Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Economist <keyword id="169639" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Roger-Bootle">Roger Bootle</keyword> says monetary and <keyword id="6415009" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="fiscal-policy">fiscal policy</keyword> is leading to "significant inflationary danger."</li><li>Bootle said demographic changes, US-China tensions, and costly climate policies will only add to the problem.</li><li>The Fed and a number of other market commentators have maintained <keyword id="22195" type="COMPANY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Inflation">inflation</keyword> will be "<keyword id="2354253" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="transitory">transitory</keyword>."</li></ul>Monetary and fiscal policies are leading to "significant inflationary danger," according to Capital Economics chairman Roger Bootle.In an interview with Bloomberg on Wednesday, Bootle repeated his concerns about <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-inflation-runaway-hyperinflation-price-growth-interest-rates-fed-2021-5">inflation</a> and criticized other economists and market commentators for their view that monetary and fiscal policies aren't important when it comes to rising costs."Money supply doesn't matter. The stance of policy doesn't matter. You've got all these cost reductions, and you've got competition. I find all this terribly funny because there's been globalization in Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Turkey, and all the other countries that have had quite rapid inflation," Bootle said."When it comes to it, it's the stance of <keyword id="6357126" type="DEFINITION" weightage="60" keywordseo="Monetary-Policy">monetary policy</keyword>, the buildup of these big-money balances in the hands of households. The stance of fiscal policy. The very low-interest rates. I think this is what really makes this a particularly dangerous thing," he added.Bootle went on to say that current inflationary pressures are not on the scale of what was seen in the 1970s, but demographic changes and increased costs due to US-China tensions and climate policies will add to inflationary pressures moving forward.There has been a heated debate among economists, banks, and analysts about inflation recently. Some argue, as the Federal Reserve does, that inflation is only "transitory" and will settle down once supply chain issues resolve themselves.Others, like Bootle, argue that a rapid increase in the money supply along with dovish Fed policy could lead to sustained rising costs.Despite the pandemic coming to an end, the Federal Reserve has pledged to maintain accommodative policies, including <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/federal-reserve-fomc-decision-september-near-zero-rates-through-2023-2020-9">low-interest rates</a> and <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/fed-powell-march-fomc-asset-purchases-central-bank-monetary-policy-2021-3">aggressive asset purchases</a>, until "substantial further progress" has been made toward employment goals.After last week's jobs report showed the US <keyword id="34412" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="economy">economy</keyword> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/may-jobs-report-559000-payrolls-unemployment-rate-recovery-labor-market-2021-6">added 559,000 nonfarm payrolls in May</a>, market commentators wondered if the Fed might change its tone.Comments from Cleveland Federal Reserve President Loretta Mester in a CNBC interview on Friday showed the Fed appears to be doubling down on its view that substantial further progress needs to be made before they change policy."I view it as a solid employment report...But I would like to see further progress," Mester said.Roger Bootle's new comments come on the back of Deutsche Bank's recent warning of a global "time bomb" due to rising inflation if the Fed doesn't act."The consequence of delay will be greater disruption of economic and financial activity than would otherwise be the case when the Fed does finally act," Deutsche's chief economist, David Folkerts-Landau, and others wrote in a note to clients."In turn, this could create a significant recession and set off a chain of financial distress around the world, particularly in emerging <keyword id="31671" type="CITY" weightage="100" keywordseo="markets">markets</keyword>," the team added.

Monetary and fiscal policies are leading to 'significant inflationary danger,' economist Roger Bootle says

