埃里克Lascelles的五个问题

2009年，在全球信贷危机和经济衰退的深度，美国大多数账户都在其背上。那一年，GDP下降了2.5％，劳工部门签订了令人震惊的6％ - 迄今为止，据埃里克Lascelles（埃里克）酋长称RBC全球资产管理的经济学家。

Even then, however, the U.S. economy was outperforming by one important measure; its productivity gains were huge—up 2.5 percent, far, far away the largest gain of any industrialized country in the world. Over the long run, that capacity for productivity growth may help the U.S. economy maintain at least part of its edge over most other countries, according to Lascelles. In his view, the job gains we are starting to see now will flow from the productivity gains over the last few years. At some point, all that cash that companies have saved must go into new jobs, and those new jobs will create the demand for more products. But without the productivity growth, there wouldn’t have been as much money to invest. Here are edited highlights of his recent conversation with Institutional Investor contributing writer Steve Rosenbush.

亚博赞助欧冠机构投资者：加拿大房屋市场的经济前景是什么？—它与美国相比如何？

One thing to keep in mind about the Canadian economy is that it can’t truly decouple from the U.S.; nonetheless, there are some important economic differences between the two countries. Canada—and Germany and Australia, for that matter—have come through the last few years with stronger labor markets than the U.S. But one reason for their job growth is that they have lagged at productivity. In time, that could come back to hurt them. Over the long term, productivity growth is the basis for a prosperous society. In this area, the U.S. is still a leader.

In 2009, U.S. productivity grew 2.5 percent, while Canadian productivity grew 0.6 percent and German productivity declined 2.4 percent. In 2010, the U.S. outperformance was even larger—4.0 percent, compared to 1.3 percent in Canada and 1.4 percent in Germany. U.S. productivity led all industrialized nations except Japan, where productivity grew 4.9 percent. U.S. productivity grew at more than twice the pace of productivity in France, the U.K., Belgium or Norway. In Australia, productivity declined 0.1 percent last year.

What exactly do you mean by productivity; and why does the U.S. still seem to excel in this area?

我真的只是平均每小时产出，并且越来越少员工的产出是果汁生产力的一种方式。至于占明显国家差异的账户，很难说。从长远来看，你会期望生产力水平收敛，并且很难将美国剥夺前方。但现在，美国准备这一点。至于为什么，有些是归因于美国的更大劳动力的灵活性，因此公司能够在经济衰退期间更轻松地将工人更容易发生。

It is more mysterious why they haven’t hired more on the way back up. Some relates to a geographic mismatch, some to a sectoral mismatch. In other words, some Americans are stuck in their underwater homes and so unable to move to stronger job markets. Others are trained up in construction and manufacturing, neither of which is likely to be where new job creation comes from. There are usually at least short term gains to be had from squeezing the existing workforce. The big question is whether the trick can be repeated.

But the U.S. labor market is much weaker. Is that the trade off for stronger productivity?

Yes, it seems to be. The U.S. unemployment rate in November was 8.6 percent, compared with 7.4 percent in Canada in November and 5.5 percent in the U.K. in October. The only major industrialized country with a higher unemployment rate was France, which had a 9.8 percent rate in October. The U.K. was close, however, with an unemployment rate of 8.3 percent this summer. Even still, European countries tend to have higher unemployment rates, so the U.S. is the most distended relative to its usual position.

Haven’t those gaps narrowed in 2011?

是的，2011年的生产力在美国的生产力仅为0.5％的增长，而加拿大的收益为0.3，德国1.4％。

我认为美国公司开始撞击他们的生产力限制，尽管这恰恰难以衡量。即使还是，我怀疑美国的生产力越来越好。

向前发展，哪些经济具有最大的增长潜力？

These are rough estimates, but over the coming decade we expect something on the order of 2 percent GDP growth in Canada, with labor market growth of about 0.75 percent. The U.S. forecast is for 2.5 percent GDP growth, and 1 percent labor market growth. The forecast for Germany is for 1.75 percent GDP growth and 0.5 percent labor market growth. The U.S. economy may grow a bit faster, given its tendency toward stronger productivity growth and faster labor force growth.