KEYNESIAN SOLUTIONS – AFTER TOTAL FAILURE – TRY, TRY AGAIN

“Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security, but at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth.” – John Maynard Keynes – The Economic Consequences of the Peace

  

While Barack Obama vacations on Martha’s Vineyard this week he’ll be thinking about his grand vision to save America – again. There is one thing you can say about Obama – he’s predictable. He promises to unveil his “new” plan for America in early September. The White House said Obama will give a speech after the September 5 Labor Day holiday to outline measures to boost hiring and find budget savings that surpass the $1.5 trillion goal of a new congressional deficit-cutting committee. It is heartening to see that Barack has turned into a cost cutter extraordinaire. He should be an inspiration to the Tea Party, except for one little problem. The plan he unveils in a few weeks will increase spending now and fret about spending cuts at some future unspecified date.

I can reveal his plan today because the White House has already leaked the major aspects of his plan. He will call for an extension of the Social Security payroll tax cut of 2% for all working Americans. This was supposed to give a dramatic boost to GDP in 2011. Maybe it will work next time. He will demand that extended unemployment benefits be renewed. Somehow providing 99 weeks of unemployment benefits is supposed to create jobs. It’s done wonders thus far. He will propose some semblance of an infrastructure bank or tax cuts to spur infrastructure spending. It will include a proposal for training and education to help unemployed people switch careers. He will attempt to steal the thunder from the SUPER COMMITTEE of 12 by coming up with $2 trillion of budget savings by insisting the Lear jet flying rich fork over an extra $500 billion.

You may have noticed that followers of Keynesian dogma like Paul Krugman, Larry Summers, Brad Delong, Richard Koo, John Galbraith, every Democrat in Congress, and every liberal pundit and columnist have been shrieking about the Tea Party terrorists and their ghastly budget cuts that are destroying our economy. They contend the stock market is tanking and the economy is heading into recession due to the brutal austerity measures being imposed by the extremists in the Republican Party. There is just one small issue with their argument. It is completely false. It is a bold faced lie. This is 2011. The economy has been in freefall since January 1. No spending cuts have occurred. Nada!!! As the CBO chart below reveals, the horrendous slashing of government will amount to $21 billion in 2012 and $42 billion in 2013. Of course, those aren’t even cuts in spending. They are reductions in the projected increases in spending. Politicians must be very secure in the knowledge that Americans are completely ignorant when it comes to anything other than the details of Kim Kardashian’s wedding and who Snooki is banging on Jersey Shore.

 

I’d like to remind the Harvard educated Keynesian economists that Federal government spending is currently chiming in at $3.8 trillion per year. Federal spending was $2.7 trillion in 2007 and $3.0 trillion in 2008. Keynesians believe government spending fills the gap when private companies are contracting. Obama has taken Keynesianism to a new level. Federal spending will total $10.8 trillion in Obama’s 1st three years, versus $8.4 trillion in the previous three years. Even a Harvard economist can figure out this is a 29% increase in Federal spending. What has it accomplished? We are back in recession, unemployment is rising, forty six million Americans are on food stamps, food and energy prices are soaring, and the middle class is being annihilated. The standard Keynesian response is we would have lost 3 million more jobs, we were saved from a 2nd Great Depression and the stimulus was too little. It would have worked if it had just been twice as large.

The 2nd Great Depression was not avoided, it was delayed. Our two decade long delusional credit boom could have been voluntarily abandoned in 2008. The banks at fault could have been liquidated in an orderly bankruptcy with stockholders and bondholders accepting the consequences of their foolishness. Unemployment would have soared to 12%, GDP would have collapsed, and the stock market would have fallen to 5,000. The bad debt would have been flushed from the system. Instead our Wall Street beholden leaders chose to save their banker friends, cover-up the bad debt, shift private debt to taxpayer debt, print trillions of new dollars in an effort to inflate away the debt, and implemented every wacky Keynesian stimulus idea Larry Summers could dream up.  These strokes of genius have failed miserably. Bernanke, Paulson, Geithner and Obama have set in motion a series of events that will ultimately lead to a catastrophic currency collapse. We have entered the 2nd phase of the Greater Depression and there are no monetary or fiscal bullets left in the gun. Further expansion of debt will lead to a hyperinflationary collapse as the remaining confidence in the U.S. dollar is exhausted. We are one failed Treasury auction away from a currency crisis.

John Maynard Keynes argued the solution to the Great Depression was to stimulate the economy through some combination of two approaches: a reduction in interest rates and government investment in infrastructure. Investment by government injects income, which results in more spending in the general economy, which in turn stimulates more production and investment involving still more income and spending and so forth. The initial stimulation starts a cascade of events, whose total increase in economic activity is a multiple of the original investment.

It sounds so good in theory, but it didn’t work in the Depression and it hasn’t worked today. It is a doctrine taught in every business school in America with no actual results to support it. Who needs facts and actual results when a good story believed and perpetuated by non-thinking pundits will do? Every Keynesian play in the playbook has been used since 2008. The American people were told by Obama and his Keynesian trained advisors that if we implemented his $862 billion shovel ready stimulus package, unemployment would peak at 7.9% and would decline to 6.5% by today. The cascade of recovery was going to be jump started by a stimulus package that equaled 27% of the previous year’s entire spending. Obama’s complete package was implemented. The outcome was an eye opener. If you show a Keynesian this chart, their response would be: “Imagine how bad it would have been if we didn’t spend the $862 billion.”

 

John Maynard Obama got everything he asked for in January 2009. He had both houses in Congress and did not need to consult Republicans to pass his Keynesian $862 billion porkulus bill. It seems that $252 billion, or 29% of the package was nothing more than transfer payments. Of course, according to Keynesians, the $252 billion should have had a multiplier effect when it was handed out. I think they were right. Obama was able to multiply the number of people on food stamps in January 2009 from 32 million to the current tally of 45.8 million. The monthly food stamp transfer payment has gone from $3.6 billion to $6.1 billion. Keynesians should be thrilled by this success story.