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Russia's war with Ukraine has its economy facing "death by a thousand cuts," a British economist wrote. </li><li>The country faces many headwinds, from inflationary pressures to a low birth rate to a bloating fiscal deficit.</li></ul>Russia's economy seems to be getting along amid its protracted war in Ukraine and harsh sanctions from the West, but that can't go on forever, according to one economist. "Russia's economy faces death by a thousand cuts," British economist Roger Bootle <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/02/25/russias-economy-faces-death-thousand-cuts/">wrote</a> in the Telegraph on Sunday. In spite of heavy sanctions, Russia's economy actually grew 3.6% last year, faster than most countries in Europe, Bootle noted. And the economy is expected to grow again this year too, by around 3%. War spending is booming, and as war production rises, its gains spill into other pockets of the economy."But these gains are limited," Bootle wrote. "They can only occur in economies with unemployed resources and they end when the unemployed resources are exhausted."And it seems like Russia is reaching that end.Take inflation as an example. The country's robust wartime economy has also stoked demand, and as the amount of underused resources dwindles, supply can no longer meet that demand, which drives prices up. Last year, Russia's inflation rate averaged 5.9%. It's forecast to increase to 7.5% this year.The nation's feud with the West is also likely to impact supply in the long run."It seems likely that the damage to Russia's productive capacity from the loss of Western technology and key supplies will increase over time," Bootle said.Another headwind facing the country is its demographic time bomb. The country's birth rate, about 1.5, has been far below the 2.1 replacement level. That matters a lot for the economy amid losses in the war and young people fleeing the country to avoid the conflict. And there's the problem of military spending. As Russia's defense spending is forecasted to rise 70% this year to about 6% of GDP, its deficit is going to go up with it. And while the forecast deficit looks low at around 3% of GDP, it's not what a country bankrolling a war can sustain. As Bootle said, Russia actually needs a surplus of about 2% to keep itself afloat. "The big vulnerability is energy prices," he added. "If they were to fall sharply then the budget deficit would balloon and the current account surplus would dwindle, putting pressure on the rouble and causing inflation to rise further. If that were to happen, then the economic screw would really tighten."

Russia's war with Ukraine has its economy facing 'death by a thousand cuts,' economist says

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image"></div></div></div>Roger Bootle, one of Britain's top economists and managing director of Capital Economics, just dubbed the eurozone a "complete disaster" and claims <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/britains-eu-referendum-could-lead-to-brexit-in-2016-2015-5">a Brexit would be good for the UK economy</a>.<a href="http://moneyweek.com/roger-bootle-interview/">In an interview with MoneyWeek</a> to promote his new book 'The Trouble With Europe', Bootle says: "I think the eurozone is a complete disaster and I'm not a Johnny-come-lately on this subject I was saying it right from the beginning."Bootle believes the grouping together of uncompetitive nations like Spain and Greece with industrious and fiscally strict countries like Germany and the Netherlands makes the Union completely dysfunctional.His comments come despite data yesterday showing <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/eurozone-q1-gdp-grows-by-04-missing-forecasts-2015-5">Europe's GDP is now growing faster than both the UK and the US</a>. Germany's economy also appears to be faltering, with GDP missing forecasts and growing just 0.3% in the first quarter of the year.Meanwhile, Spain is enjoying a period of recovery, growing 0.9% in the first quarter, while other underperforming economies such as Italy and France are bouncing back. <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/italys-gdp-grew-by-03-in-q1-2015-2015-5">Italy has returned to growth for the first time in a year</a> and <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/french-gdp-smashed-expectations--and-growth-is-now-twice-as-fast-as-in-germany-or-the-uk-2015-5">France grew by a forecast-beating 0.7% in the first quarter</a>.Bootle says: "What the euro has done is it's locked together these two groups of countries that behave fundamentally differently. In the old days the exchange rate acted as a flex, a hinge, enabling those two sorts of countries to work together. Without out it well you've got this ghastly stagnation."Bootle calls for Britain to leave the European Union, saying <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/eu-referendum-uncertainty-and-popularity-of-ukip-during-the-general-election-2015-5">the impact of a Eurozone exit is being overestimated</a>. He believes deregulation in the wake of a Brexit could boost the economy, while increasing regulation in the Union means it will grow more costly to Britain over time if we stay.<a href="http://moneyweek.com/roger-bootle-interview/">You can read the full interview here.</a> <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/game-of-thrones-stars-real-life-2015-4">Here's what 'Game of Thrones' stars look like in real life</a></h3> <div> <div> <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="NzaTRldDoXZcQw9XO6NGGy8J2dbDaF1A" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div> </div> </div> </div>

