International Financial

Systems Law

Att. Gökce Gösterişli

 

SYNOPSIS

The problems that began in the US housing market in 2007 have grown steadily and have gained a global dimension by spreading from developed economies to developing countries. In this research paper, the importance of the global financial crisis is explained as ‘why and how it grew so much’. Then the causes are given in different forms. Since the causes are related to each other, firstly the causes of creating bubble are explained then how U.S. financial institutions created this bubble is explained. After several causes, the effects of Global Financial Crisis on trade, unemployment rate and the quality are given. While these effects can be seen in almost every country- that is why the name has ‘global’ words- some countries fared better than the others such as Australia. In this part, the reasons of why Australia fared better during Global Financial Crisis are given and the reasons are simply about the banking regulations of Australia ‘twin peaks’. Since the system is different than the other countries such as U.S. and UK, Australia fared better than the most countries. Even though the system is different, like the other countries, Australia was affected from GFC, that is why in this part, stimulus packages of Australia are also explained. After comparing some countries’ features with Australia, the two different banking systems are compared to each other – Islamic Banking and Conventional Banking System. Islamic Banks’ system and why Muslims do not use conventional banks are explained. The brief history of Islamic Banking system and the current situation are also given. With some reports and researches, which system fared better during the financial crisis and why it fared better than the other one is given. After Islamic banking system, one of the Muslim country, Turkey was mentioned. During the Global Financial Crisis, as a developing and not so powerful country, Turkey was affected like the others as well such as its export, import rates and unemployment rate. However, since Turkey lived domestic crisis in 2001, banking system was not affected terribly. Conclusion of this paper is giving the possibility of the future crisis. In addition to the truth that almost in every ten years, one crisis is happening, there are also some experts’ opinion and their arguments are also given. With these arguments, possible future crisis may be happened next 1 or 2 years.

 

 

Introduction

The crises that started in the 21st century are not only local financial crises, but they also transform into global financial crises. Since the crises that start especially in the financial sector go through the real sector easily and today's economies are linked to each other, the crisis that emerges in a country spreads into all world countries and shows its influence there as well.[1]The world saw the first big financial crisis in 1929, and then in the 1970s and 1980s these crises continued. From 1990 onwards, there have been significant economic crises. For example, 1994 and 95 Mexican crises, 1997 East Asian crisis, the 1998 Russian crisis, the 1999 Argentine crisis,[2] and the Global Financial Crisis which began in the United States in 2008 and is rapidly expanding to all the countries of the world.

The United States and the mortgage sector actually have a very important common point about "size". The first one (U.S.) has the world's largest economy with a gross national product of about $ 16 trillion[3], while the second one (Mortgage Market) is the world's largest market.[4] However, in the U.S., since early 2000, the U.S. has begun to forget that the mortgage industry must be managed on a very delicate balance. Financial institutions have begun to loosen fiscal discipline by giving mortgage loans to people with weak credibility.[5] In fact, this extremely risky structure has managed to keep its defaults until 2005.[6]

However, U.S. started to realise something was not going well after that but it was too late to stop this big market to not explode. In September 2008, with failure of Lehman Brothers, the whole world entered into a new financial era which was ‘Global Financial Crisis’. How did this crisis occur?

Causes of Global Financial Crisis

First of all, in order to understand the financial crisis in general, ‘bubble’ should be understood well because bubble is an important cause of global financial crisis. Bubble means that the sector is much larger than the economy needs and also when it burst, it creates a major crisis.[7] Since bubble is bigger than economy, it has a big power to collapse the most of the economy when it burst.

For 2008 crisis, It’s said that it’s because of free market’s fault and also it’s because of greedy bankers and investors.[8] However, free market has been surviving in the world for a long time and free market does not create a bubble. Otherwise there should be bubbles all the time. Moreover, greed makes people to do things but greed cannot be a main reason of financial crisis. In every culture people want to have a house. It means that people are greedy to have houses in many years and since the capitalism has been established, every business man was greedy to make money, but not every time the crisis happens. Greed is the part of human psychology[9] and human psychology does not make the banks to collapse. As a result, greed is not a cause of financial crisis. Greed does not create a bubble as well.[10]

If the reasons are not solely greedy bankers and home owners or free market. Moreover, if bubble is very important to understand how Global Financial Crisis happened, then there should be some triggers event to create this bubble such as credit expansion, financial speculation and lending too much money.

First of all, banks provide more credit than economy need.[11] For example, when economy grows at 5%, banks grow credit at 15%. When banking economy system grows faster than economy, at the end economy will be small compared to banking financial system.

Secondly, people borrow to buy a house with the expectation that the price will rise. As long as people buy houses, prices rise. When prices rise, people have to borrow more money to buy houses. In other words, borrowing money to buy a house makes the prices of these houses rise and when prices rise people borrow more money to buy houses. This is a vicious circle that as long as people can borrow money easily, they also create a bubble. “The crisis could only have been avoided if housing prices had continued to rise at the unrealistic high rates of 2000-2005.”[12]

Thirdly, why bankers lend so much money? The answer is easy; because as long as they lend money, they make profit out of money. However, the real question is for what purposes bankers give the credit to almost everyone before Global Financial Crisis. There are two types of credit: productive credit and unproductive credit. If bankers give the credit to manufacturers to produce something such as to produce a car, it means that this credit is productive. However, if bankers give the credit to consumer for the consumption such as to buy a car or give the credit to speculative purposes such as investing in gold or houses that hoping the prices of them rise in one day, it means that this credit is unproductive. If the rate of productive credit is higher than unproductive credit, it can be said that the economy is healthy. If the rate of unproductive credit is higher than productive credit it means that the economy is sick and creates financial crisis.[13]

These three reasons can create bubble easily and they helped to create housing bubble between 2000-2007. In addition to these, there are also 7 main and specific reasons that made Global Financial Crisis was happened in 2008. These causes are as follows:

1. Reaching for yield

The Central Banks and Federal Reserve kept interest rate extremely low that interest rates were the lowest in last 50 years.[14] This situation made investors to invest their money in another field that they can make more profit which is a basically ‘reaching-for-yield’. “When interest rates fall, they may have no alternative but to seek out riskier investments,” said economist Raghuram Rajan. He also believed that FED’s low interest policy forced investors to “reach for yield” which means investors seek higher yield with higher risks. He also said “If they stay with low return but safe investments, they are likely to default for sure on their commitments, while if they take riskier but higher return investments, they have some chance of survival.”[15]

2. High Risk

Since Government gave low interest rate, people need to take more risk to make profit. Thus government enabled risky investments with its interest policy indirectly.[16] In other words, if you invest your money in high risky investment such as giving you 10% profit, you may take 10% profit which is 10 times more than government’s guaranteed 1% offer. However, the risky part is that you may not also take this %10. For example, even though banks know that some people may not pay their loan back, banks were still taking a risk and lend money to them.

