iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Robert Reich

GET UPDATES FROM Robert Reich
 

The Biggest Risk to the Economy in 2012, and What's the Economy for Anyway?

Posted: 01/30/2012 4:03 pm

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos a few days ago, said the "critical risks" facing the American economy this year were a worsening of Europe's chronic sovereign debt crisis and a rise in tensions with Iran that could stoke global oil prices.

What about jobs and wages here at home?

As the Commerce Department reported Friday, the U.S. economy grew 2.8 percent between October and December -- the fastest pace in 18 months and the first time growth exceeded 2 percent all year. Many bigger American companies have been reporting strong profits in recent months. GE and Lockheed Martin closed the year with record order backlogs.

Yet the percent of working-age Americans in jobs isn't much different than what it was three years ago. Yes, America now produces more than it did when the recession began. But it does so with 6 million fewer workers.

Average after-tax incomes adjusted for inflation are moving up a bit. (They increased at an annual rate of .8 percent in the last three months of 2011 after falling 1.9 percent in prior three-month period. For all of 2011, incomes fell .1 percent.)

But beware averages. Shaquille O'Neal and I have an average height of six feet. Exclude Mitt Romney's $20 million last year -- along with everyone else securely in the top 1 percent -- and the incomes of most Americans are continuing to slip.

Consumer spending picked up slightly in the fourth quarter mainly because consumers drew down their savings. Obviously, this can't last.

Meanwhile, government is spending less on schools, roads, bridges, parks, defense, and social services. Government spending at all levels dropped at an annual rate of 4.6 percent in the last quarter -- and that's likely to continue.

Some economists worry this drop is a drag on the economy. But it also means fewer public goods available to all Americans regardless of income.

Congress still hasn't decided whether to renew the temporary payroll tax cut and extend unemployment benefits past February. If it doesn't, expect another 1 percent slice off GDP growth this year.

Tim Geithner is surely correct that the European debt crisis and Iran pose risks to the American economy in 2012. But they aren't the biggest risk. The biggest risk is right here at home - that most Americans will continue to languish.

All of which raises a basic question: Who or what is the economy for? Surely not just for a few at the top, and not just big corporations and their CEOs. Nor can the success of the economy be measured by how fast the GDP is growing, or how high the Dow Jones Industrial Average is rising, or whether average incomes are turning upward.

The crisis of American capitalism marks the triumph of consumers and investors over workers and citizens. And since most of us occupy all four roles -- even though the lion's share of consuming and investing is done by the wealthy -- the real crisis centers on the increasing efficiency by which all of us as consumers and investors can get great deals, and our declining capacity to be heard as workers and citizens.

Modern technologies allow us to shop in real time, often worldwide, for the lowest prices, highest quality, and best returns. Through the Internet and advanced software we can now get relevant information instantaneously, compare deals, and move our money at the speed of electronic impulses. We can buy goods over the Internet that are delivered right to our homes. Never before in history have consumers and investors been so empowered.

Yet these great deals increasingly come at the expense of our own and our compatriots' jobs and wages, and widening inequality. The goods we want or the returns we seek can often be produced more efficiently elsewhere around the world by companies offering lower pay, fewer benefits, and inferior working conditions.

They also come at the expense of our Main Streets -- the hubs of our communities -- when we get the great deals through the Internet or at big-box retailers that scan the world for great deals on our behalf.

Some great deals have devastating environmental consequences. Technology allows us to efficiently buy low-priced items from poor nations with scant environmental standards, sometimes made in factories that spill toxic chemicals into water supplies or pollutants into the air. We shop for great deals in cars that spew carbon into the air and for airline tickets in jet planes that do even worse.

Other great deals offend common decency. We may get a great price or high return because a producer has cut costs by hiring children in South Asia or Africa who work twelve hours a day, seven days a week. Or by subjecting people to death-defying working conditions.

As workers or as citizens most of us would not intentionally choose these outcomes but as seekers after great deals we are indirectly responsible for them. Companies know that if they fail to offer us the best deals we will take our money elsewhere -- which we can do with ever-greater speed and efficiency.

The best means of balancing the demands of consumers and investors against those of workers and citizens has been through democratic institutions that shape and constrain markets.

Laws and rules offer some protection for jobs and wages, communities, and the environment. Although such rules are likely to be costly to us as consumers and investors because they stand in the way of the very best deals, they are intended to approximate what we as members of a society are willing to sacrifice for these other values.

But technologies for getting great deals are outpacing the capacities of democratic institutions to counterbalance them. For one thing, national rules intended to protect workers, communities, and the environment typically extend only to a nation's borders. Yet technologies for getting great deals enable buyers and investors to transcend borders with increasing ease, at the same time making it harder for nations to monitor or regulate such transactions.

