PDA

View Full Version : (April 17th, 2009): "Green Shoots and Glimmers" (Paul Krugman - NYT)


Ikasu
04-17-2009, 11:11 AM
NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/opinion/17krugman.html?_r=1)


Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, sees “green shoots.” President Obama sees “glimmers of hope.” And the stock market has been on a tear.

So is it time to sound the all clear? Here are four reasons to be cautious about the economic outlook.

1. Things are still getting worse. Industrial production just hit a 10-year low. Housing starts remain incredibly weak. Foreclosures, which dipped as mortgage companies waited for details of the Obama administration’s housing plans, are surging again.

...

2. Some of the good news isn’t convincing. The biggest positive news in recent days has come from banks, which have been announcing surprisingly good earnings. But some of those earnings reports look a little ... funny.

...

I don’t want to go overboard here. Maybe the banks really have swung from deep losses to hefty profits in record time. But skepticism comes naturally in this age of Madoff.

Oh, and for those expecting the Treasury Department’s “stress tests” to make everything clear: the White House spokesman, Robert Gibbs, says that “you will see in a systematic and coordinated way the transparency of determining and showing to all involved some of the results of these stress tests.” No, I don’t know what that means, either.

3. There may be other shoes yet to drop. Even in the Great Depression, things didn’t head straight down. There was, in particular, a pause in the plunge about a year and a half in — roughly where we are now. But then came a series of bank failures on both sides of the Atlantic, combined with some disastrous policy moves as countries tried to defend the dying gold standard, and the world economy fell off another cliff.

Can this happen again? Well, commercial real estate is coming apart at the seams, credit card losses are surging and nobody knows yet just how bad things will get in Japan or Eastern Europe. We probably won’t repeat the disaster of 1931, but it’s far from certain that the worst is over.

4. Even when it’s over, it won’t be over. The 2001 recession officially lasted only eight months, ending in November of that year. But unemployment kept rising for another year and a half. The same thing happened after the 1990-91 recession. And there’s every reason to believe that it will happen this time too. Don’t be surprised if unemployment keeps rising right through 2010.

...

Employment will eventually recover — it always does. But it probably won’t happen fast.

So now that I’ve got everyone depressed, what’s the answer? Persistence.

History shows that one of the great policy dangers, in the face of a severe economic slump, is premature optimism. F.D.R. responded to signs of recovery by cutting the Works Progress Administration in half and raising taxes; the Great Depression promptly returned in full force. Japan slackened its efforts halfway through its lost decade, ensuring another five years of stagnation.

The Obama administration’s economists understand this. They say all the right things about staying the course. But there’s a real risk that all the talk of green shoots and glimmers will breed a dangerous complacency.

So here’s my advice, to the public and policy makers alike: Don’t count your recoveries before they’re hatched.

Laura Cereta
04-17-2009, 12:16 PM
F.D.R. responded to signs of recovery by cutting the Works Progress Administration in half and raising taxes; the Great Depression promptly returned in full force.

Hmmm... :thinking:

Ikasu
04-17-2009, 02:52 PM
Hmmm... :thinking:

After the FDR spending programs successfully lowered double digit unemployment, FDR's advisers convinced him that it was now time to try to balance the budget. So he cut spending, raised taxes and the economy went in the tank again. Then the US went into WWII which required massive government spending and that ultimately got us out of the depression.

TheTaoOfBill
04-17-2009, 03:16 PM
F.D.R. responded to signs of recovery by cutting the Works Progress Administration in half and raising taxes

hmm....:thinking:

Jester
04-17-2009, 06:44 PM
So wait. I thought raising taxes was a big part of the answer. I can't believe I am more consistent than a Nobel prize winner. :rolleyes:

I believe somebody on the Obama team stated this week that a dollar to the financial sector has about an 800% to 900% return on the GDP. They are now fighting the demon they created.

Jester
04-17-2009, 06:45 PM
hmm....:thinking:

Exactly. Govt. programs that can only be artificially propped up will fail as soon as the crutch is removed. Welcome to the Dark Side.

supra5677
04-17-2009, 07:07 PM
Roosevelt had a fascist supreme court and budget advisor that forced him to cut back his new deal programs. Roosevelt was almost murdered his first day in office by the fascist and he escaped the bullet.

At his inauguration speech Roosevelt quoted " the money changers have left our temple and we shall reclaim our temple"

JP Morgan and Prescott Bush put into power Moussilini (sp) Hitler and they tried to institute fascism in the United States. FDR also put checks on the Federal Reserve and also fought off an attempted Military Coup against him.

The descendants of these same fascist have surrounded Obama in the form of Summers and Thaler.

The British also didn't sign the 1944 Bretton Woods agreement. Keynes himself was a fascist. The New Deal started in 1933 Keynes didn't come around until 1936. People don't know their history.

Jester
04-17-2009, 07:21 PM
Roosevelt had a fascist supreme court and budget advisor that forced him to cut back his new deal programs.
.......

Keynes himself was a fascist. The New Deal started in 1933 Keynes didn't come around until 1936. People don't know their history.

So Keynes, a fascist wanted huge govt. programs. But America's fascists wanted to stop huge govt. programs? I'm not sure how the term fascist could apply in exactly opposite comparisons.