 [Review & Outlook]

Obama’s Keynesian dream bill included:

  • $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn’t turned a profit in 40 years.
  • $2 billion for child-care subsidies.
  • $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts.
  • $400 million for global-warming research.
  • $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects.
  • $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons.
  • $8 billion for renewable energy funding.
  • $6 billion for mass transit that had a low or negative return on investment.
  • $600 million more for the federal government to buy new cars. Uncle Sam already spends $3 billion a year on its fleet of 600,000 vehicles.
  • Congress earmarked $7 billion for modernizing federal buildings and facilities.
  • The Smithsonian received $150 million.
  • The Department of Education got $66 billion, more than the entire Education Department spent a just 10 years ago. $6 billion of this subsidized university building projects.

Obama declared in December 2008 there were shovel ready projects across the land that would create immediate jobs. Too bad he didn’t tell the American public only $30 billion of the $862 billion mountain of pork was earmarked for highways and bridges. Obama declared his stimulus would create 3.5 million jobs, later changed to “create or save”. There were 144 million Americans employed in January 2009. Today, there are 139 million Americans employed. Obama gives the term “success story” a new meaning. The Keynesians had their chance and now they want a do-over. Sorry, that isn’t how it works in the real world. As Speaker Nancy Pelosi put it, “We won the election. We wrote the bill.” No truer words have ever been spoken.

As we know, that was only the beginning of our Keynesian debt nightmare. Let’s do some critical thinking and assess the results of Obama’s other Keynesian solutions:

  • The Homebuyer Tax Credit cost taxpayers $27 billion or $43,000 per additional house sold. The Keynesians handed 3.9 million people $7,000 to do something they were going to do anyway. They lured first time home buyers into the market. Since the credit expired, median home prices have fallen $15,000 and continue to fall. This wonderful government program has created more underwater homeowners and did nothing to stabilize the housing market or home prices.
  • Cash for Clunkers cost taxpayers $3 billion. An incremental 125,000 cars were sold at a cost of $24,000 per car. This Keynesian dream program lured more people into debt and warped the used car market by destroying used cars and driving up prices for poor people who couldn’t afford a new car. There were no carryover benefits except for government controlled union car makers.
  • Obama’s HAMP program allocated $11 billion to supposedly allow 4 million homeowners to modify their mortgages, reduce their monthly mortgage payments and avoid foreclosure. HAMP has proven a colossal failure that has done more to harm than help debt-laden homeowners. It has achieved slightly more than 500,000 permanent modifications, 40% of which the Treasury expects to default. Far more borrowers have dropped out of the program than successfully achieved permanent loan modification. These borrowers, along with those who later default, will often be left with larger outstanding debt, worse credit scores, and less home equity.
  • Obama even handed $30 billion to the largest homebuilder corporations in the country, run by billionaires like Bob Toll, by allowing them to carry back their losses and wipe out tax liabilities in prior years. This did wonders for the housing market. It did stimulate bonus payments for the CEOs of these companies.
  • Billions of tax revenue was lost by handing out $1,500 tax credits for people to buy new windows, doors, and appliances they were going to buy anyway. We are still waiting for that multiplier effect.

The usual suspects are now declaring that we can’t make the same mistakes FDR made in 1937 resulting in a dramatic downturn in 1938. As usual, the Keynesian storyline about the Great Depression is false.

Depression Keynesian Fallacy

One thing to remember is that while the depression that started in 1929 may have come to a bottom in 1933, it took a long time to recover. There was a cyclical recovery in 1937, and why was that? Roosevelt had the good luck to have been elected dead flat at the bottom. So it wasn’t his policies that cured the last depression, it was luck and good timing, combined with the fact that they were creating a lot of money after Roosevelt took the dollar off the gold standard. That resulted in a false recovery, from 1933 to 1937, and it went downhill again. – Doug Casey   

 

Keynes′ theory suggested that active government policy could be effective in managing the economy. Rather than seeing unbalanced government budgets as wrong, Keynes advocated what has been called countercyclical fiscal policies, that is, policies that acted against the tide of the business cycle: deficit spending when a nation’s economy suffers from recession or when recovery is long-delayed and unemployment is persistently high—and the suppression of inflation in boom times by either increasing taxes or cutting back on government outlays. He argued that governments should solve problems in the short run rather than waiting for market forces to do it in the long run. Keynes had too much faith in the wisdom of politicians and Federal Reserve bankers. They mastered the art of deficit spending, but fell a little short on paying off the debts during boom times. About $14.6 trillion short so far.

The Great Depression had the same origins as our current Greater Depression. The three Republican administrations of the 1920s practiced laissez-faire economics, starting by cutting top tax rates from 77% to 25% by 1925. Non-intervention into business and banking became government policy. These policies led to overconfidence on the part of investors and a classic credit-induced speculative boom. Gambling in the markets by the wealthy increased. While the haves got richer, millions of have-nots lived below the household poverty line of $2,000 per year. The rip roaring party came to an abrupt end in October 1929, with the Great Stock Market Crash.

Between 1929 and 1932, the market fell 89% from its high. The Keynesian storyline is that Herbert Hoover’s administration did nothing to try and revive the economy. It took Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his New Deal Keynesian policies to save the country. It’s a nice story, but entirely phony. Between 1929 and 1933 the Hoover administration increased real per-capita federal expenditures by 88%, not exactly the austerity measures described in fantasy stories concocted by the mainstream media.  

Bureau of Economic Analysis National Income and Product Accounts Table

Table 1.1.6A. Real Gross Domestic Product, Chained (1937) Dollars [Billions of chained (1937) dollars]
 
 1929 
 1930 
 1931 
 1932 
 1933 
 1934 
 1935 
 1936 
 1937 
 1938 
 1939 
Gross domestic product
87.3
79.8
74.6
64.9
64.0
71.0
77.3
87.4
91.9
88.7
95.9
Personal consumption expenditures
63.1
59.7
57.8
52.6
51.5
55.1
58.5
64.5
66.8
65.8
69.4
Gross private domestic investment
12.2
8.1
5.1
1.5
2.3
4.1
7.6
9.7
12.2
8.0
10.3
Net exports of goods and services
0.8
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.1
0.2
-0.5
-0.3
0.1
0.9
1.0
Government consumption expenditures and gross investment
9.2
10.2
10.6
10.2
9.9
11.1
11.5
13.4
12.8
13.8
15.0

 

The Great Depression officially lasted from 1929 until 1940. What is not well known is that real GDP was at the same level in 1936 as it had been in 1929. In no small part because real GDP soared by 37% between 1933 and 1936. The unemployment rate in 1929 was 5%. In 1936, even after real GDP had recovered to pre-depression levels, the unemployment rate was still 15%. It spiked back to 18% in 1938 and stayed above 15% until World War II. Tellingly, in 1936, private domestic investment was 21% below the level of 1929. 