The eurozone is a complete disaster and Britain needs to leave the EU

<div class="KonaFilter image-container float_right"><div class="image on-image">REUTERS/Yorgos KarahalisPeople enter a Greek Manpower Employment Organisation (OAED) office in a northern suburb of Athens on July 11, 2013.</div></div>Is the euro crisis over? To judge from how often the words appear in global media (down by three-quarters between early 2012 and early 2014), the answer is yes. Markets have calmed since July 2012, when the president of the European Central Bank (ECB), Mario Draghi, promised to do "whatever it takes" to save the euro. 
Ireland and now Portugal are climbing out of their bail-out programmes. Even Greece, where the crisis began, has just sold debt.
Yet, as these books all argue, the crisis was always about more than whether financial markets would buy government debt. It raised broad worries over how countries with widely differing levels of prosperity, competitiveness, public spending and taxes, and regulation of labour and product markets, could share a currency without economic shocks blowing them apart. And it was about whether euro-zone voters would accept low growth, high unemployment and a permanent loss of sovereignty to the centre. None of these concerns has been fully dealt with.
Jean Pisani-Ferry, who now works in the French prime minister's office, was director of Bruegel, an influential Brussels think-tank during the crisis. His careful and persuasive book is an extensive updating of an essay published in French in 2011. And, although he is a supporter of the euro and of European integration, he describes thoroughly the hugely expensive mistakes made by Europe's leaders.
The biggest error was to misunderstand the underlying causes of the crisis. Because the first victim was Greece, it became accepted wisdom in Brussels (and Berlin) that the problem was profligate spending and borrowing. The Germans liked this explanation because it confirmed the suspicions they had before the creation of the euro that they might be lumbered with other countries' debts. It also looked susceptible to a gratifyingly simple cure: ever more fiscal austerity. And it avoided any suggestion that Germany might have contributed to the crisis by running a large current-account surplus that its banks recycled in cheap loans to Mediterranean property developers.
Mr Pisani-Ferry offers a challenging alternative hypothesis. Suppose that the crisis had begun, as it might easily have done, in Ireland? It would then have been obvious that fiscal irresponsibility was not the culprit: Ireland had a budget surplus and very low debt. More to blame were economic imbalances, inflated property prices and dodgy bank loans. The priority should not have been tax rises and spending cuts, but reforms to improve competitiveness and a swift resolution of troubled banks, including German and French ones, that lent so irresponsibly.
Philippe Legrain, who once worked for The Economist, was another close observer of the euro crisis, as an economic adviser to the European Commission president, José Manuel Barroso. His conclusions are similar to Mr Pisani-Ferry's, if more stridently expressed. He is particularly good on (and particularly scathing about) the shortcomings of his own institution and the ECB. He is not popular in Brussels or Frankfurt.
Mr Legrain argues that Europe should have tackled its banks' problems much sooner than mid-2012, when it decided to create a (still incomplete) banking union. A big reason why America has recently grown faster than Europe is that it did more to sort out its banks in 2008-09. Mr Legrain is also right to criticise the ECB for its half-hearted bond purchases before July 2012, when it finally emerged as a proper lender of last resort. Only in the second part of his book, when he moves into broader topics such as education, innovation, climate change and democracy, culminating in his call for a "European spring", are his arguments sometimes less persuasive.
Both authors agree that the aftermath of the crisis is an unsatisfactory one that may not endure. Even if markets do not turn sour again, most of Europe seems stuck with low growth, high unemployment (especially for young people) and a horrible debt burden. The risk of a "lost decade" similar to Japan's in the 1990s is worryingly high. Worst of all is the broad disillusion of voters with the entire European project, which will be expressed in this month's European elections through big gains for populist and extremist parties.
Roger Bootle has similarly gloomy concerns about the state of the European project, but his conclusions strike a far more Euro-sceptical tone. He wants to reduce the role of Brussels and enhance that of governments, with a call to "renationalise Europe". He also believes that Britain, where David Cameron is threatening to hold an in/out referendum by 2017, is well-placed to push an agenda of reforms that turns the European project into little more than a somewhat expanded free-trade area - and that, if he does not succeed, Britain should leave the club (see box below).
What is striking is how much the authors agree about the failings of the EU and the euro, which is stuck in a half-completed house. Where they differ is in the solutions they propose. Europhiles want deeper integration and more centralised powers. That was proposed this spring by the German-led Glienicker group and by the French-led Eiffel Europe group. It is also backed by Loukas Tsoukalis, a Greek academic, in an essay, "The Unhappy State of the Union", published by London-based Policy Network.
Yet few voters feel warmly about ever closer union; many would agree with Mr Bootle that this aspiration of the original Treaty of Rome should be formally ditched. Nor do many welcome ever greater intrusion by Brussels and Frankfurt into domestic politics. A more plausible idea, backed by Mr Legrain, is to restore greater freedom to national governments but reinstate the principle that they will not be rescued by the centre if they get into trouble.
The biggest worry may stem from the perception that the crisis is over. This is likely to slow or even stop further reforms. If that happens, the EU and the euro will get into trouble again - and the outcome next time could be even worse.
Click <a href="https://subscriptions.economist.com/nwcd">here</a> to subscribe to The Economist.

