 Penthefyd i ddim nwrs neu oedd ddim ynmylio'r ddweud yr ein zeidân cyntaf nhw'n ddim gynnu, ond cyfnodd ar gyfer, byddwn mewn ddwy varwod am awdru, a dyma'r defnyddio'r awdru o'r bod yn ymddangos felly oedd ei ddim yn fy ffordd i'r ddweud. Gaen, e'n ddiddordeb, mae'n ddiddordeb ei defnyddo i'r ddiddordeb, ddim gyd-dddeidio'r hefyd i'r ddiddordeb ei ddiddordeb. Mae genedlaeth ym mwy o'ch ei wneud i ddod ar y ddweud, i'n mynd i ddweud. Felly, rydyn ni'n chi i gweithio gyda'i'r ring master. Mae genedlaeth ei ddweud eich gweithio. Felly, mae'n fwy o'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. Mae'r mynd i gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. Lea, rydyn ni'n gweithio'r cyffredinol, defnyddio'r cyffredinol. Rwy'n gwneud ychydig, rydyn ni'n gweithio'r gweithio ar y ddweud, Onw'r gwahanol yn dweud i gyneth ei wneud o'r bwysig gyda'r cerddwyd. Tyn ni'n gyntaf i gyfnodd iawn, ar gyfnodd iawn, o'r Llyfrgell BBC. Mae'r cyfnodd iawn. Felly oeddwn i chi'n cael ei gyd yn dweud i chi eich bod yn ymdweud ac yn dweud i chi. Dwi'n credu'r ffordd ar y gall. First of all, dweud roedd chi'n gweithio'r bwysig? Fy flynyddoedd gyda'r bwysig. But don't lose them because otherwise you won't be able to get anywhere in the building afterwards. Otherwise it looks like you… some of you have heard me… Right, we're just going live so please, could you stand by please? I'm going live at the World Economic Forum in Davos. What about the optimism? Can any of us have any optimism that the deepening world economic crisis will be reversed anytime soon? Mae'r bwysig dyfod i'r hollwch. Felly efallai i ni weithio ar y dyfodol bywyd. Mae'r peth o'r rhan o'r cyffredinol. Felly mae'n rhan o'r cyffredinol, felly mae'n amser gyda'r cyffredinol yma, fel y gallwn ar y cwrdd. Mae'n oed yn safbwynt, sy'n sicr cyflym yn ymgyrch. Mae'n fyddfynol o'r cyffredinol. Mae'n oed yn fwy hwn o'r gaf iawn. Mae'n gwybod bod ychydig i chi, Mae'r ddŵfau o maen nhw, oedd 150 o ddŵfau yna, oedd 50 o ddŵfau ar y cyfry charts dygo i ddŵfaf a ddŵffa rhifordd yn ddesig i ddŵfau. Byddai gweld 5 o 6 munud ar gwaith. Dwi'n rhaid i'n mynd i'w amser i'w ddŵfau yma. Felly ond rŵa'n rhoi ddŵf yn ei gweldoedd jedithi ar fy tŵm sydd. Felly ond yn gallu'n eitwm mae'r dŵfio'r pen, elefderau i ni wedi gweld yn siaradol, in the audience can help contribute to that. I can get the messages coming up here. So you can contribute without necessarily raising your hand. We have been soliciting for contributions, and several people have offered to speak already, and some of them are in the front row. So don't think that we've pre-selected them, but they took up the invitation which is widespread to contribute beforehand. And so we've got an idea o'r myfyrdd yr oedd yn bwysig i'r ffyrdd yn gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. Fy yw'r bwysigol Cymru o'r fath, oedd wedi'i hynny'n gwasanaeth yn ffyrdd y fath o'r fath yn y fath o'r fath, ac mae'n gwneud o'r bwysigol. Felly mae'n gwneud. Yn yr un o'r ddweud, wrth gwrs, mae'n gwneud ymddangos y fath, ac mae'r fath o'r fath o'r fath o'r fath o'r fath o'r fath, shear them during a debate not because the debate was bad because they were jet lag. If you feel you're going to have to leave before five to 10, could you just position yourself on one of the fringes. We are going to be live and it would be much better if you didn't disturb the feeling in the audience by just sort of moving across because it looks pretty impolite. Now I have said in the past. Don't look at your health phones and so on the this is now integral to this gyda'r cyflym sydd wedi'u ffurdig, yn y ffordd y dyfodol yw'r amser, yn ddefnyddio'r ffordd a'u hynny. Yn y ffrin, ddweud, ydych chi fyddai'n gweithio'n gweithio, ddwy'n gweithio, dwi'n ddweud, oherwydd mae'n ddweud yn ei gweithio a'r gweithio'n gweithio'r ffyrdd ychydig ddwy'r gweithio'r ffordd. Felly, ddych chi'n credu i'r amser. Felly, mae'n ddweud fyddi o'n credu amser, Dwi'n ystafell a dwi'n rydyn. Dwi'n mynd fyddwch yn rhoi'n ei hwnnw yn gyflo'n ddullon. Efallai ymlaen, ond byddwn yn ei gweithio o'r ymlaen a bwysigio a'n mwyaf i'r Eidio Bwysigio. Ond o'r ymdabwysigio ym乞ch Wbidio'r Llywodraeth Gwlad Wlad Argynnu'r Merthyn i ddigitalel yn gweithio. Rhaid iddw i ffynol. Mae'r detrwladau hynny, er mwyn o'r modlol chi cefnogaeth ac rhaid at ystod yn felw y cwmp— Rwy'n rhaid o'n rhan, wrth gydol gyntaf mwylo. Rwy'n dechrau i chi wedi gwybod yw'r rhagor. Mwneud i ddim yn gallu yma, er mwyn i ddim yn gallu i chi. Bydd y ddweud a'r ysgawdd arall, ac ychydig wedi arnynt i chi, y gallwn go fawr y nhw, mae'r wych, mynd i chi nes ar ddi. Thank you all for coming. Which way would you like people to move quickly? Which is the other side? I've got the left. Here. What do you mean on that side, you'd like them to move to this side? Could I just, in two minutes, ask you if some of you could move over to here please? Thank you. Angle, could you just look at camera one which is over there, thank you? We're moving people there. Mark, dwi'n ddweud, ddweud i'n dweud, mae'n ddweud oherwydd mae'r ymddangos y camera yn ysgol, ddweud i'n ddweud. Pascal, ddweud ddweud o'r DgDocs ar gyfer hyn. Rydyn ni'n mynd i gael lawer o mosquitos yn ddweud. Mae'n ddweud o'r llwyddo ar gyfer amser. Rydyn ni'n ddweud o'r edythau gwir. Ond e. Rydyn ni'n ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud. Rydyn ni'n ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud. ...odd yn gyntaf am ydydd. OK, gallwn. OK. OK, rwy'n creu bod gweithio'n dweud cyfnodfa. No. Kerry, rydyn ni'n fathau? Pascal, rydyn ni'n fath i'n gwneud yna, sy'n fathau amser gyda'n ddim, OK? Mae'n gweithio'n gweithio'n fathai o'r eich llwyll. Mae'n rhaid i'r ddechrau i'r fath... ...o ffordd i'r gwybod yn gweithio'n gweithio'n dweud ..en y gwaith cyffredinol yn ymwneud y ddechrau... ..y ddechrau'r gael i'r ddechrau'r blaenau... ..y'r ddechrau'r craysu euro-zone... ..y ddim yn y 1930-rhyw sydd ym môl yn ymddyliau'r dda. Yn ymdyn nhw, Lleol Brenard, yng Nghyrchu Sgwrdd... ..y'r Gweithfyrdd i'r Gweithfyrdd Tim Gwaith... ..yndogodd Gweithfyrdd i'r Gweithfyrdd Tim Gwaith. Nouriel Robini yn y gweithfyrdd... ..y'r gweithfyrdd yn gweithfyrdd... ..dechrau iawn i gael y demesigadau ar gyfer yng Nghymru. Yng Nghymru yn ystod yw'r adnod yma, Dr Ddwym. Angle Goria yn y llyfr yn y gweithio gyngorol... ..yng Nghymru yn dyfodol yn cymrydol o gweithio... ..yna cymryd yw 34 o gymryd ysgrifennu... ..ynd yn y cyfrifio mewn gwir. Dwi'n gweithio, yn ddechrau gyda Sfiadn... ..eul wedi eu dweud yng Nghymru yn ymgyrch... ..eol yng nghymru yn ysgrifennu... o bwysig o'r economiaeth swedin, mae'n gwaith yn y cyfnodfod. Yn ysgrifennid ar y panel, rwy'n amserio. Mae'n ceisio ar