By contrast, government expenditures surged by 46% between 1929 and 1936. With the government creating new agencies and employing people in make-work projects, private industry was crowded out. The extensive governmental economic planning and intervention that began during the Hoover administration swelled drastically under Roosevelt. The bolstering of wage rates and prices, expansion of credit, propping up of weak firms, and increased government spending on public works prolonged the Great Depression.

The facts powerfully contradict the notion endorsed by Krugman and other Keynesian devotees that the supposed 1937-38 Depression within the Great Depression was caused by Roosevelt slashing spending. In fact, real GDP only dropped by 3.5% in 1938 and rebounded by 8.1% in 1939. What actually collapsed in 1938 was private investment, which fell 34%. By contrast, government spending declined by only 4.5% in 1938, proving that Roosevelt did not drastically cut spending. To the extent that he eased up on the accelerator, it was by cutting back on useless jobs programs like those provided by the Works Progress Administration and the Public Works Administration. Austerity did not derail the recovery.

The reason private investment collapsed in 1938 was Roosevelt’s anti-business crusade. He denounced big business as the cause of the Depression. In March 1938, FDR appointed Yale University law professor Thurman Arnold to head the antitrust division of the Justice Department. Arnold soon hired some 300 lawyers to file antitrust lawsuits against businesses. Arnold launched cases against entire industries, with lawsuits against the milk, oil, tobacco, shoe machinery, tires, fertilizer, railroad, pharmaceuticals, school supplies, billboards, fire insurance, liquor, typewriter, and movie industries.

Paul Krugman’s recent veiled yearning for a war or staged crisis to revive the economy through spending to fight the war is another Keynesian fallacy perpetuated by the mainstream media. These mindless non-critical thinking talking heads actually believe World War II ended the Great Depression. Doug Casey obliterates their fantasy:

“People say that World War II cured the Depression, but in fact, it made it worse. As bad as things were in the ‘30s, they were worse during the war in the ‘40s. You couldn’t get shoes. You couldn’t get gasoline. You couldn’t get tires. You couldn’t get just about anything that was being used for the war. The war prolonged and deepened the Depression. The thing that ended the Depression was not the war but the fact that since people could not consume, they were forced to save. That delayed consumption resulted in a huge amount of savings, and that’s what caused the recovery in the late 1940s.

 

The fact that the entire world was left in smoldering ruins after World War II, except for the United States, may have contributed slightly to our recovery from the Great Depression.

According to Murray Rothbard, in his book America’s Great Depression, the artificial meddling in the economy was a disaster prior to the Great Depression, and government efforts to prop up the economy after the crash of 1929 only made things far worse. Government intrusion delayed the market’s correction and made the road to complete recovery more difficult. Today’s myopic politicians, captured monetary authorities and Harvard trained Keynesian economists have learned the wrong lessons from the Great Depression. The upshot will be a second Greater Depression and further impoverishment of the dwindling middle class. The implications of more wasteful government stimulus programs, more quantitative easing and more debt are: further debasement of the currency and ultimately a hyperinflationary collapse. The great economist John Maynard Keynes understood currency debasement:

“There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”

How to Cut Spending While Actually Increasing Spending

“Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become ‘profiteers,’ who are the object of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, whom the inflationism has impoverished, not less than of the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds and the real value of the currency fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-getting degenerates into a gamble and a lottery.” – John Maynard Keynes – The Economic Consequences of the Peace

Obama’s plan to revive America will be announced with great fanfare in two weeks. We know for sure he will propose these two brilliant ideas:

  • Extending unemployment compensation again at a total 2012 cost of $65 billion. Because we know that paying people to not work creates millions of jobs. The multiplier effect is off the charts. Why work when you can watch The View and chow down on cheese doodles purchased with your SNAP card for 99 weeks?
  • Extending the payroll tax cut at a total 2012 cost of $100 billion. This was supposed to give a dramatic boost to the economy in FY11. Have you noticed any boost? A Keynesian will argue, “Imagine if we hadn’t done it.” A critical thinker might ask: Is it prudent to increase the unfunded Social Security liability by another $100 billion and hand the bill to future unborn generations, so we can buy a new IPod 2 today?

It is a certainty that Obama will announce an infrastructure bank or some variation to spur investment in our national infrastructure that is crumbling by the day. Top Keynesian, and architect of the Obama stimulus plan, Larry Summers has been blathering about this for months. Even though the first stimulus plan was sold as an infrastructure plan, they mean it this time. As usual, the storyline is false. You can’t drive anywhere in this country and not be inconvenienced by road widening, bridge building, and repaving projects. The Keynesians act like infrastructure projects are highly unusual and need new Federal dollars to jump start the engine. The fact is that every Federal, State and municipal government has a capital fund that is budgeted every year. Most of the projects have multiple year lead times. They require planning and coordination. The reason we have 160,000 structurally deficient or obsolete bridges and thousands of miles of crumbling underground pipes is because politicians decided to spend their budgets on something more useful like train museums, murals, turtle crossings, and studies on the mating habits of ferrets.

The country has lost approximately seven million jobs since 2007. Five million of the jobs were lost in sales industries and manufacturing industries. There are 139 million jobs in America today and only seven million, or 5% of all jobs, in the construction industry. How do Keynesians expect to revive the job market with an infrastructure bank that will benefit, at most, 5% of the U.S. workforce? Let me guess. They will propose billions of new spending on education so they can retrain sales clerks from Wal-Mart into architects for designing 160,000 new bridges.

