JBS News

It's your right to be informed!

Tag Archives: Professor Paul Krugman

America: Why the High Unemployment?

by | Leave a comment

by John Brian Shannon

In 1970, of the 89,244 new cars and trucks sold in the U.S.A., 84.9% of them were built in North America, while only 15.1% of them were manufactured in other countries and shipped to this continent for purchase and registration.

In 2012, of the 14.4 million new cars and trucks sold in the U.S.A., 44.5% of them were built in North America, while imports accounted for 55.6% of registrations. Read here.

By any measure, this is an ongoing paradigm shift which directly relates to American unemployment statistics since 1970.

A total of 15.4 million car and light truck sales are expected in the U.S. for calendar year 2013 — the best year since 2007. By 2014, U.S. sales are expected to reach 16 million, with imports continuing to increase their market share in the U.S.

Since the first Model T Ford rolled off the Dearborn, MI assembly line, millions of  workers have been employed by American automakers – including some workers who worked for the same company their entire career. Fathers who worked at Ford, GM or Chrysler from their childhood until retirement, found their sons and daughters good-paying jobs with their old employers. Unemployment in the 1945 – 1975 era was generally quite low — and that, in the midst of an economically damaging Cold War which negatively affected many parts of society including the unemployment rate, not incidentally.

Generally during the post-war boom, everybody worked, everybody earned a paycheque, and almost everybody contributed to the economy. About late 1973 or early 1974 this began to profoundly change in the United States and in the Western nations generally.

Not to blame the American auto manufacturers for the Arab Oil Embargo, as the Big Three had been assured of low petroleum prices by foreign governments and several domestic administrations — hence the big, V-8 powered cars of the era and their consequently-low MPG figures were popular with both manufacturers and consumers.

But American consumers are a fickle lot. Once the gas price shot upwards in the aftermath of the Arab Oil embargo, Datsun (now Nissan), Toyota and Honda nameplates began selling as fast as the ships could deliver them from Japan.

If only the foreign vehicles were of inferior quality! But they’re not. If only they used more fuel than their U.S. equivalents. But they don’t. The corporate fuel economy average for foreign and domestic makes still favours imported vehicles. Not by the wide margin it once did — and not that GM and Ford haven’t scored impressive MPG victories in some categories, because they have.

But, to put it bluntly, many employed Americans prefer their foreign-built cars. (“And those millions of now-chronically-unemployed Americans will just have to get by.”)

It’s not just cars and trucks either. Historically, most home electronics sold in the U.S.A. including televisions, smartphones and computers were also ‘Made in the U.S.A.’  — but not these days.

Most of the clothing, plastics and extruded metals purchased in the U.S. are now manufactured in Asian and Southeast Asian nations, where countries like Indonesia rely heavily on textile exports to us and other Western nations.

Much of the American conversation these days revolves around the old austerity vs. stimulus debate which reporters and op/ed journalists are required by their respective organizations to cover.

Meanwhile the 80-ton elephant in the room is the trillions of manufacturing dollars which have transferred from the West to Asia since 1970 — and the manufacturing jobs that have gone with them.

Related articles

This gallery contains 0 photos

Stimulus or Austerity: Can Either Succeed?

by | 5 Comments

by John Brian Shannon

In the age-old debate between stimulus and austerity, many commentators fail to realize both schools of thought could be correct — and in fact, both are.

For one, look at the uncountable billions of stimulus added to the American economy during President Reagan‘s two terms. Unprecedented billions were directed towards defense, R&D, infrastructure — and even to Chrysler — although, strictly speaking, those were loan guarantees.

Do loan guarantees count as stimulus? Almost. And those guarantees tied up billions of U.S. Government dollars until they were no longer required — and served to establish and add gravitas to a new momentum in the U.S. economy. Courtesy of President Reagan’s leadership, I hasten to add.

When we look at historic stimulus, it works. When the stimulus is added at the first sign of recession it is most effective. Once all those factories are shuttered, trying to add stimulus to improve the economy is an uphill battle, every day.

The Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe at the end of WWII is a classic stimulus success story. Anyone who visited 1945 Europe and then visited again in 1960 can attest to that! About $40 billion dollars were used to stimulate the European economy — a lot of money in those days, even by United States’ standards.

Think of stimulus spending as emergency funding to keep the economy functioning. It really only works when applied immediately and at the first sign of recession.