As mentioned before, U.S. Government kept the interest rate very low rate. It means that money is almost free. That is why bankers borrowed lot of money and lent lot of money. Every lender is willing to lend money to prime customers who are defined as they are able to pay borrowed money back.[17] However, since they already lent the money to people who were able to pay back, banks started to lend money to anyone to buy anything. Because when they lend more money they made more profit. The best part of this lending was that banks almost did not take any risk. Because they were taking little share called commission which means they take the profit right away and leave the risk to depositors, bond holders or stock holders.[18] Moreover, they thought that if something goes bad in 3-5 years such as when people do not pay their loans, they were not going to be affected from that.

3. Securitization

The other reason why house prices increased too much and created a bubble is securitization. Banks and mortgage lenders packaged the home loans and sold them to investors in both U.S. and abroad.[19] With this way banks spread the risk. Moreover, instead of waiting for borrowers pay their mortgages back over 20, 30 years, banks can take money directly from investors by selling these loans to investors. This process created another situation that because banks sold their loans and make quick money with this way, they started to think like ‘we can lend more and more money’. However, if something wrong happened in this cycle such as if people cannot pay back their mortgages back, all investors would be affected. Since the investors were from other countries as well, the crisis would affect other countries. Spreading risks means spreading the possible crisis.[20]

4. Housing Policy

U.S. government encouraged people to buy a house. They create an idea that it is nice to have a house. Even though it is nice to have a house or it is nice to have a Mercedes, there is difference between what good is and what healthy is. George W. Bush said “It is a good thing” which this policy was called ‘American Dream’.[21] This encouragement includes that government gave lower interest rate to people to buy house and it also lower the down payment.

5.Credit Rating Agencies

Credit Rating agencies come from the government and stamp how good the credit is. The most well-known and authorised 3 CRO companies Standard & Poor’s, Fitch and Moody’s[22] were taking significant money-corruption- from financial institutes that even their mortgage based securities were risky, these CROs were given AAA credit rating to them to sell these securities with good prices to the global market. American financial services firm Blackstone Group said “credit-rating firms are the number one culprit in the 2008 financial crisis.”[23]

6. Bailout Policy- too big to fail

Bailout policy is a government policy. Bailout means if the bank or market is too big to fail which means if the bank’s collapse is going to cause economic problems for the whole country which, government will save it by giving money to them to protect the losses and economy. According to doctrine of ‘too big to fail’, This policy seems good for economy. However, big banks know that no matter how terrible they are, if they get in a trouble, government will save them. This situation only encourages risk taking and shows us the hazards of Bailout Policy.[24]

7. Too big to jail

The last reason of the 2008 financial crisis was ‘too big to jail’. This means big boss is too powerful to be punished. In 2008, when crisis happened, people could not see this no punishment process but now in 2016 people can clearly see that nobody was prosecuted. There were some investigations for sure but nobody went to jail. Moreover, someone decided to create a bad loan but nobody asked to give even his/her bonuses back. As a result, bankers knew that they were not going to lose any money or not going to jail even the bank would bankrupt or even they would make fraud because of their money power.[25]

As mentioned above, there are many causes of Global Financial Crisis and there many causes of these causes such as causes of creating a bubble. As Richard M. Salsman, president and chief market strategist of InterMarket Forecasting, said in his article: “many people – especially the financial journalists and professional economists among us – still don’t “get it.”[26]

In addition to the causes, since 2008 crisis was a Global Financial crisis, the effects are also global.

Trade

Global financial crisis had huge effect on trade and trade balances and weakened the global economy. Even though this subprime crisis has started in August 2007, the effects have been seen after Lehman Brother’s bankrupt in September, 2008.[27] Everyone suddenly started to think about the future of the world’s economy. This situation created a panic atmosphere for firms, investors and consumers. This situation that people did not know what to do and what was going to happen is also called Knightian uncertainty.[28] As a result, in order to be safe, all people started to wait which means they postponed both their investments and purchases.  Even though the crisis has happened in U.S., it quickly spread all around the world. For example, in U.S. and elsewhere, the situation of house prices and stock market reduced wealth. Thus, these people started to save money instead of consuming such as buying a car. Demand for oil has dropped, so the price of oil has dropped as well – from $144.29 to $33.87 in 5 months).[29] As a result, oil producing countries’ exports revenues were affected as well. According to World Trade Organization reports, 2009, including 104 nations, imports and exports has been falling especially between the second half of 2008 and the first half of 2009.[30] According to CPB data, industrial production fell %13 and international trade fell %25 between April 2008 and March 2009. Since exporters could not receive the letter of credit easily because of the credit crunch, The Baltic Dry Index which a measure of shipping volume, have fallen %50 during the one week in October 2008.[31]

According to World Trade Organization monthly database, in U.S., both import and export fell dramatically after the effects of Global financial crisis showed themselves. While the trade deficit was $100 billion in July 2008, it dropped $30 billion in 7 months. It is the import that has the most impact on this situation. While exports were also falling, import fell dramatically. This situation can be also a good improvement for U.S. Because United State is one of the deficit countries. However, for China, the situation is quite different than United State. Both imports and exports fell like U.S. in February 2009, Trade balance was almost 0.  It is the export that has the most impact on this situation. Because unlike the United State, China exports more than imports. However, in October 2009 the trade balance reached about $20 billion. Since China is one of the surplus countries, decline in trade balance has not a good effect on China’s economy.[32]

Moreover, because of the uncertainty in global economy and even The World Bank said that trade is going to be shrinking, governments may want to stay away from foreign competition by protecting national companies. This situation can also be called ‘deglobalization’. [33]

In addition to bad effects of crisis, we could say that some people took an advantage of this situation. Since the Global financial crisis affected U.S. and Europe mostly, Chen Deming who is a Chinese minister of commerce led Chinese private buyers to put their money on stakes or to buy business in Europe.[34] Because of the results of GFC, these buyers can buy the business or stakes with lower prices.