gyfer o ddweud o'r ddiweddau global i gael ddweud o ddweud o'r panel yw ddigonwys, ymddefnyddio, a'r ddweud. Aelodd yn ymgyrch ar Davos oherwydd ar y ffyrdd, mae'n trefio'n ddweud ar gael yr hyn ysgrifennidau, yn ysgrifennidau, ddweud o Davos. Well, our debate issue is 2012, the year for capitalism to be reinvented. Question mark, let me just check with our audience here, who thinks capitalism is without flaws and does not need to be reinvented. Does anyone think that? There are two or three people here, we'll hope to hear from you later. How bad are things? Well, let's get a swift view please of the way things are moving. Angle Gwria, the view from the OECD. Capitalism is with a K, you know, it used to be a bad word. I'm going to talk about market economies rather than capitalism. And I don't think we have to reinvent it, we just have to have good policies. Good economic policies, fiscal policies, growth policies, employment policies, social policies, environmental policies, we're going to get it right. So it's not a question of saying that we have to reinvent capitalism or substitute it for some of the alternatives. We know that they did not work in the past. Are you optimism or pessimistic at the moment? Yes, I'm optimistic that we know what the solutions are. I'm less optimistic about whether we are actually taking the right decisions to put them in place. Lail Brenard, your assessment at the moment from the US Treasury? I think the big challenge for us in the US and I think it's the same challenge with different characteristics for China and for the Euro area is to grow differently. Going into the crisis, there were large imbalances and growth was increasingly unfair, unequal. Going forward, we're very focused on charting a path on growth that is more balanced and more fair. In the US it means really restoring the American dream, making sure that American families have a fair share and a fair shot, not through excessive leverage that they cannot afford, but through the ability to raise their earnings and their children to school and to reinforce social mobility in the US. Does it need a new form of capitalism or not? I think it requires large and difficult reforms and let me say also that China needs to address some of its imbalances internally in equality and if it does so in a way that boosts the role of the domestic consumer, it will also help address some of the international imbalances that led to this crisis. Anders Borg, your assessment, how difficult are things? Well, I think we need to reinvent the way that companies and economies is functioning. I think there will be no litigimacy for the market system if we're only talking about short-term profit. So companies have responsibilities to their employees, to the society. We cannot have a situation where the companies are only concentrating on bonuses and not paying the taxes. So, yeah, we need to have more of a social market economy, I think. A different kind of capitalism, can it be redefined? Can it be reinvented? More social, more responsible, but we also need to understand that also the political side of things that welfare states need to be forming in the years ahead of us. Nouriel Robini. I would say there is a crisis of capitalism, but there are many different types of capitalism. There was a model that was the Anglo-Saxon model of laissez-faire free market, not even prudential regulation supervision of the financial system, and that model has proven broken during the last financial crisis. We need proper regulation supervision. There was another model that was the social welfare state of continental Europe, but now we are seeing that that social welfare state is also in a crisis. You have deficits and debt that are becoming unsustainable. Now there's a third model that is emerging of what people refer to as state capitalism, what is being done in China, maybe in part in Russia, in some emerging markets. It's sort of working right now in China, but the Chinese themselves say this is not a model that is sustainable and balanced, and eventually having too much reliance on state-owned enterprises, even in these economies, is going to prove dangerous. So we have really to rethink about how we have the right balance within markets, government, public policy, private enterprise. Well, let me put a few points we've already been getting in here from Howard Buffett, who's the grandson of one of the world's richest men, Warren Buffett, now running his own foundation. He emailed us beforehand saying capitalism is the greatest driver for development and wealth creation, but at a cost, how to make it much fairer for the long-term, values-based? Angle Gurria, your nodding agreement. Absolutely, because that is a great challenge. It's not that we need to change the base of the philosophy of a market economy, but we need to do it not only stronger, we need to do it cleaner in many ways, and that's environmental, but also get rid of some of the uglier aspects, the darker aspects, but we need to make it fairer, and fairer is something that is missing. Inequalities are growing, unemployment and inequalities together are creating the ignados and people taking Taihiir Square and people occupying Wall Street all over the world because we are in danger of frustrating a whole generation. Leo Brenner, just picking up on that issue from Howard Buffett, there's a cost at the moment, a cost. There, the grandson of one of the richest men in the world. Well, you know, in the U.S., you saw it going into the crisis. We did not have supervision in the financial system. We had all kinds of unsound and predatory practices in consumer finance. The incentives in the financial system were terribly skewed to the accumulation of leverage financial institutions operating with unsound capital buffers, and we're engaged in a very fundamental overhaul of our financial system under the Dodd-Frank Act that will lead to a very different set of incentives, and we hope a set of incentives that will nurture the real economy, that will nurture investments in job creating areas in the U.S. economy, and that it will lead to a much more, again, fair pattern of growth, balanced pattern of growth. But I think I would go back just to the interdependence among some of the major areas of the world economy. The story in the U.S. in the middle part of the last decade, I think it's very difficult to disentangle that from the very unbalanced growth model that the Chinese were engaged in at the time, which was extraordinarily resource intensive, depended heavily on cheap labour, cheap credit, excess utilization of resources, an undervalued exchange rate, and led to massive underconsumption in the economy