Every day now, we hear the pundits talk about how they have no idea what to do. They say the economy is bad, and getting worse every day. There's a credit crisis, wall street's value is a little more than half what it was five months ago, homes are foreclosing, jobs are being lost, giant companies are going out of business. As reporters repeat over and over again, everyone knows something needs to be done, but no one knows what.
Well, I know what.
As those giant businesses like the Big 3 teeter on the brink of bankruptcy, Congress once again is debating a bailout bill. Almost every qualified economist will tell you that the way out of a recession is to spend money until there's enough of it that other people can spend as well; this is called Keynesian Economics. Some point to Japan as a counter-example, but Keynesians say the Japanese simply didn't spend enough money.
Yet the public deplores the idea. Why? Most of America has no idea what Keynesian economics is, or the difference between macro- and micro- economics, for that matter. They think of the crisis as they think of shopping for groceries; there's less money, so let's spend less to meet the budget.
That's not how economics work on the scale of a government with trillions of dollars to work with, but because our politicians all want to get reelected, they refuse to back spending bills. They all secretly want to have bailouts, but they can't. That's why, in the case of the auto industry, they're leaving it to the Obama administration and the new Congress to deal with; at least the newly elected representatives can take the force of the blame.
The solution is not simply to ask our politicans to suck it up and do what's best for us, even if we don't want it. The government is and always will be the voice of the people, and that shouldn't change. Instead, a massive propaganda campaign needs to take place, educating the people about what's going on and explaining why bailouts are actually a good idea.
After all, half the problem is a crisis of perception. The public thinks the government isn't doing a good job; the public thinks the economy is in a severe recession; therefore the public is holding its money, without realizing that holding their money is precisely what is creating the recession. For those who ask where all the money went when Wall Street crashed--it simply evaporated when people got the perception that the companies on Wall Street weren't worth as much any more. In fact, there is a very powerful philosophical argument that perception is reality.
By changing that perception, we completely reverse the current track of the economy. After all, what really happened sometime in October that made the economy go in the tank? Not much. We were in what some would describe as a perilous economic situation for at least a few years before that time; it was just the failing of several large investment firms that brought attention to the problem and created the perception crisis.
Now, the other part of the problem is that the economy does need fundamental change. That, of course, is why the bailouts and other spending measures exist in the first place. President-elect Obama has already committed to dramatically improving government infrastructure. In addition, many industries need to seriously rethink their strategies--banking, investment, autos, real estate. And in the end, it will be new strategies and technologies that will pull the economy back together, like renewable energies and cheap, environmentally friendly cars; so government spending needs to focus not only on saving old industries, but promoting new, better ones as well.
In the end, it all comes down to what we think is going on. And right now, we think the economy has crawled into a hole under the dump. Let's rebuild a sphere of confidence and drag it back out, and then fill in the hole and build a recycling plant. We need to fix not just the credit crisis, but also the perception crisis. Spread the word.
You seems to be like most of these Americans. No alternative economical models will have a major place in this global world untill America leave is role of authoritative leader.
You seems to be like most of these Americans. No alternative economical models will have a major place in this global world untill America leave is role of authoritative leader.
I would say it's certainly a foreign point of view that America needs to stop being a world leader, or that America needs an alternative economic model. There is no system that has proven itself better than capitalism; lax legislation and irresponsible industry models (primarily in investing, banking, and automaking) caused the recession, not an inherent flaw in capitalism. In fact, without capitalism, the world would likely be significantly less wealthy than it is today even during the recession, and certainly less technologically advanced. Capitalism obviously creates the image of a winner and loser, but even the losers get more advantages than they realize.
So, as I said in the article, the solution to the current crisis is education/propaganda, investment in infrastructure, and restructuring certain industries.
History will show that what will boost the economy is somehting we all wouldn't want. It happened 47 years ago today as one example. It's called war. I hope we don't end up having one.
History will show that what will boost the economy is somehting we all wouldn't want. It happened 47 years ago today as one example. It's called war. I hope we don't end up having one.
War stimulated manufacturing, which pulled us the rest of the way out of the Depression. This time around, I think it will be technology that does the same.
I hope so, anyway.
The massive public education thing won't work. As individuals, some of us are certainly intelligent, but together, we are all the "dumb masses." How many people that still have a decent job would think we're in a depression if the news wasn't pushing gloom and doom every minute of every day?
Any way you look at it... recovery will be slow. What we need to really "boost" the economy is something like the Fair Tax!
How many people that still have a decent job would think we're in a depression if the news wasn't pushing gloom and doom every minute of every day?