Unemployment

Profits and sales revenues decline, that is why manufacturer stopped to hire new employees. This situation did not affect only new employees. Manufacturer also fire the current employees. Since 1980s, unemployment rate in labour market has been reached the highest level.[35]

Since GFC has damaged real wealth and economic growth, in both United States and some parts of Europe, unemployment rate has risen to double digit proportions. According to Bureau of Labour Statistics, the rate of U.S. unemployment was %4.9 in December 2007.[36] However, after global financial crisis showed itself, this rate reached to %10.1 in October 2009.[37]  At the same time, in October 2009, the rate of overall unemployment which includes part-time workers, some discouraged workers, and marginally attached workers was approximately %16.3.[38]

Some of European countries have similar results regarding decline especially in youth unemployment rate. For example, Spain was one of the worst affected countries by Global Financial Crisis. Youth unemployment rate of Spain was 17.9% in 2006 and after Global Financial Crisis it has reached %37.8 in 2009.[39]

In addition to effects of Global Financial Crisis on trade and unemployment rates, this crisis also affected the quality.

Quality

After GFC, many people bankrupted which means many people suffered to earn money. As a result, they needed to be careful about spending. This situation affected the consumption for sure. Less money means less consumption. When people stopped to consume or reduced to consume, manufacturers had to do the same things to survive as well. Manufacturers’ income fell dramatically. In order to keep their profit at a good level, they had to cut the costs. How did they do this? As mentioned before, they fire current employees and not hire new employees. The result of this decision affected the productivity and the quality as well. The same number of works had been done by fewer employees. These employees’ productivity has fallen because they had to work longer and they had to complete more work. Moreover, manufacturer started to find another way such as the same price but less quality. Less quality affects ‘brand loyalty’ which means attitude of people who committed to one brand by purchasing it most times. When manufacturers reduced the quality these loyal consumers realised the change and stopped to buy or reduced to buy. And stopping or reducing the purchase affects manufacturer’s revenue and the whole process starts again. This is a vicious circle and it is not a good solution to survive as well.[40]

Australia

The effects of the global financial crisis on countries are too big to not seen. However, some countries fared better compared to other countries. Among the developed countries, one of the least affected countries is Australia. How Australia fared in Global Financial Crisis?

See L. Metherell, “Stimulus „Served Australia Well‟ Despite Waste”, ABC News (online), 6 August 2010. Professor Stiglitz has also stated: “Kevin Rudd, who was prime minister when the crisis struck, put in place one of the best-designed Keynesian stimulus packages of any country…Rudd's stimulus worked: Australia had the shortest and shallowest of recessions of the advanced industrial countries”. See J. Stiglitz, “In Praise of Stimulus”, The Age, 9 August 2010, 8.

In GFC period, Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister, presented first stimulus package to recover the loss from GFC. This package was about $10.4 billion and it also has given to families, carers and seniors. Government also doubled the first home buyer’s grant to $14,000 for their existing homes and if they want to buy new home the grant was tripled as $21,000. After this first package, second one was released. This package was more extensive. $42 billion stimulus package was planned to boost Australian economy. When we compare the amount of packages with the other countries such as U.S., it was way less than U.S. The reason was that Australian economy was kind of an isolated economy. This reason is one of the main reasons of why Australia was not affected by sub-prime issues as much as U.S. or Europe.[41] However, this reason was not the only reason. Australia is one of the common law countries as United State. As a result, they have many common features. However, Australia has different regulatory system regarding especially banking system. In almost all countries, there is one regulator and that regular is responsible for the acts of banking. In Australia there is a “twin peaks” system. In this twin peaks system, there are two regulators, one of them is the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA). “APRA is responsible for prudential regulation of financial institutions, including deposit-taking, general insurance, life insurance and superannuation/pension institutions.”[42] The other regulator is the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). “ASIC is responsible for business conduct and consumer protection”[43]. The purposes of ‘Twin Peaks’ system are systemic stability, consumer protection and market conduct.[44] In order to provide these purposes, this system is separating these purposes by using two regulators.[45] According to the CIFR research, this twin peaks model is the most effective methods to maintain financial system stability.[46] As a result of these reasons, several countries such as Republic of South Africa5 (RSA) and the United Kingdom (UK) have moved or are planning to move to apply ‘Twin Peaks’ system.[47] Moreover, there is also the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA).  The RBA is lender of last resort (LoLR)[48] and has overall and general responsibility for the financial system.[49] Each peak is a statutory and independent body.[50] That is why The Australian model could be described as a three peak model.[51]

In addition to these multiple regulations, Hawke-Keatin government prevented mergers between 4 largest banks in Australia which are Westpac, Commonwealth Bank, ANZ and NAB. This policy is called ‘four pillow policy’. This policy was also criticized as creating anti-competitive platform. However, allowing the competition lead banks to take risks more. Even though this anti-competitive platform -which means more limitations and strong regulations- on banks give poor deal to consumers, at the end it also creates more secure banking system. International Monetary Fund stated that” U-shaped relationship between bank competition and stability and an intermediate degree of bank competition is optimal”.[52] Therefore, according to IMF, Australia and Canada had “mid-level of bank competition in 2008”[53]. Moreover, both Canada and Australia survived better than other countries.[54] As a result, we could agree Andrea Beltratti and René M. Stulz’s statements that “Banks that the market favoured in 2006 had especially poor returns during the crisis”[55]

To conclude, Australia has outperformed after GFC happened compared to other countries. The main reason of this performance is pre-existing strength. In order to survive in crisis and in order to establish healthy economy, Australia prepared itself years ago by multiple systems and limitations over financial institutes. When these factors bring together, Australia has fared much better than the other countries during GFC.[56]

Islamic Banking – Conventional Banking

Even though the banking systems were the same-conventional banking system- in most countries, some countries were not affected too much from GFC and have fared better during the GFC because of their regulatory system or their big amount of stimulus packages. However, some countries and some people use different type of banking system which is an Islamic Banking system. As seen in its name, this system comes from a religion but can be used non-Muslim as well. If this system is different than conventional banking system, what happened to this system during the crisis?

