Economic Good News and Bad News

by: Mike Lux

Fri May 22, 2009 at 16:15


Given the nature of the terrible problems George W. Bush has left us, I remain thankful every day that someone rational and intelligent like Barack Obama is our President (can you imagine McCain or Bush trying to manage all this? Oh, wait, we just had eight years of that). Thanks to Obama’s leadership and strong action, there is actually some good news to report on the economy: we’ve gone from triple red alert, every day in a panic crisis to some measure of day to day stability. That is a good thing, and Obama should get an enormous amount of credit for it. The fact that there is any good economic news at all is a huge relief after all the horrible news of the last nine months.

The question now is whether we can go from stabilizing the economy to actually improving it, and whether the improvement that does happen translates into real benefits in the economic conditions for most Americans. A Washington Post story with a very positive spin about how the economy is getting better quoted Anil Kashyap, an economist at the University of Chicago, saying this: “The feeling is that for now we’ve avoided the Great Depression. But the real economy is still in pretty bad shape.”

The good news is that President Obama’s steady leadership and aggressive intervention seems to have stabilizing the economy and returned confidence to our economic institutions. He deserves credit for that, and is getting it for the American public. But the bad news is still extremely bad; if unemployment stays incredibly high or even climbs higher, if home prices don’t start coming back, if wages don’t start climbing again, if health care costs and grocery prices stay high, if start-up businesses still are having trouble getting loans- if all of this continues for a long time to come, we are all in very deep trouble.

The American people know how deep our problems are, and will be patient for awhile. They clearly appreciate how Obama has handled things so far. But the Obama team needs to understand how important it is to deliver on tangible things that create jobs and make the economic condition of middle-class people better. Given how awful things were on January 20, the President deserves a great deal of credit for keeping our entire economic system from sliding into another Great Depression. That achievement won’t be enough to sustain him, though, if the real economy doesn’t start to get better. The President needs to be focused like a laser beam long-term economic issues that will ultimately decide the fate of his Presidency: creating jobs, increasing middle-class incomes, solving the health care crisis. If the country sees him fighting for these things, and making real progress, he will be re-elected in a landslide and set the stage for a long-term progressive majority.

Mike Lux :: Economic Good News and Bad News

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Is there really any plausibility to the claim (4.00 / 2)
that anything Obama has done has had a material effect on the economy?

My recollection is that as of a week or so ago, only about 6% of the stimulus package might yet have trickled into the economy — which hardly seems to be enough money and over enough time to have any important effect (my understanding is that it takes some time in any case even for most money that gets into the economy to have its designed multiplier effect).

So if there really is less of a problem than people had expected at this time, wouldn’t that mainly be accounted to too pessimistic projections in the first place?

And of course we all have to remember that, just as in the Great Depression itself, there were “green shoots” almost all the way down to the nadir. That may certainly be what’s going on here.


 
Just replace "the economy" with "Goldman Sachs" (4.00 / 4)
Mike Lux claims Obama has “stabilized the economy,” even though more than 600,000 people lost their jobs last month, but those were “little people,” and everybody knows by now that Barack Obama isn’t about helping the “little people.”

2.5 million “little people” have lost their jobs since Obama was inaugurated, but…

The real people, the “Obama people,” the Goldman Sachs people are doing great!

Ever since the big bailout in September that Obama supported and endorsed and Geithner designed, Goldman Sachs stock has gone up from $47 to $137… a 191% increase.

Forget about the Great Depression, forget about recession…

These are boom times for Goldman Sachs!

But for the rest of us, unemployment is only the beginning of the bad news…

More than two years year after the housing market tanked and the foreclosure rate began rising, the ongoing wave of distressed home sales is weighing on house prices and crimping a long-awaited economic recovery.

So Geithner/Obama not only stabilized Goldman Sachs, they turned it into gold…

But for the rest of us…

“Stability” apparently means lost jobs and foreclosed mortgages…

In the world according to Mike Lux.



[ Parent ]  
Another jobless recovery…. (4.00 / 4)
As long as Obama has Geithner, nothing will change.   Geithner’s plan to save autos is to globalize them by closing US plants and dramatically increasing imports from China, Korea and Mexico.  By the time he gets done saving this industry, there won’t be any American left in it.  