For two, austerity does work. Although, it must be said, removing obscene debt and irresponsible deficits from a large economy constitute a major structural change. It is no band-aid solution — although as I said above, band-aids do work.

Austerity fixes the underlying structural problem — while stimulus fixes the symptoms, if you will.

There is no doubt about the Baltic austerity success story and there are others. You need only look as far as Canada in the 1990′s. Canada’s credit rating was on the rocks, the economy was in the tank and economic vital signs were heading in the wrong direction.

Prime Minister Jean Chretien and his astute Finance Minister Paul Martin, decided to adopt aggressive Canadian-style austerity and it worked (short-term pain for long-term gain) better than anyone had imagined. It just took some political leadership, unusually good communications with voters and some serious brainstorming.

A final word on economist’s everywhere. European economists work for Europe’s well-being, Chinese economists work for China, er, directly! While American economists work to arrange things to America’s advantage — you can’t begrudge any side for ‘playing for the home team’.

If the New York Times, Nobel Prize winning economist Professor Paul Krugman believes that it is in America’s best interests to float the economy with stimulus money, then he is right. Of course while agreeing with him, I always point out that stimulus is a merely a temporary fix and that additional deficit-financing (and accumulated debt) should be ‘pared down’ during the boom times.

Just as John Maynard Keynes suggested.

When this is not done, decade after decade, or should I say, recession after recession, it adds to the unbalanced economy and the entire economic structure is thereby weakened.

For now, stimulus — although it is almost too late for band-aids. Then, during the next boom, adroit movement towards zero-deficit financing — then, once that is achieved, regular scheduled debt paydowns after that.

Stimulus will stop the worst of the present economic malaise from taking an even higher toll — and later, austerity will begin to improve the entire structure of the U.S. economy.

John Brian Shannon

Related articles

This gallery contains 0 photos

An Unserious Man — MY COMMENT

by | Leave a comment

by John Brian Shannon

Read Paul Krugman’s An Unserious Man.

My comment on Professor Krugman’s article begins.

When 5 Minus 4 Equals 10: Republican deficit cutting

First off, let me say that I like Paul Ryan. Hey, I like Mitt Romney too.

I liked his dad, the great George Romney even more – a true and honourable captain of industry who represented American corporations with class and charisma. Now there was a man who should have been a two-term President.

What is before us this day, is the Paul Ryan plan for deficit cutting, tax cuts and cuts to Medicaid.

The proof is in the pudding as they say and independent groups like the non-partisan Tax Policy Center have declared that the Paul Ryan spending cut and tax cut budget will result in a budget deficit $2.5 trillion dollars higher than the one President Obama’s team is promoting.

And that is after essentially dumping Medicaid onto the states (many of which can’t afford their current spending programs, let alone additional spending) and dramatic cuts to the food stamp program (meaning fewer American’s will be able to eat) and cuts to education funding (meaning fewer American’s will be able to attend college).

Not only spending cuts, but tax cuts for America’s highest income-earners and their sponsor corporations. All of whom, are just doing fine, thank you very much, even without the proposed Ryan cuts!

The Paul Ryan budget plan is to cut, cut, cut — but spend even more, with a total of $4.3 trillion dollars of cuts over the next decade — and still the budget deficit will zoom $2.5 trillion deeper into the red than the Obama budget.

How can $4.3 trillion dollars of spending cuts and tax cuts phased in over the next ten years, result in an unsustainable budget deficit of $2.5 trillion dollars? How can offloading Medicaid onto nearly insolvent states help those Americans who depend on it? How can dramatic cuts to the food stamp program not correspondingly increase the property theft crime rate? And how do tax cuts to wealthy Americans and American corporations help the middle class, not to mention removing grants for more kids to attend college?

We only need to look at the utterly predictable results of this economic plan, to accurately judge it’s merits.

1) Dumping Medicaid onto the states, many of which are near-insolvent already, would have the effect of making some of them fully insolvent. It would push other states which are just managing to hang on, to near-insolvency. Strong states would become weaker. How does this benefit the United States of America?

2) Dramatic cuts to the federal food stamp program in an effort to cut spending, will simply result in greater federal law enforcement spending as many thousands of hungry Americans turn to theft, to be able to eat every day of the year. I’ll just bet that the FBI and city and state police forces don’t love this Paul Ryan plan.

3)  When fewer Americans can attend college, correspondingly more people will be entering the workforce with a lower level of education. How will the ‘dumbing down’ of America help the nation?

