Spain’s new government announced an 8.9 billion euro austerity package today, split between tax increases and spending cuts. It’s part of a larger austerity plan that would cut 16.5 billion euros by the end of 2012. And yet this is what the austerity measures of the past year provided…
It also said Spain’s 2011 deficit will be about 8% of its output – higher than the 6% seen by the previous government.
The Popular Party last month ousted the Socialists from power at elections amid deep economic gloom.
The government of new Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy has vowed to meet Spain’s target of reducing the public deficit to 4.4% of gross domestic product in 2012, no matter what.
The deficit reduction target, then, is the goal. This is in a country with 21% unemployment.
We know how this movie will end. “The boom, not the slump, is the right time for austerity at the Treasury,” John Maynard Keynes said in 1937, and the words are no less true today. The last few years in economic policy seem to be in one respect a consistent effort to deny Keynes, which happens to also deny reality. And the failures of austerity which can be seen around the globe, particularly in Europe, only serve to reinvigorate Keynes’ central theories. Cutting government when government can provide the only source of demand only hurts the economy further, and it often increases the deficit, defeating the initial purpose.
In declaring Keynesian economics vindicated I am, of course, at odds with conventional wisdom. In Washington, in particular, the failure of the Obama stimulus package to produce an employment boom is generally seen as having proved that government spending can’t create jobs. But those of us who did the math realized, right from the beginning, that the Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (more than a third of which, by the way, took the relatively ineffective form of tax cuts) was much too small given the depth of the slump. And we also predicted the resulting political backlash.
So the real test of Keynesian economics hasn’t come from the half-hearted efforts of the U.S. federal government to boost the economy, which were largely offset by cuts at the state and local levels. It has, instead, come from European nations like Greece and Ireland that had to impose savage fiscal austerity as a condition for receiving emergency loans — and have suffered Depression-level economic slumps, with real G.D.P. in both countries down by double digits.
Krugman takes us through the deeply held beliefs of such pro-austerity luminaries as the Republicans on the Joint Economic Committee (“Spend Less, Owe Less, Grow the Economy”), politicians in Ireland and Greece, European policymakers. They all happened to be wrong. Austerity is self-defeating in a time of economic stress.
Krugman concludes, “The bottom line is that 2011 was a year in which our political elite obsessed over short-term deficits that aren’t actually a problem and, in the process, made the real problem — a depressed economy and mass unemployment — worse.” It’s not too late to change course, but the people with the ability to create that shift are simply clueless about how to learn from reality.




69 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Spain is austeritizing its way to greatness:
Spain cuts science ministry in government changeover
It’s tempting to think “Mariano Rajoi, what an idiot. What were the Spanish people thinking?” But that lets Europe’s Left parties off the hook. Spaniards, like people everywhere in the West, have no real choices. They can pull different levers all they want, but the result is always the same. It’s time for the Left to abandon their “third way” crap. Until they do, we will continue to see the same movie over and over again, immersed in our very own Groundhog Day purgatory.
Has anyone come to the relization that neither austerity nor stimulus will stop the failure of our crumbling Capitalist system. There is a good reason for our betters to choose austerity, it maintains their profits and control by driving down wages and benefits. Stimulus would counter these trends but would be short term and when they end i doubt that demand would return to pick up the slack.
Low wages, lack of credit and loss of equity mean that it will be difficult and probably impossible to return to a growing consumer economy.
And the failures of austerity which can be seen around the globe, particularly in Europe, only serve to
reinvigorate Keynes’ central theoriesshow that austerity has not been implemented rigorously enough on a sufficient number of poor people.FTFY.
Thank you. When is someone going to look beyond this entire ridiculous game wherein we destroy our planet and our literal selves over this fiction called money.
Keynesian economics isn’t new. We see the roots in the story in the bible about a terrible drought and famine in ancient Egypt. But because the Pharaoh’s Main Minister a Jewish man Daniel ( of the coat of many colors) has a famous dream of the seven fat cows and the seven lean cows & has set aside grain in storage in the seven fat yrs., when the famine he predicts arrives he has the grain and the people don’t perish. Today what we see is the opposite. The drought is here big time, but instead of feeding the people our stupid leaders have decided that starving the people will bring back prosperity.
