Robert Reich begins: "Imagine your house is burning. You call the fire department but your call isn't answered because every fire fighter in town is debating whether there will be enough water to fight fires over the next ten years, even though water is plentiful right now."
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
Slouching Toward a Double-Dip
08 August 11
�
For no good reason.
magine your house is burning. You call the fire department but your call isn't answered because every fire fighter in town is debating whether there will be enough water to fight fires over the next ten years, even though water is plentiful right now. (Yes, there's a long-term problem.) One faction won't even allow the fire trucks out of the garage unless everyone agrees to cut water use. An agency that rates fire departments has just issued a downgrade, causing everyone to hoard water.
While all this squabbling continues, your house burns to the ground and the fire has now spread to your neighbors' homes. But because everyone is preoccupied with the wrong question (the long-term water supply) and the wrong solution (saving water now), there's no response. In the end, the town comes up with a plan for the water supply over the next decade, but it's irrelevant because the whole town has been turned to ashes.
Okay, I exaggerate a bit, but you get the point. The American economy is on the verge of another recession. Most Americans haven't even emerged from the last one. Consumers (70 percent of the economy) won't or can't spend because their major asset is worth a third less than it was five years ago, they can't borrow as before, and they're justifiably worried about their jobs and wages. And without customers, businesses won't expand and hire. So we're trapped in a vicious cycle that's getting worse.
But the government won't come to the rescue by spending more and cutting most peoples' taxes because it's obsessed by a so-called "debt crisis" based on budget projections over the next ten years. That obsession - which serves the ideological purposes of right-wing Republicans who really want to shrink government - has even spread to the eat-your-spinach media, deficit hawks in the Democratic Party, and a major (and thoroughly irresponsible) credit-rating agency that's neither standard nor poor.
Meanwhile, some lazy (or misinformed) commentators are linking our faux debt crisis to Europe's real one. But the two are entirely different. Several European nations don't have enough money to repay what they owe their lenders, or even pay the interest. That's threatening the entire euro-zone.
But there's no question that the United States has enough money to pay what it owes. We're the richest nation in the world and we print the money the world relies on. The only question on this side of the pond is whether tea-party Republicans will allow America to pay its bills when the debt-ceiling fight resumes at the end of 2012.
Europe is scared of what's happening in the United States - but it's not America's faux "debt crisis" that's spooked them. It's the slowdown here (and the likelihood of another recession), made all the worse as our debt obsession prevents the U.S. government from doing what it should. A slowdown and recession here mean fewer exports from Europe to America. When combined with their genuine debt crisis, this could push Europe's economy over the edge.
The most important aspect of policy making is getting the problem right. We are slouching toward a double-dip because we're getting the problem wrong. Despite what Standard & Poor's says, notwithstanding what's occurring in Europe, and regardless of US budget projections years from now - our current crisis is jobs, wages, and growth. We do not now have a debt crisis.
Every time you hear an American politician analogize the nation's budget to a family budget (as, sadly, even President Obama has done), you should know the politician is not telling the truth. The truth is just the opposite. Our national budget can and should counteract the shrinkage of family budgets by running larger deficits when families cannot.
Americans are more frightened, economically insecure, and angrier than at any time since the Great Depression. If our lawmakers continue to obsess about the wrong thing and fail to do what must be done - and they don't explain it to the nation - Americans will only become more fearful, insecure, and angry.
We are slouching toward a double-dip, with all the human costs that implies. We don't have to be. That is the tragedy of our time.
Robert Reich is Chancellor's 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 thirteen books, including "The Work of Nations," "Locked in the Cabinet," "Supercapitalism" and his latest book, "AFTERSHOCK: The Next Economy and America's Future." His 'Marketplace' commentaries can be found on publicradio.com and iTunes.
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
I think we need to develop a new expression to describe those people who lack the wisdom, knowledge, foresight and intelligence to govern, but instead rely upon populist catch-phrases that oversimplify complex problems (and make all new problems that are even bigger!). That expression, with all due respect to Jim Jones and his KoolAide swilling cult, is "Drinking the TEA"! The initially conceived TEA party was built upon the acronym 'Taxed Enough Already', but that movement (albeit, initially misinformed and misdirected) has been hijacked by a group of 'Terrorists, Extortionists, and Antichrists'!!!
