However it will be difficult to reconcile the interests of eachIts recommendations are usually followed by the Government433 specifically that the opposition had filedAcross the Atlantic the crisis contracted bond of communitiesHis way Alice Dautry is a child of May 1968You need to know accompany such a processFind the articles of the series of summer onIt has managed our political training as amarkSo far this method of sale was successfulThe unknown lies on the duration of battery lifeThe media make much of the new records on international financial markets. But the most striking is the disquieting calm on all types of assets, from stocks to bonds. Would the world of investors be on Prozac
Conspiracy theories abound, especially among speculators, that volatility is like the wind for sailors. They are convinced that, as long as markets move, they can make money. Today, the speculators took flu central banks Asian, rich of hundreds of billions of dollars. Their managers, who do not necessarily share the passion of the gain of private investors, would be responsible for the sluggishness of the rate of interest and exchange rates. "The major Asian central banks us oppress", recently gave me a young trader.
In the 1990s, private investors saw the big central banks as the cows to milk very rich and short-sighted. George Soros and managed to obtain $ 1 billion from the Bank of England in under an hour, with a classic strategy: build against a Central Bank which defends an inconsistent economic policy. Today, by contrast, many speculators see these public giants as wizards able to overcome complex formulas and take advantage of their size and their information. Asian central banks are rarely accused of a conspiracy to calm global markets, but the caution that they have in common would be implicit collusion.
Despite all our sympathy for these young millionaires in grass, what about their feelings of oppression Is it true that leading public investors quietly took control of the markets This is excessive. Of course, major Asian central banks have almost 3,000 billion, including approximately 1,000 billion in China alone. This amount is equivalent to all the main world hedge funds together. But these figures are misleading. Hedge funds represent only a small part of the global financial markets which, according to a recent study by the McKinsey Global Institute, now exceed 120,000 billion. And these funds, unlike banks, can borrow to acquire assets of a vastly superior to their capital value. Otherwise, George Soros and others could not deal with the Bank of England.
In reality, the calm on the markets is probably other explanations. Low volatility is likely cyclical, as at the beginning of the 1990s. In addition, financial innovation and globalization allow markets spread risk more effectively. Other cause, the improvement of monetary policy. Global inflation is now below 4 percent, against more than 30 in the early 1990. These changes have contributed to reduce the volatility of production and consumption, in rich countries as in developing countries. They explain to a large extent the high price of assets, the origin of which envy the young traders.
Will this period of relative calm last Non. Crises will probably test this globalisation financial, reminding us that a recession is possible. For my part, if I do not think that this period of expansion five years already draws to a close, there is no doubt that the risk increases with braking of production in the United States and central banks by the inflationary threat. Markets could be disturbed by the geopolitics (Iran, Iraq, Korea of the North...). Whatever the scenario that will end the lull, the low volatility will no longer a day that a former dream for most of us and a forgotten nightmare for financiers, devoured by ambition.