As if the Oligarchy were trying to save the People. That’s not what Oligarchy does, wouldn’t be Oligarchy then.
We are witnessing the enactment of neo-feudalism. The Oligarchy just can’t be too up front about that now. The truthfulness of our condition will emerge as they consolidate more power and they no longer need the charades and lies as we lay powerless to object to the will of our masters.
Happy New Year!
but
New York Times August 2011
” Luxury goods stores, which fared much worse than other retailers in the recession, are more than recovering — they are zooming. Many high-end businesses are even able to mark up, rather than discount, items to attract customers who equate quality with price.
“If a designer shoe goes up from $800 to $860, who notices?” said Arnold Aronson, managing director of retail strategies at the consulting firm Kurt Salmon, and the former chairman and chief executive of Saks.”
I think the real question to ask, is why would the banksters want anything else besides austerity for the people?
I don’t see the banksters complaining about them getting basically free money from the FED and parking it in Treasury Bonds and making a quick billion or two for taking ZERO risk. That’s stimulus for the wealthy and a lump of coal for the rest of us.
The only way out is to nationalize the banks. Get the speculators out of the commodity markets and return the commodity markets to the producers and direct consumers of the commodities. No more banksters selling thousands of paper contracts for the same barrel of oil, a bushel of corn or wheat. No more CDS paper for assets not owned by the person seeking the CDS paper, unless the insurance companies let me buy fire insurance for Jamie Dimon’s many houses. Let’s see how old Jamie would like it if there were a couple of million people with a self interest in seeing his houses burn down. I’m thinking he wouldn’t like that!
Do you people think getting cut loose from the Euro is more beneficial than austerity?
Meanwhile the biggest problem with Keynes, is that the probability of Govt. saving during a boom is roughly the same as pigs flying. It isn’t going to happen. Ever. It is not constitutionally possible for politicians to forgo increased revenue to reduce the national debt.
It will never, ever, happen.
What hubris. What arrogance.
Govt can’t do anything until it takes more out of the economy, than it puts back. Or borrows, or prints. None of which is wealth creation. Only business can do that. Why is that a big deal? Because new jobs, growth, and new taxes, require new wealth.
This is just clueless. Look around you. everything you have that you didn’t make yourself, came from nasty old money-grubbing business and you helped make that possible. Come back when you’re totally self-sufficient.
This is Nightfall. We did this in the early Thirties, too. We do it after every panic. The world does it after every panic. It’s how depressions are always really created. Spending occurs, and then the political powers that be “sober up” and “realize” that they need to “tighten the belt” and “get spending under control” to “create new wealth” and the depression follows.
You are 100% correct – and “money” will bring our civilization to it’s knees. Don’t loose the faith – keep showing people reality and eventually they’ll get it.
Proof that being rich doesn’t always (or even often) equate with being smart.
I see that you don’t have anything with which to debunk this post, so you resort to pounding the table. By doing so, you’re tacitly admitting that Dayen is right — and so are Krugman and Keynes. Thanks!
In Keynes original theorem, one of the assumptions was the absence of a large structural debt. Keynes himself would probably not predict success in the recent fiscal era. I’m just saying . . .
Some countries have started to buy real assets – not other countries bonds – and sell them when bad years hit – but that sounds like the dreaded “socialism” and of course we can not let Social Security in the US buy corporate bonds and make real estate investments like any other pension funds because that would be “socialism by the back door” – as screamed in 1940. Indeed those SS “real assets” would not be subject to the GOP claiming the Social Security Fund is is just Government IOU’s that have no value as they are only claims on higher taxes in the future that are needed to pay them off – and the rich will not allow higher taxes to pay off the Bush deficits. Hard to see the US ever developing a “sovereign fund” so as to set aside monies for the lean years.
I do believe that’ what the plutocrats want and what they’ll get.
Here is a very good article about same:
Our Economy Has Failed — Until We Admit That, We’re Screwed
Industries, communities, natural resources, even sports leagues have collapsed as Ronald Reagan’s corrosive vision has become dominant.
“What hubris. What arrogance.” – indeed that is what econ via Fox and the Koch brothers does indeed say about things the universities teach about economics.
Of course the Koch brothers and Fox are working back from the answer of no new taxes on the rich. You may want to read up a bit. There is a lot of good research and indeed easily understood by the public commentary on how stimulus works to produce growth with zero or minimal inflation when the economy has a lot of unused capacity.