As Obama's pastor ranted to his singing and dancing congregation:
Rev. Wright: Hillary is married to Bill and Bill have been good to us? No, he ain't! Bill did us just like he did Monica Lewinsky Wright thrusting his pelvic area to and fro)!
Congregation: (cheers)
Rev. Wright: He was riding dirty!
Meaning: "us"? Wright is refering to the black community. He's saying that Hillary going to screw them over, just like Bill did.
The national media had Hillary, Bill, the Rev, & Obama on TV plenty of times back then, and didn't see the need to have the conversation.
I'll say this about the Tea Party-it was only they that have finally got Obama (today) to inform the people that he is finally going to come up with a plan to address the debt crisis, of which S & P warned us about back in April.
Obama ignored the reccomedations of his debt commission, last December-and ever since; his budget he presented in Feb., promised to swell the debt (received 0 votes in the Senate; and the Democratic congress for the past two years never even passed a federal budget - I suspect that is of hisotrical note.
With polls showing most Americans support the broad positions of the TP on these current issues, I suspect the Pres had to finally come to the table.
It sounds as though you have been drinking the tea as well. What was it you didn't like about the Clinton era--the peace or the prosperity? 23.7 million jobs under Clinton; three years of surplus (Bush took care of that), and got the U.S. out of the Somalia mess that Bush1 started. You would do well to pay less attention to less Fixed Noise and more to the historical record.
Clinton returned to Rwanda and promised "Never Again." Already, at that time, the conflict had re-erupted just next door in the DR Congo, where 2-3 million would die before the end of his term.
The era of Clinton was the most deadly period for the world, since the end of WW II.
Prosperity? Well, bubbles of greed and massive corporate fraud and venture capitalism run amuck - do have short term massive stimulus power, i.e., proof that it does absolutely trickle down.
However, in case you missed it, the Dot.com bubble (the Enron bubble) crashed in March of 2000. Every leading economic indicator that had not already turned on it's head (note - the top of the broad market was back in early 1998) did so promptly.
With the $10 Trillion crash came the end of that prosperity, the end of the tax revenue and economy that brought us the nice little surpluses - leaving behind a collapse that drove us deep back into quick massive deficits.
Howard Dean. Kucinich. Where are the liberal lions?
They've ripped off America and moved on. They've outsourced -- like all big corporations -- to other countries who have YOUR jobs that will never come back, all the while making record profits (Exxon up 44% last quarter!!). They've got their money in off-shore accounts and in hidden assets.
And WE'RE becoming EXACTLY what they want us to be: Mexico...the rich at the top, luxuriating off of unearned income to keep 1% rich, and the angry poor at the bottom, no jobs...the 99% poor, becoming more and more corrupt to stay alive. It's fetid!
Yes, we're being ridiculed by China and Russia -- that's what they do, by the way; it's their propaganda tactic -- but ask yourself, "Why wouldn't we be ridiculed?" We have just shown the World that we're all about a bunch of right-wing nut-job children who simply will take their toys and go home to their tax-haven mansions if they do not get their way. Republicans are rejoicing at our expense!
Well, they just got their way...we're the richest country in the World and our people have no jobs, thus, no money.
Just what El Mudocho and the Koch boys want: us watching helplessly, empty water buckets in hand, U.S burning.
Mickey is very correct, and it is why I call them stupid. The Koch brothers et. al. are taking more and more of the US and the world's financial wealth for themselves. Your house didn't really lose 30% of it's value. That was merely stolen by the $$boys.
However, if thay had not stolen it, that house's value would have gone up. So, if your house was worth 100K in 2007, then it is now worth 70K and the $$boys have that other 30K. If they left it alone your home may be worth 110K.
That's because as the wealth concentrates into fewer hands it circulates less. When money circulates, it grows wealth. There are problems with too much circulation (inflation), but that is not our existing problem.
So, eventually the $$boys will start actually shrinking the total wealth, if that has not started already in Europe. Once the wealth shrinks, then all that $$ they stole begins to disintegrate.
Thats why Mickey is correct!
NO MORE WAR FUNDING. Bring 'em home!
N.
And in the meantime, those of us who work for a living are getting screwed -- and I don't mean in the good way.
This is what most of America just doesn't get...or even see...or even question!
N.