and excessive dependence on exports to the advanced economies. Right. OK, Leil Brennan, thank you. But let me just move on with that issue. We've had Facebook, Faith Cotongae here, saying capitalism is some sort of economy tyranny. Well, I mean, I think to be clear, you can combine efficiency in high growth with low inequalities. We're in this country with high growth and high social mobility with very low degrees of inequality. Paradoxically, this is partly due to that we spent the last 20 years to reform our welfare state. So, it's not only that the market has to be more social, it's also that the social side of the economy of the welfare state needs to be more market-based. What has happened in the last few years has been a massive increase in income and wealth inequality, not just in the United States, but as the OECD has also suggested, in many other advanced economies, we've seen also this rise in inequality, also in China and other emerging markets. That's becoming a social and political problem. Now, inequality is due to many complex events. You have 2.5 billion Chindians joining the global labour supply and, therefore, the wages and the jobs of unskilled workers in U.S. Europe and Japan are affected. You have winner-take-all effects. You have the effects of regressive taxation. You have technological changes biased towards skills workers rather than unskilled ones. There are many factors that work, but unless we deal with this rising inequality, we'll see a lot of instability. As was pointed out, it's the Arab Spring. It's Occupy Wall Street. It's the riots in London. It's the middle class in Tel Aviv saying, I cannot afford the home. It's the Chilean students saying, I cannot afford education. Even in China, on the microblocks, people are saying I'm tired of corruption, of inequality and of this problem. So it's a phenomenon that's global. Let's pick up on that with Celil Shetty from Amnesty International. You want to build on this point, Celil. Thank you, Nick. I think certainly the view on the street for the ordinary people I think is that what we've seen in the last year is corporate greed. Bankers, financial sector people really sort of getting away with murder, literally, and government complicity. Governments and corporations being in bed with each other. So the question is, where is the... Is that capitalism? Is you worry about capitalism or the way they've been behaving, though? From Amnesty's perspective, it's not an ism issue. It's an issue about what is the impact on human rights. And I think what we are seeing, it's moving from a financial crisis to a human rights crisis. So the two questions, one is to the final, where is the accountability? A lot of the people who actually cause the crisis are walking around here in the World Economic Forum. Is there any accountability? And the second part is, are we going to repeat the mistakes all over again? Because what the crisis response people are proposing is to cut further. And the poorest sections, the most vulnerable sections and women are going to be further affected due to the response, which is to cut back on expenditure. Are we going to repeat mistakes? Leil Branard. I think there is an inherent tendency in capitalism during periods of boom towards excesses that we see recurring crises. But what matters hugely, obviously, is the balance between the sector of the society which is supposed to hold the financial sector accountable and how strong your supervisory regulatory environment. In the US, we clearly had massive distortions in the system of incentives, and we are working hard to fix those. And I think if you look at, in the era of compensation, for instance, some of the reforms that we're putting in place with seon pay and risk-based incentives, again, if you look at the attempts to address predatory practices in the consumer finance era, these are fundamental reforms. If we had them in place leading into the crisis, we would have had a much different experience. I worry your reports are pretty brutal about this issue. Yes, indeed. And I'm reminded, was it that heat that set the unacceptable face of capitalism? Well, I think compensation is one of them. But it can be regulated. It can be codified. The only problem is, it looks like we didn't learn very much. You know, you have to read Nouriel's book about what brought about the crisis. And this was one of the things that brought about the crisis, unchecked greed. And now it's happening again. So we don't seem to have learned the lesson. This is a warning shot. We need to continue to focus on that particular issue. That was, by the way, this is not going to solve the problems. It is simply causing this enormous social irritation and adding to the polarization of public opinion and to the indignation of the public. Picking up Celio Cetiz's point, though, Anders Borg, you have to sit with a lot of finance ministers and other ministers around the European Union. Are they going to make the same mistakes? Are they going to allow these kind of mistakes to continue? I mean, if we're looking at Greece, Italy and Spain, they have not had too much of flexible labour market and globalization, but too little. And it's not clear that structural reforms need to increase inequality. For example, Italy, they need to get females onto the labour market to improve gender equality. That is a hidden resource of the Italian society. And if that would happen, it would also equalize income. So right reforms can also improve cohesion if they are implemented in a good way. No, Robini, do you believe that those at the top have learned from their mistakes and therefore Celil Cetiz will get a positive answer, which is we're moving in a different direction which won't repeat these mistakes? I'm not sure. The reforms they have done in the financial system are not enough. The issue of distorted compensation of bankers and traders have not been addressed. How we regulate derivatives will have to see banks were too big to fail now because of consolidation have become even bigger to fail. Are we going to be able to break them up if another crisis does occur? I think there are many question marks about this issue. And in the meanwhile, we have recurrent to not only situation which has too much private debt. The crisis was caused by too much debt by households, by banks, by corporates. Now because of the policy response, we have too much debt in the public sector and too much deficits. And therefore there is now risk of sovereign debt crisis as well. So we are in a very fragile world in which there is a lot of macroeconomic, financial, fiscal, regulatory, taxation uncertainty, but now also political policy and also