Barack Obama will stand in front of the American people and lie. He is a born again cost cutter, who will propose new spending. As anyone with a calculator can figure out, the two guaranteed proposals from his upcoming speech will increase spending by $165 billion in 2012. If you go back to the handy dandy chart from the CBO showing the “horrific spending cuts” from the recent debt ceiling deal you will see  these “cuts” total $122 billion between 2012 and 2014. Barack will wipe out all of the supposed savings through mid 2015 with his new Keynesian plan. But don’t worry. His plan will have huge spending cuts in 2017 after his hoped for 2nd term is finished. Keynesians always promise to cut spending once their current emergency ends.     

The Keynesians had their chance. They controlled the Presidency and both houses of Congress. A Keynesian runs the Federal Reserve. They implemented everything they proposed. The $862 billion porkulus program, the $700 billion TARP program, home buyer tax credits, energy efficiency credits, loan modification programs, zero interest rates, QE1 and QE2. They increased social welfare transfers for Social Security, Unemployment Compensation, food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, and Veterans by $600 billion since 2007, a 35% increase in four years. No one has foiled their plans. The Tea Party didn’t really exist until 2010. They didn’t lose the House until November 2010. They cannot blame the Tea Party extremists, but they do.

The Keynesians have successfully increased Federal spending by $1.1 trillion, or 41% since 2007, and are running deficits exceeding 10% of GDP, but they call the Tea Party extremists. Domestic investment is still 9% below 2008 levels as the Federal government has crowded out the small businesses that create the jobs in this country. And now the Keynesians declare we need more stimulus, more programs, more debt, more quantitative easing and lower interest rates. It just wasn’t enough the first time. You have to give the Keynesians credit. Despite the utter absolute failure of every scheme they have implemented, they will worship their models and theories until they successfully collapse our economic system. Then they’ll blame the Tea Party terrorists who foiled their plans.

None of the Keynesian solutions worked during this crisis, just as they didn’t work during the Great Depression. The solution was simple, yet painful. The banking system needed to be saved, not the banks. The bad debt needed to be purged from the system. Wall Street criminals needed to be prosecuted. Bondholders and stockholders needed bear the losses from their foolish investments. Saving and investment in the country needed to be encouraged, while borrowing and consuming needed to be discouraged. Our leaders have failed to lead. The American people have failed to accept the consequences of their actions. And now we are going to pay a heavy price as Ludwig von Mises predicted:

“There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit (debt) expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit (debt) expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved.”

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
100 Comments
ron
ron
August 25, 2011 11:15 am

Governments declare war.Government spends money it dosent have and created our dept.Try to think of something the government does well?I think we really need term limits,same as the president,two four year terms,if relected.

Benign
Benign
August 25, 2011 1:08 pm

the “entitlement class” I worry about is your Ivy League students who will come out feeling entitled to run the country with the same arrogance you condemn it with to make yourself feel better. neo-feudalism, here we come, unless we address the distributional issues through a new more egalitarian social contract

Colma Rising
Colma Rising
August 25, 2011 2:24 pm

Benign…

Name a marxist government that isn’t feudal in nature.

Name any western/European socioeconomic or political theory that doesn’t stratify eventually.

Of course, I’d really like to know if you’re typing with calloused, swollen hands or the dainty fingers of
privelege.

Novista
Novista
August 26, 2011 3:11 am

Benign

… or Benighted? Let me offer you $1.37 trillion for your proper distributional issue. Do the math.

Where does the wealth come from for this thought exercise? The combined kitty of the Forbes-400.

Meanwhile, contemplate this: 76,069,000 non-paying tax filers for 2011. Top 20% group, 443,000. The 0.1% of the top, 3,000. How much more progressive do you want?

Enriqueriosh
Enriqueriosh
August 26, 2011 9:22 am

I don’t really believe in Keynesianism, but there is an example where the Keynesian concepts worked. The funny thing is that the example is taken prior to birth of Keynes, it was during the Meiji Revolution in Japan.

The Government, in an effort to modernize the country, spent money in those sectors with the potential of creating wealth, which lacked of private financing due to risk or the volume of the investments required. Once the companies were profitable, they were sold to private investors. Basically the State acted as a Venture Capital fund.

That’s the only way to make Keynesianism works. Unfortunately, it is neglected by politicians; First because more right-oriented parties trust in Liberalism (I am very liberal), and second because more left-oriented parties, more pro-Keynesian solutions, believe in the superiority of the public sector over the private initiative.

Dave Conna
Dave Conna
August 28, 2011 11:51 am

I see an enormous amount of (deserved) criticism for Obama and Keynes but apparently little recognition of the fact that the FUNDAMENTALS of our economic system are simply absurd: constant, EXPONENTIAL growth in a finite world.

After all the vitriol in so many of the above comments is sifted through, what SOLUTIONS do you propose? We have a country of ignorant people – somewhat understandably so b/c the systems are so complex – but more than necessary since, as the author so humorously puts it, collectively we know more about Kim Kardasian and Snooki than what really matters.

The article makes many very good points but in the end simply looks like an angry rant by an ideologue.

Our goal should be to figure out a way to assist people to be independent and self sufficient. Our system of greed and self centered-ness is ultimately self destructive.

Dave Conna
Dave Conna
August 28, 2011 12:19 pm

@ Admin

I have not tried to “judge you so quickly”; rather, I am giving you my gut reaction to the article and more so to the comments of so many of your readers.

But I am not interested in arguing about what your or my ideology is – I am interested in whether or not we want solutions that help get the world out of this horrific mess or just ways to help ourselves.

I do not pretend to have a lot of solutions. I think I have some really good ideas to START from – but most of them challenge SOMEONE – and we don’t seem to listen to people who tell us things we do not like to hear.

I would say that that is because life has been WAY too easy for us in the US – and I mean too easy for just about EVERYONE: the ultra-wealthy, the poor and the middle class.

I hope that clarifies (just a little bit) where I am coming from.

I am most interested in what you think of my first statement: that the problem is a fundamental problem with an economic system that expects constant, exponential growth forever. (Sounds pretty absurd when you put it that way, doesn’t it?)