For another, goals other than the best deals are less easily achieved within the confines of a single nation. The most obvious example is the environment, whose fragility is worldwide. In addition, corporations now routinely threaten to move jobs and businesses away from places that impose higher costs on them - and therefore, indirectly, on their consumers and investors -- to more "business friendly" jurisdictions. The Internet and software have made companies sufficiently nimble to render such threats credible.

But the biggest problem is that corporate money is undermining democratic institutions in the name of better deals for consumers and investors. Campaign contributions, fleets of well-paid corporate lobbyists, and corporate-financed PR campaigns about public issues are overwhelming the capacities of Congress, state legislatures, regulatory agencies, and the courts to reflect the values of workers and citizens.

As a result, consumers and investors are doing increasingly well but job insecurity is on the rise, inequality is widening, communities are becoming less stable, and climate change is worsening. None of this is sustainable over the long term.

Blame global finance and worldwide corporations all you want. But save some blame for the insatiable consumers and investors inhabiting almost every one of us, who are entirely complicit. And blame our inability as workers and citizens to reclaim our democracy.

Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future, now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org.

 
 
 

Follow Robert Reich on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RBReich

FOLLOW BUSINESS
 
 
  • Comments
  • 225
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
06:38 PM on 02/01/2012
"The US economy grew at 2.8% between October and ,..."

That's the average rate of growth during the past 300 years. If you divide 70 by 2.8 to determine the doubling time, it's about 30 years. Let's call it 25 years and say that the economy has doubled 12 times during the past 300 years since Adam Smith.

....2,4,8,16,32,64,128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, ...

The thing about exponential growth is that in every period you consume an amount equal to the sum of all the preceding periods...! So, where are we now? That's easy.

Markets don't fluctuate around supply and demand,...they're controlled by surplus, elastic surplus! Without surplus, you're looking at pricing chaos.

Now that I think of it,... it looks a lot like what's going on now.

