This is a World Economic Forum under the sign of a needed revival that opens the evening of Wednesday, January 25 in Davos, Switzerland. The themes for this year 2012 speak volumes about the concern of the organizers: “The twentieth-century capitalism is it trying to cheat the company of twenty-first century?”, “Global Risks in 2012: the seeds of disillusionment “or” Repair capitalism. ” There are many, economists, political scientists, sociologists, historians, have already discussed the evils of capitalism. If all do not agree on the diagnosis nor the solutions, each believes that the system can not leave unchanged the current crisis.
First to advocate a reform of the dominant system of production for nearly two centuries, even the founder of the Davos Forum, Klaus Schwab, who argued in the pages of the World (November 15, 2011 edition) for “further analysis” to understand “why the capitalist system no longer functions in its present form.”
Regretting that the years have passed without the lessons of the crisis have been learned, among other things he denounced the confusion between managers and entrepreneurs, the first having been linked to business results through a system of bonuses that can only generate perverse effects, and advocates a “dissociation of the manager and the risk taker”
Considered mainly responsible for the crisis, the financial sector is under fire of criticism and led to numerous proposals for reform. The economist André Orléan want a wide movement “of the economy définanciarisation” agrees, arguing that more stringent regulation will not: “What I question is the idea that financial markets would allow even a transparent allocation of capital good. It is the contrary view that financial prices do not provide right signals to economic actors, “he believes.
The economist and philosopher Jeremy Rostan questions on his side of the quarry suffered by capitalism. He said the strategy of outrageous criticism of the organization of production of wealth has – regrettable – advantages: “First, it allows the powers that be to disavow as such, and claim to be the voice and the weapon the victims. Second, it avoids the bad taste of identifying gross harm to any human group, “” third, draw a scarecrow can censor in advance any criticism, “” Fourth, such a move is especially effective in that it allows all confused – because the enemy is by definition obscure and impenetrable. ”
In a fine analysis of economic policy in the two emerging giants, China and India, the economist Joel Ruet highlights the pragmatism of the people who have not conceptualized capitalism, and who practice a version “variable geometry”: if the Indian government allowed to run the airline Kingfisher, it is because in a market economy “those who die must die”, but if Chinese banks are going through a bad patch, they benefit from a relaxation of their obligations to equity. A vision which the West will have to feed the emerging economic partners have become unavoidable.
Capitalism is not necessarily a dirty word, ahead of his side of the Bruslerie Hubert, a professor at Dauphine, denouncing mainly the responsibility of banks in the current crisis. “To avoid a ‘credit crunch’, it will, in our opinion, do not the banks and be innovative,” said he. With the withdrawal of banks, and use more and more common in private equity, private equity funds and venture capital, “capitalism project finds its roots.” “A new capitalism is emerging. It seems less financial and more entrepreneurial, less greedy and more bank debt,” he hopes.
In 2009 already, while the developed world still believed that the recession was over and that the Western economies were recovering, the economist Nicolas Baverez provided much needed changes in the deepest workings of the capitalist system of production. Pragmatic, he analyzed six “fractures” to repair to rebuild the economy: between private and public sectors, the developed world and emerging countries, in the heart of the developed world, between states and markets, between states and global governance, political freedom and economic freedom.
“The deleveraging of the developed world and the conversion of the economic model of globalization extend over ten to fifteen years,” said he. As much time needed for a “transition” at the time he considered necessary to engage “in 2010.” Nearly two years later, the site seems very late. The 2012 edition of the Davos forum he can be the starting point?