Has Saudi Arabia turned its back on the dollar?

The news that Saudi Arabia has decided not to renew a supposed agreement with the United States that compelled it to sell its oil in dollars has gone viral online and in the alternative press, sparking debates about the possible decline of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, while pundits in the mainstream media dismissed it as fake news.

The information that went viral online and was repeated by some media outlets last week stated that on 9 June 2024, Saudi Arabia had not renewed its 50-year petrodollar agreement with the United States, according to which it had to sell its oil exclusively in US dollars and invest its surplus in US Treasury bonds.

The debate has focused on the fact that this development may accelerate the de-dollarisation trend, whereby countries seek to reduce their dependence on the US dollar. Thus, further weakening the dollar’s hegemony as the world’s reserve currency and accelerating its decline.

The mainstream media simply ignored the story or dismissed it as “fake news“, citing experts such as Paul Donovan, chief economist at UBS Global Wealth Management, who claims there was never a formal agreement requiring Saudi Arabia to price its crude oil in dollars. Furthermore, Donovan explained, that after the 1974 joint economic cooperation agreement was signed, Saudi Arabia continued to accept other currencies, such as the pound sterling, and it was not until later that year that the Kingdom stopped accepting the pound as payment currency.

Yet, other commentators have also come out lending credibility to the alleged deal: “Since the 1970s, the US has been pressuring Saudi Arabia to sell its crude oil in dollars to protect the dollar’s status and demanding that Saudi Arabia buy US bonds and weapons,” said Shigeto Kondo, senior researcher at the JIME Center of the Japan Institute for Energy Economics.

Let’s review a bit of history

The dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency predates the creation of the petro-currency known as the petrodollar, essentially, oil export revenues denominated in US dollars. That said, we must acknowledge the financial flows, known as petrodollar recycling, whereby the money that Western countries spend buying oil ends up flowing largely back into the US economy through financial investments or the purchase of debt by energy producers.

It is true that this currency pattern established in 1973 was not born out of a contract or a treaty, but out of an agreement, let us call it implicit, initially between the United States and Saudi Arabia and later extended to other OPEC countries, according to which the oil-producing countries agreed to sell their oil in dollars in exchange for protection from the American partner and to reinvest the surplus from oil exports in buying US weapons and debt through Treasury Bonds.

In other words, after an oil crisis called into question the future of the dollar as a reserve currency, especially after France, Germany and other countries cashed in their dollar reserves, the US military became a mercenary military force for theocratic regimes in the Persian Gulf in exchange for ensuring that the dollar remained the currency of choice for oil purchases around the world, perpetuating its demand and value.

This recycling of petrodollars creates an almost unlimited demand for the issuing country’s debt, which allows the US to print large amounts of money (debt) without consequences. Moreover, any leader from this region who has opposed selling his oil in US currency – as Saddam Hussein and Muammar al-Ghadafi did – has been considered a direct threat to the petrodollar, i.e. to US hegemony. These countries were then subjected to a military intervention, which “coincidentally” led to the resumption of selling their oil in dollars.

The reality of a multipolar world

Ultimately, it is irrelevant whether there was a formal agreement between the two countries to use the dollar as the oil trading currency. The global geopolitical and economic context in the 1970s was much different than it is today. The dollar had emerged as the “de facto” reserve currency before any agreement was signed and there was no real alternative.

Today, however, we find ourselves in the context of a multipolar world that is spurring a necessary and inevitable rebalancing of the world order and does not require the expiry of a 50-year-old agreement. At the 2023 Davos Forum, Saudi Arabia’s finance minister, Mohammed Al-Jadaan, announced that the kingdom was open to accepting local currencies for oil trading and reaffirmed his decision on a visit to India last September. Oil sales in other currencies are no longer a novelty.

Over the past two decades, the dollar has gone from accounting for more than 70 per cent of global official reserves to 58 per cent today, according to IMF data. This is not to say that it is in any imminent danger of losing its status as a global currency, far from it, but it is undeniable that its days are numbered. Its supremacy as a trading currency and the hegemony it gives to the United States are being eroded year by year.

If you want to discover the best option to protect your savings, enter Preciosos 11Onze. We will help you buy at the best price the safe-haven asset par excellence: physical gold.

Although the US dollar is nowhere near losing its reserve status, the growing trend towards de-dollarisation is gradually eroding its place at the top of the global financial pyramid. What would be the consequences of ending the dollar’s supremacy as a trading currency?

Since the end of World War II, the US dollar has held the privilege of being the world’s main reserve currency. Even so, in recent years, several countries have redoubled their efforts to move away from the ties that come with relying on the greenback for all trade and financial exchanges.

According to IMF data, the dollar has gone from representing more than 70 per cent of global official reserves in the last two decades to 58 per cent today. This decline has accelerated dramatically over the last year as a result of the growing trend towards de-dollarisation as a defence mechanism against the abuse of economic sanctions by the United States.

This has translated into other global actors encouraging the use of their currencies in bilateral trade and exponentially increasing their gold reserves. In this context, the group of emerging countries that form part of the BRICS economic bloc have not only promoted their own financial institutions with the aim of becoming an alternative to those of the West but are also working on the creation of a new single currency as a counterpart to the dollar for international transactions.

The importance of the petrodollar

The dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency predates the creation of the petrocurrency known as the petrodollar, essentially, oil export revenues denominated in US dollars.

This currency standard was born in 1973 through an agreement, initially between the United States and Saudi Arabia, later extended to other OPEC countries, whereby oil-producing countries agreed to sell their oil in dollars in exchange for protection from the US and to reinvest their surplus in oil exports by purchasing US weapons and debt through Treasury Bonds. This is what is known as petrodollar recycling.

Put another way, after an oil crisis called into question the future of the dollar as a reserve currency, the US military became a de facto mercenary military force for theocratic regimes in the Persian Gulf in exchange for ensuring the dollar became the currency of choice for oil trading around the world, perpetuating its demand and value.

The cost of breaking off the monetary cartel

President Richard Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had devised a perfect plan to keep the United States as the world’s only hegemonic power, but this arrangement depended on the loyalty of the producing countries to sell their oil exclusively in dollars and on the willingness of the United States to deal with these countries’ enemies in the region.

