Obviously the U.S. economy is sputtering. Obviously II, our economic problems are not a short-term thing, but part of a trend since the late 1970s of bubble booms, recessions, and good-job-free recoveries. Dean Baker tells us today what is happening now:
Very Little Positive News in Latest Jobs Report
The unemployment rate climbed back up to 9.1 percent in May, as the rate of private-sector job growth slowed to just 83,000, according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics employment report. The prior two months data were also revised downward, lowering the average job growth for the last three months to 160,000, approximately 70,000 more than what is needed to keep pace with the growth of the labor force.
The weakness in the private sector goes along with a government sector that lost 29,000 jobs in May and has lost an average of 24,300 jobs over the last three months. State and local governments will continue to make cutbacks, and there is a strong likelihood of further cuts in federal spending in the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1. Without new stimulus, the unemployment rate may continue to creep upward.
But of course III, there will be no new stimulus, because the Republicans and President Obama don’t want one. Apparently they are insane, though admittedly the madness is worldwide: Greece to impose deeper austerity for new rescue. How austerity generates recovery and not the opposite is a question for madmen and mainstream economists.
But the madness of our economists is only a symptom of a deeper disease that has caused anemic or no income growth since the 1970s for everyone except those at the top. Robert Reich was very helpful on the big picture this week, in The Truth About the American Economy and The Truth About the American Economy (II). Reich sums up the story as follows:
During the Great Prosperity of 1947-1977, the basic bargain had ensured that the pay of American workers coincided with their output. In effect, the vast middle class received an increasing share of the benefits of economic growth. But after that point, the two lines began to diverge: Output per hour — a measure of productivity — continued to rise. But real hourly compensation was left in the dust. …
Starting more than three decades ago, trade and technology began driving a wedge between the earnings of people at the top and everyone else. The pay of well-connected graduates of prestigious colleges and MBA programs has soared. But the pay and benefits of most other workers has either flattened or dropped. And the ensuing division has also made most middle-class American families less economically secure.
Government could have enforced the basic bargain. But it did the opposite. It slashed public goods and investments — whacking school budgets, increasing the cost of public higher education, reducing job training, cutting public transportation and allowing bridges, ports and highways to corrode.
Reich goes on to describe the attack on the ‘safety net’, a 1980s phrase that in itself lowballs what government of the people should be doing for the people. But Why? Why did government do the opposite? Why does it do the opposite now, despite the predictably disastrous results from austerity programs?
Reich has elsewhere talked about the buying of Congress and the increasing obedience of the Democratic Party to, in a phrase, Wall Street. But he doesn’t discuss that ‘why’ in those two new posts. In The Truth About The Middle Class, Dave Cohen calls out Reich:
Think for a moment. What’s missing in Reich’s explanation? Why was the government so mean-spirited? Why would the government sacrifice the middle class at the altar of the rich?
And of course the answer is political corruption, which resulted in the financialization of the American economy. Corruption is built right into the long, expensive election process (campaign contributons, aka bribes) and the law-making process (armies of lobbyists writing legislation in the Congress).
Because Reich does not state the cause of our problems, he can’t tell us how to solve them, stating merely …
The fundamental economic challenge ahead is to restore the vast American middle class. … That requires resurrecting the basic bargain linking wages to overall gains, and providing the middle class a share of economic gains sufficient to allow them to purchase more of what the economy can produce.
But all signs point in the opposite direction for Reich’s Democratic Party, and things are worse with the Republicans. Cohen writes:
Many call[] what we [have] the FIRE economy (finance, insurance & real estate). And if you’ve got a FIRE economy, and middle class Americans are being squeezed, a housing bubble makes all the sense in the world. Those in finance and real estate prosper, while those buying houses are led to believe they are acquiring wealth (in home equity) for the first time in three decades. Then the bubble pops, and what does the government do? It bails out the too-big-to-fail banks, who effectively own the Congress, and run economic policy at the Treasury and in the White House.
Rational and unbought economists know what to do, but we get the policy that’s paid for. The solution is to end the ownership of Congress and the White House by the economic and financial elite. Of course IV, admittedly not unlike Reich, I don’t know how we get there.



17 Comments

“Reich goes on to describe the attack on the ‘safety net’, a 1980s phrase that in itself lowballs what government of the people should be doing for the people. But Why? Why did government do the opposite? Why does it do the opposite now, despite the predictably disastrous results from austerity programs?”