geopolitical. So it's a very delicate and certain world. Angel Gourier, just before we go, go on to a few more tweets and Facebook coming in. This issue of leadership, you have been very critical in your reports about leadership, its ability to learn from what's happening and not to repeat it. There is an asymmetry. We know what the solutions are. We know we've got to deal with Greece. We know we've got to deal with the banking system, capitalisation and liquidity. We know we have to deal with the firewalls and we know what size of firewalls have to be to be credible and we know we have to deal with unemployment, we know we have to deal with inequalities and we don't. And it's been 18 months and two years and 30 months and we still don't and that is causing an enormous cost to society. Uncertainty has already cost maybe 20, 30, 50 times the total size of the Greek debt. Let me move on with Facebook from Richard Johnson. Capitalism hasn't failed. This is an opportunity to improve it. A more moral capitalism should emerge. Profit, but not at any cost. Andersborg, you're not in agreement. No, I strongly agree with that. We want to have strong owners and entrepreneurs but they must direct their energy and their force also to society. Investing in long-term technology and also behaving in a way that they are strengthening their employees by providing education. The issue here of profit. In other words, profit is there's too much of it but not at any cost. That's what that Facebook says. Well, I definitely agree. If you see profit by taking money out of our Swedish society for example and putting them on Channel Island and avoiding your taxes, that's bad. If you're providing profit by an entrepreneurial product that's improving the world, that's good. But there must be a moral difference between the kind of profits and the business side must behave in a much more moral and sensible manner. In addition to the moral aspect of unfairness of inequality it's not even efficient because we are redistributing right now income from labour to capital from workers to firms from poorer people to richer people but those who are workers and poorer have a greater marginal propensity to consume and spend while firms and richer people to save rather than spend. So that redistribution of income is reducing overall aggregate demand and is reducing jobs and income growth and therefore growth rate of the economy. So in addition to the moral issue of the unfairness of it from an economic point of view it doesn't make sense. Today the share of labour income in the United States is 58% the lowest we've had in decades used to be 64%. That is an economic effect. That's one of the reasons why that is your profit. That's a perception out there. There's too much profit. The cost of profit is simply too high certainly and that's what this current crisis is showing. Look, in the U.S. system let me just speak to that. Capitalism, that's not the issue. The issue is how does U.S. society and government create incentives on the one hand to ensure that capital is directed to productive uses that generate jobs that invest in the long-term competitiveness of our real economy and essentially a tax system that ensures that that core U.S. value of social mobility, equality of opportunity is safeguarded. Of course we didn't have that under the previous administration. What we had were tax cuts for the wealthiest part of society which as Nouriel said was already gaining the largest shares of the gains and so we have to go back to the critical reforms that are taking right now looking at the tax system looking critically and making deep and I differ with Nouriel on this we are making deep fundamental reforms to the structure of a financial system that will make it sounder and safer in the future. I think this is perhaps one of the problems. It's not capitalism and it's not even profit frankly it's absolutely legitimate to have the proper kind of profit. The problem is you mentioned leadership in the case of the United States for example because we focus too much on Europe. It seems that today because of the political polarization it's difficult even to agree on the time of the day much less to make these very fundamental changes that are required. Now President Obama has been pushing job projects he's been pushing for healthcare he's been pushing migration issues he's been pushing and all of them are either stalled or are being challenged by a very polarized public opinion. This is uppermost in the minds of the people it's not challenging capitalism or profits it is whether the governance of the process and that is in Japan whether we've had seven governments in the last six years or and 13 or 17 changes in the 34 countries of the OECD and the people who are leading politically or the problem of the lack of capacity to agree in Europe or in the United States. This governance issue is just as important because it's challenging capitalism ideologically or talking ill about profits. Right we're getting a lot of tweets and other things coming into the moment George Manjoo who's actually here in the auditorium saying that we need a cleaner responsible capitalism take away some of the uglier aspects. Why are you saying that? Because I think the focus has so far been on profits and not too much on some of the issues that already the panel talked about which is inequalities particularly youth employment etc and that's the reason why I say that. But capitalism itself are you against capitalism? I think we should make money because that's efficient as an economic reason to it but we also need to look at the other aspects that were mentioned before. What do you think needs to be worked on then? I think going back to the governance point that was mentioned I think that's where how policies are set, how the leadership things, how the decisions are made, I think that needs to be different from how it was done so far. Can I move across to Nairie Wood who's from the school of government in Oxford University, your worries about jobs? Yes I've got two concerns but one is what about the short termism of capitalism? At its core is the publicly owned company at Davos last year there was a discussion which said look the CEOs are only there for three or four years the shares change hands four times a day the boards are not independent or expert but who's holding them to account where would each of you begin to make the companies which fire capitalism more long termist? And what have each of you done personally what's the most significant thing you've done in the last year to create jobs? This issue of long termism, Angoguria? Well we've been looking at the multinational enterprise