Debunk? No need. You can do it for me.
Under what conditions can you envision cutting large sums of money to the poor, and reduce Govt. “investment”?
Hell, I’d settle for freezing budgets and zero-basing them all. But no. That would make you a Republican.
Can I envision you or any Democrat politician saying “Everyone has enough money and now we need to level those budgets and save!”?… Not a chance.
Heh.
“absence of a large structural debt” – sounds like increased taxes on the rich – indeed “shared sacrifice via the return of the Clinton tax rates with a new surtax on the rich” – and cut backs in military spending, are needed before we do the next stimulus plan.
Not that those on FDL would object to that :-) .
I’ve known that far too long to call it a “realization”…
It’s more like “Obvious”… or as we engineers say, “trivial.”
Please take whatever you’re you’re smoking with you and crawl back under the bridge you emerged from.
If you really really want to post fantasyland bullshit, there’s plenty of scifi, hollywood, and/or gaming sites for that.
Or better yet try getting a fucking clue.
David, this is an excellent piece with which I totally agree. I would just like to point out that the extension of the payroll tax cut is antiKeynsian and is an invidious attack on the argument that government should be stepping in rather than pulling back in such a critical time as this.
I hope you will reconsider your support of this tax cut in light of what you have written here. The government has to be supported not only by taxes on rich people but also by that all important recognition that social services which are needed by workers and nonworkers alike need to have that excellent branch of government insurance programs separate from the austerity melee currently being fostered by nonKeynsians – these programs stand as a safety net for the increasing numbers of lower income families in need, and they are vital and will be for the foreseeable future. We cannot allow them to be undermined.
If we are to get back to Keynsian sensibilities, we need to value and not to spurn the sensible longterm structures the New Deal gave us. We need to stop talking the Republican talk about cutting government and no new taxes. We need to recognize that programs are easier to fix ongoing than to restart anew when the bottom has fallen out of the derivatives shenanigans. We need to re-regulate with teeth while it is still possible to do so.
We have a new year to start doing these things and promoting them. Please include everyone in your wellwishes for good government in the New Year. When we start to really get that, it will affect how the whole world looks at government, so this is really worth doing as we approach new leadership.
Happy New Year (I can say it already; I’m a kiwi!)
Thank you Mr. Krugman.
Heh, and not two weeks ago someone was posting here telling me Krugman disagreed with my view that tax cuts don’t create jobs.
Perhaps that person hasn’t read as much of Krugman as he/she thought.
EDIT: Yeah yeah, I know one could “relatively ineffective” in different ways so he may not be technically saying tax cuts don’t create jobs. But it’s close enough to what I’ve said that I’ll take it as agreement. I’ve said before that tax cuts are probably stimulative, but their effect is so small the economy is so large that for all practical purposes they have very little effect and don’t show up in the aggregate data. Saying tax cuts are relatively ineffective at stimulus seems like that’s pretty close to me.
Very much agree with your analogy, seaglass, but that was Joseph of the coat of many colors, (unless you are thinking Daniel was the prophet who wrote Genesis, but the general view is that it was Moses.) I know as I just did my own version of a painting of these things as a Christmas gift. I do think the example pertains, since for the Egyptians and surrounding nations of the day, a social program was instituted with Joseph’s help – and may I further suggest that the story of Joseph is the answer within the Genesis story to the difficulties Adam and Eve get into, and their progeny – reminding us as it does of the central rainbow motif – where a benificent God has promised never to attempt to obliterate mankind again through the sign of the rainbow to Noah. And now, a rainbow colored coat is given by his father to Joseph. Genesis really is a radiant book – you don’t have to be a fundie to partake of its wisdom!
There are no large sums of money for the poor to cut – but if there were I’d cut them back so that “greed” still was their to motivate economic and personal growth. Sadly “austerity” does not mean cutting where there are large sums not funded by dedicated taxes (highway trust fund, Social Security and Medicare need not be cut back) – when is the last time austerity meant cutting the military by 50%? Heck, the US is objecting to bankrupt Greece cutting the 5% of GDP it spend on its military via buying US made equipment – we demand all Greek austerity be on the poor – leave the poor military alone say both Democrats and GOP.