Capitalism.
And recommended.
Thank you.
I disagree and think the central issue is social democracy. A real social democracy at the commanding heights above capitalism would solve most of its problems. We had some of that, mainly due to the power of unions, during the all-too-brief ‘Great Prosperity’ era. But U.S. democracy since the 1980s has been completely corrupted by the wealthy and the giant corporations.
Whatever the solution is, and I think all of us should be flexible and responsive to actual experience, how we get there is the central problem.
You disagree? How? As I understand it, social democracy is essentially very well-regulated capitalism, you know, strict controls and lots of redistribution of wealth. Sure, we had some of that during your age of Great Prosperity, but never to the extent the Western European democracies had during the same period.
But the central issue is not and never has been social democracy. It is clearly capitalism and the profit motive itself, that is, a system that says it’s a good thing in itself to make more and more profit. A system that says greed is good and that material wealth should control.
The system is not sustainable. It will kill the human species, if not the planet, if left unchecked. I stand by my answer: capitalism and its influence is why our government did not act in our people’s interests. And why it can’t.
Not in our current system. Ever.
I am not a sports fan and I hate sports metaphors: but in this case, I can not help myself. Say you have a team of 9 people (pick your game); as the 9 huddle and plan their strategy at any given time 35% to 45% of the team members actively work against the team causing any plan concocted to fail! Any person who invest in a team of rivals will always be doomed to fail.
The corporate lobbyist can do what they do because America is not and for most of her history has never been a community. The lost of “White Privilege” allowed corporate money to create the Tea Party. Many Black people (not all)in this country blindly support Obama ma because of his skin color (the same way poor uneducated whites supported Bush because they thought he was someone they could have a beer with). A lot of my Jewish Brothers and sisters (not all) seem much more concern with the survival of Israel than
that of their fellow Americans (ever notice AIPAC lobbying for health care or jobs for even Jewish Americans?) Then there is the “Dream Act” which allows the brown people south of America’s border to gain their little slice of the American Dream by killing other brown people (Arabs) on the other side of the world for multi-national corporations. Yes, I understand that 2 years of education is also a path through the Dream Act, but most choose the military.
Bottom line, we are a country of individuals, who tolerate one another, not a community. This is the answer to your statement below.
“Why did government do the opposite? Why does it do the opposite now, despite the predictably disastrous results from austerity programs?”
Actually we used to be a country of separate little communities that had little contact with each other. Even within the cities.
And this was reflected in the media. Especially TV programs where most were some generic white family in some generic white community. And even when they did have a program about some minority, is was in some generic minority community.
This I think has a lot to do with the tea party right. They want it to go back to that way.
Has everyone forgot that out of the 83K private payroll jobs created included the 60K jobs that McDonald’s created during the reports period?
Although the right wing reported that this happened in last months period, it actually was in this months report.
So approximately 70% of the private payroll jobs are low paying temporary jobs.
Are we on a roll or what!!!!
thanks fairleft. rec’ed.
btw, you might like, if you haven’t already read it (i’m just starting), thomas ferguson’s “Golden Rule: The Investment Theory of Party Competition and the Logic of Money-Driven Political System”
http://books.google.com/books/about/Golden_rule.html?id=CU8oyIlNyQcC
I don’t think we know what an improvement over U.S. regulated capitalism or European (or Japanese) ‘social democracy’ during the ‘Great Prosperity’ would look like. Certainly it would be more social democratic, of course, and that’s the key problem pointed out in this essay, the corruption of the political/media system.
The capitalist impulse for profit-making will, I think, always be an element of any economic system. Even the Soviet Union allowed tiny private vegetable patches, for example, and I didn’t see a problem with that. In any case, it seems odd to prescribe the make up of a social democracy, since first of all that doesn’t sound very democratic, and second of all we want a future social democracy to learn from experience and mix together (at least) capitalism, socialism, anarchism and cooperativism both within enterprises and between different sectors in ways that the democracy feels are best at the time and that improve over time.
I’ve written about this before, a long time ago. One option is to legally change the ‘brain’ of the corporation, its board of directors, to plug in real motives in addition to the profit motive. But that’s an idea that would and should be experimented with, and I wouldn’t see my ‘corporation with a human brain’ as _the_ way to organize every economic enterprise in an economy.