First of all, Islamic banks have recently begun to grow rapidly. At the end of 2008, Islamic banks started to operate about 300 institutions in 50 countries and manage $951 millions of funds.[57] The operating systems of conventional banks are interest-based. However, according to Islamic rules, interest cannot be accepted because its ‘haram’. Therefore, Muslims decided to establish their own financial institutions operating in accordance with Islamic principles. Therefore, the main purpose of Islamic financial institutions is to bring the savings of Muslims into the economy.[58]

When analysed the distribution of Islamic banking assets according to countries at the global level, Iran receives the first rank with 37% followed by Saudi Arabia with 18% and Malaysia with 13%. It is known that 6% of Kuwait, 4% of Qatar and 2% of Bahrain. Turkey's share is 3%. According to the Islamic Finance 2014 report prepared by Finance House Research, the largest growth in Islamic banking in 2008-2012 was Indonesia with 40.5%, followed by Turkey with 28.5%.[59]

It is estimated that the business model of the Islamic banks is robust in financial crisis as stated in the IMF report "The Effects of the Global Crisis on Islamic and Conventional Banks: A Comparative Study". The conventional bank's business model based on borrowing and risk transfer. The Islamic banking’s business modes based on asset and risk sharing. With this model, Islamic banking institutions are closer to the trends of the real economy and are free from the risk of "balloons" on the market that conventional banks may be exposed to. Since Islamic banks give the credit to projects, the feasibility of the projects is very important. In conventional banking system, the main importance is the credibility of customers.[60] Because of their dependence on real sector developments, Islamic banks were more affected by the 2008 crisis than conventional banks. However, due to the growing economic conditions in the Middle East and Asia-Pacific countries, Islamic banks have been able to quickly regain their successful performance levels in the pre-crisis period.[61]

Thus, Hassan and Dridi (2010) examined the performance of Islamic banks and conventional banks during the crisis. They found that the effect of the crisis on profitability was different in Islamic banks and conventional banking. The negative effect of the crisis on profitability in Islamic banks in 2008 was found to be less than the conventional banks due to the way Islamic banks’ way of business. However, Islamic banks' profitability in 2009 was found to be affected more negatively than traditional banks due to the weakness of Islamic banks in risk management.[62]

Deloitte’s report about Islamic banking after crisis stated that although the growth momentum after 2008 has slowed down in other countries outside Indonesia, it can be considered that the annual growth rate is 20-25% higher than the global financial sector, especially after the 2008 crisis. The fact that the volatility of aggregate funds is above the 20% -30% band in almost all countries shows the market's confidence in Islamic Finance Institutions more clearly.[63]

Researchers focused on Islamic Banks and Conventional Banks in Turkey between 2005 and 2011. In this research, they compare their profits, liquidity, risk and solvency. According to this research, they could not find any difference regarding the profits, this shows us that whether their way is different than each other, their services are similar. However, rate of conventional banks’ liquidity is more than Islamic bank. In other words, Conventional banks’ ability to meet cash needs or to handle with unexpected deposit outflow is better than Islamic banks. Thus, conventional banks can be more resistant to financial fluctuations in crisis in Turkey.[64] This result shows that, even though one system can handle better during the crisis, the size of the banks is also important during the crisis.

Turkey

Even though Tukey is a Muslim country, Islamic banking is not very popular in banking sector. Because of Turkey’s secular structure, the biggest banks are still conventional banks. Then what happened to Turkey during the GFC?

According to many experts’ ideas, strong economy means healthy and strong financial sector.[65] If one country’s banks are strong enough, it means that the economy is strong as well. Before writing about the effects of GFC on Turkey’s economy, the position of financial system in Turkey should be explained and compared with other countries.

In Turkey, the financial system means banks. Turkey does not have complicated system such as U.S. Almost all financial resources are given by banks. However, in order to explain power of Banks. Financial assets of countries can be compared. In 2007, when financial assets are divided by GDP, the rates are like that: in Turkey 146%, in U.S. 956%, in Japan 1178% and in Germany 761%.[66] As a result, it is obvious that Turkey does not have much financial assets because of high inflation and low incomes over years. Because of these reasons, Turkish banking system was not affected by GFC as much as real sectors.

Even though banking system was not affected as much as Europe, this does not mean that turkey has not been affected by GFC. The real economy was affected deeply. Since Turkey's economy is related to export and import. While the other countries have been struggling- especially Europe- this situation has affected turkey's economy. The consequences of GFC show that Turkey was not successful to fare as much as Australia or Canada.

 

Before 2002, Turkey had more likely closed economy. Almost only food and textile sectors were parts of export. After 2002, the other sectors were included this cycle such as electrical machinery, automobile parts etc.  As a result, while this growth affected Turkey’s economy well before GFC, it is also affected badly during the crisis as well.

[67]

At the end of 2008, Turkey was exporting half of its exports to Europe. During the crisis, demand for external good was decreased for sure. According to Turkish Statistics Institution, export rate decreased 32% between June 2008 and June 2009. For example, while the annual volume of export was about $136 billion in September 2008, it dropped to $100 in 1 year.[68]

In addition to export, import rate also decreased from $201 billion in 2008 to $140 billion in 2009. When we compare the import and export data, we could say that decline in import was more than decline in export.[69] In other words, this correlation decreased trade deficit which is a positive consequence for economy. However, even though the correlation of these demand affected trade deficit positively, it also means that decreasing in demands creates increasing in unemployment.

Between 2003 and 2007 Turkey’s GDP was expanded approximately 30%. However, while Turkey’s unemployment rate was 6% in 2000, after domestic crisis 2001, it became 10%. Until the GFC unemployment rate was decreased only 1%. This situation shows that Turkey was already in a bad position regarding unemployment rate in OECD countries before GFC. The unemployment rate was approximately 1%0 in September 2008. It increased to 16% in February 2009. [70]

However, as mentioned before, these bad situations during the GFC has not affected banking sector as much as real sector. Because in 2001, domestic crisis happened in Turkey. After this crisis regulators changed the regulations and they created more strict rules over banks. That is why it could be said that Turkey has prepared itself for GFC unconsciously.