The best discussions come from those whose viewpoints differ from our own, provided there is honest open debate without trying to dimiss or discount someone because they have a different ideology or viewpoint or whatever.

I have to go now – Tropical Storm Irene is making a mess of my yard and garden – but I will check back a bit later.

Dave

Petey
Petey
August 28, 2011 12:35 pm

Dave

“Our goal should be to figure out a way to assist people to be independent and self sufficient. Our system of greed and self centered-ness is ultimately self destructive.”

I think these are contradicting sentences. You want to ASSIST someone to be INDEPENDENT and SELF sufficient. But then you say SELF centeredness is destructive. But moving on….

I think we all can see how “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs” fails. Why in the world should I as an engineer, physician, etc. achieve and contribute as much as I can when anything I gain will be taken away from me by a third party setting arbitrary values. To say that “I am my brother’s keeper” perpetuates dependency and too many vote themselves this dependency.

I think the solutions are simple:

1. No more money special money printing schemes out of the Fed.

2. No bailouts of banks, automakers, insurance companies, etc.

3. Eventually eliminating direct transfer payments. I think many of these programs (Medicaid, LIHEAP, Food Stamps) are corporate welfare in disguise. The only welfare I would support as Milton Friedman suggested is a negative income tax rate. That way there aren’t special interests vying for specific programs and the poor spend the money how they want to spend it.

4. Slashing Militarism and the DoD budget.

5. Junking many federal EPA and OSHA regulations on manufacturing. The employees should handle any safety hazards on their own or with management and not expect big daddy to do it for them. Now I’m not saying pollute to high heaven. I’m saying localities and adjacent property owners should deal with companies in the area who are damaging property.

6. Free market energy. A lot of this talk about deficits and inflation are meaningless unless we have enough energy inputs. Oil, Nat gas drilling. Eventually I am assuming price of both will allow alternatives like solar to be more economical. I don’t know, maybe the efficiency of solar has to be developed more as well. But subsidizing solar is how you destroy that alternative. I think maybe the smaller Thorium Nuke plants might be a better alternative to the large ones. Of course the large ones are paid for with subsidies. Maybe smaller, safer ones would be built when the gravy train is taken away.

A certain amount of public spending is necessary to perform government functions. Roads, bridges, tunnels, buildings to house legislators, police, fire, etc. are necessary to provide services. What I am concerned about is when these things are considered as a means of providing employment. That’s when politicians have to invent a project. The argument is always to provide more employment but if you look beyond the surface you are taken tax money away from people who would have spent money on more needed things instead of the ginned up projects.

That’s my plan, but I would never be elected because I can’t think of a cute 5th grade slogan to appeal to the masses or another welfare scheme. I actually want to solve our problems and eliminate dependency.

Petey
Petey
August 28, 2011 1:00 pm

7. Entitlements have to be reformed. (raise the SS age, change the Medicare price controls/fees, eliminate them all together eventually, etc.)

I think your exponential growth question is tied in heavily with energy inputs and the fiat/credit monetary system. I have already shared my thoughts on energy inputs. People expect the exponential growth forever because of the credit system. Right now, the banks are not lending and thus the economy not growing because of tighter standards. Once they do, I think we will see “growth” but it will be more of the trickle down effect. Yeah there will be more jobs, but the inflation and the exponential credit expansion will be off charts as it is already.

Working gold into the monetary system somehow would limit exponential credit growth. Of course the bankers would take the heaviest hit from that and would likely oppose it mightily. But you wouldn’t need exponential growth with a hard currency because prices would be kept in check and people could maintain their standard of living.

Novista
Novista
August 28, 2011 7:59 pm

Dave Conna

“The article makes many very good points but in the end simply looks like an angry rant by an ideologue. ” But oh no, your initial comment was not judgmental.

You want solutions? Quite a few have been offered by others. Sometimes a comment, like mine about tax, implies an answer. Work that out for yourself. Here’s one quick solution to one problem: recall all politicians who’ve violated their oath of office. The difficulty is in implementing it … remember the tale of belling the cat.

The real problem you have is, how do you prohibit (exponential) growth with growing populations?

And factor in the history of banking and money, which reveals the constant lure of inflationary policies.

eugend66
eugend66
August 29, 2011 8:29 am

May I suggest an mises.org clip on the topic ? Long enogh, 57 mins. but the first 20 mins
may be skipped: http://www.youtube.com/user/misesmedia#p/u/0/TxcjT8T3EGU
Oh, it`s an non-economist`s speech rather a historian. I liked the last 15 mins most.

Thinker
Thinker
August 29, 2011 3:57 pm

Jim, have you seen PIMCO’s report on Keynesianism?

Andrew Baker
Andrew Baker
August 30, 2011 11:18 pm

Interesting piece. However, those who wax nostalgic about the gold standard should provide a convincing analysis of the “Panics” of the 1870s and 1880s, which were in fact a combined 20-year Depression, far longer than what we call the Great Depression of modern memory. That “golden age” of hard money was a let-the-chips-fall-where-they-may era of unregulated capitalism and gold standard money supply. What better laboratory for gold lovers? So why all the panic?

A well regulated economy is a little like the 2nd Amendment — no one on the Right remembers the first clause: “in order to maintain a well-regulated militia….” One small example of a well-regulated economy: the recent mandate to increase energy efficiency in light bulbs actually created new markets for private enterprise and was praised by light bulb manufacturers. Writ larger, that example can provide a model for a job-creating regulatory framework for productive investment. Unfortunately, we tend to swing wildly between conservative de-regulators that coddle the too big to fail and liberal over-regulators that stifle small businesses while benefiting the larger corporations that can handle paperwork (witness many of the regs proposed for the emerging organic food industry.) In both cases, politically connected big business wins and the real competitive capitalism of Main Street suffers.

Challenge then — a well regulated economy. Light bulbs anyone?

llpoh
llpoh
August 30, 2011 11:50 pm

Andrew Baker – that is some of the stupidest shit ever posted here. Government regulations do not add jobs. Perhaps the light bulb sector did ok out of this, but at what cost to the public at large? And a quick Google indicates that light bulb manufacturers are closing down left right and center. The number of Americans employed in the manufacture of light bulbs is miniscule. How many Americans lost their jobs from the flow on effect of the increased prices of the bulbs.

