The world’s stock exchanges are sad when they listen to the American Federal Reserve but somewhat comforted when they hear the ECB.
Ito n‘is not because the world stock exchanges preferespect the kindness of Christine Lagarde, preside of the ECBto the brutality of Fed Chairman Jerome Powell that global investors are followingeassured about‘future of the economy.
The result of too much‘uncertaintys is that investors are acting in an unorganized manner.
Sa‘Asia, prices have fallenand the perspective is difficult. D‘first, because China is struggling to get out of the pandemic … Deconfinements are slow and painful; I‘activityis still lethargic. D‘as far as futures, the Asian zone is tredepends on the dicemouthWesterners fear a slowdown in global growth.
The US stock market is suspended on information from the Federal Reserveit expects a rise quite brutal rate. L‘the goal is to break rising prices, which are now being dragged into a relatively toxic price-wage spiral. But in a desire to break this logic, investors fear that the Federal Reserve will break the‘activitye. And that‘is not Joe Biden’s policy to ensure them. On Wall Street as on Nasdaq, the market is downright bearish and waiting a bit‘worriedstudy the FED meeting, this Wednesday.
Since early January, stocks have lost an average of 20% and fears of stagflation n‘never been so strong. In other words, investors‘expect a slowdown in growth Number D‘business and especially incometricks.
On the European side, we remain a priori calmer because the ECB, the European central bank, is more committed to‘extent of possible decrease. Its program for the next six months is considered manageable by European economies. Price increases are real and painful for the most vulnerable categories, but it was increases imported fuel and food purchases associated with the war in Ukraine. D‘ohwhere series back and forth in stock prices.
Environmentalists and anti-globalizationists will be more inflationary than the war in Ukraine and in Covid
What is intefeelingvs‘is that investors are relatively well defined those risks‘they run over the next few months and that‘thus they escape a deadly pessimismeD.
1eh point : Investors in Europe, in general and France in particularement, do not believe in serious political risks. bulkfor most of‘between them, Jean-Luc Mélenchon seems not to them tooes serious in his beliefs. His career was tres winding, tres heysitting. They bet more on Emmanuel Macron’s ability to pilot a ship. For investors, the‘The France-Germany pairing seems solid to them. This coupling is the guarantee of continuity of‘a strict monetary policybalanceed and the pursuit of‘consolidation of public funds. The saying, hesn‘do not rule out the possibility of relatively violent social movements, as long as political representations do not‘do not absorb the waves of regional or corporate discontent, because we are heading towards painful structural changes.
2e point : investors are clearly convinced that the pedagogy of structural changes to come n‘was not made. D‘on the one hand, the fight for climate will require changes in consumption and lifestyle in the way of working, moving and housing. The resistance toheatingthe demand for organic or local products will result in different trade-offs and higher prices.
D‘another side, the globalization that dominates the functioning of systemsemy production, the terms will change. Modern societies will bring the centers of production closer to the areas of consumption (relocation) but they will also separate the markets between those who respect the rules.erules of the market economy and those who do not respect them. The cynicism in international relations is likely to lose ground. This will be the main consequence of the war in Ukraine. More transparency, of honestyé and respect for Western values. But until when?
The consumer complains against inflation but refuses to admit that his or her behavior (usually) accelerates rising prices.
Investors are increasingly aware na‘they have a role in arbitrations regarding all CSR (social and environmental) issues. In the meantime and over many years, we must learn to live at a rate of‘inflation of 2 or 3%. For investors c‘is fully manageable if the ROI, C‘ie the return on investment grows simultaneouslyhurry me up.
3e point. This evolution insteadoptimist n‘does not eliminate the risk of financial crisisere to start from the most indebted state. If investors are secured by their private investments in production, they are not secured by the management of public spending that does not result ineno return. This is the case with all the operational and support costs that modern states s‘indebted. L‘the debt -free interest rate is comfortable; but if open the States must s‘the 3% debt will be destroyed. D‘ohwhere the real danger of‘a financial crisiseagain seriously (as in 2008) that there will clearly be systematic effects.