RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

Who Has Ears to Hear at Davos?

by Rachel Anderson 02-01-2010

banner-Finding-Your-Way-in-the-New-Economy

Each year, over one thousand global leaders gather at a retreat center in Davos, Switzerland, to discuss the major economic, political, and technological forces currently at work in the world. Top executives from Google, HSBC, Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, and Morgan Stanley all gathered in Davos (officially titled the World Economic Forum) last week.

This is an elite group of leaders with almost mind-boggling capacity to impact the global economy and, hence, the lives of millions. Little demonstrates this better than the fact that the decisions by the very same financial corporations represented at Davos helped bring about the economic crisis that plummeted struggling nations into deeper poverty and many Americans into joblessness and foreclosure.

Providentially, faith and values were on the agenda this year. The Forum commissioned a poll and a report on “Values in the Post-Crisis Economy.” More than 130,000 people from across the world weighed in via facebook and 15 global faith leaders offered reflections. Unsurprisingly, two-thirds of people surveyed believe the economic crisis is also a crisis of ethics and values. These faith leaders from the Christian, Buddhist, Jewish, and Muslim communities offered a tremendously profound and challenging perspective on what brought the world to economic disaster and what’s now required of the global community.

In his address at Davos and his recent book, Jim Wallis has been encouraging everyone to ask the right questions. In their report on post-crisis values, many religious thinkers also sought to remind Davos participants of the right purpose of the economic sphere. Economic and financial activity is not an end in itself, but an instrument that must be guided to the benefit of people and the common good, many wrote. Dr. Lesley Anne-Knight, General Secretary of Caritas, a confederation of Catholic agencies, describes exactly how the global economy went off the rails over the last decade when detached from moral purpose:

What was clearly lacking in the strategies and decisions that led to the crisis was any concept of respect for the human person. Attention was focused on financial mechanisms, profits, bonuses — anything but the human beings at whose doors the trail of disaster ended: poor people largely, people who had been given loans they would struggle to repay and who would subsequently lose their meager savings and homes as a result.

Similarly, less that a year ago, Pope Benedict invited those in the financial sector to remember the ethical foundations of their work.

I cannot help but ask whether all this faith-rooted wisdom transformed hearts in Davos. If, as Jesus teaches, receptivity to truth has a great deal to do with the listeners’ readiness to hear (“Those who have ears to hear, let them hear,” he said) I can’t help but wonder what kind of listening took place in Switzerland last week.

Among the Davos observers, many adopted a cynical stance toward the proceedings. Some report an atmosphere of self-congratulation within the financial sector and continued blindness to the impact of their excesses on the welfare of the globe. Others note a tinge of self-pity, citing a financial executive who complained, “tobacco companies have it so easy by comparison.” Although reporters also suggested that participants adopted a humbler tone at the event’s conclusion, acknowledging the cost of the financial crisis in loss of trust.

Pragmatically, I don’t expect executives to leave Davos radically transformed. But I do believe and pray that God’s spirit moves in mysterious and challenging ways. I also believe God’s spirit can move through us as we lift up the questions that faith leaders posed at Davos so that when the time comes, those who have ears will hear.

Rachel Hope Anderson works at the Center for Responsible Lending. You can follow her writing about faith, debt, and lending on twitter and read more on predatory lending and the financial crisis here.

Categories: Economics
Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • pawheel
    As an example of excessive loan practices:

    I just paid my mortgage 1 month late due to my wifes being barely employed since Oct 2008. Our of a $900 payment, $888 went to interest and fees.
  • NC77
    "...poor people largely, people who had been given loans they would struggle to repay and who would subsequently lose their meager savings and homes as a result."

    Had been given loans? Really, those people didn't apply for those loans?

    Let's keep in mind the federal government was responsible for lowering the lending standards and promised to punish lending institutions who would not loan to borrowers who were not credit worthy. It was not a scheme dreamed up by financial institutions.

    And they (Congress) are still at it, seeking to expand the CRA. See the following story. It is well written, the last paragraph sums it up well.

    http://www.nlpc.org/stories/2009/12/16/congress...
  • fundamentalist
    I'm not a big fan of payday loans. This is where I think the church could help the most by setting up a co-op to cash checks for very little cost. Also, provide cheap methods for transferring that cash home; some way to compete with Wells Fargo.

    The Bible condemns charging interest of poor people. But if you don't charge interest, no one will loan them money. It seems that loans to poor people should be considered charity and who better to perform that than churches?
  • john316
    Here are the regulations in my state. (I think the Bible addresses usury).

    Fees and Interest:

    Typically payday loans are taken out in amounts between $100 and a max of $500. The borrower is charged a fee that can be up to 20% of the loan amount. So for example, you would be charged $20 to borrow $100 from the lender. Also since a borrower is not allowed to have more than one outstanding payday loan out at a time, the lender can charge $5 to run a check through a database to make sure you don’t already have a payday loan. On top of the fees, the borrower will also be charged an interest rate on their loan amount. In Virginia, this interest rate is capped off at a maximum of 36% for the first two pay periods.
  • fundamentalist
    I understand your concern about charging poor people interest rates that are much higher than average, but please consider the consequences. Interest rates for mortgages are determined to a large degree by the risk that the borrower will default on the loan. If you cap interest rates, then banks will loan only to those people whose risk profile fits the interest rate. In other words, people with bad credit won't be able to get loans at all. We need to consider which is worse, high interest loans or no loans at all. If we opt for the latter, we might be keeping a lot of people from loans who could pay the higher interest rates and rebuild their credit scores to where they could refinance at lower rates.

    Here's another idea, have churches co-sign notes for people with poor credit. Of course, the church would need to have a good credit ratings, which is rare. Or have wealthy people contribute to the downpayment so that monthly payments are not unbearable. Finally, churches could form banks (nonprofit) that borrow from the Feds and charge below market rates, with the congregation pitching in to fund loans that default.
  • john316
    Rachel Hope Anderson,

    Thanks for your insight concerning what is transpiring at Davos. Your blog mentioned that you write about predatory lending which I believe is an evil that must be dealt with. In my state, there have been several attempts to limit the interest rates that these companies charge, but every effort towards legislation results in enormous pressure by the PACs that represent these companies, and the Republicans (who are richly rewarded by those PACs) have so far prevented any reform.
  • fundamentalist
    “…the very same financial corporations represented at Davos helped bring about the economic crisis that plummeted struggling nations into deeper poverty and many Americans into joblessness and foreclosure.”

    That’s very poor economic theory and it simply doesn’t fit the historical facts. You’re confusing symptom with the cause of the illness. Hayek had the best theory of economic cycles and in this particular case it would blame monetary manipulation by the Fed.

    “Unsurprisingly, two-thirds of people surveyed believe the economic crisis is also a crisis of ethics and values.”

    Of course they do. They don’t know any economics. People have blamed economic crises on ethics for the past 400 years. But they also once thought the bleeding would cure every disease.

    “What was clearly lacking in the strategies and decisions that led to the crisis was any concept of respect for the human person. Attention was focused on financial mechanisms, profits, bonuses…”

    That’s simply not true. Mortgage backed securities were designed to reduce risk for banks and make it easier to loan to people with less than perfect credit. If you’re going to start judging people’s motives, maybe you should examine your own.
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008