There's Something Wrong With Europe - But No One Can Agree What

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image">JD WetherspoonsTim Martin, the Chairman of JD Wetherspoon.</div></div></div>With only three weeks to go until the European Union referendum, the arguments for Britain either staying or leaving the EU - the latter dubbed a Brexit - are heating up.One of the most prominent business figures to wade into the argument is Tim Martin, the chairman and founder of one of Britain's biggest and most well-known pub chains JD Wetherspoon.Martin, who is an <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/eu-referendum-jd-wetherspoon-boss-backs-brexit-2016-3">avowed Eurosceptic</a> and <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/26/staying-in-eu-bad-for-small-businesses-says-wetherspoon-chief">active campaigner for the "Vote Leave" side</a>, this week spent <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/eu-referendum-jd-wetherspoon-prints-anti-eu-beer-mats-attacking-imf-2016-5">£3,500 ($5,057) on 200,000 beer mats</a> to put in his 920 pubs, urging people to vote to leave the EU.Weirdly, the text on the beer mats attacks the International Monetary Fund (IMF) - known commonly as the "central banks' central bank" - not the EU.Business Insider caught up with Martin to hear about why he believes Britain is better off outside the EU, what he thinks about <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-destroy-uk-economy-hurt-world-oecd-2016-6">economists predicting a bleak outlook for the UK economy</a> in the event of the Brexit, and of course why he focused on Christine Lagarde and the IMF on the beer mats.Business Insider: What do you think is the fundamental argument for Britain leaving the EU is? Tim Martin: Democracy - that is the fundamental issue. Democracy, prosperity, and freedom, including press freedom, are closely inter-linked and as time has gone on, the EU has switched from being a Common Market to becoming a so-called union. But it's not a democratic one.Laws are instigated from European Commission - who aren't elected and can't be deselected - and European court judgments are made by judges that we have no control over.The EU is not subject to normal rules, not subject to normal democratic control, and the net result - like what can be seen in Greece, Portugal, and Spain - is that the exchange rate mechanism and euro fantasy of the early 1990s can hurt your economy.I think when you look at countries like Australia, Japan, and New Zealand etc. you will find that democracy and prosperity always go together. Just look at Japan, Singapore, and West Germany - which rose from the ashes in two or three decades after 1945.On a personal level, I think about what is required for the future of humanity, I think it is democracy - not the Kim Jong Il the second and communist or fascist dictators running whole countries. If we are going to survive as a human race, it will be about democracy.BI: So are you suggesting that being in the EU is like a dictatorship because of the lack of democratic process?TM: It would be absurd to go down that sidetrack. The EU is emphatically not like those people or countries I just described.I just mentioned that the more democracy there is, the more prosperity there is. But by reducing the level of democracy - that is a slippery slope and dangerous path.BI: You mention that the EU is able to enact or block laws without needing consensus from Britain. Are there any prime examples you can think of that you feel symbolise or have demonstrated this lack of democracy?TM: I think the point is that it is impossible for an individual to know where UK laws end and European laws begin.But there have been laws in every form, employment regulations, building regulations and even fuel requirements [enacted by the EU]. I think this has created a feeling that it is very difficult to challenge the laws and there is a theory of resignation [when it comes to making changes to EU laws].For me, the biggest thing - and one thing I feel like I fight like hell every few years over - is [pressure] from the political and business elite for Britain to take the euro. It was a year of fighting, fighting the good fight.<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image">JD WetherspoonThe design for the front of the beer mat.</div></div></div>BI: Turning more towards the data, you have said that the Treasury's calculation that the average family will be about £4,000 a year worse off in the event of a Brexit is "<a href="https://www.jdwetherspoon.com/news/2016/05/tims-viewpoint">complete and utter fiction and is just massaging numbers to get the result the boss wants.</a>"TM: It's true - the basic proposition is that more democracy will lead to prosperity and that's true for countries around the world. What the Treasury did - in effect George Osborne because he is the head of it - was turn economic history on its head and said that prosperity in Britain is derived from treaties [like that of the EU].No one has ever said that Japan became the second largest economy between 1945 and 1975 because of treaties. They did it because of democracy and an independent economic system. You never read the history books that say Japan went from poverty to wealth through treaties.What the Treasury has tried to do is to say Britain's prosperity is to do with treaties and therefore if we leave the EU, X, Y, Z would happen - it's a fabrication of numbers.BI: But there has been a range of criticism from economists, like those at the Institute of Fiscal Studies, that say that Vote Leave's economic calculations are "<a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/ifs-brexit-report-economic-analysis-and-uk-economy-forecast-2016-5">completely absurd.