Click to see the beacon journal online
Homes   Jobs   Cars   Shopping
Blog of Mass Destruction -- Community Blog

Previous post:

Next post:

Government Choices On The Economy

by The Reverend on January 24, 2009

in economy

I see all the usual suspects, Republicans named Boehner and Cantor, Blue Dog Democrats who are actually Republicans in drag, and my favorite Knee Pad Media Pod People, are all clutching pearls and wringing hands over President Obama's plan to prop up the American economy with over $800 billion in spending.

As I see the situation, there are really only two choices.

Yesterday General Electric reported earnings down 34% from a year ago. For months we have been hearing about sales of car maufacturers, from Toyota to General Motors, down 25% to 50% over a year ago. Virtually all of the financial industry would not exist right now if it had not been for the big TARP bailout package.

The U.S. is now averaging 600,000 new unemployed workers per month….an incredible number, really. Bankruptcy and foreclosure numbers are astronomical. 55% of the houses actually selling are from sheriff and foreclosure sales. Predictions moving forward are not encouraging….

"…expect gross domestic product to decline at an annualized rate of at least 5% in the fourth quarter, the biggest drop in a quarter-century." Link

We know what has caused all this to happen. Recklessness mixed with criminality in the mortgage market during the 00's, leaving us with too many houses for too few buyers. A national economy addicted to instant gratification and enabled by an endless array of easy credit fixes. A government-gone-wild approach to taxes which insisted on cutting taxes even if it meant borrowing the money to do so!

Two choices now. Our leaders can choose to do nothing. They can. Government can follow the dictates of Blue Dog and Republican dogma and not inject any new spending into the economy. Let that great, marvelous and infallible 'free market' hand work it's god-ordained magic. Let the credit crunch, foreclosure, and unemployment chips fall where they may, and when the smoke clears, we'll start over. 20% plus unemployment, a rolling back of home ownership to Depression era numbers, a permanent reduction in wages…..may all come to pass, but hey, the market will have solved the problem. Just as both sides stood still and let the collapse happen, so too now, both sides can stand still and let the problem correct itself.

Or…

Our leaders can choose to do something. Government can attempt to soften the fall of this crash by propping up spending. Propping up demand. Redistributing tax monies in order to fill the demand void left by a population with little confidence, fewer jobs and less income.

Former Labor Secretary, Robert Reich…

"In my judgment, this will require a stimulus of about 6 and a half percent of gross domestic product, or a total of some $900 billion, spread over two years. That’s my estimate for the shortfall in private demand."

Those in the government-shouldn't-spend-any-more-money camp point to the higher national debt payments such spending would produce and conclude that such a course is unsustainable and, therefore, shouldn't be followed. While this camp has an argument worth listening to…..the inevitable conclusion of such logic would be for the government to do nothing.

So which should it be? Should the government spend more money it does not have attempting to prevent a national economic collapse…or should the government not do anything at all?

Does President Obama make a convincing argument in this morning's weekly address…..

…or not?

  • Da King

    Imagine people wringing their hands over another $1 trillion in federal spending, after the $1.2 trillion already spent in the last few months. What a bunch of wingnutty, knee padding radicals they must be. Outrageous.

    "wingnut" must mean "those with common sense."

    I remember the Rev was against the TARP bailout when the Bushies announced it.

    I wish somebody would give me an example of this "criminality in the mortgage market" (other than the Whitewater Development Corporation, that is.) An ARM is not criminal.

  • Da King

    Does anyone remember WHY we have an economic crisis ?

    The mortgage market melted down after 30 straight years of boom (we finally reached oversupply) and the banks lost tons of dough, causing the flow of credit to freeze and the stock market to crash, affecting the entire economy. That is the cause. The solution was supposed to be TARP, which was supposed to flow money back into the financial system, freeing up lending and credit again. That didn't happen. The first half of TARP was dispersed and bungled by the government.

    Enter Obama. Now, Obama wants to implement his campaign agenda under the guise of "stimulus." Remember, the first "stimulus" offered by Bush had no effect. Neither will Obama's. Obama isn't even directing the majority of his resources toward the actual problem (the financial system). That's why it can't possibly work, but it will sure put us deeper in the debt hole. And then what ?

  • larry d.

    Actually the Rev seems to be arguing that Bush's TARP saved "virtually all of the financial industry." That's a good one.

    Obama says he's not "just throwing money at the problem," and he's right. He's throwing money in the opposite direction.

  • The Reverend

    So that's two votes for the 'government should do nothing', position.

    This…

    "The mortgage market melted down after 30 straight years of boom (we finally reached oversupply) and the banks lost tons of dough, causing the flow of credit to freeze and the stock market to crash, affecting the entire economy."

    …is not altogether correct. Oversupply was reached by a laissez-faire approach to banking by government……and Greenspan's keeping interest rates too low for too long. The financial industry was encouraged to do as they pleased…..trick loans, interest only loans, ARM's,….many with no appraisals, income verification and the like. Left alone without oversight, the banks bundled those bad mortgages, traded them in a gambling arena on Wall Street, while AIG insured that the bad paper wasn't…bad.

    Much of it was bad. Proper regulation over these activities….instead of open advocacy and encouragement for them….was needed. Conservatives ran government while these practices were put in place. Conservatives reject regulation out of hand.

    The over supply didn't happen over a 30 year period. The over supply happened in the last few years, fueled by greed from banks and speculators.