4) For those Americans in the top tax brackets and for many American corporations, tax cuts for them means a further concentration of wealth for 1% of U.S. citizens, a lower percentage of wealth for the middle class to share and even less for the lowest income Americans. What egalitarian society?

5) A substantially larger budget deficit allows more control over American policy by those financing American federal debt. For the foreseeable future, China (you know, that big, booming country that Republicans like to poke with a sharp stick at every opportunity) will be financing U.S. federal deficits and accumulated debt. As budget deficits and debt soar in America, the number of nations which can step-up to service that debt drops exponentially. The day is coming when China will be the only nation with the wherewithal to float the U.S. economy — IF they choose to do so.

Paul Ryan’s economic platform would weaken individual U.S. states, increase societal class friction, increase disparity in income and education, increase the national crime rate and allow more Chinese government say in U.S. policy.

If U.S. Republicans are America’s friends, who needs enemies?

John Brian Shannon

Related articles
ABOUT JOHN BRIAN SHANNON

I write about green energy, sustainable development and economics. My blogs appear in the Arabian Gazette, EcoPoint, EnergyBoom, Huffington Post, United Nations Development Programme, WACSI — and other quality publications.

“It is important to assist all levels of government and the business community to find sustainable ways forward for industry and consumers.”

Green Energy blog: http://johnbrianshannon.com
Economics blog: http://jbsnews.wordpress.com
Twitter: @JBSCanada

This gallery contains 0 photos

Crash of the Bumblebee — MY COMMENT

by | Leave a comment

by John Brian Shannon

READ PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN’S ARTICLE “CRASH OF THE BUMBLEBEE” HERE…

Supposedly, the bumblebee is not able to fly according to all the known laws of physics. But fly it does and it does so adroitly.

So too, according to all the known laws of working political models (those are called countries) Europe is not supposed to work. But it does so and is as adroit as any bumblebee will ever… be. Ahem.

Since the ashes of WWII, Europe has risen like the Phoenix of lore, from self-destruction to become a fully-fledged working model. Europe has many disparate parts, you would expect it to be unwieldy and it should definitely not fly. But it has surpassed everyone’s expectations – including the expectations of many European citizens and I daresay, some of Europe’s greatest leaders past and present.

A tip of the hat must always go to the foresighted American politicians of 1945-1950, who gave their blessing to the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe and feed it’s people, until the Europeans could again feed themselves. Even after that the U.S.A. pursued a successful European project with vigour. There were many disagreements and even outright arguments between the Americans and the Europeans from 1945 right down ’till the present day. No doubt, there will always be differences of opinion, but so much more has gone right, than wrong over the past 67 years.

Differences aside, the U.S needs a successful Europe and Europe needs a successful America. Neither can afford a disaster on the other side of the pond.

The American Civil War can be considered America’s coming-of-age moment, while the gradually coalescing Europe, still fresh from reunification with it’s Eastern European counterparts, post-Cold War, must now forge some kind of coming-of-age moment for itself – or history will indeed pass Europe by.

One such test is the present ‘Eurozone Moment’ — where the wealthy northern European’s (where most of the euro-dollars live) must find a way to co-exist with their poorer southern cousins, who are in hock up to their nostrils.

If Europe can find a solution now, it may well be written down by future historians as Europe’s coming-of-age moment, the glorious moment when Europe realized that she is, in totality, greater than the sum of her individual parts thereof. Let’s hope Europe is self-aware at that level.

What time honoured political strategy could assist us here? I’m glad you asked. For one of the best-tested and time honoured practices for success is, the strategy of win-win.

But how to apply this to the present Eurozone Moment?

By simply finding many different things which will work to mutual advantage, where both sides can gain some amount of benefit. It doesn’t have to be an exact science. Forward progress is forward progress. On some matters, the north may gain more and on other things the south may gain more. What matters here is the need to not lose the Moment! And, to find multiple ways to succeed together.

The simplest idea in the world here is to create some kind of Euro-stock in order to ‘buy-down’ the interest rate of the southern European nations, especially the ones which are deeply in debt, or which have high unemployment and/or stagnant growth.

How could this profit the northern Euro stock-holders? The market works the same, anywhere you go. Price things over 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 years. Investors will make money on the spread between the estimated price vs. the actual selling price.