In order to fare GFC, Turkey prepared some stimulus packages like other countries. First packages included to cover loss of traders by giving credit with zero interest.[71] Moreover, this package was worth approximately $6 billion in 2008. Second stimulus package was a little bigger than the first one and it was for manufacturers. The total amount was about $7 billion in 2009.

After these packages, little amount of stimulus packages followed these first two. Moreover, these packages covered both unemployment wages, tax cuts over car sector, furniture sector and most other sectors which were affected badly from GFC[72] and for creating new opportunity-with new regulations- for unemployed people.[73]

 

The whole stimulus packages were equal to 3.3% of GDP. The reason why this amount and percentage is too little was: in 2001, domestic crisis happened in Turkey. After this crisis regulators changed the regulations and they created more strict rules over banks. That is why it could be said that Turkey has prepared itself for GFC unconsciously. Because of previous crisis in Turkey, government did not feel to prepare stimulus packages to bail out financial sector as U.S.[74]

 

Conclusion: New crisis is coming?

To conclude, in last couple decades, almost every ten-year financial crisis happened. Since the last one was in 2007-2008, if we think simply, according to this order, another future crisis may happen in 2017-2018.

However, if we think more deeply such as if we ask ‘why’, the growing concern about the slow growth figures from China and the slowdown in oil prices and the trend of the global economy has added to the warning from William White, President of the OECD Consultative Committee.

Mr. White spoke to the Daily Telegraph newspaper in Britain. He said that the current situation in economy is worse than 2007.

He believes that while developing countries have been opening their economies, they were actually saving the global economy. However, since their debt reached to 265% of GDP in these countries, now they will be a problem of new financial crisis rather than being a solution of it.

In addition to White’s opinion, there is an another idea that support White’s opinion; "The world economy has become credit addicted. China could well be the next victim.’” Martin Wolf of the Financial Times dated February 24, 2015, referring to the global debt report "Debt and (not much) Deleveraging" of international financial consulting firm McKinsey.[75]

This report, which included the current debt numbers in developed and developing 47 countries, was published in February, 2015. In one part of the report, the increase in household debt since the GFC and the reasons for this increase are emphasized. The dynamics of household debts are important because they were seen as the cause of the 2008 Global financial crisis. According to McKinsey report, nothing has changed in household debt since GFC. Moreover, household debt ratios in many countries have increased since the GFC, according to current incomes. The McKinsey report shows that there is no improvement in global debt since 2008. For the last six years, there has been no decrease in the total global debt ratios. In most of the 47 countries surveyed, the ratio of debt to GDP continued to increase. According to the report, the ratio of 47 countries to the total GDP of the total debt in 2007 was 269%, but in the second quarter of 2014, this ratio increased to 286%. Total global debt has increased from $ 142 trillion since 2007 to $ 199 trillion. Household debt ratios are also showing no decline since 2007. Household debt ratio has increased in 80% of 47 countries. In developing countries, the ratio of household debt to current income has risen by 13%. This rate is also high in developed countries except the US, UK, Ireland and Spain. Housing loans are the biggest item in household borrowing. In developed countries, 74% of household debts and 43% of developing countries stem from housing loans.[76]

In addition to all these factors, according to critics of the global financial system, rising household debt is not inevitable for the economy, but artificially produced by the financial sector. In this sense, borrowing is not seen as an element of crisis that needs to be tackled in terms of the global financial system, but on the contrary it becomes one of the most important pillars of the global financial system. That is why we are faced with an imposed debt accumulation.[77]

 

References

  1. Gros, D., & Alcidi, C. (2010). The impact of the financial crisis on the real economy. Intereconomics, 45(1), 4-20.

  2. Lessons and Controversies From Financial Crises in the 1990s. http://www1.worldbank.org/prem/lessons1990s/chaps/CnoteF_LessonsandControversies.pdf

  3. 2013 data  from World Bank http://www.worldbank.org/

  4. Emmons, W. R. (2008). The Past, Present and Future of the US Mortgage Market. Central Banker.

  5. Aalbers, M. B. (2008). The financialization of home and the mortgage market crisis. competition & change, 12(2), 148-166.

  6. Demyanyk, Y., & Van Hemert, O. (2011). Understanding the subprime mortgage crisis. Review of financial Studies, 24(6), 1848-1880.

  7. Calverley, J. (2011). When bubbles burst: Surviving the financial fallout. Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

  8. Bowman, K., & Rugg, A. (2013). Five years after the crash: What Americans think about Wall Street, banks, business, and free enterprise. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.

  9. Rees, W. (2010). Whats blocking sustainability? Human nature, cognition, and denial. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy, 6(2).

  10. Salsman, R. (2009). Altruism: The Moral Root of the Financial Crisis. The Objective Standard, 4(1). ISO 690     

  11. Brunnermeier, M. K. (2009). Deciphering the liquidity and credit crunch 2007–2008. The Journal of economic perspectives, 23(1), 77-100.

  12. Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

  13. Vasudevan, R. (2009). Dollar hegemony, financialization, and the credit crisis. Review of Radical Political Economics.

  14. Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

  15. Rajan, R. G. (2005). Has financial development made the world riskier? (No. w11728). National Bureau of economic Research.

  16. Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

  17. Reinhart, C. M., & Rogoff, K. S. (2008). Is the 2007 US sub-prime financial crisis so different. An international historical comparison, 98(2), 339-344.

  18. Mian, A., & Sufi, A. (2008). The consequences of mortgage credit expansion: Evidence from the 2007 mortgage default crisis (No. w13936). National Bureau of Economic Research.

  19. Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

  20. Ackermann, J. (2008). The subprime crisis and its consequences. Journal of Financial Stability, 4(4), 329-337.

  21. Blundell-Wignall, A., Atkinson, P. E., & Lee, S. H. (2008). The current financial crisis: Causes and policy issues. OECD.

  22. Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

  23. Headquarters, D. Causes of the 2008 Financial Crisis.

  24. Bailout policy is a government policy. Bailout means if the bank or market is too big to fail which means if the bank’s collapse is going to cause economic problems for the whole country which, government will save it by giving money to them to protect the losses and economy.

  25. Pontell, H. N., Black, W. K., & Geis, G. (2014). Too big to fail, too powerful to jail? On the absence of criminal prosecutions after the 2008 financial meltdown. Crime, Law and Social Change, 61(1), 1-13.