code of conduct at the corporate social responsibility of enterprises at the corporate guidelines we've updated them, we've upgraded them and precisely with an eye on the medium and the long term and the permanence of... Does anyone take any notice though? Yes they are taking notice more and more I think millions of people are better off because these things are happening even if they don't know who they owe it to we won't charge them for any author's rights anyway And his books? Well we actually had the highest private sector employment growth of the whole OECD area last year so I think we did pretty well in creating... Why was that? Well I mean we have been very consistent in building structural reforms and also investing in education so I mean education I think is a very important thing here we have the highest degree of social mobility for one reason that is is because we are providing free good public education for everybody and the lowest inequality This issue of long termism though Leobren when you are sitting in Washington and you have to look at the short term versus the long term, this worry of Nary Wood there about long termism I'll tell you our concerns about the long term have to do with the ability in the U.S. of our political system to come to grips with the long term challenges of growth and fairness in our economy and so you see it in the debate over our fiscal future we have to be able to come together across the political spectrum and agree that the solution has to be balanced over the medium over the long term entitlements need to be on the table but so to do revenues in order to invest in the long term financial solidity of our country with regard to the competitiveness of our economy infrastructure investments in the U.S. have been neglected for too long and we need to find a way for us to come together across the public sector and the private sector to invest in the fundamental long term competitiveness of our economy the long term versus the short term problem it's a problem as was pointed out but in the private sector given governance of corporations of banks and so on and in addition there is also the problem we have privatised gains in good times and socialised losses in bad times but there is also a problem in the public sector because we live in democracies that's good but there are these electoral pressures and you have to be re-elected because policies imply short term costs and benefits only in the medium term or long term is hard because you might not be re-elected in the case of the Eurozone unfortunately we have 17 countries 17 governments, 17 coalitions they cannot agree within the wrong coalition let alone with the opposition let alone internationally and that's a source of gridlock of delay in the policy response and market then reacting to it and we need also to coordinate policies at the international level because many of these problems are not national they are super national so you need those international policy governance at the international level Let me give you an idea of some of the responses we are getting in certainly on Twitter here from Aglina Marini, ok profit but not at any cost who is going to say how much from Florian Minga is capitalism to allow corporations to violate human rights let's rethink a market economy that respects rights and another one here where do the youth fall into this equation the next generation in other words no one is talking about how they can be part of the solution you are nodding your head in agreement there well you know in our country this issue of youth comes right back to the same question about making choices across generations you know our fiscal debate is fundamentally about how do we share the gains and the losses across generations are we going to make the longer term cuts raise the revenues that will enable our young population to get the skills they need for instance to be productive members of society but you know we go back also to this earlier question that was asked about in some of the Arab Spring countries it was not that those countries had too much or too little of capitalism they had a set of institutions that were not democratic so you had youth women who were not included in the decision making as a result you had an economy that did not provide real opportunities for youth for women and that is the fundamental shift in fairness that's being addressed we hope right now Nick on the question of how much profit it's very simple competition competition innovation innovation innovation that will bring profits down to its natural healthy level I would say you can't define arbitrarily it depends on each sector it depends on whether there's a market leader or not whether taking advantages open it to competition block all the disadvantages the obstacles to competition have more open markets internationally eliminate protectionism trade protectionism investment protectionism foreign exchange protectionism and we'll be better off and we'll find the right level of profit Leir Brenard mentioned Egypt let's go to Mohammed Elhaw a global shaper as they called here between 2030 one of the new entrepreneurs you've been tweeting during this debate you're a founder and chief executive of the Talida foundation and you come from Egypt one of the things that actually made the revolution getting stuck right now in Egypt is that there was no vision and if I recall from Alice in Wonderland when she was lost where do I ought to go which road do I ought to take and he asked her where do you want to go she said it doesn't matter which road do you need to take you're speaking about developing leaders we're constantly debating what is the method but we don't know where we're going what is our vision we need to develop leaders to be visionary we lack visionary leaders and then we can start discussing the method so I think we need to change the question where are we going that you need a new capitalism that quote is inclusive of the new world dynamics what do you mean by new world dynamics what I mean by that is that the young people are no longer looking for the one leader the saviour they need inclusion, they need collaboration they need open platforms these old things of structure programs structure curriculums are not working anymore so we need things that are more open and include more people in the decision making rather than having one person deciding everything Anders Borg there, the perception from the 20 to 30 year olds who are already very successful uncomfortable about the state of the economic system at the moment well I agree that we need to see more less of inequality because it is also a political factor in this