Thanks, I’ll check it out.
Read or listen to this interview with Randall Wray, from May 30 (emphasis added):
Wray has great proposals for a federally guaranteed job program, which would greatly decrease costs of other federal and state programs. Also, foreclosures need to completely stop. All great ideas. The transcript is here as well.
fairleft — randy wray’s most excellent interview deserves a post of it’s own (video and transcript) are you planning to do one? ….i hope? hint hint hint :)
use of the transcript might require permission from iwt.
Selise, there’s so much great stuff out there. Wray’s video is awesome. Here’s something almost better, hip tat to you, “From ‘Great Prosperity’ to _THIS_?! in 1 paragraph”:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/may/30/strategy-of-stagnation
BTW, I don’t get how he gets, from his proposed program where the govt offer a min wage plus health benefits job to anyone unemployed, would cost $130 billion a year if there are 13 million unemployed. Great if that were true, but wouldn’t it be more like twice that? Roughly $10/hr (min wage plus health care benefit) times 40 hrs a week times 50 weeks a year times 13 million equals $260 billion. Anyway, this may be a short way of saying I’ll have to go back to the tape and read other things before i confidently present Wray’s proposal.
Even at $260 billion a year, that’s a far better way to spend our money than the trillion a year we spend on the military. Especially with the way a job guaranteed program definitely reduces money spent on prisons, welfare, and so on.
Sorry I took so long; life intrudes even on the Internet. Thanks for a thoughtful answer. Sure, there will always be human failings such as greed and lust for power over others as long as there are human beings. Imperfect beings can never create a perfect economic system or a perfect society. History has shown me that attempts to do so always result in tragedy and horror, especially when those doing the attempting are convinced that they are the harbingers of The Truth.
Pontius Pilate: What is Truth?
Jesus of Nazareth: (silence)
Great answer, Jesus. Really, I mean that.
Pure capitalism is overrated. In fact, it is dangerously insane. The goal of capitalism is to increase capital. That’s it. In order to do that well, one must put aside empathy for others, concern for the environment, and loyalty to one’s civilization. In short, the most successful capitalist must engage in behavior that psychiatrists call sociopathic. That is why our capitalist-dominated government engages in attacks against social safety nets; because such safety nets are not profitable and therefore must be destroyed if possible.
Yes, I am saying that our decisionmakers are acting like sociopaths because many of them really ARE sociopaths. In a sense, Obama and the Democratic and Republican leadership are dangerously insane and they will do great harm to the majority of Americans so long as we allow them to do so. The same applies to most on Wall Street and most CEO’s.
I think some form of socialism would create a more just society, though never a perfect one. Stalin was convinced he was creating the perfect socialist society, and look what happened in his Soviet Union. I think attempting to abolish private property and the profit motive altogether is just as insane as the celebration of wealth President Obama believes in.
I think that the absolute best form of government is benevolent dictatorship or an enlightened monarchy. Unfortunately, there is no way to insure the successor to the benevolent dictator will be benevolent or that the heir to the enlightened monarch will be enlightened, so some form of representative democracy is the best we poor imperfect humans can do. Some economic system that strives for economic justice using the best traits of capitalism, socialism, even mercantilism and barter would be far better than what we have now, and definitely would be more sustainable.
Your suggestions are, I think, good ones. I’ll just add one thing. Democracy itself is also overrated, especially when those who are screaming its virtues are in fact oligarchs. It’s also overrated when most of the voters are ignorant idiots. Democracy can only work if there are educated voters who are capable of reason.
So. Can democracy work in 21st Century America right now? I don’t know. I do know it does not currently exist in America. What we have now is a corporatist(ie fascist) oligarchy, and it’s years are numbered.
fairleft! you read billy blog!! fabulous!
and i like the link too. :)
just for fun, because it’s not exactly on point…. in the epi thread, i posted a link to this bill mitchell youtube (short) from last year:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvvmzulIcZc
here’s the transcript:
i just love bill’s response. had to share.
http://www.netrootsmass.net/fiscal-sustainability-teach-in-and-counter-conference/
i don’t know the calculations either… but that would make a great question to ask him. :)
just in case you haven’t already seen it:
http://neweconomicperspectives.blogspot.com/p/modern-money-primer-under-construction.html
i plan to post a diary on monday or tuesday to spread the word about this.