And subsidies for agriculture companies – we cut ethanol via corn subsidies tomorrow by law but by law we still mandate gas be blended with ethanol (we currently ship good sugar based ethanol from Brazil to the US and send them the crap we produce from our corn) – cotton could not – and should not – be grown in most of the US but we have the government absorbing more than half the cost via special low water prices.
Toss in the international business subsidy via non-enforcement of trade laws and IRS Section 482 deferred tax rules that result in the “high” “35%” tax rate being one of the lowest EFFECTIVE tax rates, with international companies paying well under 20% and much of the time paying nothing while reporting massive profits.
But as you say – the problem is reluctance to cut welfare and food aid to the poor – right? That is where austerity should look for those dollars. Thank God there is no stimulus to increase job hiring and economic activity and thereby increase tax receipts.
I still say, had the Democrats, upon winning huge majorities and a mandate, actually governed like Democrats and passed a direct spending stimulus three times as large as the one they did pass, and passed Medicare for All, that they would’ve become a majority party just as FDR was so popular he won four terms.
But, of course, they chose not to govern like Democrats. And chose to govern like Republicans. Including passing a Republican health care plan. And then they wonder why both parties are so unpopular.
Idiots.
I was going to mention that but decided against that since as you note his main point was spot on. Indeed there is much to be learned from the Bible, and the vast majority do learn, but some see only ways to return women to the status they had 3000 years ago and ways to control what we do in the bedroom – a sad, extremely limited, and IMO very wrong, view.
Great that you have the talent do such a nice Xmas gift – a painting is forever!
Profoundly ignorant. Japan would be evidence #1.
You not only prove yourself to be a dangerous ideologue by promoting the failed schemes of Keynes, you are in fact hurting future generations. The evidence against Keynes is legion.
Sad that you would cling to ideology despite the obvious failures of said ideology, even in the face of such obvious pain being caused by it’s promotion.
What Keynesian economic THEORY does in the end is allow for corrupt self serving politicians to successfully front for banksters in convincing over willing dupes to participate in a ponzi scheme that will at some point burst.
Sad to see someone who proclaims to be concerned about their fellow human being promote such poison.
Keynesian theory had a point at which it did work. Long ago government could step in to ‘prime the pump’. That time has passed. The tank is already full and the abuse of debt has brought the world now to the point that the indebted are owned by the debt holders.
Advocating for further Keynesian abuse at this point is akin to telling the burned out and nearly dead coke addict to try meth.
Real sick.
spot on
well said.
It has already emerged, that consciousness, nbn, and we’ve already seen the consequences from the Arab Spring on.
What the new year will bring can only be following on from this, and because we do see that rainbow already, I predict the old ways are already impotent, because once the little boy screams ‘Daddy, he’s got no clothes!” the game is up for the Emperor. Sure, he’s got his armies but only to a point because armies also are not just weapons but humanity is there beholding the naked ruler.
The little boy, so many little boys, have screamed. And we all are looking where his shaking, even blooded, finger is pointing.
It remains to be seen how far our naked world emperor can drag his body – inertia will take him only so far.
New taxes? What for? Spite? It sure isn’t going to help anyone. Here’s some facts for you…
Last year Obama spent $1300 billion in borrowed/printed money.
The proposed millionaire’s tax would bring $45 Billion/yr.
The payroll tax cut for two and as half months cost $45 billion.
Poof! There goes your millionaire’s tax. Up in smoke.
Meanwhile Obama will have matched all of Bush’s debt, by the election.
Heck of a job.
Payroll tax cut $37.5 billion for 2 months http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/25/BUSC1MGD32.DTL&type=business
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/1011/CBO_Millionaires_tax_raises_4527_Billion.html
Japan is evidence of what – a poor way to handle a bank crisis is one that attempts to save the investments of the rich because it locks down future growth. Do you even know how Japan’s budget does not stimulate – or how their CPI calculation does not use the fake growth we get from Greenspans pretend there is no inflation because massive quality improvements and the ability to swap meat for beans means happy times under Reagan – and later – esp GW.
The life style in Japan compared to the US 20 years ago – compared to the same comparison now – shows what? – Only that the economic statistics are bull when produced by a GOP Ayn Rand fan. Our unregulated, under taxed form of capitalism does not work very well – even Keynes is helped by starting with a government that taxes the rich enough, and limits its defense spending enough, so that it does not have a structural deficit.
