Share
Email This Page
add comment

We're In a One-and-a-Half Dip Recession

Print
22 July 2010
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)

Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)

 

 

e're not in a double-dip recession yet. We're in a one-and-a-half dip recession.

Consumer confidence is down. Retail sales are down. Home sales are down. Permits for single-family starts are down. The average work week is down. The only things not down are inventories - unsold stuff is piling up in warehouses and inventories of unsold homes are rising - and defaults on loans.

The 1.5 dip recession should be causing alarm bells to ring all over official Washington. It should cause deficit hawks to stop squawking about future debt, blue-dog Democrats to stop acting like Republicans, and mainstream Democrats to get some backbone.

The 1.5 dip recession should cause the President to demand a large-scale national jobs program including a new WPA that gets millions of Americans back to work even if government has to pay their wages directly. Included would be zero-interest loans to strapped states and locales, so they didn't have to cut vital services and raise taxes. They could repay when the economy picked up and revenues came in. The national jobs program would also include a one-year payroll tax holiday on the first $20,000 of income.

The President should stop talking and acting on anything else - not the deficit, not energy, not the environment, not immigration, not implementing the health care law, not education. He should make the whole upcoming mid-term election a national referendum on putting Americans back to work, and his jobs bill. Are you for it or against it?

But none of this is happening. The hawks and blue dogs are still commanding the attention. Herbert Hoover's ghost seems to have captured the nation's capital. We're back to 1932 (or 1937) and the prevailing sentiment is government can't and mustn't do anything but aim to reduce the deficit, even though the economy is going down.

It looks like there'll be an extension of unemployment benefits. (If it weren't for the human suffering involved, I wish the Republicans had been forced to filibuster that bill all summer and show the nation just how much they care about people without jobs.) But the fiscal stimulus resulting from this will be tiny. Jobless benefits are humane but they alone don't get jobs back.

And what about the Fed? It's the last game in town. The 1.5 dip recession should cause Ben Bernanke to revert to buying mortgage-backed securities, buying Treasury bills, buying anything that will get more money into circulation.

But the Fed chair continues to talk about pulling money out of the system and raising short-term rates as the economy improves. During Wednesday's appearance before Congress he made it clear monetary policy won't be loosened; it just won't be tightened for a while. And he reiterated that deficits were "unsustainable."

He admitted unemployment would probably remain high for a long time, and the likelihood of growth was "weighted to the downside," which in Fed-Speak means we're still in trouble. And he said the Fed still has the tools to do what's needed if the economy needs more help.

But would he use the tools now? No. "We need to look at them carefully to make sure we're comfortable with any steps that we take." This is like the captain of the Titanic looking carefully at his lifeboats to make sure he's comfortable with using them as the ship starts sinking.

 

Open Article On Originating Site

Robert Reich is Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. He has written twelve books, including "The Work of Nations," "Locked in the Cabinet," and his most recent book, "Supercapitalism." His "Marketplace" commentaries can be found on publicradio.com and iTunes.

 

Comments  

 
+6 # Bev Switzenberg Wate 2010-07-22 21:05
Robert Reich: Why, oh why, are you not a part of the gov't, say Treasury? Why did Obama bring in the likes of Geithner, Summers, Bernanke? What a stupid move. We're getting what could be expected. Thank God, Volcker spoke, a little late, but loudly. What has been done by Obama has left millions of us angry and depressed. WHY IS THIS HAPPENING??? (Keep up your good work, you are so much needed and appreciated). Bev Switzenberg Waters
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+8 # sfrider 2010-07-23 01:37
What we are seeing is that a whole generation has been taught "voodoo economics" as if it were truth, when in fact it is more religion than science. Now it is not only that a large portion of the voting public does not support economic policies that have the best chance of pulling us out of this recession; it is that a large portion of the voting public does not even understand the rationale for those policies or why they are necessary, truly believing that precisely the opposite actions are required. It is a failure of our culture and of our educational system that makes it very difficult politically for any administration to do the right thing.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+4 # Juanbaltmore 2010-07-23 03:36
Bev asks why this is happening. It is because of the mantra that has been foisted upon the American people about government being bad. Politicians have become completely beholden to their corporate masters and must act in that manner or not have enough funds to mount an effective election campaign. The reality is that government does things more efficiently generally speaking because the profit margin and bottom line don't control the process. I agree with Robert Reich that a new WPA style jobs program is needed. The fruits of the last one are still visible all over the country.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
+4 # Rara Avis 2010-07-23 05:06
The most salient feature of this depression (it is not just a recession) is that private employers are making the decision to continue operating and being more productive with fewer human resources. People need employment and money in their pockets. Let's do as Dr. Reich says: revive the WPA and put people to work and let's make the entire election turn on that. Waiting for the private sector to do something they are not even contemplating doing is folly.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # John T. OConnor 2010-07-23 07:29
"They could repay when the economy picked up and revenues came in."

There's the rub. Mr. Reich tacitly assumes that the U.S. economy will pick up. Even more likely, I believe, an increasingly populous and resource-limited world may now be facing a permanent economic contraction.

It should now be clear that a jobs program that merely revs up our current energy-intensive economic engine and consumes finite resources at an ever-increasing rate will not be sustainable in the long run.

Perhaps, the buffalo won't come back. We should plan accordingly.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # amyemoore 2010-07-23 11:20
Why not put those folks getting unemployment back to work? They could do anything such as pick up litter on the freeways, plant trees, etc. These are low skill jobs to start. Those with higher skills getting unemployment can work for the government. Why do those getting unemployment have to rely on the private sector for employment when they are getting paid by the government? Yeah, good question.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote