Sunday, March 29, 2009
ROBERT B. REICH
ROBERT B. REICH
Twenty-eight years ago, Ronald Reagan used the severe economic downturn of 1980-82 to implement an economic philosophy that not only gave force and meaning to a wide range of initiatives but also offered a way back to sustained economic growth. Is there a similarly powerful animating idea behind Obamanomics?
Chad Crowe
I believe there is -- and it's not a return to big government.
The expansive and expensive forays of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board into Wall Street notwithstanding, President Barack Obama's 10-year budget (whose projections may prove wildly optimistic if the economy fails to rebound by early next year) presents a remarkably conservative picture. In 10 years, taxes are expected to fall to around 19% of GDP, a lower level than the late 1990s. Spending is expected to drop to around 22.5% of GDP, about where it was under Ronald Reagan -- including nondefense discretionary spending at about 3.6% of GDP, its lowest since data on this were first collected in 1962.
The real distinction between Obamanomics and Reaganomics involves government's role in achieving growth and broad-based prosperity. The animating idea of Reaganomics was that the economy grows best from the top down. Lower taxes on the wealthy prompts them to work harder and invest more. When they do so, everyone benefits. Neither Reagan nor the apostles of supply-side economics explicitly promised that such benefits would "trickle down" to everyone else but this was broadly understood to be the justification.
Reaganomics surely marked the beginning of one of the longest bull markets in American history and generated enormous gains at the top. But its benefits were not widely shared. After the Reagan tax cuts, growth in the median wage slowed, adjusted for inflation. After George W. Bush's tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, the median wage dropped. Meanwhile, an increasing share of total income went to the top 1% of income earners. In 1980, before Reagan took office, the highest-paid 1% took home 9% of total national income. By 2007, before the economy melted down, the richest 1% was taking home 22%.
Obamanomics, by contrast, holds that an economy grows best from the bottom up. The president proposes to increase taxes on the highest 2% of income earners starting in 2011. Those tax increases will fund more Pell grants allowing lower-income children to attend college, better pay for teachers that show they're worth it, broader access to health care, improved infrastructure, and more basic research. These and related expenditures are designed to help Americans become more productive. You might think of it as "trickle up" economics.
The key is public investment. Reaganomics did not view any public spending as an investment in the future except when it came to spending on the military. Hence, since 1980, federal spending on education, job training, infrastructure and basic research and development (apart from defense-related R&D) have all shrunk as a proportion of GDP. And apart from a modest expansion of health insurance available to poor children, there has been no significant attempt to make health insurance broadly affordable to Americans.
Obamanomics is premised on the central importance of public investments in the productivity of Americans. The logic is straightforward. Capital no longer remains within the borders of a nation where it is saved. It moves to wherever around the globe it can get the best return. Some of it flows as highly liquid investments that slosh across borders at the slightest provocation, as we're witnessing in the current financial crisis. But much takes the form of direct investments in new plants and equipment, telecommunications systems, laboratories, offices and -- most important of all -- jobs. Such capital goes to nations that can deliver high returns either because labor is cheap and taxes and regulations low or because labor is highly productive: well educated, healthy and supported by modern infrastructure.
In this way, every nation faces an implicit choice of whether its strategic advantage will lie in low costs or high productivity. For the better part of the last three decades America's job strategy has tended toward the former. But this inevitably exerts downward pressure on the real wages of a larger and larger portion of our population.
Only those Americans whose parents can afford to give them a high-quality private education and health care, and who can situate themselves in locations with excellent infrastructures of telecommunication, transportation, public health and safety, have been able to link up with global capital on more positive terms. But not even they are entirely secure economically, because they face growing shortages of talented people they can rely on within easy reach, and can't entirely avoid the disadvantages of a deteriorating public infrastructure, such as ever more congested roads and airports.
Obamanomics recognizes that the only resource uniquely rooted in a national economy is its people -- their skills, insights, capacities to collaborate, and the transportation and communication systems that link them together. Public investment is the key to attracting long-term private investment so that a nation's people can prosper.
Bill Clinton understood this but failed to do much about America's deteriorating public investments because he came to office during an economic expansion, when the major worry was excessive government spending leading to inflation. Mr. Obama comes to office during the biggest downturn since the Great Depression, and his plan represents the largest commitment to public investment in 30 years.
Regulation, done correctly, is also a form of public investment because it enables consumers and investors to be confident about what they're receiving, and ensures that the side-effects of trades don't harm the public. Reaganomics assumed that deregulated markets always function better. They do in many respects. But when they don't, all hell can break loose, retarding economic growth.
Energy markets were deregulated and we wound up with Enron. Food and drug safety has been neglected, resulting in contaminated products that have endangered consumers and threatened whole industries. Financial markets were deregulated and we now have a global meltdown. Obamanomics, by contrast, views appropriate regulation as an essential precondition for sustainable growth.
Under Reaganomics, government was the problem. It can still be a problem. But a central tenet of Obamanomics is that there are even bigger problems out there which cannot be solved without government. By building the economy from the bottom up, enhancing public investment, and instituting reasonable regulation, Obamanomics marks a reversal of the economic philosophy that has dominated America since 1981.
Mr. Reich is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and a former U.S. Secretary of Labor under President Bill Clinton.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
►
2018
(2)
- ► 03/25 - 04/01 (2)
-
►
2013
(5)
- ► 08/04 - 08/11 (2)
- ► 06/30 - 07/07 (1)
- ► 06/23 - 06/30 (2)
-
►
2012
(2)
- ► 08/05 - 08/12 (1)
- ► 06/03 - 06/10 (1)
-
►
2011
(3)
- ► 11/20 - 11/27 (1)
- ► 08/07 - 08/14 (1)
- ► 07/24 - 07/31 (1)
-
►
2010
(3)
- ► 11/21 - 11/28 (1)
- ► 11/07 - 11/14 (2)
-
▼
2009
(916)
- ► 06/14 - 06/21 (2)
- ► 06/07 - 06/14 (11)
- ► 05/17 - 05/24 (2)
- ► 05/03 - 05/10 (50)
- ► 04/26 - 05/03 (4)
- ► 04/19 - 04/26 (90)
- ► 04/12 - 04/19 (32)
- ► 04/05 - 04/12 (15)
-
▼
03/29 - 04/05
(160)
- Girl With a Pearl Earring
- COMIC STRIPS
- TEE SHIRT
- SLATE ... IN OTHER MAGAZINES
- ODD ART
- Charles Addams cartoons
- LETTING GM FAIL
- Learning to Live With Radical Islam Fareed Zakaria
- MONSTER with Charlize Theron
- Climate Change
- POE ILLUSTRATIONS
- America has become more socialist than we'd like t...
- After Capitalism The Nation rethinks socialism fo...
- Why Rush is Wrong
- Inconvenient Truths By Christopher Hitchens
- No More Hummer Nation?
- A Sellout of Our Unemployed by Pat Buchanan
- JFK SCRIPT
- The Israeli Urge to Suicide
- VENICE ITALY
- IMAGES III
- ESCHER
- CATS
- SAND CASTLES
- DUBAI
- pictures
- RUGGED INDIVIDUALISM
- YOGI BERRA QUOTATIONS
- MORE IMAGES
- The Complete Bushisms
- TAXI DRIVER
- 15 of the top 20 “bonus babies” at AIG have agreed...
- Apocalypse Now
- Economics and the Roots of Terrorism.
- COCA COLA BUILDING
- POLITICAL CORRECTNESS 101
- OBAMA JOKES ABOUT A.I.G.
- CALL IT FRIENDO
- MEANWHILE BACK ON THE GROUND
- training day
- Angel Heart (1987)
- QUOTATIONS
- best quotations
- IT DOESN'T TAKE A VILLAGE TO RAISE A CHILD
- TOO MUCH TV?
- cartoons
- NEWSWEEK WE ARE ALL SOCIALISTS
- CHINATOWN
- Billy Jack (1971)
- JFK OIVER STONE 1991
- BUCKMINSTER FULLER
- PULP FICTION 1994
- andy warhol
- King Tut
- IS STEVEN SPIELBURG STUPID?
- MOVIE QUOTES
- ONE AMERICAN IN FIVE IS RICH. questionable stati...
- A Clockwork Orange
- AMERICAN ROADSIDE ATTRACTIONS
- FAKED VIDEO OF NINE ELEVEN
- L.A. Confidential
- Lawrence of Arabia
- TELEPROMPTER MADNESS
- DAVID MAMET'S SPARTAN
- JONAH AND THE WHALE Herman Melville
- TAXI DRIVER
- RUSSIAN CHURCHES
- Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
- WEIRD BUILDINGS
- The Godfather
- Matisse, Picasso and Miro
- Spread the Wealth
- The myth of bad american schools
- Hieronymus Bosch 1453 -1516
- ODD ARCHITECTURE
- MORE STRANGE ARCHITECTURE
- VIENNA
- CARS of the fifties
- yellow mountains of china
- NEON
- MORE ODD ART
- HOUSEBOATS
- FIFTIES
- James Lileks
- FDA Approves Salmonella
- Everything Taking Too Long
- GAUDI
- LAID OFF EMPLOYEE TO START OWN CAR COMPANY
- PATTON
- AMERICANS READING MORE
- SILENCE OF THE LAMBS
- NAIVE ART
- MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR
- GODFATHER SCRIPT
- HOUSE ON THE ROCK
- GREAT BUILDINGS
- KRUGMAN SAYS OBAMA IS WRONG
- GANGS OF NEW YORK
- ROADSIDE ART
- ALCOHOL IS GOOD FOR YOU
- ► 03/22 - 03/29 (107)
- ► 03/15 - 03/22 (124)
- ► 03/08 - 03/15 (37)
- ► 03/01 - 03/08 (19)
- ► 02/22 - 03/01 (7)
- ► 02/15 - 02/22 (256)
No comments:
Post a Comment