If Spain, just for example, is having trouble affording the payments on the debt it owes, it doesn’t really matter that Spain isn’t carrying a lot of debt compared to some countries, what matters is, they can’t make the payments. How better to help Spain pay it’s debts, than to lower the interest rate on the money they owe? If 10% interest rates are killing them, then maybe those same multi-billions of debt financed at 2% interest, won’t.

If northern European’s can make money on buying down the interest rate for Spain, then Spain will be better able to fix it’s economy.

I would call that a win for northern European investors (whether sovereign, institutional or private) and a win for Spain.

That’s how to make a country (or a bloc of countries) pull together — instead of pulling itself apart. That is how to make Europe fly. The trick is to be there when needed, not after the crash.

John Brian Shannon writes about green energy, sustainable development and economics from British Columbia, Canada. His articles appear in the Arabian Gazette, EcoPoint Asia, EnergyBoom, the Huffington Post, the United Nations Development Programme – and other quality publications.

John believes it is important to assist all levels of government and the business community to find sustainable ways forward for industry and consumers.

Check out his personal blog at: http://johnbrianshannon.com
Check out his economics blog at: http://jbsnews.wordpress.com
Follow John on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/#!/JBSCanada

Related articles

This gallery contains 0 photos

Loading the Climate Dice — MY COMMENT

by | Leave a comment

by John Brian Shannon

MY COMMENT ON PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN‘S ARTICLE BEGINS…

It’s always a treat when the world’s leading economist writes a column about the environment — which happens to be one of my favourite topics.

But why is an economist writing about “the great Midwestern drought” presently scorching many of the United States? And, what does economics have in common with the weather, climate and climate-change anyway?

Everything, as it turns out.

Professor of Economics Paul Krugman comments, “This drought has already sent corn prices to their highest level ever.”

Just for the record, corn does not exist in its own universe. If corn prices are at record levels you can bet that other crops are at or near, record highs too. Think of corn as the bellwether for other crops in America. Where corn trends, others follow.

Lack of rainwater to fill creeks, rivers, lakes and even to help restore underground aquifer levels, combined with weeks of relentless heat, define a drought condition.

Corn, a major crop grown in the United States, is used in many different ways. One, low-grade corn called maize is used to feed livestock, and millions of tons of it are produced and consumed each year. Cattle like the taste, its filling and its high sugar levels provide them with plenty of energy, or if they don’t expend enough energy, they eventually turn into nicely-marbled tenderloin. Mmmm…

Two, corn is widely available for consumers and is a tasty summer treat fresh from the field, or it can be frozen or canned.

Three, it is increasingly used by the petroleum industry as a fuel-feedstock. Over six billion litres of ethanol fuel was produced from U.S. corn last year. Not only that, some plastics are manufactured from corn cellulose, for example, many plastic soda-pop bottles are manufactured with 5% corn bio-content.

The thing about corn — it requires huge volumes of water, fertilizer and lots of sunshine. Water must come from the sky to supplement the always insufficient water available on the ground or underground. When it doesn’t get the water it needs, it quickly punishes farmers by dying within a week. End of crop.

Thousands, or even millions of acres of corn which had received months of hard work and expense – all gone within one week.

At that point, thousands of farmers face the end of their year and there is little for them to do except fill out their crop-insurance claim forms, praying they get an amount equal to 49% – 66% of their planned crop gross-revenue.

Which has a downstream effect on the economy, obviously.

If, in the space of one week and at about halfway through the year, you were suddenly forced to accept only about half of your total yearly pay — would your spending patterns change for the balance of the year?

This is how climate-change affects the well-being of a nation and by extension, the world, as Prof. Krugman rightly points out, “If [the drought] continues, it could cause a global food crisis, because the U.S. heartland is still the world’s breadbasket.”

But its not climate-change unless it happens again and again. True fact. One bad year, does not a climate-change make.

Professor Krugman cites a research paper by the world-renowned NASA scientist, Dr. James Hansen, “As documented in a new paper by Dr. Hansen and others, cold summers by historical standards still happen, but rarely, while hot summers have in fact become roughly twice as prevalent. And 9 of the 10 hottest years on record have occurred since 2000.”

Imagine that. Perhaps the climate-deniers can continue to obfuscate for another ten years the growing body of evidence which proves global warming is real. What they might not be able to explain away are the increasing billions of dollars of losses in the U.S. agriculture economy and in other nations which possess highly-accurate crop monitoring systems — including impressive ag-satellite technology it must be said!.