Here is a quote for you, you stupid left-wing ignorant shit-for-brains:

“The current price of CFLs reflects the manufacturing of nearly all CFLs in China, where labour costs less. In September 2010, the Winchester, Virginia General Electric plant closed, leaving Osram Sylvania and the tiny American Light Bulb Manufacturing Inc. the last companies to make standard incandescent bulbs in the United States”.

Yep, government regulation sure does work. Ignorant asshole.

Petey
Petey
August 31, 2011 12:00 am

llpoh you beat me to it. Regulating efficiency, emissions, etc. requires that the companies meet a standard. To meet this standard they have to put capital into redesigning a product. What companies are usually the ones with more capital? Maybe larger ones? It should be plainly obvious that the regulations are almost always there to coddle the big boys. I would assume very few are actually there with the intent to protect the consumer. Apparently, some people can’t see the forest from the trees and they tend to be the hit and run trolls.

Colma Rising
Colma Rising
August 31, 2011 12:23 am

Anrew Baker. You’ve been fed a spatula creamed with shit and swallowed it’s nutty goodness.

The 1870’s was a post Civil War decade. That meant a recall of bank notes, scarce pennies (copper was melted for bullets) and even the demonetization of silver. Sound deflationary?

The credit expansion of a war, you’ve been told, was a form of Keynesian boom. Bullshit. Rations, destruction, conscription… sound like “wealth creation”? No. It sounds like hell. Sounds like a “well-regulated economy” too.

If you pause for a second before throwing around misnomers like “Bust” and look at the facts: You know… inventing light bulbs, telgraphs, airplanes and, incidentally, American Trade Unions… you MIGHT conclude, if you stop burping your Keynesian fecal dinner, that the Gold Standard and the “Bust” was one of the greatest things that could happen to a working person. Wouldn’t it be great if taco bell had a 45 cent menu again? How’s about a home for only 3X your yearly income? Wow! Think of the true wealth creation!

If robbing the Middle to pay the rich and poor is your idea of a boom, I must kindly ask you to blow it out your ass.

So is it?

llpoh
llpoh
August 31, 2011 12:35 am

Petey/Colma – nice smackdown on that troll Asshole Baker.

AKAnon
AKAnon
August 31, 2011 12:39 am

Mr. Baker, I will leave to others your economic education-they are doing fine. But I must ask, are you suggesting that the “well regulated militia” phrase somehow implies that law-abiding individuals are not guaranteed the right to privately owned firearms? Can you find any evidence from the era that was the intent of the framers? Are you sure you want to go there? Think carefully.

Novista
Novista
August 31, 2011 6:58 am

Andrew Baker

Several have given you points to think on. I suspect you won’t and will likely not return. But, should you venture where angels fear to tread, I will offer a factoid or two.

The first easy one, Henry Hazlitt, “Economics in One Lesson.” Additional elective reading, Bastiat’s “The Law”. Advanced work, “A History of Money and Banking in the United States” which may shed light on … “the ‘great depression’ of the 1870s is merely a myth … prices in general fell from 1869 to 1879 by 3.8% per annum … ” Meanwhile, productivity and exports rose significantly, and lo! wages were up. too. Some depression.

Of course, you have to factor in Lincoln’s war and greenbacks trashed the bimetallic standard that the Constitution had mandated. And the ‘crime of 1873’ killed silver as a monetary metal. Really, the Cliff’s Notes version won’t do you any service.

As for:

“A well regulated economy is a little like the 2nd Amendment — no one on the Right remembers the first clause: “in order to maintain a well-regulated militia….”” And the Left never remembers, “the right of the People” … as SC Justice Antonin Scalia said: “Nowhere else in the Constitution does a “right” attributed to “the people” refer to anything other than an individual right.””

Strange how I’ve met many Democrats in cyberspace, IRC, usenet, blogs, and, like as not, they’re women and supportive of gun rights. Whatevs.

A well-regulated economy would have to encompass the ‘robber barons’ working hand-in-glove with Washington, DC. (Pity James T. Hall didn’t fit in, eh?) And from there through FDR’s cartels to Amtrak. And now, corn-for-ethanol. And while lightbulbs are topic of the moment, it appears the CFL is the loser to the LED (when they get the cost right.)

Maybe innovation should be left to the innovators, and let God sort them out?

eugend66
eugend66
August 31, 2011 8:12 am

You guys may like this presentation Peter Schiff made some time ago:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=EgMclXX5msc%26rel%3D0%26hl%3Den_US%26feature%3Dplayer_embedded
For those with time to “spare” ; some 75 mins !

eugend66
eugend66
August 31, 2011 8:15 am

Some years ago … . Great guy.

Smokey
Smokey
August 31, 2011 9:53 am

Andrew Baker,

This site is not flooded with witless pussies lapping up your many profound insights, as you are accustomed to on Seeking Alpha.

Most of the regulars here, like those above, will not hesitate to pack your shit if when you post stupid shit in an attempt to show some sort of extraordinary revelation.

Most people here see through that shit INSTANTLY, as you just discovered.

michaelj007
michaelj007
September 1, 2011 9:41 pm

@ Admin

Great piece! I’m glad to see we still have some people in this society who are able to intelligently critique our leadership. What’s more refreshing is ability to sit right back and peer through the foggy looking glass of history to unravel the horribly distorted views of the “facts” we are spoon fed by the public education system. I’ll be 30 yrs old before year’s end, and I have yet to meet more than a handful of people in my age group that really grasp what’s going on within our nation and, once great, society today- and I find this to be incredibly disturbing. NO ONE MY AGE GIVES A FLYING FUCK! Go ahead and ask someone under 30 some pretty standard questions- How did Saddam Hussein rise to power in the first place? Where did the the “taliban” in Afghanistan get their weapons from? Who is Ben Bernanke? What is a dollar? Name 1 foreign president.- and the reactions range from a glazed over look to a “man, I don’t care about any of that stuff.” Its very unsettling. Ask them when the next iPhone is coming out, or name 10 songs on the top 40, or name 4 members of the Jersey Shore crew and they will snap out correct answer with the military tact and precision. Still, I’m hopeful. Hopeful that when things get bad enough, and they will, people will start paying attention and start demanding some REAL answers other than- where will the next Real World take place?

