Militant International Review Archive

The theoretical journal of the Militant tendency, 1969–1995

Economic Focus

· No. 59, November 1994 · pp. 17-18 of the scan · 1,371 words

The scan: Militant International Review no59.pdf (PDF, opens at this page)

Uncorrected machine reading. This text was read by machine (Apple Vision OCR: cell by cell where that read better, otherwise whole-page and column-aware) from the scan and has not been corrected. Expect misread words and titles. Quote from the scan, not from this page.
How this article was cut and titled: contents+offset; byline: byline found in the text.

[page 17]

Economic Focus

Why the interest?

HE TORY GOVERNMENT

has been blowing its trum-

pet about the British

economy recently. Growth is

now at the fastest rate for six

years and production stands

3.8%, higher than last year.

Tory strategists are hoping for a

'feel good factor involving tax

cuts and an unemployment drop

to help them at the next gen-

eral election. To see the real

situation, however, requires a

look beneath the surface of

these figures at the deeper na-

tional and international factors

at work.

In the years 1988 to 1990

Britain had a relatively healthy

growth rate. This was partly

based on a jump in real invest-

ment in manufacturing industry.

What is the situation today?

Since 1989 total UK invest-

ment has fallen by a third: the lowest as a proportion of production (Gross Domestic Product) for 30 years. An element in this low investment is the 'short termism' of the British ruling class. (See MIR No.57 for more detail). Most UK companies insist on 'payback' of investment within two to three years, making long-term investment plans very difficult. But companies are also reluctant to spend because they are often still repaying debts built up in the 1980s.

The upturn experienced after 1983 was led by credit. Debts were racked up by companies, consumers and government in the belief that the upturn was long-lived and debt could be paid off later. Those debts are weighing on the mind of con-

sumers. British people are cur-

rently reducing spending and

saving. Poverty is growing. De-

spite the myth that Britain is

reaching boom time, real per-

sonal disposable income fell by

1.8% between the first and sec-

ond quarter of 1994.

There is no prospect of mas-

sive government-led spending.

Attacks on the public sector,

welfare state and public spend-

ing in general is the strict

policy of government in Britain

and, in the main, internation-

ally. The present ratio of gross

accumulated public debt to pro-

duction (GDP) in the advanced

capitalist countries (OECD) is

70% and climbing. There is lit-

tle sign therefore at the

moment of any consumer-led

boom. Investment levels show

that employers are not planning

a massive increase in produc-

tion.

Underlying

processes show

the akness of

Britain's

recovery.

This brings us to the question of interest rates. If British bosses were expecting a longterm healthy growth of the economy, interest rates would typically be low. At the beginning of an upturn borrowing from the banks is at a low ebb because of the preceding collapse of industry and employment. Financiers keep interest rates low to encourage companies and people to borrow. They expect to recoup the

By

money at a later stage with in-

terest. If interest rates rise,

however, it is a sign that the

world's financiers are worried

about the future. They don't

wish to lend money to dodgy

companies that may go bust.

Government and bosses also

promote interest rate rises to

squeeze out inflation. By mak-

ing money more expensive to

borrow they hope to reduce the

amount of money available to

people and therefore keep infla-

tion in check. Inflation is a sign

of economic difficulty for capital-

ism. With strong growth in

investment and production infla-

tion should be kept down. If the

British economy looks such a

picture of health, why did inter-

est rates go up half-a-per cent

in September to 5.75%? Former

Chancellor Lamont has pre-

dicted interest rates as high as

It is clear that even at this early stage of economic recovery inflation will develop. The retail price index rose 0.5% between July and August. This news prompted a sharp drop on the British stock market. Underlying processes show the weakness of Britain's recovery. There is little to 'feel good' about.

Britain is not the only economy suffering from rising interest rates. World finance markets took a tumble in September when the USA's trade figures were published. The difference between imports and exports showed a deficit of $11bn in July - the second-worst ever. As recovery takes place imports are being sucked into the US economy. Again inflationary fears are driving up interest rates in the USA.

The world trend is for interest rates to rise. This will in

Pete

Watson

16 Economic Focus

[page 18]

turn have an effect on the eco-

nomic recovery. Companies will

be reluctant to borrow to ex-

pand production because of the

increased cost of loans.

The world economy cannot

find immediate hope in Ger-

many and Japan, the two giants

next to the US. It was Japanese

growth that contributed to the length of the upturn from 1983 to 1990, while Germany is the most powerful economy in Europe. The Christian Democrat government in Germany has sought to talk-up' the economy in the hope of gaining votes in the federal elections. But in 1993 Germany was in recession, the economy shrinking by 1.7%. This year growth in the economy has been mainly in housing construction and restocking warehouses. Investment is still very sluggish.

Japan is only now just coming out of recession. Growth was at 0.4% for the first six months of this year. Profitability of industry is rising and forenast at 16% this year compared to a 26% fall last year. But consumer spending is low: sales in lokyo stores fell for the thirtieth month in succession in August. Investment in industry is still getting worse. The big

companies expect to cut capital

investment by 3.8% this year.

There is little chance of Japan

being a motor for the world

economy in the immediate fu-

ture.

The general picture therefore

emerges of a world economy

only slowly coming out of reces-

sion. Some countries such as the US, Australia and Canada are leading the way. This is not because they are in any way the healthiest economies. It is just that as they entered recession in 1990 - before the rest they are now showing some growth. But the underlying indicators of investment and so on show a weak recovery. Inflationary fears are forcing up interest rates. Growth in Japan and the US coupled with a big expansion of credit were big motivators of the upturn from 1983 to 1990. A lot of factors that contributed to that upturn are now missing.

Militant Labour has characterised the coming years as years of long-term depression. Weak unhealthy growth will be followed by recession. Today's world economy confirms this analysis.

Defence

spending

EFENCE SPENDING IS

D a good example of there-

sources that are wasted

under capitalism. A new jet

fighter, the Eurofighter, will cost

over $110 million each. They are

so expensive that some experts

believe that they will never be

used!

But that is chicken-feed com-

pared to the US 'Stealth'

aircraft. This aircraft is so

clever, say its makers, that it

does not need escort fighters or

radio-jamming aircraft. Which is

probably just as well as each

one costs $2bn!

The big military manufacturers

are linked by a thousand threads

to government. Military personnel

and government ministers inter-

mingle to make sure that all

sides make a fast buck.

But now it seems that some

of these threads are being cut.

With the collapse of Stalinism

capitalist governments in the

West are cutting defence budgets. US defence spending is expected to fall from a peak of 6.5% of GDP in 1986 to no more than 3.2% by 1997. By then three million defence jobs will have gone. Currently one worker in the industry is losing his or her job every every 30 seconds.

Here would lie an opportunity to use these skills for the benefit of society. Couldn't the technology available to send a crusie missile to its target be put to better use? Norman Augustine, tipped to be Lockheed Martin's next boss, replies: "I would submit that defence conversion does not consist of training unemployed aerospace workers to become unemployed autoworkers"

Meanwhile there is still plenty of profit to be made in the increasing number of national conflicts across the globe. Regional military spending in the Middle East for example is expected to run at 20%, of the regions entire GDP for the foreseeable future.

Economic

Focus

[page 19]

← After the ceasefireChild Support Act →

Something wrong on this page?