With the many technological achievements including improved crop species, more effective fertilizers/pesticides and astronomically better land management practices, why are our ag-related losses increasing over recent years? Surely we should be facing lower losses with the greater productivity afforded us by employing the latest technologies.

Its time for an economics team to step up and provide this answer, for there will be no fooling accurate ag-statistics and to-the-penny ag-accounting practices. Where is the U.S. Department of Agriculture team dedicated to plotting each year’s crop losses (whether a fully-failed crop, or only partially-damaged by drought) into 2010-equivalent dollars and presenting it to the President for his consideration — and to the media for their informed commentary?

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; “The Market is the perfect, self-correcting machine. It will get to the heart of every matter connected to it.” Though we may not always like what it says, if we choose to listen it can teach us much.

The market informs us about every step along the path of production for every crop and manufactured product. America’s ag-economy has been state-of-the-art for some time now and there is not a cent which is not fully accounted-for. The only unaccounted-for losses these days are climate-related. And almost everyone seems afraid to step up and say so.

John Brian Shannon writes about green energy, sustainable development and economics from British Columbia, Canada. His articles appear in the Arabian Gazette, EcoPoint Asia, EnergyBoom, the Huffington Post, the United Nations Development Programme – and other quality publications.

John believes it is important to assist all levels of government and the business community to find sustainable ways forward for industry and consumers.

Check out his personal blog at: http://johnbrianshannon.com

Check out his economics blog at: http://jbsnews.wordpress.com

Follow John on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/#!/JBSCanada

Related articles

This gallery contains 0 photos

Another Bank Bailout – MY COMMENT

by | 1 Comment

by John Brian Shannon

MY COMMENT ON PROFESSOR PAUL KRUGMAN’S ARTICLE BEGINS…

The great sucking sound that everyone is hearing these days is the sound of capital leaving the Western economies by the billions – perhaps trillions of dollars – over the past few decades.

Money goes where the investments pay the best returns – and these days that means the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and other rapidly developing economies. As uncountable billions leave the Western economies, the jobs attached to those mega-billions go with them. Is it any wonder then, that some of the weaker Western economies have been in free-fall for some time? No, it is not.

A great deal of lamenting has been gone on in recent months – but the geomacro-economy has been changing and will continue to change as it reflects the new and evolving reality, for one simple reason – “If we continue to do what we have been doing, we can continue to expect the same results.”

And what is that result, exactly?

I quote Professor Paul Krugman – arguably the leading economist alive today: “An old routine plays out in Spain, with the banks getting help while the unemployed continue to suffer.” Read Professor Krugman’s excellent article here…

Bought anything lately that ISN’T Made in China? Clothing labels or manufacturing stampings could also read Made in India, Indonesia, or any number of other fast-growing economies.

Our consumers demand lower-priced goods and services, so foreign nations have gratefully fulfilled those requirements – effectively transferring Western wealth to third-world nations in huge, glorious gobs of U.S. and European bank notes!

It is said in China these days that one must watch the sky carefully for all the Manna falling from Heaven – which is falling in the form of chunks of gold large enough to take out entire city blocks!

Lest you think this is a recent development, it all started in earnest about 1973 shortly before the Arab Oil Embargo, when oil prices suddenly shot up and Detroit’s thunderous, but thrilling V8′s became unaffordable for millions of workers in nations used to interstate highways serving distant suburbs, spirited driving on the autobahn, and long summer vacations involving hundreds of miles of travel.

Japan at the time and still to this day, exports huge numbers of cars to the West and enjoys a growing market share of (mostly) fuel-efficient vehicles – and the ones that can’t boast good fuel economy, can certainly brag about outstanding reliability and brand-loyalty.

Since the 1990′s, South Korea, China, Indonesia, India and others have also stepped up to fulfill the wants and needs of American and European consumers with everything from home appliances and personal electronics, to tools, clothing and just about anything else you might purchase. Lower labour rates and production costs in Japan, then Korea and now, China, India and Indonesia, allowed more R&D spending, better products and lower prices for consumers and business alike.

Of course, those are all great things. It has been a decades-long bonanza for consumers, businesses and even the governments of the Western world are able to lower their costs by purchasing cheaper and often, more reliable goods from Asia.