</a>" As the boss of one of Britain's most prominent companies, don't you worry that the Vote Leave calculations are wrong and you could be negatively impacted?TM: No. The relevant economists are the ones that looked at these potential issues around the turn of the millennium in respect to the euro.The great majority of economists - almost an identikit army - have been trying to get us in favour of taking the euro and only a small number of people like Roger Bootle and businessmen like [Next CEO] Simon Wolfson and my good self [have] said it wouldn't work. Look what has happened to countries like Greece.However, when you speak of economists, they are more prone to group-think than any other group and they got it wrong. As a group on the euro, they got it wrong and they got it wrong on the exchange rate mechanism and not a single one predicted the recession in 2008, so I am not in the slightest bit worried.Look at the big picture. Economists who get it wrong, can't see the wood for trees because of all their computer modelling and numbers.<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image">JD Wetherspoon</div></div></div>BI: Well it sounds like you're saying that all these economists are banding together or conspiring to deliver on one set goal. So turning towards the news that JD Wetherspoon spent £3,500 printing <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/eu-referendum-jd-wetherspoon-prints-anti-eu-beer-mats-attacking-imf-2016-5">200,000 beer mats for 920 pubs in Britain featuring the International Monetary Fund</a>. Why did you target the group and Christine Lagarde in particular? Clearly you think there are a number of major issues with the EU, not the IMF which is wholly separate. Why attack it?TM: I wrote a <a href="https://www.jdwetherspoon.com/~/media/files/pdf-documents/wetherspoon-news/eu-referendum-articles.pdf?la=en">2,000-word article</a> on the whole series of arguments about the IMF. A lot of the public don't realise that the Treasury is not independent - it is just George Osborne's finance department. And the cornerstone of a lot of Osborne's economic arguments about how Britain's prosperity is based on treaties is tied into what the IMF says.In January this year, Lagarde was put up for a second term in charge of the IMF and Osborne nominated her. They're close friends. Then she comes out with a gloomy prognosis which helps Osborne's argument.The table mat is meant to show the public that this is all a stitch up and the British public should know the facts. If you have a financial advisor who is going through things that an ordinary financial advisor wouldn't be allow to be going through [such as Lagarde <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/17/imf-head-christine-lagarde-tfrench-trial-bernard-tapie-affair">facing a trial in France over a €400 million payout to a controversial French businessman who supported Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007 presidential race</a>] then they should question that.BI: But if Britain was to leave the EU, the UK's relationship with the IMF, which you described, wouldn't necessarily end. The IMF is separate to the EU.TM: No, but it's a sign of the arrogance of office. In fact, it's what Shakespeare says [in the play Hamlet] "the insolence of office." [A Brexit] would be a detachment from the European elite that Osborne and Cameron are part of. Also, it shows the temerity of nominating someone as a financial advisor with this [Lagarde's trial] over their head.BI: But what if there was a Brexit and the IMF was just as close and involved with Britain's Treasury as it was before?TM: I said this before - "you will always get idiots in office."If Britain leaves the EU, it doesn't mean there won't be idiots around but what I want people to do is to have the power to put people in parliament and elect politicians they want. I want the public to influence power through the ballot box.BI: So what are your immediate expectations if Britain was to leave the EU in June?TM: I think if Japan and Germany, for example, can rise from the dust in a few years, Britain can. The UK's position at the moment is one in great wealth, international trade, and historic democracy and [leaving the EU] will take the UK a great leap forward.We will improve financially, in business and wealth, and freedom if we leave the EU. There's no need to be scared. <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/alibaba-jack-mas-secrets-to-success-2016-5">REVEALED: Alibaba founder Jack Ma's secrets to success</a></h3> <div> <div> <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="htYmNtMzE6dD7eBpI_wAtO8n2X-00eMe" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div> </div> </div> </div>

You Searched For "Roger Bootle" and got 5 results

Monetary and fiscal policies are leading to 'significant inflationary danger,' economist Roger Bootle says

Will Daniel

Russia's war with Ukraine has its economy facing 'death by a thousand cuts,' economist says

Aruni Soni

The eurozone is a complete disaster and Britain needs to leave the EU

Oscar Williams-Grut

There's Something Wrong With Europe - But No One Can Agree What

The Economist

'Democracy, prosperity, and freedom': The founder of JD Wetherspoon makes the case for a Brexit

Lianna Brinded

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides