彼得.赫尔曼教授在 “中国与拉美：跨越太平洋的发展伙伴”高端圆桌会议上发表了 “增长和发展——互补还是矛盾？全球议程面临的挑战”（Growth and Development – Complement or Contradiction? Challenges for a Global Agenda）的主旨演讲。他指出，在面临国际发展挑战过程中，需要重视经济学教学的作用；呼吁政府在大力发展经济的同时考虑环境问题，出台长期的可持续经济政策；同时，他还提到，近期一些服务贸易协议文件的泄露可能会对中国经济发展造成严重的威胁。
本次圆桌会议旨在加强中国和拉美国家的多边合作，谋求两国的共同发展。会议邀请了政府、学术界、智库、企业机构等不同主体，共同研讨中国与拉美合作的前景和合作的模式，建言如何提升中拉整体合作水平和促进中拉多边关系发展。会议由复旦发展研究院金砖国家研究中心主任、复旦大学国际关系与公共事务学院副教授沈逸担任主席，巴西前驻华大使Luiz Augusto de Castro Neves先生和中国前驻巴西大使陈笃庆担任会议嘉宾。
I am not sure if I missed something, or if it was just a rumor about some things that went wrong around that time?
What makes capital provision work so well in America is the security and regulation of our capital markets, where minority shareholders are protected. Lord knows, there are scams, excesses, and corruption in our capital markets. That always happens when a lot of money is at stake. What distinguishes our capital markets is not that Enrons don’t happen in America—they sure do. It is that when they happen, they usually get ex- posed, either by the Securities and Exchange Commission or by the business press, and get corrected. What makes America unique is not Enron but Eliot Spitzer, the attorney general of New York State, who has doggedly sought to clean up the securities industry and corporate board-rooms. This sort of capital market has proved very, very difficult to duplicate outside of New York, London, Frankfurt, and Tokyo. Said Foster, “China and India and other Asian countries will not be successful at innovation until they have successful capital markets, and they will not have successful capital markets until they have rule of law which protects minority interests under conditions of risk… We in the U.S. are the lucky beneficiaries of centuries of conditions of risk… We in the U.S. are the lucky beneficiaries of centuries of economic experimentation, and we are the experiment that has worked.”
From: Thomas L. Friedman: The World is Flat; New York: Picador: 2007: 332 f.
Well, the Friedmans, be it Thomas or Milton, don’t understand that we face what James Galbraith calls
The End of Normal: The Great Crisis and the Future of Growth
One important point is, and that is another way of thinking about the end of the normal, the need to question the normal or at least part of it. Three (we always strive for trinities) essential parts of the normal were: growth, growth, and some form of regulation – and indeed Friedman talks about such regulation. But what he does not say is that this had been about marginal forms of social distribution, limited control of excesses and in particular/not least about securing the conditions of and for growth. It is interesting that even this is now largely taken away. As we know since recently, namely the leak of the TISA-Annex on the Annex on State Owned Enterprises
the role of securing the conditions of and for growth is now under the increasing pressure of being finally, formally and completely handed over to the ‘market’. This is globalisation not simply by imposing specific structures and conditions on other countries but by establishing the control
Economics is the religion of equations.
Had been said before, by several others … . A pity that good presentations on the role of monetary expansions are “religionised”, so much deceiving the real issues, even if the directly deal with them.
If you put an ‘almighty god’ into any equation, there is only one solution. If you leave human beings, there needs, the abuse of power ecc. out of economics, there is no solution. As recently said, the devil is not always in the detail; and as also said Brazil is not just a geographical place …