Keynes was fought by Milton because of Milton’s fear of socialism – not because Keynes was wrong. Indeed it is Milton Friedman that has been shown to be wrong on most of his theories.
Thank you very much, papau, and Happy New Year to you! I have a theory that the entire Bible is actually a promotion of women as equals (Ruth, the Shunammite woman, Mary, the Samaritan woman, Mary Magdalene who was called Equal to the Apostles…) not patriarchal at all – that’s the fundies’ distortion – but that’s for another conversation. The wonderful thing about the Genesis-Exodus story, and thanks to seaglass for contributing that, is that it does bear significantly on our current discussion. We see a good Egypt (thanks to Joseph) transformed into a slaveholding empire from which Moses is obligated to extract his suffering people – and they carry Joseph’s bones out with them and across the Red Sea. Glorious story. Martin Luther King saw the message plainly and used it to invigorate his own people, which were not only blacks, not only the poor, but also the peacemakers. It’s a grand vision – don’t let the fundies co-opt it; they have entirely the wrong interpretation!
Sorry – but your facts: “$1300 billion in borrowed/printed money.
The proposed millionaire’s tax would bring $45 Billion/yr.
The payroll tax cut for two and as half months cost $45 billion.
Poof! There goes your millionaire’s tax. Up in smoke. Meanwhile Obama will have matched all of Bush’s debt, by the election…Payroll tax cut $37.5 billion for 2 months” are only a start.
Almost all of the deficit from Obama is the cost of preventing the depression that Bush had pushed on us.
Once the Clinton tax is back we get $400 billion more per year – end the Afghan and Iraq war is a an easy $100 billion a year and a hard to get passed politically $500 billion a year if we get back to Clinton defense spending levels. – a return to 3% growth is cost reduction of a few hundred billion plus new taxes of a few hundred billion.
GW Bush and no tax on the rich with no growth resulting – less than a million new jobs in 8 years, plus no regulations on businesses with the resulting depression, is already down in the history books as one of the worst 8 years in our history – and we are not even discussing blowing off 6 months from January 2001 to July of Clinton folk screaming about the need to stop Osama, and a blown off August 6, 2001 CIA briefing and warnings to not fly, follow by 9/11 on the GOP GW Bush watch.
I agree – the Bible’s push is to improve the lot of women, but the times reflected had limited rights for women – and that is all that some see.
I love your positive attitude! Politics is making me too negative about too many things. My youngest daughter is insisting I follow less news and just enjoy the time remaining with more contact with church and family – and she is right.
:-)
What is required is to recognize and abandon consumerism as a failure. Of course that would mean capitalism is also a failure. (Things that are = to the same thing etc….).
There aren’t enough trees for 7 billion people to have one or more of everything.
Absolutely correct – and we must never forget – that is what we elected Barack Obama to do! Huge numbers of us – it was not for nothing brave souls who crowded doorways in the freezing cold in Washington DC in incredible numbers, not even getting a glimpse of anything but wanting to be there – you did not do that in vain! We all were of one mind, one very visible mind! Everyone wanted something better and that was plain to see. And there was Yo Yo Ma PRETENDING to play his Bach partita, probably on a cheap cello that didn’t matter if it cracked in the cold, lipsynching to the artificially provided piped out music – no mike checks here, but do you think there won’t be at the next ‘inauguration’ if they attempt it? (I can’t wait – imagine a mike check of such proportion?) Well, perhaps they will inaugurate to empty streets this time around, riot police on every corner.
And he turned his back. They turned their back. How despicable that was, when we gave them so much to work with – how unAmerican. They turned their back on us. We may be unable to impeach them as a practical matter, but they stand impeached nonetheless. How, how do any of them sleep at night after such betrayal?
I cannot believe anyone would ever vote for either supposed representative party any longer. They will have to do an enormous fabrication to have any electoral votes counted for anyone who calls him or herself Democrat; they will have to do an enormous fabrication to have any electoral votes counted for either party.
And if they do that, we shall know it. This is not just a matter of ‘stolen’ elections. The entire process, as we see in other countries already, can no longer be trusted. Those crowds at the Obama inaugural; remember them. They are and were the 99 percent.
