In the face of this profound crisis that we are experiencing, more than one thinker is reflecting on whether it will be the last breaths of this system. Those who think that way are neither the first nor the last. Moreover, capitalism has done so objectively in the 19th century, thinkers such as David Ricardo and Karl Marx tried to show that Keynes was also concerned about the future of capitalism and proposed measures for the survival of the system. However, among all of them, the former President of Harvard and then the Chief of the Treasury with Clinton, Mr. Lawrence Summers, draw attention when he asks what would happen if capitalism cannot be reformed. The biggest difference with the rest of Summers is that it charges 135,000 euros for each conference; after collecting all that you can say anything, can you not reader?

Indeed, growth rates in recent years have been very modest, both in Japan and in the European Union (EU), since the beginning of the contraction. Efforts have been made to make the economies grow, but they are not. Interest rates can't be lowered anymore because they're around zero. The economy appears to be in deep stagnation and conventional measures are not, above all, affecting the EU. A similar situation occurs in the Spanish State, where lower growth rates are expected in the short term.

There are four reasons for this deep stillness: 1) In three decades, benefit rates have been declining. 2) Over the past thirteen years, labour productivity has not increased or is in recession. 3) The reduction in domestic demand has been partly maintained through credits since 1980; and 4) the fall in productive investment since 2001, despite the many incentives that have been given, both with Greesp and with Bernanke. Summers does not take into account the evolution of population and the staging of innovation.

And how do you get out of such a long resting? Some neoliberals claim that the solution is “expansive austerity”, because in this way they will lay the foundations for unique and lasting growth; austerity does not weaken growth, but quite the contrary. Others believe that the cause of weak growth is that the Government has done wrong debt management and that, among other things, they will make two proposals: 1) Lower corporate taxes and 2) alleviate the State's economic burden.

On the other hand, there would be Paul Krugman's proposal. This economist does not anticipate the effectiveness of monetary policy, since it has been used sufficiently with negligible results. That is why he has every hope of sound budgetary management. And that is that governments should spend more, especially on public investments, because private investments are cut or diverted.

Private investment is not stagnated by the lack of savings. In fact, large non-financial companies have a lot of money. 2.8 trillion dollars. However, most of that money is spent on buying stocks, not on real investments. The intangible assets of these companies (brands, patents...) accounted for five percent of their value in 1970 and has now risen to 60 percent.

In short, financial investments alter the distribution of income and wealth to the detriment of the poor, and the real economy remains stagnant. That is the contribution of financial capitalism!

And yet, it's hard to detect signs of capitalism's decay.