Something is in the air. Seriously, the talks in Brussels and in other neuralgic center of global decision-circuit seem to focus on the subject with attention and persistence which demonstrates a deep concern.  

Driven by a determination: if a major crisis economic occurs now associated with the illegal migration of the labor markets, terrorism, the consequences of war in Syria, with political uncertainties post-Brexit, movements centrifuges that would be born within the EU following a failure of the European project through the coming to power of extremist nationalist movements, then things could become much more serious than the previous episode of global economic crisis, 2008-2009. 

The biggest problem seems to be finding the ineffectiveness of traditional remedies, despite monetary policies that aimed mainly idea of

"cheap money", the result is far from expectations for, be it consumption or investment enthusiasm is missing completely. a situation that American economist Lawrence Summers qualifies as "historic stagnation" that states should "react immediately, because there is no room for error," warns Maurice Obstfeld, chief economist of the IMF:

 "In principle, losses from producing countries should translate into earnings equivalent to importing countries, but the balance is negative." 

Let us also remember the warning given all this summer all messages odd to Christine Lagarde, IMF Managing Director who spoke about the similarities that the current period presents to those before the outbreak of World War I, referring to the emergence and multiplication protectionist policies. 

Whereupon naturally analysts' attention focuses on pre-crisis signals, that news would talk about training, emergency plans and programs of major central banks. And, perhaps most important of all, the signals transmitted by the IMF, the first of institutions acting in cases of extreme urgency to meet the needs of a country or the other, a specific place or region, obscuring the crisis.

 Here's why I think it is important to see what measures already announced by the IMF as a formula for insurance and reinsurance in the global economy, central banks absolutely clear signal input in pre-alert. Produce still the main points of "data sheet" published by the IMF under the "fightback IMF global economic crisis". Thus, "to meet the financing needs increasingly larger countries affected by the financial crisis and to promote economic and monetary stability, the IMF significantly increased its borrowing capacity after the outbreak of the 2008 crisis." Here is a description of complex measures taken , the great achievement is reshuffling full panoply loan instruments to achieve better adapt by providing more beaches action policies to prevent crises, streamlining while the conditionalities associated with the program . At present, the total capacity of the IMF loan is about $ 950 billion. IMF important is the need to emphasize that "some countries are likely to be under threat of a crisis in normal circumstances, they may be subjected to the effects of further strikes due to increased tensions at the regional or global level." Very interesting remark followed by an indication that it is now possible intake "rapid and adequate short-term liquidity" to support these countries' innocent victims of the crisis. "

     But the next big global economic crisis may be determined not only by reasons purely economic or mistakes flagrant forecasting market trends, but growth at high levels or very high distrust of public opinion in the capacity of sustainability of the European project, for example and at the same time, the quality and competence of the current political leaders to resolve the main conflict situations of this. 

In this sense, it is highly likely that a major economic crisis to be generated by what we see now, that lack almost total political unity that can generate a consensus decision, even if it is more than obvious that the explosion may occur anytime from now. And, as history has shown us, the first reaction is really destructive one that keeps restricting markets, raising protectionist walls hoping that isolation can be equal survival. Reasoning just as false as the one that, in substance, generated previous global economic crisis, that policies based on the principle of "minimal state institutions minimal centralization minimal decisions, total freedom to market and total confidence in their ability to self- . "

 Such a political crisis could certainly be triggered by a failure of the talks on the future of Europe, then superimposing over the explosion of a financial bubble that many experts foresee a period as occurring in 2017-2020. Resulting in a generalized recession tougher and more violent than those of 1992 and 2008. 

A failure of the negotiations on the continuation and strengthening of the European project and its eventual collapse in a group of countries "hardcore" with other navigating around it "matches the level of their specific ambitions" or, simply, the political victory of an aggressive nationalism that want to restore national borders and leaving the current formulas NATO and the EU will certainly cause a tsunami effect with consequences still impossible to assess. And not only for the peace and welfare of our continent but throughout the world.

Can be possible such a violent development  consequences? Yes, when we consider the fact that every year, the population of the EU are increasingly more people poor or living below the poverty line, and the phenomenon of over-indebtedness has become endemic, reaching unimaginable proportions several years ago. Check, please FICO index, indicating the score below which a household can not borrow from a bank and see how, in 2011, the number of those who can not pay their rates is growing. You may remember that, in January 2009, Sarkozy opened in Paris International Conference "New world, new capitalism" saying words remaining historical and (unfortunately) history "must moralizing capitalism". What really happened? He learned the lessons of previous crises someone something? Signals were considered serious financial stability and creditworthiness of European banks analyzed in the recent "stress tests"?