The Economist

Cette semaine l'administration Bush a décidé de mettre en place une nouvelle série de régulations pour prévenir de nouvel crise dans son système financier. Le magazine "The Economist" nous explique pourquoi cette décision est mauvaise pour l'économie.

Bold re-regulation could damage the very economies it is designed to protect. At times like this, the temptation is for tighter controls to rein in risk-takers, so that those regular, painful crashes could be avoided. It is an honourable aim, but a mistaken one. […] Regulators cannot know how trust will ebb and flow as new markets develop the experience and practice they need to work better. They therefore cannot predict the peril of new ideas. They have to let new markets develop, or stifle them. […]

The notion that the world can just regulate its way out of crises is an illusion. Rather, crisis is the price of innovation, so governments face a choice. They can embrace new financial ideas by keeping markets open. Regulation will be light, but there will be busts. Or governments can aim for safety and opt for dumbed-down financial systems that hobble their economies and deprive their people of the benefits of faster growth. And even then a crisis may strike.