Farewell to Supply-Side Economics
- From: periodistalibre@xxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:01:51 -0800 (PST)
A Stimulus to What?
Delusions Prevail in Washington /
By Paul Craig Roberts /
21/01/08 "ICH" -- -- With his tax rebate policy, President Bush has
put economic policy back on a Keynesian basis. Will it work?
During the two decades it was in effect, supply-side economics had
restorative effects on the American economy. Its predecessor,
Keynesian demand management, stimulated demand more than supply.
Consequently, over time the trade-offs between employment and
inflation worsened, and for a while it appeared that inflation and
unemployment would rise together. The breakdown of the Keynesian
policy opened the door for the Reagan administration's supply-side
approach.
By following Nobel economist Robert Mundell's advice to "reverse the
policy mix," the supply-side policy allowed the US economy to grow
without paying for the growth with rising rates of inflation.
However, the new macroeconomic policy was not a cure-all, and its
success in banishing worsening "Philips curve" trade-offs between
inflation and employment masked the appearance of new problems, such
as the loss of jobs and GDP growth to offshoring, problems from
deregulation, and the growing concentration of income in fewer hands.
The Bush administration is turning to tax rebates, because problems in
the financial system and the amount of consumer debt hinder the
Federal Reserve's ability to pump money to consumers through the
banking system. Like an easy credit, low interest rate policy, the
purpose of a tax rebate is to put money in consumers' hands in order
to boost consumer demand.
Will consumers spend the rebate, or will they use it to pay down their
debts? If they spend the rebate on consumer goods, will it provide
much boost to the economy?
Many Americans are overloaded with debt and will have to use the
rebate to pay down credit card debt. The gift of $800 per means-tested
taxpayer is really just a partial bailout of heavily indebted
consumers and credit card companies.
The percentage of the rebate that survives debt reduction will be
further drained of effect by Americans' dependency on imports.
According to reports, 70% of the goods on Wal-Mart shelves are made in
China. During 2006, Americans spent $1,861,380,000,000 on imported
goods, that is, 23% of total personal consumption expenditures were
spent on imports (including offshored goods). This means that between
one-fifth and one-fourth of new consumption expenditures will
stimulate foreign economies.
Americans worry about their dependency on imported energy, but the
$145,368,000,000 paid to OPEC in 2006 is a small part of the total
import bill. Americans imported $602,539,000,000 in industrial
supplies and materials; $418,271,000,000 in capital goods;
$256,660,000,000 in automotive vehicles, parts and engines;
$423,973,000,000 in manufactured consumer goods; and $74,937,000,000
in foods, feeds and beverages.
The Keynesian policy of driving the economy through consumer demand
was applied to a different economy than the one we have today. In
those days the goods Americans purchased, such as cars and appliances,
were mainly made in America. Construction workers were not illegals
sending their wages back to Mexico. The US had a robust manufacturing
workforce. When consumer demand weakened, companies would reduce
their output and lay off workers. Government policymakers would
respond to the decline in employment and output with monetary and
fiscal policies that boosted consumer demand. As consumer spending
picked up, companies would call back the laid off workers in order to
increase output to meet the rising demand.
Today Americans are losing jobs for reasons that have nothing to do
with recession. They are losing their jobs to offshoring and to
foreigners brought in on work visas. Today many American brands are
produced offshore in whole or part with foreign labor and imported to
the US for sale in the American market. In 2007, prior to the onset
of the 2008 recession, 217,000 manufacturing jobs were lost. The US
now has fewer manufacturing jobs than it had in 1950 when the
population was half the current size.
US job growth in the 21st century has been confined to low-pay
domestic services. During 2007, waitresses and bartenders, health
care and social assistance, and wholesale and retail trade,
transportation and utilities accounted for 91% of new private sector
jobs.
When a population drowning in debt is hit with unemployment from
recession on top of unemployment from offshoring, will the people
spend their rebates in eating places and bars, thus boosting
employment among waitresses and bartenders? Will they spend their
rebates in shopping malls, thus boosting employment for retail
clerks? If they become ill, the lack of medical insurance will direct
their rebates to doctors' bills.
Economists and other shills for globalism told Americans not to worry
about the loss of manufacturing jobs. Good riddance, they said, to
these "old economy" jobs. The "new economy" would bring better and
higher paying jobs in technical and professional services that would
free Americans from the drudgery of factory work. So far, these jobs
haven't shown up, and if they do, most will be susceptible to
offshoring, just like the manufacturing jobs.
The Bush administration has in mind a total rebate of
$150,000,000,000. As the government's budget is already in deficit,
the money will have to be borrowed. As the US saving rate is about
zero, the money will have to be borrowed abroad.
Foreigners are already concerned about the US government's
indebtedness, and foreigners are bailing out some of our most
important banks and Wall Street firms that foolishly invested in
subprime derivatives.
Under pressure from budget and trade deficits, the US dollar has been
losing value against other traded currencies. Having to borrow
another $150 billion abroad will further erode the dollar's value.
Meanwhile, Congress passed a $700 billion "defense" bill so that the
Bush administration can continue its wars in the Middle East.
Our leaders in Washington are out to lunch. They have no idea of the
real challenges our country faces and America's dependence on foreign
creditors.
The rebate will help Americans reduce their credit card debt.
However, adding $150 billion to an existing federal budget deficit
that will be worsened by recession could further alarm America's
foreign creditors, traders in currency markets, and OPEC oil
producers. If the rebate loses its punch to consumer debt reduction,
imports, and pressure on the dollar, what will the government do next?
As long as offshoring continues, the US cannot close its trade
deficit. Offshoring increases imports and reduces the supply of
potential exports. With Washington's Middle East wars, with private
companies ceasing to provide health coverage and pensions, with
political spending promises in an election year, and with recession,
the outlook for the federal budget deficit is dismal as well.
The US is moving into a situation in which the government could find
it impossible to close the twin deficits without massive tariffs to
curtail imports and offshoring and without pursuing peace instead of
war. The outlook for the United States will continue to worsen as
long as hegemonic superpower and free trade delusions prevail in
Washington.
----------------------------------------------
Dr. Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury for Economic
Policy in the Reagan administration. He is credited with curing
stagflation and eliminating "Phillips curve" trade-offs between
employment and inflation, an achievement now on the verge of being
lost by the worst economic mismanagement in US history.
.
- Prev by Date: Chinese shares close more than 5% lower
- Next by Date: Re: Child Sex Tourism in Cuba
- Previous by thread: Chinese shares close more than 5% lower
- Next by thread: Cuba N
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
