President Barack Obama gave a small hint today about what, if anything, he plans to do about unacceptably high unemployment and slow economic growth over the next year. In a press event with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Obama was asked about the economy. His answer is worth repeating in full (emphasis mine):
Q: Thank you, Mr. President. You both face economic troubles. Mr. President, how worried are you about the threat of a double-dip recession? What specific policies are you considering to help head it off? And abroad, do you expect Germany to fund another bailout for Greece?
And Chancellor Merkel, is Europe concerned about the possibility of the U.S. defaulting on its debt? Thank you.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I’m not concerned about a double-dip recession. I am concerned about the fact that the recovery that we’re on is not producing jobs as quickly as I want it to happen.
Prior to this month we had seen three months of very robust job growth in the private sector. And so we were very encouraged by that. This month you still saw job growth in the private sector, but it had slowed down. We don’t yet know whether this is a one-month episode or a longer trend.
Obviously we’re experiencing some headwinds, gas prices probably being most prominent. It has an enormous impact on family budgets and on the psychology of consumers. And so we are taking a range of steps to make sure that we’ve got an energy policy that can bring some stability to world oil prices.
But the overall trend that we’ve seen over the last 15 months — 2 million — over 2 million jobs created over the past 15 months — a rebounding of the manufacturing sector in the United States that’s exemplified by the recovery of the Big Three automakers here — all indicates that we have set a path that will lead us to long-term economic growth.
But we’ve still got some enormous work to do. And as long as there are some folks out there who are unemployed, looking for work, then every morning when I wake up, I’m going to be thinking about how we can get them back to work.
Some of the steps that we took during the lame duck session, the payroll tax, the extension of unemployment insurance, the investment in — or the tax breaks for business investment in plants and equipment — all those things have helped. And one of the things that I’m going to be interested in exploring with the members of both parties in Congress is how do we continue some of these policies to make sure that we get this recovery up and running in a robust way.
We then have a set of long-term competitiveness challenges that aren’t so different from what Germany or any advanced country is having to go through in the 21st century, where we have emerging markets who are becoming more competitive themselves. And we’re going to have to step up our game.
So making sure that our school systems are working well and we’ve got the best-trained workers in the world; making sure that we’re investing in infrastructure so that we can attract businesses to our shores; making sure that we reform our tax system so it’s less complex, more transparent, and is encouraging of business investment; and getting a hold — getting a handle on our deficit in a way that’s balanced and sensible.
So we’re going to have some days where things aren’t going as well as we’d like. There are going to be some times where we’re surprised with better economic data than we expected. We are on the path of a recovery, but it’s got to accelerate. And that’s going to require a continuation of a lot of the steps that I’ve already discussed.
Obama mostly talks here about long-run budgeting priorities and the usual preoccupations of taxes and deficits that we’ve seen for some time. But there’s one new feature: Obama may ask for an extension of the tax-side stimulus measures in the 2010 deal which extended the Bush tax cuts. Many of those run out this year, including the three he specifies – the payroll tax cut, the extension of unemployment insurance, and the business tax breaks for investment. He’s going to ask to extend those again. Indeed, since they would represent a “get” from a stimulus standpoint, they may become part of the deal to increase the debt limit or pass the 2012 budget, such that there is one.
A couple things here. First, this gives more evidence for the axiom that once you enact a program like a tax cut, even if it’s time-limited, it becomes very hard to let it expire. This thinking animated the sunset of the 2001 Bush tax cuts (happy 10th anniversary), done to make the budget numbers look better.
The second part of this is that, while by the end of the year, the economy may be in such a state that it would be desirable to extend the payroll tax cut or to extend unemployment benefits, these things shouldn’t be seen as stimulus. They basically extend current law, so fiscal policy doesn’t tighten when they run out. Obama could have answered this question any way he wanted; his utterances don’t have the force of law. So the best he can come up with for an economic recovery plan in May 2011 would be to extend some one-year tax breaks and unemployment benefits in December 2011. That’s the essence of stay-the-course thinking. Not to mention the fact that, aside from the unemployment benefits extension, these ideas do not have great economic multipliers.
There’s also the fear that continual extensions of the payroll tax cut will put in peril the separate funding mechanism for Social Security, and lead to a drive to cut the program. That’s more of a speculative consequence, but it’s worth mentioning.
Finally, this is coming in the context of a drive to cut the budget deficit, something Obama himself initiated with a pivot eighteen months ago, and in which he is a willing participant. The fact that some stimulus measures could be extended will not calm the drive for cutting; in fact, in order to hit an overall number, Republicans may ask for MORE budget cuts to offset the payroll tax cut or unemployment benefits or business tax breaks. In that case, from a macroeconomic perspective these extensions wouldn’t matter at all. The overall fiscal policy would end up sharply negative.
