roubini137_Mikhail SvetlovGetty Images_xi putin

Economics

2020年的白天鹅

Feb 17, 2020 Nouriel Roubini

纽约—在我2010年的书《危机经济学》（Crisis Economics），我没有像纳西姆·尼古拉斯·塔勒布（Nassim Nicholas Taleb）在他的同名畅销书中那样，将金融危机定义为“黑天鹅”事件，而是定义为“白天鹅”。按照塔勒布的说法，黑天鹅是指从肥尾统计分布不可预测地出现的事件，如龙卷风。但我认为，金融危机至少更像是飓风：它们是经济和金融脆弱性和政策错误的可预测的结果。

时不时，我们应该预测到系统正在达到引爆点，即“明斯基时刻”（Minsky Moment），枯荣周期即将进入幻灭阶段。这类事件不是“未知的未知”，而是“已知的未知”。

除了大部分金融分析师所担心的常规经济和政策风险，还有大量可能引起地震的白天鹅在今年清晰可见。任何一宗事件都有可能引发不亚于2008年危机的严重的经济、金融、政治和地缘政治扰动。

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

Nouriel Roubini

Writing for PS since 2007
177 Commentaries

Nouriel Roubini, Professor Emeritus of Economics at New York University’s Stern School of Business, is Chief Economist at Atlas Capital Team, CEO of Roubini Macro Associates, Co-Founder of TheBoomBust.com, and author of MegaThreats: Ten Dangerous Trends That Imperil Our Future, and How to Survive Them (Little, Brown and Company, 2022). He is a former senior economist for international affairs in the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers during the Clinton Administration and has worked for the International Monetary Fund, the US Federal Reserve, and the World Bank. His website is NourielRoubini.com, and he is the host of NourielToday.com.

Financial Markets’ Iran Delusion
Wang Ying/Xinhua via Getty Images

Economics 4

Financial Markets’ Iran Delusion

Nouriel Roubini shoots down the two assumptions underlying investor complacency following the latest Middle East dustup.
After Suleimani
Video still: ABC News

Big Picture 13

After Suleimani

The jury is out on whether the US airstrike on Iran’s top military figure will lead to a broader war in the region. But, at a minimum, the situation suggests that hardliners in both countries are now calling the shots.
Trump Will Make China Great Again
Getty Images

Economics 21

Trump Will Make China Great Again

Nouriel Roubini argues that the latest stopgap trade deal cannot paper over the two countries' widening strategic rivalry.
Has the “Great Decoupling” Gone Viral?
Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

Longer Reads 4

Has the “Great Decoupling” Gone Viral?

Kevin Rudd assesses the oft-heard claim that the United States and China are heading for a hard, sharp break.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 17 Comments on this article

James Charles May 3, 2020

"Financial markets remain blissfully in denial of the many predictable global crises that could come to a head this year, . . . "
According to T.G.C., for good reason?
“First, US money growth remained on the high side in January, although both December and January have seen less buoyant expansion than in the autumn of last year. If it were not for the coronavirus, this development – combined with the good stock market until mid-February and the return to life in real estate markets – would have justified a forecast of at least trend growth in 2020 and a suggestion that above-trend growth might well be recorded.”
https://mcusercontent.com/78302034f23041fbbcab0ac6d/files/a77ea12f-c5b4-472f-b29e-174059cc8018/Monthly_e_mail_2002_Global_money_round_up.pdf
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jaskaran Singh Feb 24, 2020

White Swans yes, but gold a liquid asset? Surely not, unless the author is being intentionally provocative. Freezing Chinese holdings of US Treasuries would hurt China but hurt the US even more - imagine the chaos such a move will cause. It will destroy the faith the world reposes in the US and the US dollar.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jim Edge Feb 23, 2020

One piece of content overlooked by many so far is the mention of the severe divide in the political landscape in the US. . . 'With the US electorate already so polarized, it is not difficult to imagine armed partisans taking to the streets to challenge the results, leading to serious violence and chaos.' What's additionally disturbing is the apparent plan by this administration to NOT respect the results (should he lose), and refuse to leave power. He then could easily suspend the Constitution and dissolve the US Congress, and with McConnell's and Barr's help...
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ray Comeau Feb 23, 2020

This is an interesting read of the potential before the world and it is certainly coloured by Mr. Roubini's constant exposure to US media. Hence I think the over emphasis on China, the current bête noire of US political class, and a distraction from a lack of domestic and foreign policies.
IMO the Chinese nuclear option regarding dumping treasuries is hollow. A slow acting nuclear trigger has already been pressed by the addiction of US government to unrestrained debt and $1 trillion in annual budget deficits. One just waits as the clock tics away.
Contrary to American perspectives neither China, North Korea or Russia want Trump to be defeated in 2020. Trump is predictable and not a war hawk. Trump has weakened US industry through his tariff wars, and one can expect more instability to follow in the next term.
Some believe the US will decouple from China, but it will not. The relationship will instead become more complex in 2020-2021.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Kerry Pechter Feb 23, 2020