Saving autos at the expense of American jobs is a good idea why?    


[ Parent ]  
The story quotes a university of chicago enconomists (4.00 / 3)
.

My blog  

[ Parent ]  
The Chicago School of Economics (4.00 / 3)
Yes indeed, the story quotes a University of Chicago economist…

“The feeling is that for now we’ve avoided the Great Depression,” said Anil Kashyap, an economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. “But the real economy is still in pretty bad shape.”

And you gotta love those University of Chicago economists like Milton Friedman!

The Chicago school is associated with neoclassical price theory and libertarianism in its support of radically lower taxation and private sector regulation, but differs from pure free-market economics in its support of government-regulated monetary policy.

Radically lower taxes! Less regulation!

And Obama delivered the biggest tax-cut in the history of the United States, and he just keeps dumping trillions of dollars into the bank accounts of billionaire bankers with (almost) no oversight whatsoever.

No wonder those University of Chicago economists love Obama…

Just like they loved Ronald Reagan.



[ Parent ]  
that last sentence should have… (0.00 / 0)
never seen the light of day. Making a point about the program some 20-30 years ago, at the height of Friedman economics and the love-fest the GOP had with the Chicago economists has nothing to do with what Lux is talking about.

To be sure, the school is still somewhat entrenched in economic theory that is conservative in nature, but that’s no longer the absolute rule. Like a pendulum, today’s economists deal with a more complex set of variables and the last 20 years have proven to be a failure for pure Friedman ideology.

Also, I’ve seen New Haven’s economy be propped up by stimulus spending. Grants for science and medicine at Yale are higher today then they were during the boom years. Without this money, the area economy would be doing worse. Did the stimulus and economic policies of the current administration save the country from a “great depression”? I suppose there’s no way of knowing, and despite signs that the economy is becoming more stable, it doesn’t signify an end to a greater drop in the foreseeable future.


[ Parent ]  
It's way too soon to be talking of bottoms or stabilizing in the real economy (0.00 / 0)
Sure, the banking/finance system is doing better, just by looking at LIBOR and the TED Spread. But the housing crisis will continue through 2012 before it bottoms and that means there’s a great deal more foreclosures to be dealt with. In addition, commercial real estate is only now really hitting the proverbial fan, so that’s a couple hundred billion more in defaults on the way.

Thus far, Geithner and Bernanke have committed $12.8 Trillion to paying off the gambling debts of US and foreign banks. The economic utility of all that free money sloshing around will soon become apparent as the current speculative bubble now emerging in oil prices becomes a much bigger drag on an already comatose economy. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see new bubbles forming in commodities in general, which will mean much more expensive food while employment, hours and wages are all plummeting.

Lastly, all that free money sloshing around will, at some point, launch us into very significant inflation, thus diminishing even more American purchasing power. It will also essentially confiscate US domestic savings. Both of these things will send the economy on yet another downward leg.

So all this talk about bottoms, stabilization and so on is extremely premature. Without real reform in banking, markets and the economy, real recovering simply cannot occur. Of course, reform is the last thing on anyone’s mind in DC, especially at the very neo-liberal White House.

This is going to be a long and very bumpy ride. Tens of millions will end up in chronic poverty they simply won’t recover from. And we’re still going to be having this discussion when Obama’s eight years are up.

We’ve committed only $400 Billion to the real economy, or only about 1.4% US GDP per year for two years. It’s the economic equivalent of putting a band-aid on a sucking chest wound and calling that “surgery.”

“The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences…” – Winston Churchill, November 1936


[ Parent ]  
to be clear… (0.00 / 0)
i don’t ever make the claim that the economy has stabalized.

[ Parent ]  
Positive Things (0.00 / 0)
Are you allowed to say positive things about Obama on the front page?  The occasional, positive side note is okay, but you can’t go full bore.  I’m pretty sure that is against Open Left editorial policy.  