  26. http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardsalsman/2013/09/19/the-financial-crisis-was-a-failure-of-government-not-free-markets/#644f4c17449e

  27. Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

  28. Buiter, W., & Sibert, A. (2008). The central bank as the market-maker of last resort: from lender of last resort to market-maker of last resort. The First Global Financial Crisis of the 21st Century, 171.

  29. http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Why-This-Oil-Crisis-Is-Different-To-2008.html

  30. World Trade Report (2009). Trade Policy Commitments and Contingency Measures., World Trade Organization

  31. Jones, Sam (2008-10-10). "A juddering halt to world trade". Ftalphaville.ft.com. Retrieved 2010-01-21.

  32. World Trade Organization International Trade Statistics 2015

  33. Gjelten, T. (2009). Economic Crisis Poses Threat to Global Stability.

  34. http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2009-02/25/content_199596.htm

  35. Norgren, C. (2010). The Causes of the Global Financial Crisis and Their Implications for Supreme Audit Institutions‖. Auditor General of the Swedish National Audit Office Stockholm.

  36. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "The Employment Situation: January 2008", January 2008

  37. Goodman, Peter S. (2009-11-07). "U.S. Unemployment Rate Hits 10.2%, Highest in 26 Years". The New York Times.

  38. "Alternative measures of labor underutilization (U6, not seasonally adjusted)". Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Government. June 5, 2009.

  39. Tanveer Choudhry, M., Marelli, E., & Signorelli, M. (2012). Youth unemployment rate and impact of financial crises. International journal of manpower, 33(1), 76-95.

  40. Perriman, H., Ramsaran-Fowdar, R. R., & Baguant, P. (2010). The impact of the global financial crisis on consumer behaviour. The 2010 Annual London Business.

  41. Leigh, A (2012), “How Much Did the 2009 Australian Fiscal Stimulus Boost Demand? Evidence from Household-Reported Spending Effects”, B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics 12(1).

  42. Hill, J. G. (2012). Why did Australia fare so well in the global financial crisis?.

  43. Hill, J. G. (2012). Why did Australia fare so well in the global financial crisis?.

  44. Working Group on Financial Supervision, 2008, p. 24. For a complete analysis of the four approaches to financial regulation, see also: David T. Llewellyn, Institutional Structure Of Financial Regulation And Supervision: The Basic Issues, paper presented at the World Bank seminar Aligning Supervisory Structures with Country Needs, Washington, DC, 6th and 7th June 2006

  45. Schmulow, A. D. (2015). Approaches to Financial System Regulation: An International Comparative Survey. CIFR Paper, (53).

  46. Schmulow, A. D. (2015). Approaches to Financial System Regulation: An International Comparative Survey. CIFR Paper, (53).

  47. Schmulow, A. D. (2015). Approaches to Financial System Regulation: An International Comparative Survey. CIFR Paper, (53).

  48. http://www.rba.gov.au/publications/confs/2008/davis.html

  49. Schmulow, A. D. (2015). Approaches to Financial System Regulation: An International Comparative Survey. CIFR Paper, (53).

  50. Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act (Cth), No. 51 of 2001, (Australia); Australian Prudential Regulation Authority Act (Cth), No. 50 of 1998, (Australia); Reserve Bank Act (Cth), No. 4 of 1959, (Australia).

  51. Schmulow, A. D. (2015). Approaches to Financial System Regulation: An International Comparative Survey. CIFR Paper, (53).

  52. Claessens, S. (2009). Competition in the financial sector: overview of competition policies. The World Bank Research Observer, 24(1), 83-118.

  53. Claessens, S. (2009). Competition in the financial sector: overview of competition policies. The World Bank Research Observer, 24(1), 83-118.

  54. Hill, J. G. (2012). Why did Australia fare so well in the global financial crisis?.

  55. Beltratti, A., & Stulz, R. M. (2009). Why did some banks perform better during the credit crisis? A cross-country study of the impact of governance and regulation (No. w15180). National Bureau of Economic Research.

  56. Xu, Y., Jiang, A. L., Fargher, N., & Carson, E. (2011). Audit reports in Australia during the global financial crisis. Australian Accounting Review, 21(1), 22-31.

  57. Hanif, M.(2011), ‘Differences and Similarities in Islamic and Conventional Banking’, International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol:2 No:2, pp.166-175

  58. Gökalp, F. (2014). Kriz Öncesi ve Kriz Sonrasi Dönemler Itibariyle Katilim Bankalari ve Ticari Bankalarin Karliligi Üzerine Karsilastirmali Bir Arastirma/A Comparative Study About Participation and Commercial Banks' Profitability In Pre and Post-Crisis Periods. Selcuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (32), 191.

  59. Türkiye Katılım Bankaları Birliği (2013), Katılım Bankacılığı 2013

  60. Rahman UH ve Zaharuddin, A R (2014), Differences Between Islamic Bank and Conventional, Available at http://zaharuddin.net/senarai-lengkap-artikel/38/297-differences-between-islamic-banka conventional.html

  61. Deloitte, Türkiye Katılım Bankacılığı Büyüme Yolundaki Önemli Adımlar, Deloitte Yayınları, 2014

  62. Hassan M. Ve Dridi J., The Effects of the Global Crisis on Islamic and Conventional Banks: A Comparative Study, International Monetary Fund(IMF), 2010

  63. Deloitte, Türkiye Katılım Bankacılığı Büyüme Yolundaki Önemli Adımlar, Deloitte Yayınları, 2014

  64. Doğan, M. (2013). Katılım ve Geleneksel Bankaların Finansal Performanslarının Karşılaştırılması: Türkiye Örneği. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, 58, 175-188.

  65. Liukisila, C. (1996). IMF Survey, Healthy Banks are Vital for a Strong Economy, Finance and Development.

  66. Economist Intelligence Group, "Turkey: Key Developments." Economist. 2010. Web. 5 May2012.

  67. Yörükoğlu, M., & Atasoy, H. (2010). The Effects of the Global Financial Crisis on the Turkish Financial Sector‖. BIS Paper, (54), 387-405.

  68. Yörükoğlu, M., & Atasoy, H. (2010). The Effects of the Global Financial Crisis on the Turkish Financial Sector‖. BIS Paper, (54), 387-405.

  69. Yörükoğlu, M., & Atasoy, H. (2010). The Effects of the Global Financial Crisis on the Turkish Financial Sector‖. BIS Paper, (54), 387-405.

