US has got to build its way back

Je vais faire des commentaires à l’intérieur du carnet.

Extrait de : US has got to build its way back, Ed Crooks,FT, January 21 2011 20:07

Restoring “manufacturing might” to the US should be a priority of economic policy, Jeff Immelt, General Electric’s chairman and chief executive, has told the Financial Times.

Speaking just before the announcement of his appointment as chairman of President Barack Obama’s new Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, Mr Immelt said the US needed to be “a country that builds things” if it was to create sustainable growth and good middle-class jobs.

His appointment as the US president’s most senior external economic adviser gives Mr Immelt the chance to argue at the heart of government for a strategy that he has championed for years.

Even before the financial crisis, Mr Immelt was warning about the decline of the country’s industrial base.

He told the Financial Times in 2006: “If the US continues on the current trend towards a service-based economy, it could easily end up with wealth concentrated on the two coasts and bigger discrepancies between rich and poor.”

Bon Dieu !, on vient de comprendre, c’était encore une brillante théorie qui est apparue, il y a une dizaine années, que nous avions besoin juste d’une économie de service.

Évidemment, ils semblent que les Chinois et les Indiens sont aussi brillants que les gens des pays industriel, oups ! petit problème les compagnies de service se délocalisent aussi.

De plus, ça prend des gens brillants pour faire de l’économie de service, on fait quoi pour les autres qui n’ont pas la capacité, ou tout bêtement n’ont pas les mêmes ambitions, on les oublie !, donc on oublie toute la classe moyenne.

Ton industrie manufacturière est ta colonne vertébrale de ton économie, et c’est là que le problème se corse, si tu veux survivre dans la mondialisation, tu dois être compétitif et le rester, tu dois avoir une sérieuse valeur ajoutée et une excellente liberté économique, les Allemands ont très bien compris !, car n’oublie pas tu te bas avec des gens qui ont dix fois moins ton salaire et aussi brillant que toi.

Now, with the administration looking for an alternative to the debt and housing fuelled growth of the 2000s, he has found a receptive audience.

Speaking to the FT this week Mr Immelt did not set out detailed policy prescriptions, but highlighted some of his key priorities, such as support for innovation, education and regulatory reform.

“It’s a little bit on policy – a lot on tone,” he said.

For example, he said, Mr Obama had been “right on” this week with his initiative to improve business regulation.

“It’s a very good, very strong way to think about it,” he said. “This can unlock lots of productivity and speed, without back-stepping in terms of any of the important protections that these industries have.”

Reform should focus on simplifying structures, sharing of best practice between regulators, and “two-way accountability”, so that regulators had a responsibility both to make sure that an industry was safe and that it could be successful.

Simplifié la bureaucratie, plus facile à dire qu’à faire, quand une armée de fonctionnaire ont leurs raisons d’être à cause justement du fardeau réglementaire, ils vont se battre pour dire que leurs emplois est nécessaires pour maintenir la bonne gouvernance de l’État.

Mr Immelt also backed the president’s aim of doubling exports over the next five years, saying it was a “great target” – and GE’s experience proved it could be done.

But he gave warning that “we all have to be concerned about the lack of love” for free trade and globalisation among the public.

“We’re going through a time when there’s high unemployment in the US, there’s high unemployment everywhere, and people are debating free trade – as they should,” he said.

“It’s up to companies to do a better job of demonstrating to everybody just how important free trade really is.”

Vous être mieux d’avoir des excellents relationnistes, car le résultat est drôlement piteux.

Si nous avions des taux d’intérêt à 7% ce qui est raisonnable pour maintenir un équilibre entre l’épargne et l’endettement, la plupart des pays démocratiques feraient faillite, y compris une grande partie de la population.

La mondialisation rassemble plus à une boulimie excessive d’endettement excessif qu’un résultat équilibré, les pays industriels sont assis sur des trilliards de dettes et les pays émergents sont assis sur des trilliards de réserves, ça ne prend un génie en économie, pour dire, oups ! , il y a un BOGUE !

While he backed the administration’s attempt to put pressure on China over its exchange rate, Mr Immelt was sceptical about its significance.

“Anybody that thinks the valuation of the renminbi is solely responsible for China’s trade surplus is really wrong They graduate a lot of engineers. They’re very productive. The system works well. The government and business is quite collaborative – it’s far beyond just a currency situation.”

An issue that was important for competitiveness, said Mr Immelt, was the budget deficit, and he suggested that businesses should be prepared to accept tough decisions – possibly including tax increases – if necessary.

Voici, encore une idiotie, on dit à l’entrepreneur qu’il doit être plus compétitif, mais en même temps, il veut augmenter les taxes, il faudrait qu’il se décide, c’est ce genre de commentaire qui tue littéralement toute crédibilité.

“Every company is going to lose some as we go through this process. You’re going to win some – you’re going to lose some. And I think everybody has to recognise that there is going to be nobody that’s untouched as we go through it. But it’s important for the long-term competitiveness of the US.”

That meant, he added, that GE would strongly support the efforts to curb the deficit.