This explains many of the conflicts and wars that have taken place in the Middle East over the past 50 years. Any leader of the region who opposes selling his oil in the American currency – as Saddam Hussein and Muammar al-Ghadafi did – poses a direct threat to the petrodollar, i.e. to US hegemony, therefore these countries have to be “liberated or democratised” by military intervention.

The same interventionist foreign policy that years ago both the UK and US secret services had used against Iran. With the 1953 coup d’état, they overthrew the government by Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh when the Iranian parliament voted to nationalise oil exploitation after the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (APOC) – now British Petroleum (BP) – refused to participate in an audit to verify it paid the contracted royalties and limiting its control over Iran’s oil reserves.

Saudi Arabia turns its back on the dollar

After nearly five decades of an exclusive relationship with the dollar, Saudi Arabia’s finance minister, Mohammed Al-Jadaan, announced at the 2023 Davos Forum that the kingdom is open to accepting local currencies for oil trading and reaffirmed his decision on his visit to India last September.

The fact that the petrodollar’s main supporter is joining BRICS countries that are already trading oil in local currencies, at a time when US imports of Saudi oil are at historic lows and Chinese purchases of the same crude continue to grow, suggests that the kingdom may be preparing for a paradigm shift in the international order.

To be clear, even if oil-producing countries accept other currencies, the dollar will not lose its relevance and international appeal overnight, but if the dominance of the US currency is diluted towards multipolarity, the current geopolitical and economic order could change considerably. Especially when we consider that Russia, Iran and Venezuela, which are under strict US sanctions, hold 40 per cent of the proven oil reserves of OPEC+ members.

Losing the unlimited credit card

Having the world’s reserve currency has allowed the US to run large deficits, both in international trade and public spending, without consequences. Losing the dollar’s hegemony would mean higher financing costs, reduced access to capital, a shock to the stock markets and a devaluation of the currency caused by a decline in demand for Treasury bonds. In other words, the United States, for the first time in many decades, would have to tighten its belt to avoid the collapse of a highly indebted economy.

On the other hand, the impact of a dollar devaluation would likely increase exports and decrease imports, thereby reducing the US trade deficit. In addition, other currencies and safe-haven assets such as gold would likely increase substantially in value in a context in which global capital rushes out of the greenback.

This de-dollarisation could help rebalance the world order and economies not aligned to the West. However, with the threat of the dollar’s possible demise as the world’s reserve currency, it is more than likely that the US and its client states will continue to use their military power to prevent, or at least prolong, the inevitable collapse of the empire.

If you want to discover the best option to protect your savings, enter Preciosos 11Onze. We will help you buy at the best price the safe-haven asset par excellence: physical gold.

Amid the escalation of tension with Iran, a new variable has come into play in global markets: Donald Trump’s tweets —or posts—. Each message shakes the price of oil, stock markets and investors’ expectations. Coincidence or strategy? The line between information and informational advantage is increasingly blurred.

The relationship between war and the economy is not new. Historically, conflicts have affected energy prices, currencies and financial markets. But the current moment introduces a new layer: the immediacy of information, which accelerates any reaction to unprecedented levels.

Political statements, leaks or simple messages on social media can trigger instant movements. In a matter of minutes, oil can move by several percentage points after a political statement. The facts do not need to materialise for the market to react. Perception is enough, expectation is enough. The market no longer waits. It reacts. In recent weeks, a disturbing synchrony has become evident: relevant political communications, immediate oil movements and chain reactions in stock markets.

This correlation is observable with data, but what really raises questions is not the subsequent reaction, but what happens before. When certain movements occur minutes or hours before the information becomes public, the debate ceases to be about volatility and becomes about informational advantage.

The invisible risk: who plays with an advantage

Financial markets are based on a fundamental premise: all participants should have access to the same information. When this does not happen, a structural distortion appears that calls the functioning of the system into question. In the United States, this problem is not new. The approval of the STOCK Act in 2012 already highlighted the risk that public officials could use non-public information to trade in the markets.

In this context, the synchronisation between certain political communications and financial movements reopens an uncomfortable debate: to what extent do markets reflect public information… or informational advantage? It is not about pointing to specific culpabilities, but about understanding the incentives and patterns that repeat over time and that can generate imbalances.

As set out in The current state of the extractive system, the great structures of power have evolved towards more subtle forms of control. Direct intervention is no longer necessary; influencing information is enough. The management of the narrative —political, media or financial— thus becomes a tool capable of generating value, volatility and opportunities. In this scenario, whoever has early access to information does not only interpret the market… they can anticipate it.

Basel III: the system seeks refuge

Faced with this environment, the financial system has begun to react. With the implementation of Basel III, international regulators have strengthened the quality requirements for bank assets. This is a profound change that seeks to restore confidence in a system increasingly strained by volatility and uncertainty.

There is, however, one particularly revealing element: physical gold comes to be considered an asset of the highest quality —Tier 1—. This move is not accidental. It implies recognising that not all financial assets have the same solidity and that not everything can be based solely on trust or on the information available.

When the system demands more real assets, it is implicitly admitting that trust in “paper” is not enough. It is a silent but significant shift, pointing towards a growing need for stability in an environment dominated by volatility and informational asymmetries.

In this context, gold regains prominence not because of tradition, but out of pure logic, because this metal has historically been the refuge when monetary or financial systems become destabilised. It does not depend on any issuer, it cannot be created arbitrarily and it cannot be anticipated with privileged information. “It is, in essence, an asset that exists outside the narrative… and outside the game of information.

Two speeds: speculation vs. value

The current market seems to move in two very different dimensions. In the short term, speed dominates: information, immediate reaction and growing volatility that responds more to expectations than to fundamentals. It is a space where time is measured in seconds and where any stimulus can trigger abrupt movements.

By contrast, in the long term, the logic is different. Here the focus shifts towards the preservation of value and security. When the perception grows that prices may be influenced by early information, investors look for assets less exposed to this dynamic. It is not an ideological question, but a rational response to a system that raises doubts about its own fairness.

A fair market… or only an apparent one?