Never in my lifetime did I think I would see such national psychosis.
The Republicans have lost all sense of humanity, and the Democrats can't bring themselves to fight back and CHANGE the narrative. The crazies in both parties have convinced the people that the only tool we have left is a hammer... so every problem needs to look like a nail.
Can this blog be published as a guest editorial in every small town paper? that would help.
"If pro is the opposite of con, is Progress the opposite of Congress?"
Isn't it truly obscene that they issued their downgrade the same day so many Seals lost their lives when their helicopter was hit by a missile?
No, no. The only acceptable cuts are to the sick, the poor, children, the elderly. And heaven forbid the fine people at S & P offer to help out their country in an hour of need.
One commentator has expressed his/her preference for Hillary Clinton over Obama for the presidency. let's face it, whoever had become president in 2009 would have the same predicament as long as the stupid war policy inherited from the previous administration had been pursued. War is costly and does not bring one any friend.
President Obama had a chance with the Democrats controlling both branches of the legislature to make the changes he touted so much during the campaign, but opted for the ill advised "bipartisanship " policy that made the American voter become utterly disgusted with them. Hence this mess!
In the parliamentary democracies of most countries, where the leader of the majority party becomes the prime minister, the government makes all decisions, subject to debate in the house, despite opposition from the other parties. In the end, it takes action to change policies in order to avert crises.
Reagan gave tax-breaks to corporations to pay for their shipping jobs off-shore - never forget that.
To correct "wrong thought, wrong action, wrong results" on this kind of level is going to require a VERY big change in policy. I am NOT going to hold my breath.
"But there's no question that the United States has enough money to pay what it owes. We're the richest nation in the world and we print the money the world relies on."
So why is our government $14.4 trillion in debt? Instead of raising the debt ceiling, why haven't we just printed $14.4 trillion and repaid the debt to end its interest payments, debt ceiling controversies, and risk of more credit rating downgrades?
Reich also says,
"The American economy is on the verge of another recession. Most Americans haven't even emerged from the last one. Consumers (70 percent of the economy) won't or can't spend because their major asset is worth a third less than it was five years ago, they can't borrow as before, and they're justifiably worried about their jobs and wages. And without customers, businesses won't expand and hire. So we're trapped in a vicious cycle that's getting worse."
Such words tell me that we have never recovered from Bush's 2008 recession and instead are "slouching" or perhaps rushing to the verge of a Depression.
BTW, Reich's above words also reinforce my conviction that the only errors S&P has made is not downgrading our government's debt to a lower rating and not doing so much much sooner.
(as it should have been with a couple of wars to boost it)? In fact, when Bush submitted his proposed 2009 budget in February, 2008, it promised a $48 billion surplus budget by 2012.
Unfortunately, the economic collapse later in 2008 revealed that Bush had been feeding us BS and that he had "set the stage" for the crisis that Obama inherited.
In truth, however, the deficits were disappearing sharply from 2003-2007, and as they CBO does this BS with just projecting forward that which is going on in the moment - they (like we were told in 2000) told us that we were going right back into surpluses. I never believed it, as I understood back in 1999-2000 what was upon us, because the housing bubble - like the dot.com bubble before - was overripe for a collapse.
This does compare to the BS we are told about what Clinton left - and if anyone has the balls to ask either Dan Baker or Paul Krugman, or any other economist out there, left or right, they will tell you that the surpluses were toast the second the dot.com bubble crashed (March, 2000).
This stuff is not rocket science - it's simply Econ 101 - or Gut Logic 101.
And here we go again -- been listening to Obama for 2-1/2 years?
But the debt from Bush's January, 2001 inauguration to Obama's January, 2009 inauguration increased $4.9 trillion.So, Bush's deficits must have been huge in the other years,including 2008 when he submitted a proposed 2009 budget with a projected $48 billion surplus by 2012.
You say this "stuff" is "simply Econ101" but Bush supposedly had a Harvard MBA. While running up a record debt increase why did he cut taxes? And why did he predict a 2012 a balanced budget with a $48 billion surplus? To help elect a Republican to succeed him in the 2008 election with more lies?
2004 - $412.7
2005 - $318.3
2006 - $248.2
2007 - $160.7
It was going down because federal tax revenues were really climbing again from 2004-2007. It was not because they were cutting spending - not new news there.