Maybe we've come to the end of exponential growth.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aikani
09:28 PM on 01/31/2012
As long as there is no acknowlegment that the modernamerican economy is built on the continued growth of unsustainable suburbia and the industries (such as home furnishing,etc.)that supply them coupled with the coming global Hubbard peak we will only throw ourselves blindly off the cliff of the long emergency. We need to be creating policies that will encourage an orderly transition to the post oil economy. Or we can do nothing and fight what will be resource wars on both a global and local level.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carl Caroli
I just don't understand people
04:50 PM on 01/31/2012
Geithner has never been concerned about jobs and wages here. Neither was Summers. Neither is Bernanke. These guys are too busy worrying about wall street to worry about main street.
11:57 AM on 02/01/2012
yeah, one 1/2 an hour in their shoes may be stretched by your account.
04:47 PM on 01/31/2012
Our government "sold" US out. Before the 'Great Decline' American jobs meant health care, pensions, workplace safety, environmental protections, living wages, and unions fighting for the workers. Now, Americans buy an iphone made by a Chinese worker making $10.00 per day, no health care, no retirement, minimal workplace safety (they do get nets outside worker housing to discourage suicides), and almost zero environmental safeguards. ALL these costs have been pushed off onto others by the iphone manufacturer and by extension Apple. WHERE IS OUR GOVERNMENT - the ONLY institution that can end this nightmare?
04:35 PM on 01/31/2012
Good point. What is the point of all this organized cooperation anyway? Is it that when the tide comes in, all boats will rise, or just the yachts. Problem is, that when the tide goes out, all the lifeboats are not included in with the yachts.
photo
LeftCoastEng
Obsessed with failed trade
03:57 PM on 01/31/2012
Sooo, trade reform?
11:58 AM on 02/01/2012
food replacing ciggarettes, sobriety replacing comfy junkies....is that what you mean?
02:36 PM on 01/31/2012
The biggest risks to our economy continue to be an unfettered Wall Street, a Foreign Policy of Empire, the massive non-productive spending to maintain the Empire, “free trade” and the most corrupt Government in our history.
12:01 PM on 02/01/2012
I disagree. Putting a street name as the NOUN to replace the sad but cool Glory Days of getting what you or they wanted, when you or they wanted...alongside with whom and however many is the FREETRADE capitolism thats been limelighted and extinguished in some parts of this country.
Not sad enough though. Egos stretching dollars....main men and down women inherent to provide for themselves has become Obamacare.
02:30 PM on 01/31/2012
Posted this article one day too soon. The CBO just released the projections for 2012 and beyond and they don't look good. Forget the debt crisis in Europe (like we could), we have a doozy brewing right here. 1.2 trillion deficit projected for 2012. Reich will demand taxing the rich, always popular but never sufficient to cover our mammoth spending. Obama just made the obligatory request to let the debt ceiling climb to 16+ trillion. Look at the CBO report and look what they are projecting for 2025! And republicans would say these are underestimates....
02:29 PM on 01/31/2012
It's always so much easier to solve everyone else's problems than one's own. The day the politicians start focusing on "at home" and the congress actually start doing some work, we might get somewhere. But sadly, at the moment, I think that is too much to ask.
01:57 PM on 01/31/2012
Actually the US faces a far larger risk than Prof.Reich discusses here. The U.S.Federal tax policy was based on the assumption that the country has a very highly paid labor force and so a tax policy that placed the major burden on the wages of the working class would be the most productive means of raising revenue to support the government. And while that has been true since the 16th Amendment authorized Congress to tax incomes., it becomes less true each year as avegare worker incomes decline as a percentage ofthe economy, as measured against the per capita gross domestic product.
04:27 PM on 01/31/2012
Total government taxes as a percent of gdp in 2011 was higher than it was in 1980, 32.17% and 31.76% respectively. And 1980 was higher than any year going back to 1950 when it was 22.7%. I guess your answer is to keep increasing.
09:24 AM on 02/01/2012
Federal Tax revenues never exceeded 20% of GDP. As the Federal Government attempts to reduce spending and cut taxes the burden falls on the States who have to offset the cuts by increasing State and Local taxes.
photo
Gestas
Mountain Man
01:19 PM on 01/31/2012
Let me quote Confueius.."In a country that is well governed poverty is something to be ashamed of..In a country that is badly governed wealth is something to be ashmed of."
01:18 PM on 01/31/2012
Geithner, Summers, Paulson, Bernanke these guys know less about the real economy than the guy who changes the oil in your car. Obama's biggest mistake has been keeping them on.
12:57 PM on 01/31/2012
We constantly read that Obama made a mistake in hiring Geithner and others because they represent Wall St and the large corporate financial interests. Maybe he didn't make a mistake. Maybe this is what he believes and the rest is just rhetoric. Think about it.
01:26 PM on 01/31/2012
I think those wall street apointments were mostly to appease his detractors who said he was anti-business.
02:38 PM on 01/31/2012
They were repayment for millions in campaign funding. Too bad he stiffed all those small donors as a result.
photo
fugmo
Reality leaves a lot to the imagination.
01:41 PM on 01/31/2012
Those appointments were for the simple reason of maintaining consistency and avoiding any jolts to the markets. Obama's overall strategy, as I see it, was to let the economy stabalzie and gather strength. That was the whole reason, aside from the fact that he had major majorities and felt the time was right, that he went after health-care reform. One of the biggest drags on the economy was the spiraling health care costs.so by addressing that first, he hoped to kill two birds with one stone...control medical inflation and by doing so, calm the markets and economy.
12:55 PM on 01/31/2012
"Government spending at all levels dropped at an annual rate of 4.6 percent in the last quarter -- and that's likely to continue."

Well, yes, but Fed government spending is still at a rate of $3.5 Trillion, up from $2.5 Trillion in 2005 so 4.6% annual cuts would have to continue for a very long time to get it back to population plus inflation. I don't think we have to worry to much about politicians under spending.
photo
fugmo
Reality leaves a lot to the imagination.
01:43 PM on 01/31/2012
That $2.5 trillion in 2005 doesn't include the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which were carried off the books until Obama included them in 2009, hence the explosion in the official debt at that time.
RSGmusic
Instrumental music is great
05:08 PM on 01/31/2012
That is correct! Let assume taxes on corps is the same for the last 4 years or so, with increasing profits is there an increase in tax revenue from corporations in the same ratio?

The spending on special interest groups is a big porblem. Are the top levels of corporatations salaries to high? probably, and this also leads to less profit for the corporation as a whole.

Are coporation people!

individuals pay aprox 1.1 trillion
corporations aprox 380 billion
06:27 PM on 01/31/2012
"The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated the cost of "prosecuting" a war against Iraq at up to $9 billion per month, on top of an initial outlay of up to $13 billion for the deployment of troops to the Persian Gulf region." So a total of less than $1 trillion for the whole period ...not that I think it is money well spent...so even though we are out of Iraq...the spending is ferocious.
12:45 PM on 01/31/2012
Obama's biggest mistake has been in appointing Geithner as Treasury Secretary. He should have appointed Reich!
02:40 PM on 01/31/2012
I thing Larry Summers was worse but it's only the difference between horrible and awful.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
billw8017
History looks like this
04:18 PM on 01/31/2012
I admire Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz. Larry Summers is said to hate him, so he must be alright.