I love ya, supra. I think you have a lot to add t the discussion, but we can definitely draw some different conclusions. Glad we can be on the same side according to others (you are either with Obama, or against Obama) because it shows we are not in a group think mode.

supra5677
04-17-2009, 08:30 PM
Fascism definition from wikipedia

Quote: Fascism is a radical, authoritarian, and nationalist ideology.[1][2][3][4] Fascists advocate the creation of a single-party state.[5] Fascists believe that nations and races are in perpetual conflict whereby only the strong can survive by being healthy, vital, and by asserting themselves in combat against the weak.[6] Fascist governments forbid and suppress criticism and opposition to the government and the fascist movement.[7] Fascism opposes class conflict and blames capitalist liberal democracies for creating class conflict and in turn blames communists for exploiting class conflict.[8] Fascists reject the individualism and self-interest of laissez-faire capitalism.[9] Many fascist leaders have claimed to support a "Third Way" in economic policy, which they believed superior to both the rampant individualism of unrestrained capitalism and the severe control of state communism.[10][11] This was to be acheived by a form of government control over business and labor (called "the corporate state" by Mussolini).[12] Some call this corporatism[13] while some others to not use the term corporatism to describe the fascist economic arrangement.[14]
Following the defeat of the Axis powers in World War II and the publicity surrounding the atrocities committed during the period of fascist governments, the term fascist has been used as a pejorative word.[15]

Supra Commentary...
We technically have a single party state controlled by fascist banking interest. We have bailed out non productive banking institutions and at the same time bankrupted productive institutions like the auto industry. We have bankrupt states but we bail out bankrupt bankers with false derivative junk bonds values. The government is taking over by protecting finance and forcing productive industries and governments go through austerity measures. If government does nothing for the benefits of the banks (Hoover bailed out the banks in 1932 and it failed) its fascism. If government imposes high taxes for the benefit of bank bailouts like now its also fascism. These new behaviorist crazy economists making policy around Obama are all FASCIST. This is why Obama is getting hit on the right with the Secession movement and on the Left with "government shall provide for the general welfare on the left". Obama if he stays on this track is finished.

Jester
04-17-2009, 08:37 PM
I will use Webster's dictionary over wikipedia for simple definitions.


1: often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control


The political spectrum goes from:
Left to Right - Dictator to Anarchy

So why would a fascist Supreme Court be against "economic and social regimentation" such as a New Deal or now, stimulus package. It just doesn't fit the true definition.

No need to name call. You've already gone down that path. I understand we have fundamental agreements (G20) and fundamental disagreements. That's fine with me. I'm just glad we both aren't involved in a group think.

supra5677
04-17-2009, 10:43 PM
Quote: Fascism is a radical, authoritarian, and nationalist ideology.[1][2][3][4] Fascists advocate the creation of a single-party state.[5] Fascists believe that nations and races are in perpetual conflict whereby only the strong can survive by being healthy, vital, and by asserting themselves in combat against the weak


Fascists advocate the creation of a single party state.... In the 1930's and throughout time especially in America the banking financial interest put up candidates IN THE DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN PARTY who were financed via fascist groups. The Morgan's and Rockefeller's put up candidates against FDR hoping the "banking class" would stay in power preventing the birth of a middle class. The middle class didn't exist yet, it was created by Roosevelt vis the New Deal. Women via war bonds financed the homes that the soldiers moved into upon their return from home. The supreme court was the "protector" of the banking class and essentially 1 party rule. (The most important element of fascism)

Fascism is a political/financial tool to oppress the population (called the weak) weak being economically weak. That is the point of fascism.

Justice Black appointed by Roosevelt had a revolutionary judicial philosophy that was at odds with the Fascist Justice Frankfurter. Frankfurter believed that "settled law was settled law" in other words all the pro TRUST legislation that screwed the public out of wages was ok in his opinion. Justice Black who supported all Roosevelt's Programs as a Senator said "I can intervene on behalf of the poor and helpless". The latter philosophy is anti fascist! Don't confuse fascism with anything else than an economic tool used to oppress 99% of the populous.

Suzan
04-18-2009, 01:15 AM
After the FDR spending programs successfully lowered double digit unemployment, FDR's advisers convinced him that it was now time to try to balance the budget. So he cut spending, raised taxes and the economy went in the tank again. Then the US went into WWII which required massive government spending and that ultimately got us out of the depression.


But this is a combo of CUTTING spending and raising taxes. Obama has increased spending and is raising taxes. I know he's says he's cutting them, but taxes are going up for everyone who pays them, especially in the long term. I wonder what happened to taxes during the massive government spending for WWII?

Jester
04-18-2009, 04:33 AM
But this is a combo of CUTTING spending and raising taxes. Obama has increased spending and is raising taxes. I know he's says he's cutting them, but taxes are going up for everyone who pays them, especially in the long term. I wonder what happened to taxes during the massive government spending for WWII?

The best thing WWII did was give all Americans a common cause that most agreed with, after Pearl Harbor, not before.

ZY123
04-18-2009, 04:34 AM
but taxes are going up for everyone who pays them

keyword: pays

Jester
04-18-2009, 04:47 AM
keyword: pays

I think it would be productive if you shared what you witnessed as the flaws in the tax code, other than the fact that it is impossible for a single person to stay up with the mass of code and constant changes.