While some actors can take advantage of these asymmetries, the real impact is distributed across the rest of society. The increase in the price of energy, persistent inflation, the loss of purchasing power and insecurity for savings are its most visible consequences. It is a familiar pattern: the benefits are concentrated among a few actors, while the risks are spread among the majority.

Financial markets are built on an apparently simple idea: equality of informational opportunities. But when this equality is called into question, so is their legitimacy. There is no need to manipulate the market when one can trade before everyone else. It is at this point that trust begins to erode and the foundations of the system are exposed.

In a world where information can move markets in seconds, understanding who has access to what —and when— becomes essential to protect wealth. Because when doubt sets in, capital does not seek explanations: it seeks refuge in what does not depend on time, nor on the narrative, nor on early information. It seeks, simply, what is real. And that, in today’s markets, is increasingly scarce. At La Plaça by 11Onze, we continue to analyse these dynamics to help you make informed decisions in an increasingly complex system.

Protecting savings with physical gold has been one of 11Onze’s main contributions to its community and, now, the range of products is being expanded. That is why, in the face of volatility, still-high inflation and the growing crisis of confidence in the banking system, gold is once again strengthening as a safe-haven asset. Discover Gold Seed at Preciosos 11Onze.

The People’s Bank of China is leading record gold purchases by central banks around the world, up to an all-time high of 800 tonnes since the beginning of the year, in an economic context where countries try to hedge against inflation and seek to decrease their dependency on the dollar.

According to the latest report from the World Gold Council (WGC), central banks have purchased 337 tonnes of gold in the third quarter of this year alone. Although far from beating the record of the third quarter of 2022, accumulated purchases since the beginning of the year have reached 800 tonnes, a year-on-year increase of 14% and a new absolute record.

Persistent inflation, the trend towards de-dollarisation, and the devaluation of some of the world’s major currencies in a context of armed and geopolitical conflicts in Europe, Asia and the Middle East, have spurred purchases of gold as a store of value, maintaining its price at around $2,000 per ounce.

Specifically, the armed conflict between Palestine and Israel and the fear of it spreading to other countries in the Middle East with the subsequent escalation in the price of oil, has contributed to the increase in gold demand and the rise in its value. A fact that has taken many market analysts by surprise, who had expected a decline in gold demand from last year’s record high.

China at the forefront of buying in reserves

The People’s Republic of China’s voracious appetite to buy the golden metal is once again confirmed. The central bank of the Asian giant leads the record of gold purchases after having acquired a total of 181 tonnes since the beginning of the year, increasing its gold holdings, at least officially, to 4% of its reserves.

On the other hand, this increase in gold accumulation has been accompanied by a reduction in its holdings of US Treasury bonds. Although China, along with Japan, remains one of the largest foreign buyers of these securities, the tendency to dump US debt is driven by concerns about the fiscal deficit, the stability of its currency and the effort to untie its economies from the dollar, known as a process of de-dollarisation.

In this context, the WGC forecasts that total investment in gold at the end of the year – including over-the-counter purchases – together with central bank purchases, will exceed last year’s. Unfortunately, the economic and geopolitical uncertainty of recent years has not only increased, but looks set to continue to worsen.

If you want to discover the best option to protect your savings, enter Preciosos 11Onze. We will help you buy at the best price the safe-haven asset par excellence: physical gold.

The automation of work is creating an occupational metamorphosis, in which tasks usually done by humans are transferred to a set of technologies. Economics is not spared, and artificial intelligence is also gaining ground. But are economic forecasting algorithms a real alternative to economists?

As a result of the digitisation process of the last decades, huge amounts of data are being generated that are transforming the methods by which we analyse statistical models. Storing, registering, and analysing this constant flow of information has become an essential task for many sectors of the economy.

A technological revolution has opened up new possibilities in economic and financial forecasting capabilities. The analysis of these large databases, known as ‘big data’, would not be possible without artificial intelligence (AI). A rather broad term that encompasses a whole range of ideas.

Even so, there are two concepts in this field: machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), mathematical algorithms that allow computers to identify patterns in data and make predictions by imitating humans. Two computational advances that form the basis of economic forecasting with artificial intelligence.

An algorithmic crystal ball

Experts often compare algorithmic forecasting to “a crystal ball”. Indeed, this metaphor is the title of an internal study published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), in which the authors of the research, Jin-Kyu Jung, Manasa Patnam and Anna Ter-Martirosyan, try to establish whether macroeconomic forecasting algorithms can improve on the results predicted by IMF economists themselves.

The study applies three different machine learning algorithms to a common economic forecasting problem, and the results are surprising. In all three cases, the algorithmic prediction far surpassed the benchmark performance of IMF economists.

In their observations, the authors warn that there are still factors that require further research. They also state that, for these predictions to be truly effective, real-time observations would have to be included. They explain that there is some freedom in the introduction of the parameters used by the algorithms, and that this may be key to determining their effectiveness.

Even so, in their conclusion they agree on the fact that the potential of machine learning in terms of statistical analysis of economic data is evident; and that, although these predictions made by algorithms cannot fully replace the work of economists, they represent a valuable additional reference when making decisions on economic forecasting.

11Onze is the community fintech of Catalonia. Open an account by downloading the super app El Canut for Android or iOS and join the revolution!

Europe could once again be talking about food rationing. This is not an alarmist headline: it is a direct warning from the heart of the financial system. The question is not only whether it will happen, but what this scenario really implies. Above all, what it says about the fragility of the current economic model and our dependence on factors we do not control. And, even more importantly, what consequences it may have for the daily lives of millions of European citizens.

When Christine Lagarde speaks, markets listen. But this time the message goes beyond monetary policy. The President of the European Central Bank has opened the door to extreme measures such as food rationing if geopolitical and energy tensions persist. It is not the central scenario, but nor can it be ruled out in an increasingly volatile context.

To understand the scope of the warning, we need to look at the global context: an economy still wounded by the pandemic, strained by the war in Ukraine and subject to persistent inflation. Now, the focus is shifting towards the Middle East and critical points such as the Strait of Hormuz. If this key route is disrupted, the world could lose up to 13% of its daily oil supply, with an impact that would go far beyond fuel and end up affecting the entire economic chain.

