the crisis.
Sure, there were some experts who have warned of the disaster on the U.S. housing market that began in the summer of 2007 and advised the first German bank IKB into difficulties and later, after the Lehman bankruptcy, the financial markets and the economy come to the brink of collapse left. You have not heard or simply smiled as prophets of doom. But leading economists all that came, did not foresee, and what is more serious: they had to counter all of nothing.
Daranhat in principle unchanged. The problem has been solved by economists not. It occurs even more strongly now in the foreground, the controversy on the question of whether there are new economic programs or drastic saving programs in the right step or everything will only make it worse. Saxon neo-Keynesian economic mainstream contra - the old beat-abtausch continues and it does it show more clearly that two losers fighting a losing battle, because both seek to bring still their ancient teachings of the man but in fact, no suitable explanation for the crisis, not be correct, concerned forecasts and no real solution to offer. It is therefore likely that the problem of language and confusion of the economists will again become the focus once again significantly worsened the crisis.
This can happen very quickly - despite the strong second quarter in Germany, the current island of apparent economic bliss. The technical reason for this lies in the closely networked global economy and in the computerized global financial market. The real problem is the consequent vulnerability and even latent instability of the global economic system and the fact that the destabilizing risks are now more numerous than ever before. There are many festering problem herd. Everyone is individual as a potential trigger for new, severe turbulence are: for Beispielsweisedie the real estate markets in the U.S. and in China, the problem of bad loans in China, the precarious public debt in various countries, the risk of a relapse of the U.S. economy into recession, social conflicts - such as in China, but also as a result of draconian austerity packages, such as Greece, the bursting of possible new financial bubbles - in the light of such high prices would be this among others of gold or other commodities to think. presents For Germany, the high export dependence, such a risk dar.
Against this background, an explanation for the jubilation of experts, politicians and, yes, even managers of the positive second quarter for the German economy is obvious: they are world champions in repression.
example, had the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW) or predicted in mid-November 2008 for the fourth quarter of 2008, a growth of 0.2 percent over the previous quarter. In early December, it corrected the value to minus 0.3 percent down. The same happened with the forecasts for 2009. In September 2008, around the Rhine-Westphalia Institute for Economic Research (RWI) for 2009, with GDP growth of 0.7 percent was expected in early December it expected a decline of 2 percent - and was more pessimistic than many other economic researchers . (8) put the Ifo Institute in Munich with a decline of 2.2 percent after. (9)
A similar picture was also chaotic in the economic expectations of the banks: for example, expected in early December 2008, Commerzbank, the German economy could shrink in 2009 more than the previously projected 1.2 percent, while the former chief economist of Deutsche Bank, Norbert Walter, the head of the pessimists, and even put a drop in gross domestic product (GDP) of up to 4 per cent predicted. (10) was In comparison, almost optimistic at this stage, the growth forecast by the Bundesbank, which counted for 2009, but still with a downturn in the 70s. out in numbers suppressed, this meant a decline in GDP of 0.8 percent - still in June 2008 it was predicted for 2009 GDP growth of 1.4 percent. (11)
the same time, it was reported in the press about a Regierungsmemo, therefore, consider the Federal Ministry of Economics and an economic slump of 3 percent in 2009 for "not unrealistic". (12)
The forecast chaos finally led the DIW President Klaus Zimmermann to the helplessness of the economists' term-making proposal to give some time to entirely on economic forecasts. (13) But also broke out again only new dispute among economists. Not (14)
only that all these forecasts proved in retrospect to be wrong - the German economy shrank by 5 percent in 2009, ultimately. It was because of the wrong predictions, but above all due to the language of economists and confusion regarding the causes and dealing with the crisis, the politicians with the problems largely alone and let them seek their salvation in experimenting (15 ) to a Debattein the media (16) , blogs (17) (18) , especially but also in economics itself (19) . This debate shook the very foundations of economics in and it continues today, even if it receives in the media and blogs for months, not nearly the same attention as in the recent heyday of the crisis.
Sure, there were some experts who have warned of the disaster on the U.S. housing market that began in the summer of 2007 and advised the first German bank IKB into difficulties and later, after the Lehman bankruptcy, the financial markets and the economy come to the brink of collapse left. You have not heard or simply smiled as prophets of doom. But leading economists all that came, did not foresee, and what is more serious: they had to counter all of nothing.
Daranhat in principle unchanged. The problem has been solved by economists not. It occurs even more strongly now in the foreground, the controversy on the question of whether there are new economic programs or drastic saving programs in the right step or everything will only make it worse. Saxon neo-Keynesian economic mainstream contra - the old beat-abtausch continues and it does it show more clearly that two losers fighting a losing battle, because both seek to bring still their ancient teachings of the man but in fact, no suitable explanation for the crisis, not be correct, concerned forecasts and no real solution to offer. It is therefore likely that the problem of language and confusion of the economists will again become the focus once again significantly worsened the crisis.
This can happen very quickly - despite the strong second quarter in Germany, the current island of apparent economic bliss. The technical reason for this lies in the closely networked global economy and in the computerized global financial market. The real problem is the consequent vulnerability and even latent instability of the global economic system and the fact that the destabilizing risks are now more numerous than ever before. There are many festering problem herd. Everyone is individual as a potential trigger for new, severe turbulence are: for Beispielsweisedie the real estate markets in the U.S. and in China, the problem of bad loans in China, the precarious public debt in various countries, the risk of a relapse of the U.S. economy into recession, social conflicts - such as in China, but also as a result of draconian austerity packages, such as Greece, the bursting of possible new financial bubbles - in the light of such high prices would be this among others of gold or other commodities to think. presents For Germany, the high export dependence, such a risk dar.
Against this background, an explanation for the jubilation of experts, politicians and, yes, even managers of the positive second quarter for the German economy is obvious: they are world champions in repression.
addition recommended articles:
- William R. White to risks in the global economy: "Then it comes to global event" (v. 26.08.10);
- The Capital: Obama disavowed the economists (by 7:09:10).
0 comments:
Post a Comment