 
You can, when it's true. n.t (4.00 / 2)


[ Parent ]  
Bsinesses (small businesses) nationwide have the lowest cash-on-hand (4.00 / 2)
since October 1929. We haven’t even begun to deal with the coming crisis in the credit card business. Pie-eyed optimists like me will always find reasons to be hopeful, but it will be the social safety net – social security and Medicare – and the indomitable dread of doom that saves us from the worst aspects of the Great Depression…not any good news that I can see just yet. Oh, yeah, one: we saved the big banks and Wall Street from utter well-deserved collapse. Big deal. I could have lathered them in dollar bills, too. The only reason it took this long is that printing money takes time.


They only call it class war when we fight back.

 
Since so little of the stimulous has been spent on (0.00 / 0)
anything.  I don’t think the bottoming out can be attributed to Obama.  The market just has to bottom out somewhere.

My blog  

 
California (4.00 / 2)
I’d wait to see what happens to California before declaring that we’ve avoided a Great Depression. Krugman put up a chart a couple times on his blog showing the false bottom in the original Great Depression – roughly at an equivalent timing to where we are right now. California is a huge problem – but it could also be the spur to getting the level of Federal stimulus that’s needed. Congress really needs to deal with not just California, but state budgets as a whole – and if Congress can’t get its act together on this, then Obama needs to use all the smoke and mirrors to bail out the states that they’ve been using for Citicorp and Bank of America.

 
California is having a picnic compared to what is (4.00 / 3)
going on in the industrial states, MI in particular.  You guys are just catching up to what we have been dealing with for eight years.    

[ Parent ]  
Meanwhile in the real world…. (4.00 / 6)
…Obama undersized the initial fiscal stimulus and allowed Nelson-Collins to define the final size of the stimulus…

…Obama failed to fight for cramming down, and the coming tidal wave of foreclosures as ARMs reset will be a consequence…

…Obama is failing to fight for universal healthcare and it is now clear that cost containment not universality will be the driving rationale for reform…

…Obama is failing to fight for trade reform as US employment collapses, and until very recently was actually pushing for a more-of-the-same trade pact with Panama…

…Obama is failing to fight the Wall Street oligarchs and is allowing Geithner to throw away trillions (trillions!) of taxpayer dollars to preserve the illusion that the banks are solvent….

Of all of these, the last one is the most worrisome.  It could be the catalyst for the populist backlash that obliterates the Democrats in Congress and the WH and brings a truly frightening demagogue to power.  


 
It could also bring a truely representative party (4.00 / 1)
to power.  

My blog  

[ Parent ]  
Yes, forestalling complete economic collapse is a positive (4.00 / 3)
Duh.

Handing two trillion to the banksters with no accountability and no transparency is a FAIL, no matter the “pragmatic” result; we’ll always be left wondering whether we could have gotten the same results while strengthening the rule of law and the Constitution, instead of abandoning them entirely. And the lack of the two trillion that went missing — no, we really don’t know where it went; on TARP, see Elizabeth Warren, and the other programs are even more opaque — is going to structure all our policy and program choices for years to come, and not in a good way.

It’s very hard for me to see how reinforcing kleptocracy is going to net out positive for the American people — although Versailles courtiers and Democratic operatives may have a different view.

So, a little cheerleading is always appreciated in times like this, but let’s look at the net, please, not just one item on the balance sheet.

I am in earnest — I will not equivocate — I will not excuse — I will not retreat a single inch — AND I WILL BE HEARD.  


 
Even that one item is extremely dubious (4.00 / 1)
The Chicago School economists are obviously desperate for things to turn around, because right now they’re looking at being completely shamed into irrelevance by events. And quoting economics from WaPo, one of the outlets that totally missed the housing crisis for starters, is an iffy proposition at best.

We’re still shedding 600K jobs a month, down from 750K. That’s spun as good news somehow, even though we’re on track to lose at least 7.5 Million jobs this year alone.

If Obama had actually done anything to really turn this all around, I’d welcome the cheerleading. But the simple fact is he hasn’t, he won’t and he’s completely unapologetic about it. His priorities lie elsewhere.

“The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences…” – Winston Churchill, November 1936


[ Parent ]  




USER MENU


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you

Donate to Open Left

QUICK HITS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

STATE BLOGS