Energy, scarcity and control: the return of an old ghost

Energy is the circulatory system of the economy. When it fails, everything is affected. It is not only a matter of fuel or electricity: it is the root of all productive activity. When energy costs rise, everything that depends on them becomes more expensive, from industry to the most basic services.

More expensive fertilizers. More expensive transport. More expensive production. The result is inevitable: more expensive food. We have already experienced this recently. After COVID and the war in Ukraine, the cost of living soared while wages lagged behind, causing a sustained loss of purchasing power. And that was in a scenario without extreme supply disruptions.

The problem is that this time it could go further. We are not only talking about inflation, but about possible physical interruptions in supply chains. When there are not enough resources for everyone, the logic of the market gives way to the political management of scarcity. And it is at this point that rationing ceases to be a memory of the past and becomes a real option.

CBDCs: the piece that fits too well

In parallel with these warnings, central banks are accelerating the rollout of digital currencies —CBDCs—. On paper, they are presented as a natural evolution of the financial system: more efficient, faster and with lower transaction costs. A logical adaptation to an increasingly digitalized economy.

But this innovation incorporates a differentiating element that cannot be ignored: control. As has been analyzed at 11Onze in several articles, CBDCs allow full traceability of transactions and open the door to mechanisms of direct supervision over citizens. It is not only a new way to pay, but a tool that could redefine the relationship between the State and money.

Unlike cash, these currencies could:

• Limit what you can buy
• Determine where you can spend
• Impose expiry dates on money
• Apply negative interest rates directly
• Block accounts in real time

In other words, a system in which economic policy ceases to be an indirect tool and begins to act in real time on citizens. Decisions are no longer limited to interest rates or taxes, but can directly affect how, when and on what money can be used. A paradigm shift that transforms economic management into a mechanism of immediate control.

Crisis and control: the logic of the system

This combination —systemic crisis and increased control— is not new. The current economic model has been built, to a large extent, on major shocks: wars, financial crises or global emergencies. These are exceptional moments that allow measures to be implemented which, under normal conditions, would generate strong social rejection.

It is what some economists —such as Naomi Klein— define as the “shock doctrine”. When fear and uncertainty dominate, the room for manoeuvre of governments expands. Citizens, seeking stability, accept profound changes that transform the rules of the economic and social game.

In parallel, pressure on the middle classes continues to grow. Inflation not only increases the cost of living, but also silently increases tax revenue, making citizens pay more without any explicit tax increase. The result is a delicate scenario: less purchasing power, a greater tax burden and a growing dependence on public subsidies which, in an environment of programmable digital currency, could also end up conditioning how and on what they can be spent.

And while all this is happening… gold returns to the centre

In a context of growing uncertainty, central banks are strengthening their reserves with this precious metal, recovering a pattern of behaviour that has been repeated throughout history. This is not a casual decision, but a response to mistrust towards a system that is increasingly under strain.

Gold does not depend on any government, it cannot be created out of nothing or easily manipulated. It is tangible, limited and universally accepted. In this sense, it represents almost the antithesis of digital currencies issued by central banks. That is why, as money becomes digitalized, interest in physical assets also grows. In the end, everything comes down to a question of trust.

But the underlying debate is not technological, but political and social. The uncomfortable question is inevitable: what price are we willing to pay for stability? If energy and food crises become entrenched, exceptional measures may cease to be temporary. And what is presented today as an emergency solution may end up defining the rules of the game in the long term.

We have all the ingredients of a perfect storm: geopolitical tensions, energy dependence, structural inflation, high debt and an accelerated digitalization of the monetary system. Understanding this scenario is not alarmism, but rather responsibility. The system is changing rapidly. And only those who understand what is happening will be able to protect their wealth and their economic freedom.

Protecting savings with physical gold has been one of 11Onze’s main contributions to its community and, now, the range of products is being expanded. That is why, in the face of volatility, still-high inflation and the growing crisis of confidence in the banking system, gold is once again strengthening as a safe-haven asset. Discover Gold Seed at Preciosos 11Onze.

Since the start of the pandemic, Spain’s top 23 billionaires have seen their wealth grow by 29%. At the same time, in the first year of the pandemic alone, more than one million citizens found themselves in a situation of severe material deprivation in the state. This is demonstrated by Oxfam Intermón in a report on growing inequalities in the world. 

According to the NGO, the wealth of the ten richest men in the world has doubled. During the first two years of the pandemic, the wealth of these richest men has risen from $700 billion to $1.5 trillion, or $1.3 billion a day. All this while the incomes of the remaining 99% of the population have deteriorated unchecked.

In fact, Oxfam Intermón also points out that every 26 hours a new billionaire is born in the world, while inequality causes the death of at least one person every four seconds. The director of the NGO, Franc Cortada, said that, currently, the richest of the rich accumulate six times more wealth than the 3.1 billion poorest people in the world. And they have also been responsible for more than twice as much carbon emissions as these millions of poorest people. “If these ten richest men were to lose 99.99% of their wealth tomorrow, they would still be the richest people on the planet,” he said.

According to ‘Forbes’ magazine, the richest men in the world are: Jeff Bezos of Amazon; Elon Musk of Tesla; Bernard Arnault, CEO of Louis Vuitton, and his family; Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft; Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, now Meta; Warren Buffet, chairman of Berkshire Hathaway; Larry Ellison, co-founder of Oracle; Larry Page and Sergey Brin, co-founders of Google; Mukesh Ambani of Reliance Industries; and Amancio Ortega of Zara. Not a single woman on the list.

Inequalities kill

Thus, as the NGO states in the report, fighting inequalities could prevent the deaths of 21,000 people a day. Oxfam Intermón also recalls in the study that, on a global scale, “billionaires have increased their fortune by five trillion dollars, more than in the last 14 years accumulated.” It is, according to the NGO, the largest increase since records have been kept.

The result, says Oxfam Intermón, is “more wealth for a few and more public debt for all.” In addition, it is estimated that inequality between countries will grow for the first time in just one generation. The inequalities caused by the pandemic, according to the report, are particularly severe for women and girls, as well as for all those who are migrants or in situations of exclusion. 

