THROW away the economics textbooks - there's very little in traditional teaching that could have been adequate preparation for the world the way it is today.
It's a world in which banks are part-nationalised, turning capitalist theory onto its head. A world in which central banks aren't worried about inflation, but rather about deflation.
What was once an evil - the printing of money by central banks - has become a necessity as liquidity is pumped into banks reluctant to lend. Interest rates have been slashed to zero in some cases and record lows in others. Another evil, soaring budget deficits, has become the norm.
And so on. It's worth reflecting on these dramatic turnarounds in policy, necessitated by the worst global recession since the Second World War. And to ask the question: is the world going to pay a price for some of the policy actions taken in a spirit of desperation?
Take the US budget deficit. Considering only the $700bn financial sector relief package announced in 2008, the deficit this fiscal year will run into 7% of gross domestic product (GDP). Some analysts predict that once President Barack Obama's stimulus plan, expected to reach about $825bn, is put in place, the deficit will run into 10% of GDP.
The irony is that the US economy is supposed to be one of small government, big private sector. But the size of the US government deficit is of the scale of some developing countries when they were flirting with disaster (we're not talking about basket cases like Zimbabwe here). At its worst, SA's budget deficit was 9% of GDP.
The US is implementing policy it would have regarded as unacceptable in an emerging market. It truly is a new world.
The trouble with such a big US deficit is the national debt will soar. So far, funding the deficit hasn't been a problem.
Culprit benefits
The world has shown an almost insatiable appetite for American government bonds, even as the US economy has tanked. Even after everything that has happened in America, the place where the global crisis originated, investors still believe that the safest place to put their money is US government debt.
As long as they continue to believe that, the US will be able to finance its deficit without having to digest a massive interest bill.
But the question is whether the world's debt markets will continue to remain so positive, especially given that other countries in the world are also financing stimulus packages.
In addition, the debt picked up by America now will have to be repaid down the line, crowding out other spending by the US government. America is mortgaging its children's future.
If America isn't careful about making sure that the huge budget deficit doesn't become entrenched, it will have severe problems down the line. And it's difficult not to allow this to happen, as government is like a huge ship - it doesn't change course easily.
Then there's monetary policy. No one can argue with the decision in the US to cut interest rates to 0%-0.25% and Japan's 0%. Britain's Bank of England has cut rates to their lowest level in the more than 300 years that the bank has existed, to 1.5%.
These are desperate times and dramatic action is needed. But the key point is that, when these economies pull out of recession, central banks mustn't allow rates to remain too low for too long.
That happened in the US in the past, post-9/11, and is one of the causes of the present crisis. Overly easy monetary policy allowed banks to lend money to risky customers.
But it's far too soon to start talking about monetary policy being too easy. At the moment, it's ineffective. Despite the low interest rates, banks haven't cut their rates to borrowers in the same dramatic way.
Options?
This has left central bankers with no choice but to create money so that banks are awash with cash. If the world weren't in the depths of a deep recession, this would be regarded as heresy.
In some cases, the US Federal Reserve has provided liquidity directly to businesses and investors in key markets, bypassing the banks. US Fed chief Ben Bernanke described the Fed as the "liquidity provider of last resort". This is necessary in a climate where banks won't lend.
Mark Twain once said: "A banker is a fellow who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining, but wants it back the minute it begins to rain." How true that is at the moment. That is why further nationalisation of banks which would give government the leverage to force them to lend might be necessary.
This idea isn't as heretical as it sounds. It was argued in the Financial Times by Christopher Wood, an equity strategist who is the author of The Bubble Economy.
If governments nationalised troubled banks, there would probably be gains in future years for taxpayers as these banks are privatised once they are profitable again. But some will go down, with costs attached for the taxpayer.
Only one thing is certain at the moment: the global economy is in uncharted territory, and economic policy has to reflect that. If there are some costs later on, these will easily be borne if the world economy can now be saved from disaster.
- Fin24.com