Andrew Baker
Andrew Baker
September 1, 2011 11:15 pm

Its a pleasure to engage in such a well reasoned discussion. On other sites, people just spend their time hurling swear words around and making uninformed characterizations about my educational background and political affiliations. Not here, I’m glad to see.

1870 was five years after the end of the Civil War, which the writer seems to suggest was illegitimate because greenbacks were used to hold the Union together and end slavery. (Slavery is a good example of an over-regulated economy, wouldn’t you say?) What about the 1880s and 90s? Still a lot of “panic” and instability. That was the era of railroad barons and big banks oppressing farmers that spawned the Populist movement and William Jennings Bryan’s “cross of gold” speech. Some of the angry writers on this site sound a bit like the Populists of that era. Read about it and see for yourself.

We are living today with the clear and present problems of a paper money system in the hands of very poorly regulated mega-banks and hedge funds. On that we probably agree. What I am suggesting, which may be hard to accept for the ideologically fervent hard money folks, is that the gold standard is not by itself a panacea for our problems. Things were tough back in the good old gold days.

A 45 cent Taco Bell meal may sound good to one writer, but most of us would not be able to afford that 45 cent meal in a gold standard world, because we would be paying for food with scrip at the company store (Walmart) or bartering eggs and carrots with our neighbors, if we had any. The gold, just like paper money, rises to the top and gets socked away in the bank vaults of the rich. It doesn’t circulate well. A big difference between a gold economy and a paper economy is that there is a lot less money circulating among ordinary people in a gold economy. Houses may be priced at 3x some people’s income, but they also required a 20% down payment and a five year mortgage so very few could afford the payments. The people with the gold could not create longer term financial instruments because they could not back those larger and longer debts easily with gold.

A well regulated economy is hard to create, in any era, under any administration – Democratic, Republican or otherwise. A regulatory framework, however, does not in itself kill jobs or stifle innovation. Don’t like my light bulb example? Try this one: the price of fossil fuel in the U.S. and Europe is exactly proportional to the energy efficiency of those two economic zones. In the U.S., gas costs half as much as Europe, and we are half as efficient. That is, it takes us twice as much fuel here to do the same things Europeans do — heat homes, travel etc. Artificially regulating that fuel price by taxing it up to $7 a gallon has spurred a revolution in efficiency, building technology and renewable energy. We import Venmar and Buderus furnaces from Germany because they are among the most efficient in the world. And for those who mourn the loss of those incandescent light bulb jobs (a bit sentimental for those who love the “creative destruction” of free market capitalism, don’t you think?), remember that Germany still has a strong manufacturing economy along with national health care, 4 week vacations, and unions that cooperate with industry to preserve jobs when the economy slows. We might learn something from their approach to a well regulated economy. We are now about 20 years behind as a result of our lack of political will in the energy policy area. Want to see an economy with really cheap fuel prices? Take a look at Iran or Venezuela. Gas is about 25 cents a gallon in Iran but there’s not much of it, even though it’s an oil producing nation.

Regulations provide the predictability that business value. The theoretical alternative may a “free market” but the practical reality of that kind of freedom looks more like the thuggery and corruption that accompanied the end of communism and launching of capitalism in Russia during the 1990s, or the drug baron economy of Mexico …. or the Pinkerton private armies of the 1880s and 1890s, to return us to our own golden age — war in the coal fields, 14 hour work days etc..

Those who associate regulation with Democratic administrations might pause and remember that it was during the Nixon era that the EPA was created, along with the Clean Air and Clean Water acts. Is anyone suggesting that unregulated businesses have a good track record managing public goods like air and water? And it was Nixon who took the US entirely off the gold standard.

The global economy is a big messy and complicated thing. It’s not likely that a return to gold will happen on a global scale without a pretty major cataclysm that destroys most of the world’s major currencies (and likely a lot of other stuff and people too). Even less likely that a return to gold would be a good thing for a global trading system. But it could be a good experiment at a local or even regional level. There is no law stopping you or me from issuing our own currency. You could start a bank tomorrow and back your own currency with gold and begin building the world you envision. Get off the old posterior and grab those bootstraps! I bet if all of the people who spent the past few days swearing at me pooled your shekels together, you could actually do this, rather than just ranting at those you perceive to be threatening to douse the fire protecting the mouth of your ideological cave.

Grab hold of the courage of your convictions! Joseph Smith did … remember those golden tablets? The Mormons are pulling off their own social experiment in Utah and even have a candidate running for Prez. Not bad for a pretty nutty little religion that was roundly hated by nearly everyone else in the 1840s. The gold bank could be your heroic beginning. Good luck!

Smokey
Smokey
September 1, 2011 11:56 pm

Andrew Baker,

Your time could have been far better spent taking a shit than composing that nonsense. The people here that bother to read it are very few in number, and the people who agree with it even fewer.

Take your nonexistent writing skills back to Seeking Alpha, where there are some idiots who will buy your stupid shit.

This is the wrong site to motherfuck gold.

Please read for comprehension the response by LLPOH to your earlier post.

Colma Rising
Colma Rising
September 2, 2011 12:25 am

Andrew…

If you insist on eating proverbial patties of stinking shit cakes and liking them, please do not chew with your mouth open.

It’s barbaric.

AKAnon
AKAnon
September 2, 2011 1:05 am

OK Colma, that warranted a thumbs up. Now don’t get a swelled head.

Colma Rising
Colma Rising
September 2, 2011 1:32 am

Thanks, AKAnon. No worries. Too tired for pride…

Consider yourself removed from my Punk Book.

Colma Rising
Colma Rising
September 2, 2011 1:52 am

Mr. Baker…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coinage_Act_of_1873… “The Crime of 1873” to the Populists.

You ought not discard populism altogether. (Fire away, Novista)

I consider myself a Neo-Populist.

Hoarding gold, the Money Of Kings is one thing, but the demonetization of silver dealt a kick in the nuts to the circulation of real tender.