In Spain, more of the same

Oxfam Intermón also notes that, in Spain, the austerity policies implemented during the crisis have been a scourge for the health system, which has withstood the blow of the pandemic in an extreme situation. “We cannot afford to see the public health system collapse,” Cortada said. Meanwhile, the richest people in Spain have seen their wealth increase.

For this reason, the NGO calls on governments, among other measures, to apply more taxes on large fortunes, reorient policies with public funds, combat the gender gap and tackle the climate crisis once and for all. In particular, it reminds Spain that it must seize the opportunity of tax reform, ensure that European funds for the pandemic are “a real and effective opportunity”, reinforce social protection policies and invest in health and education.

11Onze is the fintech community of Catalonia. Open an account by downloading the super app El Canut on Android and Apple and join the revolution!

A mesura que el segle XXI ha deixat enrere el bel·ligerant segle XX, el sistema econòmic s’ha anat fent cada vegada més complex. Pel camí, algunes crisis han estat terriblement violentes i de conseqüències devastadores; altres, anecdòtiques. Finalitzem aquesta radiografia sobre les grans crisis de la història de la humanitat.    

Malgrat que el segle XX és un segle curt, les seves conseqüències afecten encara el nostre dia a dia. La historiografia considera que el seu arc cronològic va des del final de la Primera Guerra Mundial (1918) fins a la caiguda del mur de Berlín (1989), tot i que es podria allargar fins a l’atac de les torres bessones de Nova York (2001). La intensitat dels esdeveniments és de tal magnitud que ens obliga a reflexionar cap on anem. Per això, el segle XXI l’hem iniciat amb un munt de preguntes transcendentals a respondre: la crisi climàtica, el model productiu, el consum, l’habitatge, la relació amb els diners, la tecnologia, la llibertat… Sabrem trobar respostes que beneficiïn el conjunt de les societats?

1929: El megacrac

Hi ha fets històrics… i després hi ha EL FET històric. I, per al món contemporani, aquest l’és. És la frontissa que marca un abans i un després. Una concatenació de decisions polítiques, econòmiques i socials que acabarien portant el món a l’abisme. Les seves causes i conseqüències han estat estudiades per totes les disciplines de les ciències socials. I, encara avui, es pren com la referència per definir si una crisi econòmica tindrà un impacte més o menys gran. Parlem del crac borsari americà de l’octubre de 1929.

L’economia americana de principis dels anys 20 del segle XX es va assentar seguint un esquema purament especulatiu, la qual cosa va provocar un important desfasament entre l’economia real i l’activitat borsària, que s’aniria agreujant i agreujant cada cop més.

Davant del tancament dels mercats europeus i del descens dels preus agraris, el govern americà i els bancs van intentar contrarestar-ho amb l’oferta d’un volum considerable de crèdits. Aquestes mesures van donar lloc a una gran abundància de capitals a curt termini i a l’especulació, especialment a partir del 1926. Per a més desgràcia, les autoritats monetàries no van actuar a temps per posar fre a aquest lucre malaltís.

Així va ser que, en començar l’octubre del 1929, es van produir tendències a l’alça de les inversions. Però quan la venda d’accions es va disparar, el 24 d’octubre es va desfermar el pànic, i el mateix va succeir el dimarts 29 d’octubre. La caiguda de la borsa va ser inevitable a causa de la nul·la demanda d’accions i es va desencadenar una crisi global de dimensions bíbliques. Apocalíptica. Molt pitjor que la crisi anglesa de 1720, atès que va afectar el món sencer.

Fins al 1932, uns 5.096 bancs es van declarar en suspensió de pagaments. El seu esfondrament va arrossegar a la fallida moltes empreses, que veien com s’acumulaven els estocs de mercaderies, cosa que va comportar un important descens dels preus, especialment en el sector agrari. Finalment, el descens de l’activitat econòmica va provocar un augment desbocat de l’atur. 

Per frenar l’hemorràgia del sistema financer, a partir de 1931, la repatriació massiva de capitals nord-americans d’Europa —que havien ajudat a finançar la postguerra de la Primera Guerra Mundial— va provocar les fallides dels bancs europeus, principalment austríacs i alemanys. A partir d’aquí, la història és coneguda. El món sencer es veié abocat a una llarga nit apocalíptica.

1945: Després de l’Apocalipsi

60 milions de morts. Aquest és el cost total en vides que va haver de pagar la humanitat per la Segona Guerra Mundial. La destrucció de ciutats, pobles, infraestructures, paisatges, béns materials, indústria… fou gegantí. Descomunal. La despesa econòmica ha estat xifrada en 200.000 milions de dòlars del 1947, la qual cosa equivaldria actualment a uns tres bilions de dòlars. La devastació d’Europa i parts de l’extrem asiàtic, com ara el Japó, va ser de tal magnitud que el món sencer va experimentar una profunda i dolorosa postguerra. Calia començar a escriure la història de nou amb urgència. Però, quines opcions hi havia?

Igual que havia succeït en el passat en la resolució de conflictes bèl·lics, com ara al Congrés de Viena per redibuixar el mapa d’Europa després de la derrota napoleònica o al Tractat de Versalles després de la Primera Guerra Mundial, la trobada entre vencedors era un fet imminent. Calia projectar el futur i, per aquest motiu, els aliats es van reunir a la ciutat alemanya de Potsdam, l’estiu de 1945.

Els acords van tenir una resolució relativa, perquè es van anar configurant en les següents dècades. Tanmateix, els vencedors van actuar més com a notaris de la nova situació geopolítica que no pas com a cervells de la nova reordenació mundial. Per tant, la Conferència de Potsdam va visualitzar amb claredat la divisió del món en dos blocs. Dos models polítics, socials i econòmics que provocarien diversos conflictes armats de baixa intensitat al llarg de les següents quatre dècades.

L’avenç tecnològic que va suposar la Segona Guerra Mundial portaria la humanitat a sortir a l’espai exterior, a la Lluna i més enllà, però també va suposar el desenvolupament de la bomba atòmica com a arma de destrucció massiva. Aquesta amenaça ha estat emprada des d’aleshores com a instrument de pressió política.

