Prior to the global financial crisis, I used to content myself with reading only the headlines in the economic sections of Arab and international newspapers. But after the crisis, I began reading the business sections before the political sections, to the extent at which I am terrifying myself. This in fact reminds me of that smoker who read about the dangers of smoking, and was so terrified that he quit reading. But I cannot quit reading myself because it is both my job and my hobby. I find the published news of the global economy to be contradictory to the extent at which they cancel out each other. For instance, I read in recent days that the crisis is over, or that it is on its way to being over, and somewhere else, that it is not over, and that did not even begin yet. I also read about an upcoming financial crisis that is so bad, it will make people lament the current crisis. The most pessimistic report I read was the one published by the Dutch bank ING, which said that the collapse of the euro crisis will unleash the worst financial crisis in modern history and will bankrupt banks. ING also mentioned that the Greek drachma will lose 80 percent of its value against the Deutsche mark that would resurge, while the currencies of Spain, Portugal and Ireland will lose 50 percent of their value. Is this true? I do not have a vested interest in this subject because I get paid in the British Pound. However, I realize that the world has become a village, and that what affects the economies of the euro zone or the Far East will ultimately affect the reader's pocket and mine. But the United States remains the most important factor here, as it alone makes up a quarter of the global economy. The maxim that if the U.S economy sneezes, the world catches a cold is still valid. In other words, it is not enough that America is harming us politically through its absolute commitment to the criminal state of Israel. It also would be harmful if its economy weakened and the world was dragged to the brink of collapse, as was the case with the genius of war, peace and economy George W. Bush. The U.S news is not reassuring. Perhaps there are solutions, but the Americans are divided to the extent of animosity. The right considers Barack Obama a socialist who is trying to destroy the American free market economy, while the left opposes Obama because it accuses him of betraying his principles and the people who got him into the White House. I read very strange things, such as when the far right wing Rush Limbaugh said literally that Obama caused the financial crisis as revenge against the previous administration. It is not enough to say that Limbaugh is a fool or a radical even if he is both, since he has millions of listeners who believe what he says. Also, the former presidential candidate Tom Tancredo said that Obama is a bigger threat to the U.S than al-Qaeda. The crisis took place as a result of accumulating factors, ever since Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher deregulated the markets, because the “market knows better”, and then it turned out that the market knows only exploitation, greed and extravagance. Perhaps we would not have arrived to this situation were it not for Bush's wars as well, after he inherited a surplus of one trillion dollars in the treasury from the Clinton administration, and left Obama with a deficit that started at one trillion dollars, and is now at several trillions. Where does this money come from and where does it go? Last year, the United States announced the allocation of nearly 800 billion dollars to stimulate the U.S economy. Then in last May, the European Union announced a similar stimulus package of 750 billion euros. I find no other way to explain how this amount of money was provided except through the printing of more dollars and euros, which means that inflation is taking place and affecting the average citizen. I began to look for information and ideas about the financial crisis in the hope of reassuring the readers. However, I admit that after two weeks of research and consultation, I could not find many causes to expect any improvement soon. The Europeans are at each other's necks, and the Americans are divided on every economic or other kind of measure being taken by the Obama administration. The G20 Summit increased the causes for concern: after 2008, there was an almost global consensus on the need to work together to end the crisis. However, the G20 Summit in Toronto did not speak in one, two or three voices, but in twenty voices. Each sought their own interests, and even the issue of imposing a levy on banks to support the local economies caused a dispute between Britain, France and Germany on one hand, and Canada, South Korea and other nations that oppose the proposed levy on the other hand. I can confidently say that the crisis will continue, and may get worse or decline, but that it will not end. Every talk that decisively predicts what will happen tomorrow is in the realm of fortune telling. More importantly, the crisis engendered a new phenomenon in the global economy: In contrast with a time when the major industrial countries used to oppose protectionism and work against it, they now call for it against China and other countries, while demanding that other nations abolish it. Everyone, as is the case in the summit in Toronto, works for his own interests alone. [email protected]