You’re not seeing the big picture.

Who in the fuck do you think put the Referendum and Direct Democracy in the California Constitution and just who did it serve? Clue in your latest spazfest.

I want you to think about it. When you see that you’re in fact eating a figurative bowl of Poop Porridge disguised as economic pudding treats fed to you by sinister policy magicians, then Uncle Colma will teach you more.

For now, I suggest a tall glass of water and an antiseptic rinse.

llpoh
llpoh
September 2, 2011 4:24 am

AB – What a stinking pile of shit. Conveniently ignoring Germany’s massive debt, aren’t you, dickhead?

And your examples re petrol are also bullshit. The fact is Europe has a GDP approx 40 percent below what it would be if it were not such a regulated welfare state. Sure – let’s use a continent that is falling on its face as an example of how to succeed.

No comment on the GDPs of European nations, I notice. Gee, a real bastion of efficiency.

I repeat, what a pile of shit. I am just glad you didn’t use Somalia as an example – it would have been no less stupid.

Do us all a favor and go buy a clue before you post again.

llpoh
llpoh
September 2, 2011 4:29 am

AB – let me restate – Europes GDP has suffered a 40 percent hit because of over-regulation (about 1 percent per year compounding over a lot of years now) and excessive welfare. Jam that argument up your ass.

cv51
cv51
September 2, 2011 6:51 am

Michaelj007, Those who are not paying attention will be ripe for picking by the political demagogs. They vote for the ” Hope and Change” candidates.

AB: Your just trying to stir up some shit right? Your really not that f*&^%$ misguided?

Novista
Novista
September 3, 2011 2:32 am

A Baker

“There is no law stopping you or me from issuing our own currency.”

Care to run that by the IRS, FBI, legal tender laws? How about that NORFED Liberty Dollar saga? Even quirkier was the case of the builder who decided to pay his sub-contractors in gold, until the U.S. decided legal tender wasn’t legal tender. In the first instance, it was asserted people would mistake those silver coins with legal tender.

Colma Rising
Colma Rising
September 3, 2011 3:08 am

Novista with the reality smack-down from down undah…

Novista
Novista
September 3, 2011 6:33 am

Colma

I quite agree with you about silver as real tender. The problem with that was the bimetallic standard as specified in the Constitution was a flaw that yielded, as always, to Gresham’s Law. That happened in Great Britain in the 1700s, where undervalued silver coinage left the country for better return in Europe, as a commodity metal. A mint ratio can’t correct against the market.

Time and again, that problem raised its ugly head in early America. Sure, a fight against the Money Power of the eastern banks was justified. ‘Cross of gold’ nailed it.

Where they went wrong in 1894 was naively believing bringing back the Lincoln income tax would help them. Even worse, they were led to believe a central bank would be a good thing. The whole history of banking in America, from the Bank of North America, to the Bank of the United States and the Second Bank of the United States always led to bankers gaming the system. You couldn’t begin to count the defaults of redeeming paper against gold.

The “Creature from Jekyll Island” was the penultimate chapter in a years-long campaign of propaganda, with front organizations of ‘independent’ businessmen, co-opted newspapers and more, and the populists movement bought that pig in a poke.

Both aspects of the populist agenda came to fruition in 1913, when Wilson signed off on the original tax legislation using the 16th amendment as an excuse, and of course the FRS on Dec. 23rd.

They truly believed the income tax would limit the excesses of the rich and that the ordinary working man would have, as one would say now, a more level playing field — and that an independent authority would control the baniks. We see how that worked out.

But! there’s always a plus. The banksters also co=opted the bookkeeping class, persuaded them they would become a respected class of accountants. And today we have an MBA hosting a site that lets us discuss this shit. It’s all good.

Andrew Baker
Andrew Baker
September 11, 2011 9:58 pm

Try this as an experiment — remove all references to shit, poop, fucking of any kind in your next post and then see if there is an argument remaining. If so, press “submit comment”. Psychoanalysts long ago documented the fascination with shit and the fascination with money. Don’t indulge them further.

There are non-dollar currencies currently circulating in the U.S. Berkshares in Western Mass. is one. Ithaca Hours in western New York is another. They are legal tender.

Western European economies may be operating at 40% less than their full capacity in some economic framework that hasn’t actually been implemented yet. But Germany does still have a manufacturing sector that looks pretty good compared to most other countries – that was my point. And one worth looking at. It requires an integrated set of policies and regulations to maintain a manufacturing sector — including decades of consistent investment in trade schools and apprentice programs that we have not done. The free market by itself doesn’t create and maintain that kind of expertise among a skilled working class. I know a lot of machinists in the U.S. but they are old now — the new generation didn’t come up to replace them because the jobs weren’t there, nor was the educational infrastructure. And now there are some good skilled jobs going begging because we haven’t trained people for them… now that the old paper dollar has dropped some in value. It’s a complicated world.

GDP is a pretty crude measure of a nation’s real prosperity — in this country it includes the prison industrial complex, a massive defense economy, toxic waste dumps and a whole lot more unpleasant stuff. I’ll take a 4 week vacation over more prisons any day. And I’d willingly pay $7 for gas if the result were an invigorated domestic renewable energy tech boom, a 50% increase in energy efficiency like the Europeans have achieved, and far lower dependence on the massive imports of foreign oil that has led us into imperial over-reach, endless war and corruption of our own government by mega-corporations. Those higher gas taxes could be offset by lower payroll taxes and other measures. Those are a few examples of policy shifts that might lead us closer to a “well-regulated economy”. None of them involve gold.

Now, would a gold-backed currency help, hinder or make no difference to those kinds of issues — oil dependence, loss of our manufacturing sector and good jobs, imperial over-reach and a bloated defense sector? Not sure. It seems clear to me that the world we live in needs more than just a return to the gold standard in order to function well. I await your well-reasoned arguments. That is why you value this site, no? You can swear at people on any chat line.

Notice — no references to shit in the above! Caged primates fling their feces about. You are free men and women are you not?

LLPOH
LLPOH
September 11, 2011 10:22 pm

Go fuck yourself you cockgobbling pile of arrogant shit.