crisis societies that are divided are not able to deal with crisis or continue to reform in the long term so we need to find broad based political support for going forward and that means that social cohesion is also a political asset in terms of being able to continue to reform so for any country to build an inclusive political and economic strategy I think is at the core of starting a long period of growth and sustainable development this need for a real new adaptation Nero Robini this coming from the next generation which I've been hearing a lot of here in Davos well I think that social media can make a big difference because in addition to traditional democracy I think that from the Arab Spring to what happened recently in Russia to the fact that in China you have 300 million people on their own version of Twitter complaining about inequality and corruption to the fact that even in the United States a recent law was pushed back by having a popular movement just last week saying over the internet, Twitter, Facebook we don't want certain piracy laws and so on I think there is ways to have more direct democracy in which people can express their views, the young those who are not in the political system is going to make a difference so we want democracy that is more inclusive but more inclusive means to give voices to the young, to women, to poor to people that are not in the traditional political process and from this point of view the internet, the social media can help to make a good difference Andersborg you are a politician are the politicians listening to this social media some of which we are getting here on the world debate that accountability has been stepped up over the last few years, but do the politicians realise the obligations now? We have an obligation to listen obviously I mean an open society is based on the fact that criticism and discussion can take place and if you look at Europe for example it has been quite clear that governments that has not been able to tackle the crisis has not been re-elected so I think also the political game is changing here, you need to be long term to be able to have votership. Well there Brenard let me come to you a recent pure research centre polled in the US said that only 50% of Americans react positively to the term capitalism 40% reacted negatively among Americans aged 18 to 29 more had a negative view of capitalism than a positive view now this at a time when for example one Facebook near Serentill is saying we need stakeholder capitalism instead of shareholder capitalism but that point particularly about understanding the new generation out there who are disillusion because they can see what's going on I think in the US the answer is very clear we've seen increasingly skewed income distribution we have an educational system that is not doing its traditional job of providing equality of opportunity regardless of the child's parents incomes and we have a lot of work to do to redress the imbalances the unfairness that's grown up in our system and we'll do it in a way and we'll do it in a way I think that will be very responsive to the young generation just going back to this question about open platforms though it's not just a question in places like Egypt of open platforms for governance which I think are critically important but also creating the ability for young people to start businesses and that goes right back to the form of capitalism can young people in the Egyptian economy get access to finance to start small businesses so it's really democratising capitalism as well as the political system but let me put it to you, is there a kind of generational time warp even in Washington where you're thinking the old think rather than the new think which the next generation are clearly wanting I think in fact in Washington it's very much focused on opportunities for the new generation and looking forward to the future of our country and realising we've got to get ourselves out of some of these stale debates and move forward on a fiscal compact that is fair and balanced and move forward on addressing the long-term competitiveness of our economy Public perceptions here, Angoguria Frankly I think in Washington it's the other way around President Obama is the one who is leading the charge and the time warp is right there and the two will not mix Just a question about ruling or governing and listening to the social networks, this is fine but in the end rulers are elected to take tough decisions even if they meant not be popular and if you're looking at the polls every day of every one of your decisions and seeing whether it's going to be popular or not the result can be rather disastrous because you end up not taking the necessary decisions and by the way I don't agree that in the Middle East they don't know what they want, we get the same recurrent demand to say that is ways to encourage jobs to create jobs, governance anti-corruption transparency the things that will underpin a healthy vibrant economy a healthy vibrant democracy again and again and again the same demand even from government that change they come back the same and the fight against corruption in particular is one very very strong one Let me give you one tweet we've got here from Tudyshokan I think that the main issue is how to regulate the incredible greed of Wall Street and the city in fair ways Now I'm putting that on the agenda because of course for the last three years that has been the issue but that is still the perception Norio Robini Certain there is a perception that nothing changed that in good times there were profits, there was restaking there was excessive compensation that we privatized those gains and then when the mess occurred we socialized the losses and we put them on the balance sheet of the governments and we've created a massive public debt problem we also have a question of fairness of the taxation in United States labor income is taxed up to 35% while various sources of capital income whether it's capital gains, dividends estate taxes or charity interest is taxed much lower as low as 15% or even lower so a worker may pay 35% marginal rate while a private equity investor pays 15% that's not fair and is becoming a social and political issue so those are the kind of things that throughout the world we have to address otherwise there will be real backlash against it But this issue again of the Occupy movement it hasn't really taken off in many ways in terms of numbers but it's made an impact is this a real hostage of what is coming for politicians Lea Brenard we've had it here in Davos as well I think that if you look at the changes that are moving forward in our financial