1973: Si jugues amb foc, et pots cremar

Acabada la Segona Guerra Mundial, el model de creixement que va adoptar el món occidental, inclòs el Japó, es va basar en el consum massiu de petroli. D’aleshores ençà, l’economia d’Occident ha tingut una forta dependència d’aquest recurs limitat. I és ben sabut que, si vols que la teva economia funcioni correctament, has de saber quines són les teves amistats i ser conseqüent amb els teus actes.

El 6 d’octubre de 1973, el dia del Iom Kippur o Dia de l’Expiació del Pecat, la festivitat més important pels jueus, tropes d’Egipte i de Síria van llançar una gran ofensiva contra Israel per tal recuperar el Sinaí i els Alts del Golan perduts el 1967. Després de tres setmanes de combats, els israelians, amb el suport dels Estats Units, van aconseguir restablir la seva hegemonia a la zona.

Aleshores, els països àrabs de l’OPEP, és a dir, els que controlaven el petroli, no contents amb la situació, van decidir embargar el petroli a tots els països occidentals com a represàlia vers els qui havien donat suport al conflicte. La mesura va provocar un increment desorbitat del preu del petroli —es va passar de pagar 2,90 dòlars a 11,90— cosa que va provocar un fort augment de la inflació a escala mundial.

Per a l’economia nord-americana, principal motor econòmic d’Occident, l’embargament va suposar una desacceleració dràstica de l’economia, amb el consegüent augment de l’atur. De fet, ja feia mesos que el mercat havia començat a mostrar símptomes preocupants de desacceleració, als quals se sumava la decisió del president Nixon de deslligar el dòlar del patró or. Així va ser com, amb la fi del sistema pactat en els acords de Bretton Woods, es va abocar l’economia a l’abisme.

L’embargament va durar sis mesos i va generar importants problemes de subministrament energètic, així com una etapa de baix creixement econòmic generalitzat a escala mundial. Alguns països, com França, van buscar altres fonts energètiques, com l’energia nuclear, mentre que els Estats Units i el Canadà van optar per la crema de residus de fusta. 

Precisament, el nostre present ens obliga a plantejar-nos si aquest model de consum energètic desbocat, que ha estat durant dècades la principal font de creixement per al món occidental, es pot continuar mantenint. La crisi climàtica és una realitat ben palpable i cal treballar de valent per trobar solucions reals que promoguin un canvi de model productiu i de consum molt més sostenible.

1988: El sistema va col·lapsar

Si volien sobreviure, havien de fer un pas endavant. Per no col·lapsar, calia fer una reforma molt rellevant, i mil·limètricament calculada, del sistema implementat el 1917. L’encarregat de dur a terme aquest repte gegantí va ser un jove advocat, escollit primer secretari del Partit Comunista tres anys abans, i sobre el qual la vella guàrdia tenia dipositades totes les esperances. A principis de la dècada dels 80 del segle XX, l’URSS estava davant d’una cruïlla històrica important. Com era possible que, essent la segona potència industrial del món, no fos capaç de produir prou béns de consum i aliments per satisfer les necessitats de la seva població?

La situació s’havia fet més que evident a partir dels 70, quan el sistema soviètic s’havia mostrat ineficaç pel que feia a planificació central. I a això s’hi sumava el pes descomunal de la despesa militar, un endarreriment tecnològic brutal i una deficient qualitat del treball a causa d’una mà d’obra desmotivada. A més, tot això era gestionat per un partit únic conformat per velles glòries!

Les reformes econòmiques i polítiques promogudes a partir del 1988 pel primer secretari del Partit Comunista rus, Mikhaïl Gorbatxov, anaven encaminades a reajustar el sistema sense destruir-lo. Aquest reajustament implicava una liberalització del mercat i una obertura del comerç exterior. No obstant això, tard o d’hora, se sabia que ambdues opcions desembocarien en una democratització de la societat. L’acceptació explícita de la transició d’una economia centralitzada i planificada cap a l’economia de mercat posava fi a més de 70 anys d’experiment soviètic, iniciat en aquella llunyana Revolució d’Octubre del 1917.

Malgrat totes les mesures dutes a terme, la Perestroika va fracassar. El debilitament del poder central, la reactivació dels nacionalismes i l’aparició d’importants conflictes interns va accelerar el final de la Unió de Repúbliques Socialistes Soviètiques en menys de tres anys. Després d’això, li va seguir un període de fortes crisis als antics territoris de l’URSS, molts dels quals encara perduren avui en dia, com demostra el que passa a Ucraïna, on es barregen motius històrics i interessos geopolítics derivats de la guerra freda.       

2001: ‘Corralito’, quan els diners es van volatilitzar

I van voler tocar el cel. A principis dels 90, l’Argentina havia posat en marxa el Pla de Convertibilitat, que consistia a mantenir un canvi fix d’un peso per un dòlar (1:1). Aquesta mesura pretenia acabar amb la hiperinflació i estabilitzar els preus a través del creixement econòmic. D’aquesta manera, es buscava reduir el dèficit fiscal després d’un període de recessió amb el consegüent endeutament de l’Estat.

A principis del 2000, el deute extern argentí provocat per la convertibilitat va començar a ser cada vegada més important, cosa que va propiciar un augment exponencial del dèficit fiscal. Tot plegat, va començar a generar desconfiança entre els inversors, tant interns com externs, que, moguts pel rumor d’una possible suspensió de pagaments de l’Estat, van iniciar una fugida massiva de capitals.

El drama de tot plegat va començar un fatídic 3 de desembre de 2001, quan l’Argentina es va enfrontar a una limitació de la llibertat dels titulars dels comptes per disposar de diners en efectiu dipositats a les entitats bancàries. Aquest ‘corralito’ va ser decretat pel president de la República per estabilitzar l’economia, la qual cosa va provocar l’efecte contrari.