  70. Yörükoğlu, M., & Atasoy, H. (2010). The Effects of the Global Financial Crisis on the Turkish Financial Sector‖. BIS Paper, (54), 387-405.

  71. Kaya, F., & Yilar, S. (2011). Fiscal transformation in Turkey over the last two decades. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 11(1), 59.

  72. SEDEFED (2009).“Kronolojik Olarak Önlem Paketleri”, http: //www.sedefed.org/default. aspx?pid=60978&nid=57158, (12.12.2009).

  73. Resmi Gazete (2009). “5838 Bazı Kanunlarda Değişiklik Yapılması Hakkında Kanun”, 28.02.2009 Tarih ve 27155 Sayılı Resmî Gazete, http: //rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr/main.aspx?home=http: // rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr/eskiler/2009/02/20090228.htm&main=http: //rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr/ eskiler/2009/02/20090228.htm, (12.12.2009).

  74. Kaya, F., & Yilar, S. (2011). Fiscal transformation in Turkey over the last two decades. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 11(1), 59.

  75. http://www.cnbc.com/2015/02/24/how-addiction-to-debt-came-even-to-china.html

  76. Dobbs, R., Lund, S., Woetzel, J., & Mutafchieva, M. (2015). Debt and (not much) deleveraging. McKinsey Global Institute, 136.

  77. Maurizio Lazzarato, Borçlandırılmış İnsanın İmali - Neoliberal Durum Üzerine Deneme, çev., Murat Erşen (İstanbul: Açılım Kitap, 2014).

 

[1] Gros, D., & Alcidi, C. (2010). The impact of the financial crisis on the real economy. Intereconomics, 45(1), 4-20.

[2] Lessons and Controversies From Financial Crises in the 1990s. http://www1.worldbank.org/prem/lessons1990s/chaps/CnoteF_LessonsandControversies.pdf

[3] 2013 data  from World Bank http://www.worldbank.org/

[4] Emmons, W. R. (2008). The Past, Present and Future of the US Mortgage Market. Central Banker.

[5] Aalbers, M. B. (2008). The financialization of home and the mortgage market crisis. competition & change, 12(2), 148-166.

[6] Demyanyk, Y., & Van Hemert, O. (2011). Understanding the subprime mortgage crisis. Review of financial Studies, 24(6), 1848-1880.

[7] Calverley, J. (2011). When bubbles burst: Surviving the financial fallout. Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

[8] Bowman, K., & Rugg, A. (2013). Five years after the crash: What Americans think about Wall Street, banks, business, and free enterprise. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.

[9] Rees, W. (2010). Whats blocking sustainability? Human nature, cognition, and denial. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy, 6(2).

[10] Salsman, R. (2009). Altruism: The Moral Root of the Financial Crisis. The Objective Standard, 4(1).ISO 690            

[11] Brunnermeier, M. K. (2009). Deciphering the liquidity and credit crunch 2007–2008. The Journal of economic perspectives, 23(1), 77-100.

[12] Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

[13] Vasudevan, R. (2009). Dollar hegemony, financialization, and the credit crisis. Review of Radical Political Economics.

[14] Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

[15] Rajan, R. G. (2005). Has financial development made the world riskier? (No. w11728). National Bureau of economic Research.

[16] Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

[17] Reinhart, C. M., & Rogoff, K. S. (2008). Is the 2007 US sub-prime financial crisis so different. An international historical comparison, 98(2), 339-344.

[18] Mian, A., & Sufi, A. (2008). The consequences of mortgage credit expansion: Evidence from the 2007 mortgage default crisis (No. w13936). National Bureau of Economic Research.

[19] Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

[20] Ackermann, J. (2008). The subprime crisis and its consequences. Journal of Financial Stability, 4(4), 329-337.

[21] Blundell-Wignall, A., Atkinson, P. E., & Lee, S. H. (2008). The current financial crisis: Causes and policy issues. OECD.

[22] Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

[23] Headquarters, D. Causes of the 2008 Financial Crisis.

[24] Bailout policy is a government policy. Bailout means if the bank or market is too big to fail which means if the bank’s collapse is going to cause economic problems for the whole country which, government will save it by giving money to them to protect the losses and economy.

[25] Pontell, H. N., Black, W. K., & Geis, G. (2014). Too big to fail, too powerful to jail? On the absence of criminal prosecutions after the 2008 financial meltdown. Crime, Law and Social Change, 61(1), 1-13.

[26] http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardsalsman/2013/09/19/the-financial-crisis-was-a-failure-of-government-not-free-markets/#644f4c17449e

[27] Salvatore, D. (2010). The global financial crisis: predictions, causes, effects, policies, reforms and prospects. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 7(2), 1-20.

[28] Buiter, W., & Sibert, A. (2008). The central bank as the market-maker of last resort: from lender of last resort to market-maker of last resort. The First Global Financial Crisis of the 21st Century, 171.

[29] http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Why-This-Oil-Crisis-Is-Different-To-2008.html

[30] World Trade Report (2009). Trade Policy Commitments and Contingency Measures., World Trade Organization

[31] Jones, Sam (2008-10-10). "A juddering halt to world trade". Ftalphaville.ft.com. Retrieved 2010-01-21.

[32] World Trade Organization International Trade Statistics 2015

[33] Gjelten, T. (2009). Economic Crisis Poses Threat to Global Stability.

[34] http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2009-02/25/content_199596.htm

[35] Norgren, C. (2010). The Causes of the Global Financial Crisis and Their Implications for Supreme Audit Institutions‖. Auditor General of the Swedish National Audit Office Stockholm.

[36] U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "The Employment Situation: January 2008", January 2008

[37] Goodman, Peter S. (2009-11-07). "U.S. Unemployment Rate Hits 10.2%, Highest in 26 Years". The New York Times.

[38] "Alternative measures of labor underutilization (U6, not seasonally adjusted)". Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Government. June 5, 2009.

[39] Tanveer Choudhry, M., Marelli, E., & Signorelli, M. (2012). Youth unemployment rate and impact of financial crises. International journal of manpower, 33(1), 76-95.

[40] Perriman, H., Ramsaran-Fowdar, R. R., & Baguant, P. (2010). The impact of the global financial crisis on consumer behaviour. The 2010 Annual London Business.