This was not inevitable; this was highway robbery. Interstate highway robbery. Worldwide highway robbery. The fourth Reich. The fifth or sixth Jerusalem. Call themselves sons of Abraham? Truly I tell you, I can make sons of Abraham out of these very cobblestones, and neither in Jerusalem nor on that mountain shall you worship the father, but in spirit and in truth. Spirit and truth. Not fundie truth; real truth – such as we are now becoming aware of universally across the world.
Happy new, new year – and it really will be – to everyone!
Okay, your words likely give you comfort but the fact is that Japan has been the poster child of Keynesian lunacy. Japan has world class infrastructure and yet Japan is nearing the point of a wall where the can kicking will no longer be an option.
At the end of the day that is really all that Keynesian theory amounts to. A failed excuse for one generation to shift the burden of reality acceptance onto another generation. It has ‘worked’ in a perverted and disgusting sense now for quite some time.
It no longer works. As with a dog chasing it’s tail to create motion, debt can for a time create the illusion of economic activity.
That is until it no longer can and that is very near the point we are today.
I won’t waste much time attempting to argue this with you. I am confident that doing so would be a waste of time.
Time is all I need. Time will prove me correct and you foolish.
Keynesian voodoo is how the government/bankster complex has created the 99% smart guy.
Yes, it does that, and your daughter is right – we need reality and politics is not that. It’s just the system by which we are freed to do the important things, and when it aligns and frees us that’s great to see, as in the good Egypt of Joseph’s time, because the practicalities really do serve all, rich and poor.
That alignment: it has happened in the past; it can happen again. It is always possible. And if it doesn’t, I remember a Magdalene type Jewish woman (forgotten her name) who went into one of the harshest concentration camps and did not come out. She stayed creative, writing from her cell that she just stood and imagined the stretch of the universe which really existed outward from the top of her head far, far, far… I think of that as spiritual alignment, which we all need. It is happening in the Occupies and it can’t be stopped. We are at a very creative moment in time.
I’m glad you mentioned ‘voodoo’, iseeitfx. In one of his honest and sane moments, before he sold his soul, George Bush called the Reagan theory ‘voodoo economics.’ It is the propensity of the devious (excepting you of course) to charge the innocent with the very crimes they themselves commit. Thank you for illustrating that point so well.
One need look no further than the experiments conducted by the Chicago School Boys in Chile, Argentina, Poland and Russia to see just how flawed Friedman’s theories are.
Too bad the trolls choose to ignore those examples of reality.
Milton Friedman’s economic theories are junk. Period.
Here’s a fact for you: Raising taxes on the rich and compelling them to pay their fair share for the upkeep of the society that has benefited them so well would be in addition to the other revenue streams. Even if your “facts” were correct, it wouldn’t be 45 billion dollars from the rich and that’s all revenues. Your “logic” is shakier than your facts and it’s past time that the rich sacrifice a little bit since this whole economic disaster created by followers of Friedman has so far been borne solely by the middle and lower classes. The rich profited from their own greed while taking food out of the mouths of poor children. If they whine about paying a bit more, fuck ‘em. Let them move to Somalia or the UAE. I’d be willing for my taxes to go toward moving expenses.
The rich who migrate to the UAE can always hire a local guy to provide protection for them. It was gettin’ a little too hot for Eric Prince to stay here.
Right u are Joseph sorry about that. I got the story right. Daniel was in the Lion’s Den, right? My biblical memory is a bit weak these days. Neverthe less, that was an example of early Keynesian thinking. The Neos today and that crowd have it as usual backassward.
Nothing to debunk this post other of course than empirical evidence, which you refuse to acknowledge.
The party is over. The conversation should now shift to survival in the ‘new normal’ and consideration of where to go from here.
There is no santa claus dear, get over it.
No problemo! Learned the skill by following both sides of the ‘dialectic’.
Look, I’m not trying to hurt anyone’s feelings here, just trying to point out that paradigms shift and a shift has occurred. Think of me as a rude friend who has the courage to tell you what you do not wish to hear.
Keynes and Friedman have been exhausted. The very idea of central planning producing positive outcomes for a majority has been exhausted. The fools who, (as some say)
“It is the propensity of the devious (excepting you of course) to charge the innocent with the very crimes they themselves commit. Thank you for illustrating that point so well.”