American and European corporations have gladly followed this trend and contributed mightily to those developing nations attempting to service the wants and needs of Western consumers. If you doubt me on this – just do a Google search on Apple Computer for just one of many examples of U.S. companies which have elected to have their goods manufactured in China or other rapidly growing nations, instead of the U.S. Check Apple’s stock price in 1990 (mostly U.S. production) vs 2011 (mostly Chinese production). Impressive by any standard but not unusual, in fact, this Western-inspired trend is well established and continues to this day.

One day soon, there will be no manufacturing capacity in the U.S., Canada or Europe. It is dramatically cheaper to have it all done inside the BRIC countries and export those products to the West. Costs are so low, that shipping millions of products thousands of miles across entire oceans, becomes a tiny factor of the final price paid at U.S. or European cash-registers.

The “real price” of that huge manufacturing shift continues to play out in the daily media – higher Western unemployment rates, longer welfare rolls, lower domestic production, real-estate bubbles, bank failures, bank bailouts and so far, about one decade of destroyed dreams for families and small businesses.

But, man, did I get a great deal at the mall today!

Follow John Brian Shannon on Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/JBSCanada

This gallery contains 0 photos

Why Are We In Debt? – MY COMMENT

by | Leave a comment

by John Brian Shannon

As far as economist’s go, you can’t have enough respect for Professor Paul Krugman. Passionate about his calling, vociferous in his critique of failed fiscal or monetary policy and as fine a gentleman as you could ever hope to meet.

He is so compelling and believes in his mission so deeply that even his fiercest economic critics find themselves nodding in agreement with him – before they snap out of it and return to the party line they were following prior to the beginning of the good Professor’s speech.

He is arguably the leading economist on the planet – and I doubt he would have a problem with me putting his life’s work into those terms as he himself realizes that he is in some pretty fine company.

So why would I, wearing my junior economist hat, ever disagree with him on any matter of economics? Just who do I think I am?

Well, I have found a clearer version of my usual answer and it was the kind Doctor of Economics himself, who provided it to me in one of his recent articles.

To read his article, please visit: The New York Review of Books

How to End This Depression
by: Paul Krugman
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/may/24/how-end-depression/

In case you just got back from Mars, Krugman is famously anti-austerity, regularly informs us of the ills of the American economy and posits remedies for present fiscal and monetary maladies. I should say right now that he is most often right. Depending which year it is, that is usually 364 out of, oh well, 365 days of the year. Just saying.

So, three paragraphs into his fine article, we read this:
“But don’t we have to worry about long-run budget deficits? Keynes wrote that “the boom, not the slump, is the time for austerity.” Now, as I argue in my forthcoming book*—and show later in the data discussed in this article—is the time for the government to spend more until the private sector is ready to carry the economy forward again. At that point, the US would be in a far better position to deal with deficits, entitlements, and the costs of financing them.”

Imagine me nodding my head in full agreement with Professor Paul Krugman! Me – a fervent austerity-booster! Imagine that. Didn’t I tell you that was going to happen? Yes I did.

He does have that effect on economist’s all over the world – including those who disagree with his views on the austerity question.

I too, am a Keynesian and I agree profoundly with those words spoken by John Maynard Keynes so long ago and I’ll prove it now.

Ricardian Equivalence aside, lagging economies do need stimulus! The time for the government to begin spending money to boost the economy is in the first few seconds after an official recession has been called by the market. That’s three consecutive quarters of zero growth or decline, or a mixture of both, followed by an official announcement in order to qualify for recession status.

Irregular government stimulus has been happening since before the stock market crash of 1929 when government intervention began in earnest the American marketplace as a force against market turmoil.

Let me say it as plainly as I can, John Maynard Keynes and Paul Krugman are absolutely right, stimulus has been proven to work, it begins to work immediately and it does fulfill the desired effect. It works every time.

The fact that Ricardian Equivalence kicks in part way through the process to begin the incremental process of diminishing the government stimulus – doesn’t change a thing. The stimulus does exactly what it is supposed to do and the fact that consumers later adjust their savings and spending, resulting in a flat net gain to the economy a decade or two later matters little – because all of that takes place on a completely different schedule compared to the instant economic gratification stimulus spending plan.

To put it plainly, the full effects of Ricardian Equivalence take 10-20 years – and if the stimulus hasn’t recovered the economy before Ricardian Equivalence kicks in, you have way bigger problems than three quarters of net loss in the market!

Spending our way out of recession by virtue of taxpayer-supported government stimulus is the equivalent of knowing well-in-advance the exact future day that your house will burn down — and going to the bank as soon as you find this out, in order to borrow sufficient funds to buy the property next door and build your new house identical to the old house — and having it completed and ready to move into, just hours before your old house burns down.