Regarding the threat that China could dump its Treasuries: Why the fear about this? China bought those Treasuries with dollars at high prices; if it wants to sell the Treasuries at a discount, we can buy them back with the dollars they paid us and make a profit. But as long as the Chinese rely on our market for exports, and accept dollars in payment rather than demanding yuan, they will buy and hold our Treasuries... especially if we deny them other stuff, like our ports. We've helped finance the Chinese miracle. Why would they want to mess that up? Am I missing something?
- Alex Aslanidis Feb 23, 2020
  
  No, you're not missing anything. That's pretty much how it is. Selling US treasuries means bye-bye to exports in the US.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Tom Larkin Feb 19, 2020

What a nonsense article. For a general overview of the world, please watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT6HFCAFDgU Regarding climate change which is pure fraud, please watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hElTSfQEdsk&t=21s Regarding individual events like Greenland ice sheet melting, the opposite is happening: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ke26J0N74YI&list=PL1hxWLOq3m_wUq4O_fwQKGTjFjWXvzEXN
- James Charles May 3, 2020
  
  “For climate change, there are many scientific organizations that study the climate. These alphabet soup of organizations include NASA, NOAA, JMA, WMO, NSIDC, IPCC, UK Met Office, and others. Click on the names for links to their climate-related sites. There are also climate research organizations associated with universities. These are all legitimate scientific sources.
  
  If you have to dismiss all of these scientific organizations to reach your opinion, then you are by definition denying the science. If you have to believe that all of these organizations, and all of the climate scientists around the world, and all of the hundred thousand published research papers, and physics, are all somehow part of a global, multigenerational conspiracy to defraud the people, then you are, again, a denier by definition.
  
  So if you deny all the above scientific organizations there are a lot of un-scientific web sites out there that pretend to be science. Many of these are run by lobbyists (e.g.., Climate Depot, run by a libertarian political lobbyist, CFACT), or supported by lobbyists (e.g., JoannaNova, WUWT, both of whom have received funding and otherwise substantial support by lobbying organizations like the Heartland Institute), or are actually paid by lobbyists to write Op-Eds and other blog posts that intentionally misrepresent the science.”
  https://thedakepage.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/how-to-assess-climate-change.html
  - Tom Larkin May 3, 2020
    
    For the last 150 years, the thermometer record of the rural United States has been trending downward. Global warming is pure fraud. CO2 impacts temperature logarithmicly not linearly as presented in papers. Regarding YouTube videos, they are only a medium like newspapers and television. You must address the specifics in the videos, not trash all videos. Search on YouTube for Climate Fraud at the New York Times, Part 1. That will generate a number of videos to kept you busy.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Feb 19, 2020