I explained, by comparing the Clinton era projections to what the Bush era projections were... Both were off in the Trillions - as soon as the economy turned - crashed - bubble burst - whatever you want to call it.
The 2001 and 2003 stimulus bills (mostly tax cuts) were just that -- stimulus trying to get the economy going again following the economic crash of March, 2000 - and then the after effects on the economy from 9/11.
Your Q - "while running up a record debt inc why did he cut taxes?" is out of context, completely. The stimulus was to help the economy - and indeed following the 2003 tax cuts, tax revenue soared from 2004 thru 2007. Then, as in 2001, following the 2008 crash, revenues collapsed again - and stimulus and other spending increased the debt.
Take the political bias out of your process - and it's econ 101, as I said.
My biggest problem with Bush, economically, is that he didn't follow thru on getting the housing bubble he inherited from Clinton (born of Clinton/Cuomo) - in check. And, the top tax cuts.
Then you say, "I ignore the stimulus effect of the wars."
I wasn't ignoring it. Personally, yes I understand that they have a stimulus effect - course if I'd volunteered that here on this board, I'd been called ever name under the sun.
Whatever - the stimulus effect is not more than the dollar cost. If you just pull out - then the cost will be less and the revenue loss will increase as well.
How do you pay it back? Can't, any more than you can pay back the current stimulus spending - it's done. Only by balancing the budget and getting us into surplus can that process be started.
Last I checked, the President's last budget that he submitted (which received 0 votes in the Senate) would have run the deficits up to $20 trillion in ten years. The House passed Cut cap and balance bill, which has super majority support by the nation, might be a better starting point -- certainly, for a starting conversation point.
And what do you mean "if" the Bush tax cuts were stimulus? Certainly the first leg - the tax rebates pushed by the Democrats in 2001 are considered stimulus by everyone. The corporate jet tax cuts, extended by Obama's Stimulus Bill are considered stimulus.
Those tax cuts for the above $200k ($250 couples) - 18% of the total Bush cuts - don't do as much.
You misunderstood the intent of my question, I'll re-phrase (and expand it): When and how do you personally propose we both balance the budget and then repay the debt attributable to the Bush tax cuts, unfunded wars. and unfunded Medicare D?
For example: Do you propose increasing further what you call the "Bush tax cut stimulus?" Do you propose maneuvering our country into one or two more war stimuli? Do you propose expanding unfunded Medicare D to also cover, but unfunded, over-the-counte r drugs?
Alternatives, of course, would be to repeal the Bush tax cuts, end the Iraq and Afghanistan military occupations, and reduce the size of the Pentagon to a Triangle.
Duh!
There are lots of peripheral issues that will improve the lot of everyone, but the rich owe us a ton of dough. And our government is so dysfunctional that we don't even ask to get it back.
The murder of Duggan by the police was just a catalyst.
What Americans must realize is THE ECONOMY IS IN PLAY AND HAS BEEN IN PLAY for more than a decade. All the pomp and circumstance of hard work, saving, wise financial planning and so on is for naught when political hacks and gangsters throughout the financial community are pulling the switches.
Yep, we are in for an intentional recession. And the ignorant will still vote for the culprits. Amazing.
President Obama's hands are tied. The TP (GOP) are bad-mouthing him in their campaigns and etc.
One said the Dems have killed a Billion people! Billion -- and then laid the rhetoric on President Obama (Saw this on RT.COM -- Russian TV)
Register and get mail-in ballots NOW for 2012-- if we vote out the GOP/TP -- I BET Obama will make America whole in the next 4 years --- TRUE!
Go Wisconsin - tomorrow will be a new trend if the Dems prevail -- and I believe they will.
Otherwise, a Democrat will have to change our election laws first.
By the way, the 'moronic', as you call him, Dr. Reich was right on target.
We need jobs directed stimulus.
There should be no question now about who is in charge. The financial tail is wagging the dog.
That being said. There is bad news in it, as the Fed is doing this, and up front (and I'm sure Geithner and the WH were in on it) to encourage and provide the confidence to business that rates will be low for some time to come - so that that have more confidence to borrow money for capital needed to run the business and to hire.
The bad news is that the Fed doesn't expect the economy to improve for two years (what took them so long to figure that one out?)