    American capitalism eats it's own children…..and this crisis is simply another example.

  • larry d.

    The banks were not left alone without oversight, Reverend. As you point out, they were 'encouraged' to give out 'creative loans' by Maxine Waters, Barney Frank and that crowd. All the while community organizers like Barack Obama were threatening to sue any bank that didn't.

    Real estate speculators were eager to take advantage of the creative loans while banks had no choice but to get rid of those risky loans as fast as they could.

    Is that what you mean by 'proper regulation'?

  • Da King

    Rev,
    Let me start out with the one thing you got right (since I'm post-partisan).

    Greenspan DID leave interest rates too low as the housing bubble grew. That was a mistake.

    But all that about laissez-faire banking and such is absolute trash. Banks are regulated out the butt. The quality of their assets, reserves, transactions, etc. are regularly monitored by the feds.

    And that stuff about conservatives being in charge while loans were given out to unqualified people doesn't even qualify as trash. It's the ultimate half-truth. It would have to rise up to become trash. The whole truth is, the government DIRECTED the banks to give out those loans. It was politics that drove it (to increase home ownership), and the Democrats were every bit as involved in it as Republicans were, actually moreso, in numbers. Why do you think the Dems were against every regulation of Fannie and Freddie that the GOP put forth during the Bush admin ?

    Honesty is the first step, Rev. You just ain't cool without it.

    And has anyone noticed that not one new regulation has been implemented on the banking industry regarding mortgage loans. Not one. You'd think that would have been the first thing the government would do if the banks were so under-regulated (they aren't). Instead, all the government is trying to do is reinflate the housing bubble, by any means necessary, even if it takes trillions of dollars.

    The stimulus package is a pork-filled, sleight-of-hand Obamanation, deceptively packaged as stimulus, when a great deal of it isn't. It really would be a better idea to take the entire $825 billion and hand it directly to the banks (not that I'm for that either, but it'd be an improvement).

    If Obama's wet dream comes true, and 3 million jobs are created by the $825 billion boondoggle, that is an average spending of $275,000 PER JOB. Heck, give me $275,000 and I'll create five jobs to Obama's one.

  • larry d.

    How about give me $825 billion and I'll hire 3 million folks to mow my lawn, at $150,000 a year a piece. The rest can go to "administrative costs."

  • The Reverend

    larry is almost entirely mistaken in his understanding of what the financial industry did.

    larry, did the government order mortgage sellers to over appraise, or not appraise at all…..how about income verification, did the government order banks to no longer verify income? Did the government order the writing of trick, gimmick loans?

    The far-right position on the collapse is that government ordered and encouraged the selling of houses to people who couldn't afford them. This is simply a lie.

    Greenspan and former Treasury Sec Snow testified under oath that sub-prime mortgage paper did NOT cause the meltdown. Greenspan later went on to admit he was wrong in trusting financial leaders to do the right thing.

    The F & F talk is all about propagandizing folks, misdirecting them to a phony "cause" of the collapse.

    You guys are completely mistaken on this topic. And the undercurrent of racism is unpleasant as well.

  • larry d.

    Where's the undercurrent of racism, Reverend. I said speculators were more than happy to take advantage of the 'creative loans' we've all seen Frank, Waters and other dems defend. Are you saying speculators are all black or Mexican or something?

    They used the race card then, too. It's shameful.

  • The Reverend

    Speculators? Speculators weren't building and flipping sub-prime loan homes, for crying out loud.

    Speculators were tricked into believing they could take out ARM's and interest only loans, flip their spec houses quickly, and make a quick and easy profit. I have no sympathy for them. But government regulators should have never allowed those types of loans…..they were never allowed before.

    The biggest engine of despair was the mortgage derivatives gambling games. Such childish recklessness and greed should have been stopped before it got going.

    Every imaginable reason is being set forth by proponents of the 'free market" and deregulation to blame anything other than Wall Street criminals for causing our current collapse. Sorry. Conservative free market voodoo has looked itself in the mirror and found no reflection……totally bankrupt.

    Conservative Republican economic policies have failed miserably….we should never go back to them again.

  • Da King

    "The undercurrent of racism ?"

    Sorry Rev, that phony card doesn't play any more. You'll have to upgrade your misdirections.

    And since when have we tried Conservative Republican economic policies ? Certainly not under Bush II. His were liberal economic policies, the most liberal since LBJ. But I agree, they failed. I'm glad we have reached consensus. Get ready for more of the same from The One. Big spending and tax cuts. Sounds very familiar to me.

  • The Reverend

    Bush cut taxes….deeply….and mainly benefiting the rich, while at the same time he oversaw a reckless, irresponsible deregulation mess and did nothing about any of it. Because of laissez faire ideology.

    Here's a tic that economic conservatives have….and it needs addressed…..conservatives believe that if conservative policies carried out by Republicans fail, as they have most recently, it's not the policies that failed….it's, somehow, construed that only the Republican carrying out those policies failed.

    It's dishonest.

    Conservative economic policies have failed over and over again….and now we have the largest conservative economics, policy-based depression in our lifetimes to remind us again that they always fail.

  • http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090218204819AARRMpC Haraye

    Hi there, I found your blog via Google while searching for first aid for a heart attack and your post looks very interesting for me.

Previous post:

Next post:

 

© The Akron Beacon Journal • 44 E. Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio 44308

Powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).