News concerning the failure, nationalization and and rescue mergers of major banks in New York and London is not coming from ‘nowhere’. Understanding what happens next is hard if one concentrates on the media search for the next particular financial weakling to be culled (the speculation has been on Morgan Stanley, seeking a Chinese partner) or on the narrative of financial re-regulation. Instead, how about reading this as a geography lesson at urban, national and global scales? Skip the epochal doom and look at the following economic geography, from The Guardian:
Shaun Springer, chief executive of Napier Scott , the financial headhunter based in the City [of London], said he was hoping to pick up a bit of business over the next few weeks as staff at Lehman and other troubled banks looked for new berths; but he knows that the golden age of the City is over.
‘What we are living through now will reverberate through the rest of the century in the same way the Great Depression did last century. We are witnessing a very real power shift. Money is moving eastwards – while they’re creating wealth, we’re losing it hand over fist. Where it ends no one knows.
‘London has enjoyed an unprecedented decade of global dominance. Let’s hope people took lots of photos to look back on in the years to come’
This makes part in sense because surely the United States government requires its own bankers and bond holders who will underwrite the cost of their nationalization of significant parts of the financial sector which is now underway. Where are the geographers commenting on this? (Feel free to add links via Comments).