A series of six parts, on the relation between Capital and the State in the
epoch of Financialisation
  _____  


 

 


 



 

 

Financialisation and State Capture

 

 

(Originally "What can we say about the crisis of 2007/2009?")

 

 

"Financialisation is best understood as an epochal transformation of
capitalism"

 

 

Costas Lapavitsas, Theory and Struggle, Marx Memorial Library, 2014

 

We can say first of all that this was a global crisis. If you look at the
data, towards the end of 2008 all mature economies dived together. So, there
is no question this was a global crisis, although it affected mostly mature
capitalist countries rather than newly emerging ones.

 

The second thing we can say is it was systemic. Clearly, it was something to
do with the way finance, production and distribution were woven together. It
wasn't an accidental event. It wasn't an isolated event. It was systemic and
it was structural as well. Something was deeply wrong with the accumulation
of capital and how the financial system interacted with the accumulation.
That was clear.

 

The next thing we can say about the crisis is that it emanated from the
financial system. This wasn't a crisis that emanated from the productive
sector. There's no evidence during that period that we had some major
malfunctioning of production. There are plenty of things wrong with
production, of course, and I will mention them, but the crisis emanated from
the financial system, the US financial system in the first instance, and the
British financial system and other major financial systems closely related
to the US.

 

Next, and things are now becoming increasingly strange, the crisis came out
of loans made to the poorest section of the US working class. These were
loans made to people without any assets, without any income, without any
credit history, who were often black or Latino and lived in urban areas of
the United States that were previously off-limits to banks and credit.

 

That's a very strange development. Never before has a global crisis of
capitalism emerged connected to loans made to the poorest section of the
working class. It would have been unthinkable to Classical Economists or
Marxists that something like this could ever have taken place.

 

The last thing we can say about the crisis is that it was fed by enormous
financial speculation, financial innovation as they call it, but really
speculation.  It was the creation of paper on the back of paper, to create
even more paper, to result in profits not from lending, but from dealing in
paper, from transacting in paper, from buying and selling paper among the
financial institutions to generate fees, commissions and all the other
profits that the dealers in these financial assets secure for themselves as
they trade in the markets.

 

The State

 

How was the crisis dealt with? Think about it. Who dealt with it? The state.
Quite clearly in the absence of the state there would have been total
collapse in the summer of 2008. There wouldn't have been a major bank
standing in the United States and quite possibly in this country too.
Whether the banks were directly involved in the speculation that I
mentioned, or not, there wouldn't have been a major bank standing because
healthy banks also fall when problematic banks go under. 

 

So the crisis was dealt with through intervention by the state. And it is
this intervention that requires thinking about, because it shows how the
state and contemporary capitalism are connected. What was the major thing
that the state did? It drove interest rates down to zero. That's the most
decisive policy undertaken by the state.

 

What the State did for the Banks

 

I know it isn't obvious, so let me explain why it's so important. The state
drove interest rates down to zero through the central bank - by using public
resources. The rate of interest that was driven down to zero is that charged
by the central bank, a public rate of interest. By driving it down to zero
what the state did was to create profits for the commercial banks. The
reason is that commercial banks borrowed at next to nothing - at zero-rate -
from the central bank, and then they on-lend to private borrowers and could
make a secure profit. In this way, the state subsidised the banks and
ensured that the banks could make secure profits. This was the biggest
intervention by the state, a massive public subsidy to banks through the
rate of interest.

 

The second thing that the state did was to give to the banks vast public
funds. Particularly in the United States, an enormous system of public
funding for the banks was instituted and banks were effectively buttressed
with tax income. Tax income was mobilised and passed onto banks to make sure
they didn't go under.

 

The third thing that the state did was to create liquidity for banks. Not to
give them public funds (or tax money) but fresh money created by the central
bank that was lent to the banks. And this allowed banks to continue their
normal business and not to go under, because in a crisis banks are typically
short of liquid funds. So the state created the necessary liquid funds for
the banks.

 

In these three key ways public intervention rescued the banks and saw to it
that the worst of the crisis was confronted. Public resources, public
credit-worthiness, public liquidity were mobilised to rescue the private
banking system that had created the crisis in the first place. 

 

The fourth part of dealing with the crisis of course related to working
people. For working people, however, the conditions that prevailed were the
opposite of those for banks. To working people were given austerity, fiscal
retrenchment, and cuts in welfare expenditure. What the state was giving
with one hand - the largesse towards the financial system to rescue it - was
actually taken back by cutting, restraining and restricting welfare spending
- austerity in other words - and at the same time wage restraint. That was a
clear demonstration of the class character of the modern state, of where its
priorities lie.

 

 

~ * ~

 

 

 

From:
http://www.marxlibrary.org.uk/theory-struggle/item/175-what-can-we-say-about
-the-crisis-of-2007-2009

 

To read a facsimile of the original, on line, complete with all the graphs,
go to:

 

https://issuu.com/marxmemoriallibrary/docs/14junefinal_1_/2?e=16494710/14316
995

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-- 
-- 
You are subscribed. This footer can help you.
Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this 
message.
You can visit the group WEB SITE at 
http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, 
pages, files and membership.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You 
don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put 
anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this 
address (repeat): [email protected] .

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"YCLSA Discussion Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to