Què havia fet l’Estat davant d’una situació extrema? Doncs demanar un préstec de 40.000 milions de dòlars al Fons Monetari Internacional (FMI) l’any 2000. I quan se li van acabar, què va fer? Doncs tornar a demanar un altre préstec de 30.000 milions de dòlars a l’FMI el 2001. D’aquesta manera, el novembre del 2001, el deute públic de la República Argentina es va situar a prop dels 145.000 milions de dòlars. O sigui, un 150% del seu PIB. Per tenir una equivalència i ser conscients de la magnitud de la tragèdia, les economies occidentals d’aquell període estaven a prop del 50% d’endeutament del seu PIB. Un any més tard, l’Argentina abandonava la convertibilitat [1:1,45], devaluava la seva moneda i es declarava en bancarrota.  

La taxa d’atur s’havia situat a prop del 35%, la prima de risc s’elevà per sobre dels 5.000 punts, la inflació se situà en el 52% i el 60% de la població esdevindria pobre en els següents anys. Davant d’aquesta situació tan dramàtica, esclataren importants aldarulls a les principals ciutats argentines. I quina va ser la reacció de l’Estat? Una contundent i indiscriminada repressió. Les seqüeles d’aquella crisi perduren en la societat argentina i la por d’un altre ‘corralito’ continua existint en la seva memòria. Es calcula que en 11 mesos, quasi 25.000 milions es van volatilitzar. El 2010, Grècia va viure una situació similar al ‘corralito’ d’Argentina.

2008: Una hipoteca dona tant?

Segur que aquesta història et sona: “Tenia un piset que em van deixar els meus pares en herència. El vaig vendre. Amb l’import obtingut, vaig comprar un terreny que vaig hipotecar per construir la casa dels meus somnis, perquè sempre havia volgut viure fora de la ciutat. D’aquesta operació financera em van quedar uns estalvis.

Un bon dia, vaig rebre la trucada del meu assessor, el del banc de tota la vida, el qual m’oferia invertir els meus estalvis en la promoció d’una luxosa urbanització de cases unifamiliars a prop del mar. Semblava una inversió segura. Com que estava avalada pel mateix banc, hi vaig confiar. Llavors, el meu assessor em va comentar, sense estar signat enlloc, que amb aquesta operació podria viure despreocupadament dels diners la resta de la meva vida.

Aleshores, va ser quan em vaig engrescar. Per la confiança que em generava l’operació, per la gestió personalitzada de tants anys plegats i, per dir-ho clar i català, per guanyar més diners, vaig sumar als estalvis una ampliació de la hipoteca de la casa. També vaig demanar una mica més per construir-me una piscina, renovar-me el cotxe i, fins i tot, vaig anar de vacances a les Illes Fiji.

Però un dilluns fatídic em va trucar l’assessor per comentar-me que la promoció havia estat un fracàs i que, per tant, ho havia perdut tot. A partir d’aquell moment, la quota mensual de la meva hipoteca se’m va incrementar un 800%”.

Aquesta va ser la il·lusió amb què el sistema financer, encapçalat principalment pels bancs, va fer creure a molta gent que era possible viure en un món feliç. Tanmateix, a partir del 2008, la realitat va ser una altra: un veritable desastre que, sumat a altres productes que el sistema financer va desenvolupar i comercialitzar, com les hipoteques ‘subprime’, les preferents o els futurs, acabaria engolint la cobdícia d’aquest mateix sistema.

Infinitat d’estudis, articles, entrevistes, reportatges, documentals o pel·lícules han explicat fins a l’avorriment la crisi financera global del 2008, que va tenir el seu origen en la comercialització d’un conjunt de bons d’habitatges col·locats al mercat pels principals bancs als Estats Units. En un principi, aquests bons immobiliaris oferien a l’inversor un alt rendiment amb un risc baix. Aviat, això va propiciar que aquests productes es convertissin en l’instrument de moda i els preferits pels bancs.

Els bons estaven sustentats per un conjunt d’habitatges hipotecats, amb pagaments regulars al corrent per part dels propietaris. En aquesta fase, la taxa d’interès es mantenia baixa. Fins aquí, un producte normal del 2000 que oferien els bancs. Però la cosa va començar a canviar a partir del 2006, quan algun espavilat va trobar la manera de mantenir el flux constant de capital que aquests bons generaven.

Per tant, la clau de volta radicava en ampliar el mercat i començar a oferir crèdits hipotecaris a tort i a dret, sense comprovar ni ingressos regulars ni l’historial creditici de qui l’anava a adquirir. Segurament, l’espavilat d’abans ja sabia que això tenia un límit, perquè les cases són finites i els pagadors regulars, també. Perquè, què passa quan un no paga? El sistema ho pot assumir. I què passa quan dos no paguen? El sistema encara pot assumir-ho. I què passa quan molts no paguen? Aquí és quan apareix el problema. Tot s’esfondra. La resta és sabut. 

A mitjans dels anys 80, l’economia japonesa ja havia passat per un procés similar de revalorització d’actius financers i immobiliaris, que els experts havien considerat com una de les majors bombolles especulatives de la història moderna. El 2006 ningú va mirar al passat. Només uns pocs se’n van adonar. Si t’interessa saber com s’ho van fer, no et pots perdre la pel·lícula ‘The Big Short’ (2015).

2022: Cap a una simbiosi amigable

Potser va ser massa agosarat i el temps ha demostrat que es va equivocar. Va ser en el context de la caiguda del mur de Berlín, l’any 1989, quan el politòleg nord-americà Francis Fukuyama va publicar el seu cèlebre i polèmic article sobre “el final de la història”.

La tesi plantejava que, amb el final de la guerra freda, la història havia arribat a la seva fi, perquè s’havia arribat a una uniformitat ideològica global. Aquesta afirmació se sustentava sobre la idea que havia estat la democràcia liberal, representada pel capitalisme occidental, la que havia estat capaç de fer caure el comunisme del bloc soviètic i, per tant, seria capaç de frenar en el futur altres guerres i revolucions. Però realment la història s’havia acabat?

La realitat del nostre present ens obliga a mirar cap al passat per entendre el que ens està succeint. I el debat actual pivota sobre l’enfrontament de dos models, a priori antagònics, que busquen una simbiosi amigable, i que troben la seva hipèrbole en dues novel·les distòpiques escrites precisament al segle XX.

