Part of a Triple Crisis series leading up to the Nov. 11-12 G-20 meetings.
The G-20 aims to accelerate the global recovery through a global economic rebalancing process which, among other things, requires consumers in advanced deficit countries, such as the U.S., to cut spending and consumers in emerging surplus countries, such as China, to expand spending.
To accomplish this, the G-20 countries committed themselves to certain policies and asked the IMF to track their implementation through a “Mutual Assessment Process” (MAP). However, the MAP may take countries to a dead end for several reasons.
First, if it wants to expand consumption in China and other emerging surplus countries, the G-20 should be calling for these countries to raise wages. However, the MAP does just the opposite by calling for these countries to cut minimum wages.
The MAP also facilitates a “race to the bottom” in advanced surplus countries (e.g., Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Korea) where it calls for dismantling national wage bargaining systems, limiting collective agreements, and reducing hiring costs, unemployment insurance and non-wage labor costs (e.g., health insurance and pensions).
The MAP fails to acknowledge that countries, such as Germany, became competitive because of its wage bargaining system, not in spite of it.
Second, in the advanced deficit countries, the G-20 is calling for “growth-friendly medium-term fiscal consolidation.” But, this “recipe” can be an oxymoron, since researchers at the IMF and elsewhere have found that the impacts of fiscal consolidation are not, in general, growth-friendly, except in unique circumstances. Moreover, synchronized fiscal austerity among several advanced economies will cut demand at a time when factories around the world suffer from excess capacity.
Third, global recovery and rebalancing depends on the capacity of countries to use means, such as capital controls, to prevent speculative flows from fueling boom, bust and buy-out cycles. The more the U.S. engages in quantitative easing, which triggers capital flows to emerging market countries, the more these countries need capital controls. However, on behalf of the G-20, international institutions are encouraging the use of international investment agreements, including those that prohibit the use of capital controls (e.g., the Korean-US FTA).
Lastly, as the economies of emerging market countries boom, their reliance on a low-carbon path is vital to human survivability– not just economic progress. Yet, the MAP does not include environmental policies. Moreover, despite the fact that the G-20 countries account for about 80% of greenhouse gas emissions, leaders are not instructing their climate and trade negotiators to take bold action to limit global warming.
Citizens should urge G-20 leaders to design another roadmap to achieve a low-carbon path to global recovery and rebalancing.
Nancy Alexander is Director of the Economic Governance Program at the Heinrich Boell Foundation of North America.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.