Can governments and central banks minimise the dangers? The BIS thinks they can. Four things need to be done.
First governments need to step up structural policies to make their economies more efficient. These are things like labour market policies to encourage more people into work, curbing anti-competitive action by companies, improving training and so on. The more efficient your economy can become, the longer the expansion can continue without hitting capacity barriers.
Second, they should strengthen the financial sector. Third, they need to work at reducing the public debt accumulated as a result of the recession.
And finally they need to tighten monetary policy and get interest rates up. But they have to do this carefully because of the indebtedness of many sectors. What should the rest of us make of all this?
Well, it is all eminently sensible, but as the BIS warns it is quite a narrow path to tread. Governments and central banks will make mistakes. As it points out: “Financial market ructions will no doubt occur. Higher volatility per se is not a problem as long as it remains contained; it is actually healthy whenever it helps inhibit unbridled risk-taking.”
Ructions. That’s a good word. The BIS is not telling when there will be a market crash or correction. It is warning us there need to be crashes to keep the system sweet. The idea that if things go wrong the central banks will step in and print the money is unhealthy and corrupting.
It has a special chapter on cryptocurrencies. Good idea? It notes a recent comment by the bank’s general manager that they were a “combination of a bubble, a Ponzi scheme and an environmental disaster…” Cryptocurrencies are not important enough to wreck the world economy, at least I don’t think so. But they may wreck the finances of a lot of people. Warnings do not come much starker than that.