This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Feb 18, 2020

Nouriel Roubini fears we are sleepwalking into a global crisis in the course of 2020, particularly in the run up to the November election in the US. Financial markets remain “blissfully in denial” of the many predictable risks ahead of us, and many are “convinced that a calm if not happy year awaits major economies and global markets.” It may not be the case, and it could just be a matter of time before we got a rude awakening.
At the start of 2017, the author speculated that Trump’s election would portend a geopolitical shift away from globalisation and more toward isolationism, a change which he felt could lead to global instability and rising military conflicts among other countries. He seems to be right about his predictions.
Today, he speaks about “black swans” – the “unknown unknowns” – events that are unpredictable or unforeseen, typically those with extreme consequences, and the “white swans” – the “known unknowns” – events that are “visible on the horizon” and could trigger “severe economic, financial, political, and geopolitical disturbances.”
Yet the ongoing events – according to the author – have the characteristics of “white swans.” The conflict between the US and Iran will continue in the shadows, where it has been fought for 40 years. Trump’s miscalculations – maximum pressure on Iran to try to negotiate a new nuclear deal – had brought the two countries to the brink of war. Iran fought back with violent attacks, and a military confrontation can not be ruled out, which would “likely soon escalate.”
China is struggling to contain the Coronavirus, that could become a “global pandemic.” The biggest challenge is to contain rising public anger over its response to the spreading virus even as it took unprecedented steps to slow the outbreak, restricting travel for millions of people and shutting down thousands of factories. Disruption to the Chinese economy will be inevitable, with “spillover effects on global supply chains.”
Cyberwarfare is raging, with the US “locked in an escalating strategic rivalry with at least four implicitly aligned revisionist powers: China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea.” The author says “these countries all have an interest in challenging the US-led global order, and 2020 could be a critical year for them, owing to the US presidential election and the potential change in US global policies that could follow.”
He sees an increase in cyber attacks that can destabilise the US from within. “If the US election descends into partisan rancor, chaos, disputed vote tallies, and accusations of ‘rigged’ elections, so much the better for America’s rivals,” who will benefit from the weakening of US power abroad.
Given the stringent sanctions imposed against Tehran, Iran has a “particular interest” in removing Trump. Iranians could “escalate the conflict with the US in the coming months – even if it means risking a full-scale war – on the chance that the ensuing spike in oil prices would crash the US stock market, trigger a recession, and sink Trump’s re-election prospects.”
The author says the “revisionist powers could also attack the US and Western financial systems – including the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) platform.” It the trade war between the US and China escalates, and if Beijing fails to appease the widespread discontent due to an economic fallout and the failure to manage the health crisis, it might seek a scapegoat and “set its sights” on Hong Kong, Taiwan, or confront the US, which has military bases in Asia.
But the “nuclear option” would be to dump the US Treasury bonds. China currently owns more than $1 trillion in US debt, and the Chinese “are increasingly worried that such assets could be frozen through US sanctions (like those already used against Iran and North Korea).” China could sell its dollar assets, but instead of converting back into renminbi “(which would appreciate)," it could "diversify its reserves by converting them into another liquid asset that is less vulnerable to US primary or secondary sanctions, namely gold. Indeed, both China and Russia have been stockpiling gold reserves (overtly and covertly), which explains the 30% spike in gold prices since early 2019.”
All the while political leaders have overlooked the “increasingly obvious risks associated with climate change” and its “real-world costs” as well as other “environmental trends.”
The author points out the greater threats these “deeper seismic events,” could pose, as they would lead to "rapid global movements in magnetic polarity and accelerating ocean currents.. Any one of these developments could augur an environmental white swan event.” Many of us may find this scenario apocalyptic, but it is precisely this thinking that explains why people often not take threats seriously, only to realise the danger when it is aleady too late.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Margaret Bowker Feb 18, 2020

Nouriel Roubini's 'The White Swans of 2020' is an enjoyable and interesting article, as were his 2010, 2014 and 2017 commentaries on white and black swans. Professor Roubini explains that white swans are predictable crises and black swans are more like bolts from the blue. In his 2020 Swan essay, he puts forward several theories/scenarios, although their extrapolation seems rather extreme and tending towards confrontation. One of the comments on the piece basically asks where is the policy to deal with these points.

The essay expounded the risks the Professor thought confronted the US. And to address just two or three of them, much of his fear could be ameliorated by the US leading positively again, and not withdrawing. The JCPOA and in particular, the Joint Commission meetings spring to mind. It would mean a change of US policy, but that could bring far reaching results if the E3, China, Russia, Iran and the US all negotiated together to bring about a new, enhanced, far-reaching deal for October.

The Professor is also worried about China, but the country is already taking steps to fiscally protect its economy whilst striving to overcome the virus. If the US and China build on the Phase One deal, it would be a positive step. Being active and positive is always more effective than negativity.

The US election is also touched upon. Competence and no unsolved or neglected issues are good guidelines for effective electioneering. Presenting an all round capability, and important though it is, not entirely restricted to the economy, raises confidence.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Godfree Roberts Feb 17, 2020

Professor Roubini's broad point–financial crises resemble hurricanes more than asteroid strikes–is well taken but his speculations about Chinese attacks are not. Internal mistakes and systemic weaknesses in the US economy are far more likely to cause trouble than the Chinese.

"the four revisionists want to undercut American hard and soft power abroad by destabilizing the US from within through asymmetric warfare"? No they don't. That's not their MO and, besides, they're winning and are following Napoleon's admonition not to interfere when the enemy is making mistakes. The long term trend is 100% in China's favor and, even if all of China's current woes are US-originated, the trend is their friend.

"Open aggression is not really an option at this point, given the asymmetry of conventional power"? China's army and navy are bigger than America's and their all their missiles (the decisive weapon in 21st century warfare) outrange all America's by 50-100%. Any attack on Chinese soil (or reefs) will be met by symmetrical attacks on American soil.

And so on...
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
douglas ungredda Feb 17, 2020

With all due respect, uncertainty also breeds value. Volatility can be a boon for risk managers. Climate change can be contained. Let's use your invaluable expertise to analyze these problems under the spectrum of workable solutions.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.