You are no further ahead in absolute terms – but you have an exact duplicate house and property and the exact same mortgage and you don’t have to sleep in a hotel for six months waiting for your new house to be built. Saving you significant misery – which is the whole point of government stimulus, saving millions of citizens from significant misery in the 0 – 10 year time-frame.

This is the secret of government stimulus spending. The government can spend as much stimulus money as it wants. If government stimulus is large and the spending commences soon after the announcement of recession, the economy begins improving almost immediately.

If it spends the stimulus money too slowly, over a ten year period for example, the effect is greatly minimized and could end up a complete failure in every sense. The law of diminishing returns is what happens when government begins a large slow-motion spending program designed to stimulate the economy.

But when it begins immediately and is targeted to produce the best results, it is the exact medicine a country needs – even if, sometime past the ten-year mark, the national economy is no further ahead in absolute terms on account of that stimulus.

Why is stimulus important? Because it immediately and dramatically begins to lower the misery felt by millions of citizens who suddenly become unemployed during recessions. In fact, government stimulus spending creates jobs and can prevent further job cuts as the market sees the strength of the economy and the level of government commitment to the economy. Many a recession has turned out to be a paper recession because a government took early action, spent much – and pushed the evil day farther down the road.

We’re here at the evil day. And if not now, certainly by the next recession – which used to be farther down the road, but is now close to where we live these days.

Keynes wrote that “the boom, not the slump, is the time for austerity.”  – That is very true.

As Professor Krugman wrote in his article which I quoted above:

“Now, as I argue in my forthcoming book… is the time for the government to spend more until the private sector is ready to carry the economy forward again. At that point, the US would be in a far better position to deal with deficits, entitlements, and the costs of financing them.”

Which decade after decade, continues to not happen. Many multi-billions have been spent on government stimulus but none, not one, of those borrowed multi-billions have ever been paid back. Deficit after deficit has accumulated since before there were rocks, and now the debt is piled so high we might not have the chops with our lenders to borrow stimulus multi-billions so that we may assist those who are in unemployment misery – or worse.

The simple fact is, governments can borrow as much as they like and not pay it back – ever! And they have. But eventually, a day will arrive when nobody will lend us more money. Whether this is the case now, or whether it waits till the next recession, we are at or near the end of this particular paradigm of borrow, stimulate and not pay it back during the boom times.

We can’t blame the economist’s – their job is to help the economy progress, to create wealth, to lure capital, to innovate new ways of using money for the good of the nation – and so much more. But economist’s do not have secret powers to force governments to “pay off deficits and pay down debt when times are good” as John Maynard Keynes many times suggested.

We can’t blame the Russian’s anymore – this wasn’t their fault.

We can’t blame our politician’s – because any politician who brings up the topic for even a nanosecond – simply does not get elected!

We want our nice life now, we want our tax breaks now, we want our government spending programs now, we want our toys now, and we don’t want to hear about paying for them.

Why are we in debt? Because that’s what we have asked for every year since before there were rocks.

If we want to continue as a solvent and sovereign nation, we need to authorize a President and a Congress (at the same time!) to print enough money to cover next year’s deficit, effectively clearing our current account to zero. We need to pass legislation that will eventually outlaw deficit spending – except during times of national emergency. We need to pass laws that will force the government to pay down the accumulated government debt by 2% per year until it reaches a sustainable level, say debt-to-GDP ratio of 50%, or less. And we need to start living within our means as a civilization.

Other nations cannot be expected to take the lead on this and until the U.S. begins to do so, western countries will remain uncomfortably near the end of this present paradigm, living uncomfortably close to economic disintegration.

An economic netherworld beckons.

Follow John Brian Shannon on Twitter: https://twitter.com/@JBSCanada

____________________________________________________________

Related articles

This gallery contains 0 photos

Europe’s Economic Suicide by Paul Krugman — MY COMMENT

by | Leave a comment

The Euro was doomed to failure from the start IF all of Europe did not convert to the Euro early on. Having a centralized currency in some parts of Europe while national currencies operate in other parts of Europe (operating together and against each other) in some jurisdictions is unworkable.

It would be the equivalent of having an Eastern U.S. dollar and a Western dollar in the U.S.A.

Obviously, both regional currencies would trade at a different value and compete against each other with the goal of defeating the competing currency. Effectively, one region of the U.S. would be at economic war with another region of the U.S.!

