The global financial crisis and after: a new capitalism?

The 2008 global financial crisis was the consequence of the process of financialization, or the creation of massive fictitious financial wealth, that began in the 1980s, and of the hegemony of a reactionary ideology, namely, neoliberalism, based on selfregulated and efficient markets. Although capitalism is intrinsically unstable, the lessons from the stock-market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression of the 1930s were transformed into theories and institutions or regulations that led to the “30 glorious years of capitalism” (1948–77) and that could have avoided a financial crisis as profound as the present one. It did not because a coalition of rentiers and “financists” achieved hegemony and, while deregulating the existing financial operations, refused to regulate the financial innovations that made these markets even more risky. Neoclassical economics played the role of a meta-ideology as it legitimized, mathematically and “scientifically”, neoliberal ideology and deregulation. From this crisis a new capitalism will emerge, though its character is difficult to predict. It will not be financialized but the tendencies present in the 30 glorious years toward global and knowledge-based capitalism, where professionals will have more say than rentier capitalists, as well as the tendency to improve democracy by making it more social and participative, will be resumed.

Financial frictions, informality and income inequality

We studied the effects of changes in banking spreads on distributions of income, wealth and consumption as well as the welfare of the economy. This analysis was based on a model of heterogeneous agents with incomplete markets and occupational choice, in which the informality of firms and workers is a relevant transmission channel. The main finding is that reductions in spreads for firms increase the proportion of entrepreneurs and formal workers in the economy, thereby decreasing the size of the informal sector. The effects on inequality, however, are ambiguous and depend on wage dynamics and government transfers. Reductions in spreads for individuals lead to a reduction in inequality indicators at the expense of consumption and aggregate welfare. By calibrating the model to Brazil for the 2003-2012 period, it is possible to find results in line with the recent drop in informality and the wage gap between formal and informal workers

Consumption-wealth ratio and expected stock returns: evidence from panel data

This paper investigates the role of consumption-wealth ratio on predicting future stock returns through a panel approach. We follow the theoretical framework proposed by Lettau and Ludvigson (2001), in which a model derived from a nonlinear consumer’s budget constraint is used to settle the link between consumption-wealth ratio and stock returns. Using G7’s quarterly aggregate and financial data ranging from the first quarter of 1981 to the first quarter of 2014, we set an unbalanced panel that we use for both estimating the parameters of the cointegrating residual from the shared trend among consumption, asset wealth and labor income, cay, and performing in and out-of-sample forecasting regressions. Due to the panel structure, we propose different methodologies of estimating cay and making forecasts from the one applied by Lettau and Ludvigson (2001). The results indicate that cay is in fact a strong and robust predictor of future stock return at intermediate and long horizons, but presents a poor performance on predicting one or two-quarter-ahead stock returns.