D’una banda, tenim el model que tan bé va descriure l’escriptor Aldous Huxley a la distopia ‘Un món feliç’ (1932), en què descriu un món on les persones són controlades per mitjà de l’entreteniment, les drogues i unes relacions afectives deformades. De l’altra, el model que va descriure George Orwell a la també distòpica novel·la ‘1984’ (1949), on planteja un món dirigit per una elit que, per mitjà del llenguatge i de la manipulació de la ment, ens vigila i castiga amb violència.

Serà la quarta revolució industrial, amb tota aquesta hiperconnectivitat, la que possibilitarà la coexistència d’‘Un món feliç’ i de ‘1984’ en una mateixa matriu? Són Rússia i la Xina la concreció d’aquesta simbiosi? Què passarà amb Occident, que s’encamina més aviat cap a un ‘Don’t look up!’ (No miris amunt!), com a la pel·lícula que porta el mateix nom?

Arribem al final d’aquesta radiografia econòmica, on hem analitzat les crisis dels darrers segles a partir de moments concrets. I, a mesura que ens hem apropat al present, hem abandonat l’anàlisi històrica amb què les ciències socials interpreten l’esdevenir de les generacions per convertir-nos en opinadors de l’actualitat. Com més a prop som del que ens passa, més perdem la perspectiva necessària per comprendre amb mirada crítica el que succeeix. Encara no som capaços de percebre la multidimensionalitat del present històric, perquè ens manca el pòsit temporal. 

Molts dels esdeveniments actuals encara estan en marxa i molts altres ni tan sols han començat. Quin futur ens espera? No ho sabem. Sí que sabem què va succeir en el passat, sí que sabem que hi ha preguntes que la història ens ajuda a respondre. I, sobretot, sí que sabem que serà de vital importància preparar-se, construir una cultura financera sòlida, en comunitat i amb llibertat, per no tornar a caure en l’abisme, pel que vindrà.

11Onze és la fintech comunitària de Catalunya. Obre un compte descarregant la super app El Canut per Android o iOS. Uneix-te a la revolució!

You’ve probably heard a lot about tokens lately, especially in connection with cryptocurrencies, the blockchain, and the metaverse. But what exactly are they? What are they for? We are already surrounded by tokens in our daily lives, although we are not sufficiently aware of it. Núria Rambla, executive assistant at 11Onze, gives us all the clues.

‘A token is a token, a symbol, a code. Tokens are objects similar to a currency, but not legal tender,’ Rambla explains. This means that they only have value within the market where it has been established that they will be used and only for the purpose for which they have been created. Tokens have been around for many years and the clearest example is casino or fairground tokens, those plastic coins that can only be used to play slot machines or poker or to ride the witch train or bumper cars.

And what characterises tokens? ‘They have no value, they are issued by institutions or private companies, they are made of low-value materials, they have a control system, and they are secure and cannot be counterfeited,’ says the executive assistant. In the digital world, tokens use the infrastructure of cryptocurrencies, the so-called blockchain, to circulate. We could say, in fact, that a cryptocurrency is a token, although a token is not exactly a cryptocurrency.

‘While a cryptocurrency has its own blockchain, a token always takes advantage of an existing blockchain, so it is cheaper for digital platforms’, argues Rambla.

In the virtual world, tokens have infinite applications: they can serve as security codes that are validated when we enter a website, as redeemable points in video games, as miles flown by airlines… In the world of finance, they are also used in the so-called ‘tokenisations’, that is, to protect our data when we make online payments, through a code that validates the transaction with total security. And in terms of investments, there are ‘security tokens’, i.e. investment securities in ‘tokens’. Want to know more? Just watch the video below!

11Onze is the community fintech of Catalonia. Open an account by downloading the app El Canut for Android or iOS and join the revolution!

Central banks buy record amounts of gold while drastically reducing their dollar reserves. The banking crisis, market volatility and geopolitical tension are shaking the global monetary system and threatening the dollar’s hegemony.

It is no secret that the rising value of gold is fuelled by bad news and economic uncertainty. The risk of contagion from the US banking crisis and market volatility in the face of a possible recession have caused the price of this precious metal to rise by 10% since January.

So far nothing new, the demand and price of gold are approaching historic highs whenever money seeks refuge in safe-haven assets such as precious metals. According to a report by the World Gold Council (WGC), central banks have maintained a steady pace of gold purchases during the first quarter of 2023, adding almost 230 tonnes of gold to their national reserves, an increase of 176% over purchases made in the same period last year.

In this case, however, the gold rush is partly due to an occurrence that could signify a paradigm shift in the world order. We are talking about de-dollarisation, a process that implies a reduction in dependence on the dollar as a currency for international trade transactions and as a reserve currency. The consensus among geopolitical and economic analysts is that the end of the dollar’s reign as an international reserve currency is not a question of if, but of when it will happen.

Growing demand for tangible assets

It would be unfair to attribute the rise in gold purchases to a single factor, but there is no denying that a return to fiat currencies underpinned by tangible assets such as precious metals is the order of the day. From digital currencies issued by some central banks to a future quantum financial system, gold is establishing itself as the ultimate safe-haven asset and an antidote to the loss of confidence in today’s fiat currencies.

According to the IMF, the US dollar’s market share as the world’s reserve currency has fallen from 66% in 2003 to 58.4% at the end of the fourth quarter of this year. A downward trend that is accelerating thanks to economic sanctions and which contrasts with an exponential increase in central banks’ gold reserves.

In this context, and unlike other occasions, it is important to bear in mind that this increase in demand for gold is not only driven by small and large investors who want to protect themselves against inflation and falling interest rates but is also led by central banks, which now account for 33% of the global market.

This diversification into gold, especially spurred by large emerging economies that are part of the BRICS group, seems to confirm that the international financial system is undergoing a radical transformation process which, although it is too early to know whether it will mean a return to the gold standard, suggests a continued demand for this precious metal and other tangible assets.

If you want to discover the best option to protect your savings, enter Preciosos 11Onze. We will help you buy at the best price the safe-haven asset par excellence: physical gold.