Currency speculators worldwide would be quick to make that opportunity work for them – regardless of the economic consequences to either region!

Which is exactly what has been happening to Europe since 2000 and to think otherwise is to be looking through the wrong end of the telescope.

The quiet, almost polite, currency/economic war raging in Europe over the past decade increased unemployment, lowered profits, decreased confidence domestically and abroad and charted an erratic path for the often different national economic systems there.

This wound in the very fabric of Europe won’t heal until the decision is made to either drop the Euro completely – or the European nations embrace one currency.

If that decision is deferred much longer, Europe will continue to lose economic power, until there is complete and utter economic failure there.

To read Professor Paul Krugman – visit:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/16/opinion/krugman-europes-economic-suicide.html?_r=1#comments

Follow me on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@JBSCanada

This gallery contains 0 photos

Nobody Understands Debt by Paul Krugman — MY COMMENT

by | Leave a comment

My response to: Professor Paul Krugman’s NYT Op/Ed of Jan 1, 2012:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/02/opinion/krugman-nobody-understands-debt.html?_r=3

——————————————————————–

What is wrong with historically low interest rates in America? If not for those low rates, twice (or, even ten) times as many American homeowners might have lost their homes due to higher payments caused by — yes, higher interest rates!

Is that any way to stimulate the economy?

Your second point, – “Deficit-worriers portray a future in which we’re impoverished by the need to pay back money we’ve been borrowing.”

Take a good look around, citizens are already impoverished on account of huge government deficits and government debt. It’s called compound interest that the government pays to foreign lenders to finance American government overspending and it goes on decade after decade.

It is money that could have been spent in America for the benefit of U.S. citizens — but instead was spent to pay astronomical interest payments to Japan, Europe, Canada and recently, China.

You err in failing to account for the difference between the situation that exists now — and the situation which would exist if there were no government debt/deficit at all.

IF all the money that has been thrown away as interest payments on federal government deficit and debt financing — had been spent wisely — just imagine all the job-creating national infrastructure projects that could be continuously running in America. We’re talking mega-billions of dollars here. You know how compound interest works.

In practice, it goes like this; supposing we are talking about the paltry sum of 100 Billion dollars:

Which is a better use of 100 Billion dollars from America’s point of view?

A) Pay it to a foreign lender to cover compound interest payments.

B) Use it to build a job-providing infrastructure project.

Results:

We see in A); that money, once gone, will not produce anything of value for American’s.

We see in B); that money will be paid as professional services, to engineers, draft-person’s, architects, lawyers and others — and paid to companies who hire thousands of construction labourer’s — WILL spur the economy on the macro scale and American households.  Also, a good portion of it will return to the government in the form of taxes and income-tax.

From such spending, the government could reasonably expect to recover 50% of that 100 Billion dollars in taxes, income-tax and other fees and services paid to the government by engineering and construction companies within five years!

Possibly to spend again on even more infrastructure programs — starting that process anew!

In your scenario, ever-increasing taxes to pay an ever-larger deficit/debt load eventually leads to low citizen-satisfaction levels. Don’t believe that? Wait till the income-tax rate hits 70% — there will be a revolt, or outright revolution.

Western governments have proven to be among the worst historically, to curb excessive spending. Which means eventually taxes rise to meet lender demands for payment.

We will see much higher income-tax levels in North America, just to cover existing interest payments on government debt. Of that, there is no doubt. Let’s try to keep it under 70% by not adding to the problem daily.

Finally, only an economist like yourself would have a large enough calculator to calculate the following. How many American dollars have been paid out of the country to finance government debt and to finance government deficits, since the U.S.A. began deficit financing?

Of course, that is only half the equation. The other half is this; If no deficits had been run, how much national infrastructure or education spending would that very large amount have bought?

http://brillig.com/debt_clock

For just one example of how it’s done, Saudi Arabia has paid down it’s government debt which sat at 102% of GDP 20 years ago — to 6.3% of GDP for 2011. All while maintaining balanced growth.

http://arabnews.com/economy/article554645.ece
http://arabnews.com/economy/article554176.ece

It can be done. If the Saudi’s can do it – so can America! It’s called leadership. If anyone suggests otherwise, be advised, I’m not listening — because I don’t want to ‘catch’ whatever you have.

johnbrianshannon@gmail.com

This gallery contains 0 photos

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 202 other followers