A week ago, the President may not have talked about extensions of these measures at all. But in the context of the current crisis, these ideas barely register as a fix.




45 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
“So the best he can come up with for an economic recovery plan in May 2011 would be to extend some one-year tax breaks and unemployment benefits in December 2011. “; ??? jet lag?
Great Post!
Now we all know OBAMA is an idiot, none of the ideas mention in this post will help the USA economy
the only question left, is how many sitting DEMS in DC will follow OBAMA over the cliff?
Obama only mission now is to end the careers of sitting Dems.
Obama ignores the fact that STATES will start laying off workers big time soon as QE2 ends.
A lot of Dem Senators and Dem House Members are going to have to throw OBAMA under the Bus to save their careers.
What is amazing about the corporate the media is they act like the Economy and the lack of jobs just became a major issue? Welcome to the Party corporate media, better late than never.
With his “making sures” Obama forgot one thing — making sure that businesses will have uncertainty about the PPACA with its mandates and penalties for companies, given that there have been over a thousand waivers granted so far.
Companies all less likely to hire with uncertainties like that.
huh?
wonder what Chancellor Merkel has to say about Obama and Reid’s failure to do anything on carbon emissions, which are going up fast.
I would like to hear about that “conversation”
I really, really wish people would stop saying “extend unemployment benefits” because the benefits themselves were never extended. It was the eligibility to access the federal tiers of unemployment benefits that were extended. Every time someone says it wrong, the more it reinforces to the sheeple that the unemployed are being taken care of and don’t need the help that they truly and desperately need!
You mean he wants to extend the SS payroll tax cut?
NO!!! As an ardent Obot, I am shocked. Just shocked I tell you. I am so shocked, I think I just dropped a load in my pants. Which is incidentally what O did to the US.
All kidding aside, he’s lost it.
Doesn’t he even know how close things are to people in the streets? Not thousands. But millions.
This guy lives in a different world.
Still living in some fantasy land.
OY
Yessiree, Bob, I’m gonna go right out and buy a Formula 1 racing team with the humongous payroll tax cut I got. Mayhaps I’ll talk to Ford and bring back the Jaguar F1 car. With an extra $52 a year I’m sure they’ll be impressed.
If you hear someone use uncertainty as an excuse, they are an idiot and shouldn’t be listened to.
Lube job.
Prezdinent Audacity Orwellian…
The Enabler’s plan is too basically do the same thing over and hope for the best.
What is the definition of insanity again?
Bush tax cuts added 2.6 Trillion to the deficit. So, continuing this failure of tax policy is his great idea?
Personally, I don’t think it’s speculative at all that this policy will damage SS and is probably the prime backdoor way to hysterically yell that SS is broke.
The republicans get in your face with their bad ideas, the democrats go thru the back door with theirs
As an involuntary part-time worker, I had to use a microscope to find my payroll tax cut. Yeah, it really helped pay the mortgage and health insurance bills.
Pfft. I got $104 per year.
Thanks for the post, DDay.
The trade of tax cuts to kill Social Security for the “hostage to the GOP unemployment benefits” did not get the base excited last time – but Obama wants only the less intelligent college kids as his ground game , so no problem.
Fool me once ……
Here’s a better idea Mr. Presididn’t, let everybody who’s down on their luck follow your example and line up at the next republican or democrat campaign financing dinner and hold up a sign reading “Will give Wall-Streeters rim-jobs for food.”
Totally agree, David, that extending the payroll tax cut is sticky–once done, it is very hard to un-do. I mean, what is the WH going go say, “taxes for those earning less than $110K a year will be going up 2% a year now.” that’s a great policy to win an election in any economy!
I’ll repeat my prediction once more: if the 2% is ever re-instated, it will be voluntary with some of that “voluntary” contribution able to go to a stock market/401k like plan.
I carefully read the part of President Obama’s answer that David Dayen helpfully highlighted.
Most specifically, he said “one”, not all, of things he was interested in exploring was continuing “some”, not all, of these policies. This indicates to me that new policies will be considered and not all of the old ones will be renewed.
Actually it was a tax increase for the working poor since the making work pay tax credit was eliminated by this backdoor tax increase.
Is there someone here with a solid grasp on worldwide economic history that can provide at least one example in history where “austerity measures” brought about a complete positive turnaround for a country?