That's exactly my point. But if there was a campaign that claimed otherwise, or if there was a campaign that said that bailouts would work, or something similar--then opinions could reverse and the crisis could turn around more quickly.
I don't like it when people (obviously this is non an idictement of anyone here) say they care about the economy, because frankly, when Wall Street had more money and unemployment was lower, no one cared. American employment is still hovering at 94%, depite the loss of half a million jobs last month. During the great depression employment had sunk to 66% and at that point, most people's bottom line was affected. Point being, I'm fustrated because like IceCreamYou suggested, our economic problems are a product of the media's attention given to them. If the media didn't report bad economic news, I would wager the markets would perform better. Investing money on Wall Street is a fundamentally emotionally based process, conducted on subjective interpretation of fact and this leads to mistakes.
On a site note, obviously there seems to be an issue of incompetence in certain areas of the privatre sector, especially financials who suddenly don't lend money, thus rendering themselves totally useless.
Also, unless our financial sector is willing to do the lending, I oppose any kind of further bailot measures. We just gave a handful of companies upwards of 700 billion dollars to play with, they should lend to other struggling markets and comanies instead of using gratitous amounts of money that we never had in the first place. Spending taxpayer money means compensating by either (A) cutting spending or (B) raising taxes. While I know President-Elect Obama wants to cut some programs, he is by no means a fiscal conservative, so for the sake of argument I would suggest that an increase in spending will lead to more raised taxes than increased spending. If taxes are raised, citizens will inevitably have less money to spend and this would only further any kind of struggling due to our current recession.
Well, I think it's more important to create confidence that the economy is going to get better than it is to create confidence that the economy is good right now--because it isn't. Bad reports have been coming out lately and that's not helping anyone's outlook. What we need to do though is convince people that the plans that Congress and Obama's team are coming up with are going to do their job and put the economy back on track. But that also requires being more than responsive--as you suggest, not simply throwing money at the problem every time someone comes to Congress and begs for it--but rather taking the initiative to correct the source of the problem: financial deregulation (which Obama announced today would be a "central" part of his agenda) and lethargic transitioning to modern globalized demands in some industries. If these problems are attacked--and I think they will be--there's no reason not to have a positive outlook on the future except for the constant media negativity.
Yes, the media has become quite whinny. Let me emphasize, QUITE.
I'm talking to you:
Lou Dobbs
Wolf Blitzer
Cambell Brown
Anyone else who I've seen on TV recently that's not an animated character.
On another note, I've been consistenly saying that now is not only not a bad time to spend money, it is in fact the BEST time to spend money (I'm talking about consumers, of course). Not only will your moner go further, but any kind of relatively safe investment should make it through this recession. I would even go further as to suggest that one could invest in non blue chip stocks, too. Obviously those would have to be chosen carefully.
On another note, I've been consistenly saying that now is not only not a bad time to spend money, it is in fact the BEST time to spend money (I'm talking about consumers, of course). Not only will your moner go further, but any kind of relatively safe investment should make it through this recession. I would even go further as to suggest that one could invest in non blue chip stocks, too. Obviously those would have to be chosen carefully.
Of course, the nature of investment is that only a very few invest at the best time--when everyone else is doing poorly--and everyone invests when everyone else is doing well.
That, of course, is why Warren Buffet is a genius.
As if you needed another reason to believe me, here you go.
The rally, which gave the Dow a two-day gain of almost 560 points, extended a period of relative tranquility on Wall Street. The Dow and the Standard & Poor's 500 have risen in nine out of 11 sessions as investors have absorbed bad economic news without signs of the panic that rocked the market for much of the fall.
Investors also grew more confident as the government neared a deal to dole out billions to America's three biggest automakers. The White House said during Monday's trading that it was "very likely" to strike an agreement with Congress on funneling money to General Motors Corp., Chrysler LLC and Ford Motor Co. The package was expected to total about $15 billion.
The stock market has become more optimistic although a number of reports last week seemed to indicate the recession is showing no signs of weakening. As the week progressed, the market appeared to be taking the bad news in stride — even Friday's Labor Department report that showed the nation lost more than a half million jobs last month. The report raised hopes that the government would take more steps to stimulate the economy.
On the auto bailout--that looks like it's coming along as well.
My only problem with this, which I think is otherwise accurate, is that the stock market is hovering in the 8000s. I guess the stock market is the best indicator of public confidence though, and it has proved itself to be volatile enough to go back up if public confidence does too.

Wow. so simple, yet so elegant.
there's more to it than that though. where is a propaganda campaign going to come from? who will run it, who will pay for it, how will it be executed? it's a great idea but it's almost too simple.