system they are profound the Dodd-Frank Act is profoundly transformative Do the public understand that? I think it will take time for us to see the full impact of that Do you have time though? Our banks are already running with capital buffers that are three times as great as they had going into the crisis leverage is much reduced we are now seeing rules being written to regulate for the first time the derivatives markets to bring them out of the shadows to subject them to the same kind of transparency that we have on many bank transactions I think you're seeing already the impacts of some of the compensation reforms and we're hoping to move forward on this very significant transformation of consumer finance practices in the US so I think those things will take time these are structural changes but they are extraordinarily significant and I think you will see the result being a much better allocation of capital towards productive uses You say it takes time Lea Brenard but on the other hand the perception out there is not enough is being done fast enough it's not just in the financial area the politicians here on the panel do the politicians get what is happening it's cold in many capital cities at the moment spring is coming, there's a lot of anger a lot of people in the public sector are going to start losing their jobs around the world is this something which is looming as a dark shadow for the politicians I think we must also see this that the voters are grown up and very realistic I mean now for example in Italy they've done substantial pension reforms we've actually seen a very mature reaction from the voters and it's very important that when we're talking about reforms and social cohesion that we're not naive we are not going to recreate unemployment traps and poverty traps we need to have a society based on cohesion that also brings out the growth we cannot see Italy or Spain moving ahead without becoming more competitive and growing better but the public is wanting growth and expecting it much quicker than really delivered by the dynamics of capitalism this contradiction almost I think we also must be fair about democracy democracy is about anchoring your political decisions among the voters and voters want to see what are the consequences how are we going to deal with different principles how are different interest groups going to deal with this so democracy means also that we're not going to do a systematic change over all our system but that we have to do a gradual piece more changes How much is this a looming shadow at the moment do you think Angle Gurreir the public and their concern the occupy movement even though it's quite modest at the moment This is a very obvious part of the problem today take the question of the firewall you mentioned a while ago well what is the condition well there will be a bigger firewall to the extent that there is a de facto fiscal union and maybe a de jure fiscal union at some point in time Le Rigeur has to be there Le Rigeur must be de Rigeur oh no this is okay the problem is that takes years to put together and the firewall needed to be there six months ago and it needed to be big credible the big bazooka had to be in place it's not there yet as we speak today and the credibility is not there yet the losses continue to accumulate the uncertainty continues to accumulate the trust continues to be destroyed because of this asymmetry the timing considerations there has to be a bridge and there has to be a lot of explanation has to be capital political capital spent saying it is not possible to get us out of this thing in three months and six months but there is a clear roadmap and that roadmap has to be explained for democratic purposes to get legitimacy there's irritation out there a lot of people are still not convinced here for example from Akasim Usman a tweet capitalism as a concept is good but the problem is the capitalist that hijacked the capital from society Nuro Rupini well in the greatest IMF reports they worried about maybe a repeat of the 1930s if you think about it in the 1920s do you agree your doctor do I say there is a risk in the 1920s there was a gilded age there was a rising inequality there were financial and speculative excesses then were the stock market crash because of the wrong policy response it led to the great depression then were trade wars currency wars, capital controls the false inflation and then because of the social and political instability that came out of that with the rise of a bunch of authoritarian regimes in Germany, in Italy, in Spain in Japan and we ended up with World War II now I'm not saying that's what's going to happen but we have to think about the fact that if we don't resolve the fundamental economic, financial fiscal, social and political problem we're facing today is a huge amount of source of instability within countries and across countries so the challenges we are facing are serious and we have to take this problem seriously well let's get a voice from those who are in difficulties who live in difficulties Sheila Patel chair of the slum dwellers international do you think those you represent who are some of the poorest in the world will be convinced by any of the arguments you've heard up here I'm sorry none of this would make any sense to any of them because they're beginning to lose faith not only in their own politicians but this global market forces that are supposed to transform their lives that's what they hear I just want to bring to your notice the fact that there are three things that are happening simultaneously market forces are making cities the growth of engines for development not only in these big economies but all over the world and all the protests that you are talking about are also coming from cities and there are younger economies which are trying to follow all the mistakes that all of your countries have made and they are producing cities in which more people are living informally in slums and informal settlements you're talking about infrastructure in the united states you have to see the crisis in all these cities in the global south livelihoods are getting informal there is no way by which informal entrepreneurs can get anywhere so what we're talking about here is that it's something the OECD has been warning about income disparity this greater inequality which is emerging with capitalism something your president talked about literally a few days ago in the state of the union this issue of inequality it's haunting the capitalist system and in a recent risk report here at the world economic forum they said that not terrorism, not climate change income disparity is the biggest threat of