The superb economic historian Harold James has a column of this title in today's Financial Times, based on his most recent book, The Creation and Destruction of Value. I must confess that despite being a big fan of Professor James, including his previous book, The End of Globalization, I haven't yet read the latest one (which was published in September). The column makes me feel sure I'd agree with him. He writes:

” ….[F]inding a way out of the damage was very tough in the 1930s and is
just as hard now. Unlike in the case of a 1929-type challenge, there
are no obvious macro-economic answers to financial distress. The
answers lie in the slow, painful cleaning up of balance sheets; and in
designing an incentive system that compels banks to operate less
dangerously. A 1931-type event requires micro-economic
restructuring, not macro-economic stimulus and liquidity provision. It
cannot be imposed from above by an all-wise planner but requires many
businesses and individuals to change behaviour.”

This point is exactly what puzzles me about the optimists who seen sprouting green shoots in recent economic data; macro stability is only the precondition for the reconstructive surgery needed now.

A second point in the column is that the recent era of financial globalisation suited small and nimble trading states such as Singapore and Ireland, whereas the dawning age of retrenchment severely limits their options and will be an age of big states. The BRICs, to be precise, not the old G7.

Reading about the economy of the 1930s is essential for understanding what's happening now. I shall order Prof James's book at once.