Cling to their indoctrination despite the obvious failure of the cult to achieve the promised results, the ‘nirvana’ assured as so long as they receive your support.
The 99.9% have been screwed precisely because we have allowed ourselves to be herded into various little factions that can then be easily duped into fighting among ourselves while they carry out their plans unnoticed.
Wake up and smell the coffee. Question your programming, there seems to be a few bugs?
Can we be honest, here? How many on the left would accept austerity during economic booms? In European comparative politics, you quickly learn that the welfare state had a shoddy record because the populace didn’t want social programs scaled back during good economic times.
This quote has been flying around for some months now, as a talking point against cutting deficits during a recession. Oftentimes, the part about austerity during economic booms is ignored. Liberals love Keynesian fiscal policy during bust cycles, but the problem is that they hate it during boom cycles.
Krugman indeed has an I-told-you-so coming. He wrote many columns in which he warned that Obama’s stimulus package was way too small and that when it came time to come to Congress for a second round, his stimulus program would be seen as discredited.
I’m trying hard to explain this in small words.
Two cases.
1. A company raises capital or borrows (issues corporate bonds); buys a right of way; hires workers; and builds & maintains a road. It makes a profit from the tolls it charges.
2. The government raises taxes or borrows to build the same road over the same right of way and doesn’t charge tolls–or it charges tolls to cover some portion of the maintenance.
An identical road over the same right of way has to have the same impact as the road built privately (in your terms, wealth creation). In the former case, the question is whether the company is able to make enough profit to justify the investment. In the latter, the question is whether the value of the road to citizens is greater than the taxes they paid to build it.
An advantage of government road building is that it’s very hard for a private entity to capture the true value of the roads in tolls. (For the technically minded, infrastructure projects typically have substantial external benefits that are difficult to capture in pricing.)
Right now the U.S. government can borrow at less than the cost of inflation. People and businesses are paying the government to hold their money. This is a perfect time to invest in infrastructure. Improving infrastructure creates wealth. Whether you can fit that fact into your ideology is your problem.
On the contrary, during the dot-com boom, the Clinton Administration ran a surplus and bragged about it as a sign of “fiscal responsiblility.”
That said, there is some evidence that fiscal responsibility is economic insanity. Per L. Randall Wray, a founder of the Modern Money Theory school of thought:
I’d grade that a B. It’s not bad, but you can do better. Dig a little deeper.
You don’t actually have to pay back the debt in the boom times. In fact you’d only want to run a surplus if the economy was overheating. In normal times, as long as the deficit is small enough that the debt is becoming a declining percentage of GDP, you’re doing fine.
What happened to that massive debt at the end of WWII capped by the borrowing the U.S. did to pay Europeans to buy our products with the Marshal plan? Did we pay it back? No, it’s still there. It’s a tiny part of our current debt. We grew beyond it, partially using capital raised to meet demand created by the debt.
From the end of WWII related borrowing until the election of Ronald Reagan, the general trend of national debt as a percentage of GDP was down. The government could have continued borrowing on that basis forever.
Yes! And isn’t it true that even the neo-Keynesianism which Krugman has espoused is an attempted synthesis between Keynes and Friedman? Is this why Krugman can be so irritatingly inconsistent in espousing progressive positions? (Not rhetorical questions).
Margaret you are a fount of economic myth.
* The rich pay their share of and part of your’s too.
* The bottom 47% pay no income tax. None. Zip, zero, nada.
* The rich take nothing away from anyone, certainly not poor children.
* A lot of the rich have left already, but the real question might be… when was the last time a poor person gave you a job?
Any questions?
Happy new year to anyone interested in truth!
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/two-lectures-history-austrian-economics
Actually, both highway magnates hired a business to actually build the road. A business that takes land, asphalt, painters, and electricians, to come together and create something of value. Wealth creation.
So you have no facts but time will provide you with those facts? – it is so hard to be a Fox News intellectual these days – :-)
And that is the supposed purpose of credit-based global or national economic systems. That’s the way it is expected to work. National budgets in nations with sovereign currency are NOT anything like household budgets.
There is no “benefit” to these human-caused boom-bust cycles. They’re a game from which some profit. That’s all.