risk to the world I think certainly in the US context if you look at the gains in the earlier part of the decade leading up to the crisis and over a longer term you saw a disproportionate share going to the wealthiest with the lowest part of the income distribution losing and during that time changes put in place to the tax system that reinforced rather than offset those trends and so we need to turn that around in the US we need to turn it around internationally we are working with our international partners to do that I think the single most important thing I'll have to say that we can do right now to lift the people in the poorest countries is to get our own economies back to more sustainable growth to create jobs at home which creates demand around the world but it's also the people in your country the people in the sink areas who can't even afford bus passes at the moment across the US economy in such a way that we bring people back into the labor force unemployment in the US is a terribly destructive force it puts stresses on families it essentially undermines that whole positive spiral of social mobility and so that has to be our number one focus in the US economy has got to be putting people back to work the labor market is a source the largest single source of these inequalities that we're seeing the whole world over so that is where the target should be I just wanted to comment on the slum dwellers representative the process of urbanisation we're not going to turn it back the question is how do we plan the cities how do we provide the services how do we provide the green how do we provide the proper taxation how do we provide the proper water the electricity there is a good quality of life in the cities because the cities if anything are going to continue to grow and the growth is in the developing emerging economies actually in the developed countries the cities are coming they're sprawling and we can work with them a lot better but in the developing countries we're going to have to work very seriously and plan the cities cities is where everything is happening everything is happening in the cities Anders Borg well I think we also must understand the perspective for example from the Germans I agree with Angelo on the firewall but let's also remember we are seeing a right-wing populist reaction in North Europe to this if people are perceiving that money is wasted in bureaucracies inefficiencies and corruption and the capitalism is failing well we must also have conditionality and tough love here it will not be a firewall but that's happening already policies are changing tough decisions are being taken let me go to China because one of the interesting debates literally in the last few weeks has been about state capitalism let's go to Fujun who is Dean of the School of Government at the Peking University in Beijing what kind of capitalism are you comfortable with in China well China is relative speaking very new to the theory and the practice of capitalism or market but the question that we have is we are students to that idea and we are doing practice of capitalism or market oriented capitalism but now the question is it's a very serious question to what extent have we gone wrong in theory and the practice and the question is to what extent can we continue to learn from advanced market economies and vice versa do you have a clarity of what kind of capitalism is emerging well we have been reading very carefully about the great economists like Adam Smith Douglas North, Ronald Kors and we are sensitive to the fine line between hierarchy and the markets and during different stages of development different countries probably will have different proportions to the two lines market and the hierarchy right we are coming to the end of our discussion we are never going to resolve the issue of what future of capitalism but let's get a sense of where you think we've got to and what has to be done, Leo Brenard quickly if you can please well I think we have a system that tended towards large imbalances very uneven distribution of the gains and going forward we have the same challenges I think whether you are in China in the euro area certainly in the US we have got to move forward with growth that is both more balanced and more fair Nourio Robini can that growth come from the current capitalist system with all its flaws at the moment well all the various variants of capitalism have their problem Douglas Axon, let's say a fair model has failed the social welfare system of continental Europe now as a fiscal crisis even state capitalism eventually is going to be problematic for China and countries following it we have to find the right balance that economic activity is going to occur mostly in the private sector private enterprises for those private enterprises to thrive you need to have skills, education investment in human capital infrastructure, public investment and the right balance between a state that provides efficiently a variety of public goods that make then productive activity in the private sector balance so we find the right balance balance and sequence in the euro crisis we decided to build a common currency before having a common fiscal policy now we are finding out that we have to do it all over again and maybe put the sequence right so it's sequence but I would say the politics, the politics, the politics let me put this to you we've just had a tweet from Eric Prenan we don't need elected leaders we can manage ourselves you're an elected finance minister Andersborg we need democracy we need stable societies we need more of social cohesion and reforms we cannot create the solidarity society by building welfare traps so cohesion but also continuous reinventing our own welfare models in Europe welfare models within capitalism can it be fair what we're getting here is tweets which clearly indicate they're not convinced well I'm a European we have a societal model where we are trying to build a social market economy to combine the society with good chances for those worst off for social mobility that is a good model democracy and the welfare state combined with the market is a good model that we have to renovate but have to bring forward also renovate but bring forward that's a great way to end Andersborg thank you very much indeed for joining us we haven't reinvented capitalism but thanks to all of you here in Davos and those who contacted us from around the world we've only heard a small selection we may not have heartened you what lies ahead but I hope at least we've enlightened you on the enormity of what still faces us all for a minute going here at the world debate in Davos in Switzerland bye bye