PROTECTIONISM

But there are other ways to discourage imports: wildcat strikes in the UK aimed a keeping British jobs for the British; governments' attempts to deter companies that have received public capital from investing outside their home country; exchange rate moves that revive talk of manipulation; and complaints that the scale of borrowing by the US will crowd out efforts by other governments to do so. All reflect ways of “protecting” local economies at the expense of global trade.

These developments imply that the world might yet slip into the beggar-thy-neighbour trade policies of the 1930s even without adopting the explicit tariffs. They help explain why equities are selling off once more.

If there was a return to economic nationalism, its effect would be to ensure almost unified and universal market falls. The S&P 500 had its worst January on record, down 8.6 per cent. Other developed indices did slightly worse, with the MSCI World index excluding the US down 9.3 per cent. There was little refuge in emerging markets, down 6.5 per cent, though big exporters China and Brazil saw bounces.

您已閱讀66%(1097字),剩餘34%(576字)包含更多重要資訊,訂閱以繼續探索完整內容,並享受更多專屬服務。
版權聲明:本文版權歸FT中文網所有,未經允許任何單位或個人不得轉載,複製或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵權必究。

約翰•奧瑟茲

約翰•奧瑟茲(John Authers)是英國《金融時報》的Lex主編,是全球最具影響力的金融市場專家之一。他於1990年加入FT,曾經擔任美國市場編輯、美國銀行記者和墨西哥分社社長。奧瑟茲畢業於牛津大學,並且擁有哥倫比亞大學的MBA學位。

相關文章

設置字型大小×
最小
較小
默認
較大
最大
分享×