Debate con Martin Wolf

El lunes, creo, Martin Wolf/martin-wolf-exchange-the-conservative-counter-revolution/   abrió uno de sus foros sobre qué implicación habían tenido en la crisis la revolución liberalizadora de Reagan y Thatcher. Para él la causalidad es clara:  la liberalización de estos dos levantó un polvo que trajeron estos lodos.  Estoy en total desacuerdo, salvo en que se relajaron cuestiones de regulación que sí amplificaron las ondas destructoras a través del mundo; pero eso no creo que sea achacable a la apetura y desregulación, Las cueles permitieron, por ejemplo, el acceso de muchos países del tercer mundo al primero. Sin liberalización, y sin el abandono de las políticas keynesianas en boga en los setenta, ahora seríamos más pobres. Expongo aqui mis comentarios a Wolf, su respuesta y mi réplica. Como siempre, Wolf abre debates que so interesantes, y se molesta en replicar y puntualizar. un lujo. Eso sí, Martin parece que se está haciendo leynesiano, como otros. 

Luis H Arroyo | August 24 10:40am | Permalink

I do not think the conservative revolution was the direct cause of the crisis. Therefore, I do not think the solution is the return of Keynesianism. Keynesianism has had its day, and lost the battle miserably. Moreover, much of today's problems come from the debts accumulated by the European countries that have chosen to follow Keynes.
There are many factors that have strayed from their beds Conservative revolution. for example, the commercialism of China, which has devastated the productive sectors of the world. In the West we have praised China as a simpleton when it has never been a credible rival.
Then the history of the euro has played a key role in the crisis, as determined interest rates very low in the countries which embarked on the bubble. Now, the Euro is a huge barrier for these countries to adjust their failure competitiveness.
These and other conditions can not be charged to the account of the Conservative Revolution, that brought capitalism to depressed areas that are now very close to us.


Martin Wolf 
@ Luis Arroyo, I generally like what you write, but disagree here. It seems to me clear that the deregulation of finance played a massive role in the crisis. Moreover, Keynesian economics is relevant in a Keynesian situation. There are no universally valid economic theories. They are, at best, approximations to the truth, whose relevance depends on the circumstances. I do not think that the euro crisis is fundamentally a fiscal crisis. It is fundamentally, a private sector crisis, with fiscal consequences (except in Greece).

Luis H Arroyo | August 26 10:55am | Permalink

Martin, you said "Luis Arroyo, I generally like what you write, but disagree here. It seems to me clear that the deregulation of finance played a massive role in the crisis. Moreover, Keynesian economics is relevant in a Keynesian situation. There are no universally valid economic theories. They are, at best, approximations to the truth, whose relevance depends on the circumstances."
When i say "Keynesianism has had its day, and lost the battle miserably", What I mean is that in the seventies the thesis of keep the level of employment by deficient policies failed.


When you say that there is no universal theories, but whose validity depends on the circumstances, you are opening a door to the imposition of the law of the jungle. I think there is a hard core in the theory without which we could not achieve minimum operational arrangements.
This core has proven to be true with the success of countries like Korea, Chile, and others who have got our level thanks  to liberalize their economies.