As for the payroll tax cut, as many here predicted, that will be the new normal. Continued reduced funding of Social Security will continue. I find it interesting that President Obama, who has stated his admiration for former President Reagan on numerous occasions, didn’t raise the taxes for Social Security just as Reagan did. Even Ronald Reagan knew that if you wanted to save SS, you don’t decrease funding. I guess when your mindset becomes totally focused on “austerity measures”, what actually works is an afterthought or you have proven that you certainly do not represent the vast majority of citizens.
Increasing the pool of revenue lost to Social Security’s coffers doesn’t seem the best way to fight for the middle class.
Boy, that should boost confidence. Some new policies being considered and some old policies being renewed is definitely an improvement over no new policies being considered and no old policies being renewed. That would mean no policies being considered or renewed.
Won’t work. They’re already getting free rim-jobs from the WH.
The 2% payroll tax cut is a middle class tax cut.
“payroll tax cut” – isn’t that the social security defunding / robbing?
IF it is, why are you using their right wing lies to describe … right wing lies?
c’mon dday.
rmm.
HELLO negative nelly! When we go to econ policy there are the known knowns, there are the unknown knowns and the no nos and the …
ya know.
rmm.
Maybe Obama can suggest the unemployed can sell Lemonaide to keep going…I thought Bush was a moron but now Obama takes that mantle….what is his next great idea to help the economy? WIN buttons?
If and only if the loss to SS is made up with general revenue. Watch the bouncing ball b/c one day it will not be made up and SS will run out of money sooner.
I bought into the “plan” last year. Not going there this year. It is a sham and ineffective, as we can now see. I want a straight up stimulus and no more extensions of tax cuts for anyone.
Vouchers for WIN buttons.
And of course nothing for the 99ers cus we just suck and don’t offer rim jobs.
because the stimulus was so effective last time around?
I love it. I’m called every name in the book while maintaining the highest levels of maturity and its my comments that need moderation. How ironic.
Well what would you like?
Uh… ya think?? I believe that’s the GOAL of payroll tax cuts.
I was against this “cut” to begin with. If anything the payroll cap needs to be increased. It’s clear from Pete Peterson’s Cat Food Commission that the fat cats are doing their d*mndest to cut/chop/eliminate/or otherwise mess with Soc Sec. This cut is just step one… beware of wolves in sheep’s clothing….
And, as others have said, that “cut” is so insignificant as to be laughable especially in comparison to how much the upper 2% enjoys in their Bush tax cuts. There is no comparison.
What a load of horse hockey this all is. I’ve started see articles in Rupert Murdoch’s Wall ST J, fer the dog’s sake, stating plainly that the USA needs the govt to create jobs and NOT to cut the taxes of the super wealthy. Don’t have time to look it up, but there was an editorial style article stating just this in last week’s Wall St J… sheesh!
Hey Barackstar: evah hear of the Wall ST J??? Maybe you ‘n Palin can get together to figure out what it is and READ it!!!
Obama doesn’t want to fight anyone. So his choice is easy. Cut payroll taxes and the conservatives will agree and the fund will run out sooner. But, he will say, it was not supposed to be that way.
This is crazy. Would Romney be any worse than Obama?
Can this guy ever say one single thing that isn’t a steaming pile of blather? Jesus!
Was that an op-ed that slipped through the cracks? Or, has the world turned upside down and even the Wall Street Journal needs to face reality?
Won’t work, Holder will shut down the stands like the cops did to those little kids a while back.
No
I think if you analyzed Romney’s past actions as a Governor and businessman, you would find very little difference between the two. I also suspect, based upon how he has governed for the past two and a half years, that had Barack Obama run a few businesses, there would also have been some failures. But, it is pathetic that our only choices are two candidates who both push the Republican platform. Under Obama, the Democratic party has changed from the “tax and spend” party to the “tax cuts and austerity for everyone but the rich” party.
Yes, a Wall Street mouthpiece like Obama will tell the German bondholders what they want to hear– that no matter what, they will get their money back. Of course you and I know that Wall Street thinks its cocaine- and alcohol- addled gambling problem is the responsibility of you and me. I say remove the Wall Street middle men to their jail cells and seize their a$$ets including the $ecret off-shore sta$hes. Then we can settle accounts with the German and French bondholders after all the books are open and we all get to see what’s inside.
I physically just can’t listen to Obama anymore. It’s the same as it was with Bush.
Hiring Geithner and Summers, and re-hiring Bernanke was the tell early on. It was clear who Obama was determined to govern for at that point, and everything has flowed from there.
Well this should offset the hundreds of billions in budget cut./s
Clue to the clueless President:
Tax the rich,
tax the corporations,
end the wars,
bust up the Wall St TBTF banks,
and cut defense.
Will ANY of this happen?
No.
Will Obama get our votes?
No.