Or the job is done by government employees – hired and managed by government employees – as we have done many times in the past. The point that is important is that at the moment US business is hiring 6 million workers abroad while firing the same here – as they do no country building investment – so the only road is government action.
We have to include maintenance and repair expense. Often that upkeep is pushed onto the public sector. If that type of work creates and sustains public sector or private sector jobs, fine. Which work is of higher quality and more reliable? If the public is footing the bill in the end anyway, then what is the point of paying higher costs to have the road constructed by the private sector in the first place?
Mty last good deed of the current year will be trying to save you from the wrath of Margaret – you really do not know the fate that awaits if she is annoyed! :-)
.
* The rich DO NOT pay their share of cost of government because almost all of the government is about protecting assets owned by the rich – middle class folks once had real estate wealth but that is just about gone these days.
* The bottom 47% DO pay an income tax – indeed as a percentage of income it is much more than the rich pay because of the wage cap on the Social Security payroll tax (there should be no cap on the payroll tax and it should include investment income, and the standard current benefit formula should be applied taking into account all income on which monies have been paid – we are all into the retirement security program, bonds us as Americans, and the rich may end up poor and a burden on society without Social Security)
* The rich take EVERYTHING away from EVERYONE as that is how they got rich – hopefully in return the 99% get to stay at an average wage 1/36 of that of the wage paid the top 1% – but that ratio has been zooming up since Reagan on its way to its current 1 to 36 level. To see how the poor are treated in a rich state run by the rich check out Texas, where an income tax is avoided and benefits near zero as the GOP says their living on a sales tax benefits the poor – the poor can now “budget” their tax and indeed reduce the tax paid by just not eating as much and wearing fewer clothes and sleeping outdoors.
* A lot of the rich have left already, but the real question might be… when was the last time a poor person gave you a job? – this Fox News put down fails on many fronts – not the least of which is that it is the economy that provides jobs – the rich try to provide them first so they can make the overhead off those jobs – but the small company shop provides most of the new jobs. As to leaving the country, good riddance – and note that we have a worldwide income tax system (although the GOP are trying to change it so the rich escape even more of the tax load), so running away from the country may not really reduce the income made in the US that can be taxed – they will still have to buy Congress to avoid that potential taxation.
Well said!
Wonder how much “corporate socialism” is in play for every new “private” venture? I’d like to see some graphs and charts illustrating the hidden dependence of the rich on public largesse. Truth, not truthiness.
And all this has been accomplished how? Problem identification is easy. Solutions are more difficult because it means you and I must both work to find common ground. Libertarians and ‘progressives’ can (you would hope) find common ground?
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/two-lectures-history-austrian-economics
What ya afraid of? the way things HAVE been?
Maybe you should at least spend the time to consider the possibility that we HAVE ALL BEEN MISLEAD?
We have had the wrong damn map. And as a consequence we are now lost.
iseeitfix, you prove yourself to be an ignoramus when postulating that Keynesian is about passing liabilities onto the next generation .China has become an economic superpower for no reason other than raw-ass Keynesianism shrewdly promoted in a context of economic nationalism.Sure they manipulate their currency ,because they are savvy enough to know we won;t retaliate and jeopardize the sino-positioning of American multinationals whose transhipments account for over 50% of Chinese imports .Conversely ,Japan is in a deflationary spiral because it didn’t deploy a massive Keynesian injection over a decade ago for fear of inflation .You have neither the knowledge or mental h/p to fake macroeconomic understanding.You’re just embarrassing yourself .
Sorry for the nasty rant iseexitf ,so much more than the info was espoused .Once again , my apologies .
I hope you don’t actually believe that nonsense.
Ignorance isn’t helpful.
The rich don’t take from anyone?
Nope, no such things as fraudclosures or a worldwide economic collapse caused by speculators.
If you think nothing wrong with credit default swaps then can I take ten million dollars of life insurance out on you? If you don’t think that there’s anything wrong with the moral hazard in unrestrained speculation then you shouldn’t think that there’s anything untoward about me wanting to take life insurance out on you.
Hell, wal mart already does it with dead peasant insurance. Come one, I promise to treat the sanctity of your life with the same respect the waltons give their workers. Now take 3 steps to the left into the path of the laser pointer. It’s just a laser pointer, it couldn’t possibly be anything else.