[41] Leigh, A (2012), “How Much Did the 2009 Australian Fiscal Stimulus Boost Demand? Evidence from Household-Reported Spending Effects”, B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics 12(1).

[42] Hill, J. G. (2012). Why did Australia fare so well in the global financial crisis?.

[43] Hill, J. G. (2012). Why did Australia fare so well in the global financial crisis?.

[44] Working Group on Financial Supervision, 2008, p. 24. For a complete analysis of the four approaches to financial regulation, see also: David T. Llewellyn, Institutional Structure Of Financial Regulation And Supervision: The Basic Issues, paper presented at the World Bank seminar Aligning Supervisory Structures with Country Needs, Washington, DC, 6th and 7th June 2006

[45] Schmulow, A. D. (2015). Approaches to Financial System Regulation: An International Comparative Survey. CIFR Paper, (53).

[46] Schmulow, A. D. (2015). Approaches to Financial System Regulation: An International Comparative Survey. CIFR Paper, (53).

[47] Schmulow, A. D. (2015). Approaches to Financial System Regulation: An International Comparative Survey. CIFR Paper, (53).

[48] http://www.rba.gov.au/publications/confs/2008/davis.html

[49] Schmulow, A. D. (2015). Approaches to Financial System Regulation: An International Comparative Survey. CIFR Paper, (53).

[50] Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act (Cth), No. 51 of 2001, (Australia); Australian Prudential Regulation Authority Act (Cth), No. 50 of 1998, (Australia); Reserve Bank Act (Cth), No. 4 of 1959, (Australia).

[51] Schmulow, A. D. (2015). Approaches to Financial System Regulation: An International Comparative Survey. CIFR Paper, (53).

[52] Claessens, S. (2009). Competition in the financial sector: overview of competition policies. The World Bank Research Observer, 24(1), 83-118.

[53] Claessens, S. (2009). Competition in the financial sector: overview of competition policies. The World Bank Research Observer, 24(1), 83-118.

[54] Hill, J. G. (2012). Why did Australia fare so well in the global financial crisis?.

[55] Beltratti, A., & Stulz, R. M. (2009). Why did some banks perform better during the credit crisis? A cross-country study of the impact of governance and regulation (No. w15180). National Bureau of Economic Research.

[56] Xu, Y., Jiang, A. L., Fargher, N., & Carson, E. (2011). Audit reports in Australia during the global financial crisis. Australian Accounting Review, 21(1), 22-31.

[57] Hanif, M.(2011), ‘Differences and Similarities in Islamic and Conventional Banking’, International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol:2 No:2, pp.166-175

[58] Gökalp, F. (2014). Kriz Öncesi ve Kriz Sonrasi Dönemler Itibariyle Katilim Bankalari ve Ticari Bankalarin Karliligi Üzerine Karsilastirmali Bir Arastirma/A Comparative Study About Participation and Commercial Banks' Profitability In Pre and Post-Crisis Periods. Selcuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (32), 191.

[59] Türkiye Katılım Bankaları Birliği (2013), Katılım Bankacılığı 2013

[60] Rahman UH ve Zaharuddin, A R (2014), Differences Between Islamic Bank and Conventional, Available at http://zaharuddin.net/senarai-lengkap-artikel/38/297-differences-between-islamic-banka conventional.html

 

[61] Deloitte, Türkiye Katılım Bankacılığı Büyüme Yolundaki Önemli Adımlar, Deloitte Yayınları, 2014

[62] Hassan M. Ve Dridi J., The Effects of the Global Crisis on Islamic and Conventional Banks: A Comparative Study, International Monetary Fund(IMF), 2010

[63] Deloitte, Türkiye Katılım Bankacılığı Büyüme Yolundaki Önemli Adımlar, Deloitte Yayınları, 2014

[64] Doğan, M. (2013). Katılım ve Geleneksel Bankaların Finansal Performanslarının Karşılaştırılması: Türkiye Örneği. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, 58, 175-188.

[65] Liukisila, C. (1996). IMF Survey, Healthy Banks are Vital for a Strong Economy, Finance and Development.

 

[66] Economist Intelligence Group, "Turkey: Key Developments." Economist. 2010. Web. 5 May2012.

 

[67] Yörükoğlu, M., & Atasoy, H. (2010). The Effects of the Global Financial Crisis on the Turkish Financial Sector‖. BIS Paper, (54), 387-405.

[68] Yörükoğlu, M., & Atasoy, H. (2010). The Effects of the Global Financial Crisis on the Turkish Financial Sector‖. BIS Paper, (54), 387-405.

 

[69] Yörükoğlu, M., & Atasoy, H. (2010). The Effects of the Global Financial Crisis on the Turkish Financial Sector‖. BIS Paper, (54), 387-405.

 

[70] Yörükoğlu, M., & Atasoy, H. (2010). The Effects of the Global Financial Crisis on the Turkish Financial Sector‖. BIS Paper, (54), 387-405.

[71] Kaya, F., & Yilar, S. (2011). Fiscal transformation in Turkey over the last two decades. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 11(1), 59.

[72] SEDEFED (2009).“Kronolojik Olarak Önlem Paketleri”, http: //www.sedefed.org/default. aspx?pid=60978&nid=57158, (12.12.2009).

 

[73] Resmi Gazete (2009). “5838 Bazı Kanunlarda Değişiklik Yapılması Hakkında Kanun”, 28.02.2009 Tarih ve 27155 Sayılı Resmî Gazete, http: //rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr/main.aspx?home=http: // rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr/eskiler/2009/02/20090228.htm&main=http: //rega.basbakanlik.gov.tr/ eskiler/2009/02/20090228.htm, (12.12.2009).

 

[74] Kaya, F., & Yilar, S. (2011). Fiscal transformation in Turkey over the last two decades. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 11(1), 59.

 

[75] http://www.cnbc.com/2015/02/24/how-addiction-to-debt-came-even-to-china.html

[76] Dobbs, R., Lund, S., Woetzel, J., & Mutafchieva, M. (2015). Debt and (not much) deleveraging. McKinsey Global Institute, 136.

[77] Maurizio Lazzarato, Borçlandırılmış İnsanın İmali - Neoliberal Durum Üzerine Deneme, çev., Murat Erşen (İstanbul: Açılım Kitap, 2014).