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

Robert Reich

Posted: June 9, 2010 01:50 PM

Why Economic Advisors Are Paid to Be Economic Advisors

What's Your Reaction:

Say you're a high government official with some responsibility for advising the president on what he should be doing and saying about the economy. You know the economy is still in a deep hole, the deepest since the Great Depression. The jobs report for May was dismal -- a mere 41,000 new private sector jobs, when the economy needs at least 100,000 to keep up with population growth. The Fed projects gross domestic product, the broadest measure of economic activity, to rise about 3.5 percent this year -- a pace barely above that needed to keep pace with the growth in the labor force.

You also know that consumers don't have the buying power to get it out of the hole because they can no longer use their homes as collateral for loans, as they could before the crash of 2008, and they also have to get out from under huge debts. The housing market is still awful. You know businesses are reluctant to create new jobs if there are few customers for their goods or services. And you know export markets are drying up because of a high dollar that's made our exports more expensive, and Europe has embarked on austerity measures to shrink its deficits. You also know state revenues are way down because of the deep economic hole, and they're forced to raise taxes, cut services, and lay off large numbers of state workers, including teachers.

Oh, and one more thing: You know that all the boosters keeping the economy barely going now are coming to an end. The Fed can't keep interest rates near zero for long because it's starting to worry about inflation. It's already stopped buying Treasury securities and mortgage bonds, and its own deficit hawks are squawking. The federal stimulus is 75 percent spent, and the money will be gone in a few months. Census workers will also be gone by the end of the summer.

So what do you do?

A) Tell the president the economy will either go into a "double-dip" recession or, at best, suffer anemic growth over the next five years -- creating enormous pain and suffering for millions of Americans, and imperiling his reelection -- unless he immediately champions a $300 billion jobs bill, including zero-interest loans to states and locales to prevent them from having to raise taxes and cut services, public-service jobs (cleaning up the Gulf), and a one-year payroll tax holiday on the first $100,000 of income. To sell this, he'll need to explain to the American people why larger short-term deficits are necessary now, in order to get jobs back and the economy growing again so that long-term structural deficits (read: health care and Medicare, mostly) can be tackled.

B) Tell the president you understand the political pressures for deficit reduction are growing, and Republicans are making headway fooling the public into believing that this terrible recovery is due to to excessive government deficits. So so it's perfectly fine for the president to bend to those political pressures. Cut the budgets of most federal agencies by 5 percent, enforce "pay-go" rules that don't allow bigger deficits, build up expectations for the report of his "deficit commission" on December, and tell the American public that we now have to move toward fiscal austerity.

If you choose B, you shouldn't be advising the President.

This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org.

 
 
 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 103
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
01:53 PM on 06/10/2010
Well, they're ALL choosing "B", so we're screwed in the extreme.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
journeyman steve
04:12 PM on 06/10/2010
Funny, but the list wasn't a choice, it was a duality of execution strategies. You're right, the politically expedient thing is "B" and the tough love is "A". Mr. Obama should figure out now that he doesn't want a second term unless he can do it on his own terms, without the political baggage and quid-pro-quo obligations he's carrying around in this first term. Toss the contributions from Goldman Sachs and others to the curb. He can do this campaigning from his oval office through actions and leadership, not some conspicuous spending of TV and print ads. I'd love to have a president who raised the least amount of campaign donations. Tougher, yes, but morally stronger.
10:40 AM on 06/10/2010
Repeal the Healthcare Entitlement. That alone would save Taxpayers a solid TWO TRILLION dollars.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tekkdude
Battling Republican lies one post at a time.
12:47 PM on 06/10/2010
Over the course of 20 years.
02:07 PM on 06/10/2010
Hahahahahaha...
10:19 AM on 06/10/2010
Economy--from the Greek meaning "the running of the household"

Ecology--from the Greek meaning "the study of the household"

Running our planet without first studying it and learning how it works is like piloting a helicopter without knowing how to fly it, by pushing buttons at random. Economists are piloting our crashing spaceship earth.

Ecologists have discovered that stable ecosystems have things in common: a stable population of diverse species with enough natural resources for all and low entropy, meaning that little or no garbage and pollution is produced because everything gets recycled.

Economists give little consideration to the way our planet works. They are like gamblers guessing what to bet on next that will "grow the economy", betting that economic growth is the answer to all our problems. They join the theocrats in pushing unsustainable population growth, in economist's case, to provide ever cheaper labor.

In their quest for endless growth, economists do not consider the species they drive to extinction. They are apologists for a cancerous plutocracy that pollutes our planet and kills our biosphere with their pollution and garbage and that employs economists to push for more growth to avoid having to share.

Despite the impressive jargon they produce, economists have a worse record of predictions than bookies do. (from a Science News study). Voodoo economics still runs the world.
photo
WASanford
I think, therefore I am mad as hell!
09:48 AM on 06/10/2010
I don't understand how any rational person could worry about inflation given the current economic paradigm. It is so obvious that our economy is suffering from a paucity of cash flow, and that it hasn't been fixed, that inflation should not show up on anyone's radar, let alone that of a paid economic adviser. Misconceived efforts to fight inflation will prove to be dangerous and threaten to push us deeper into the hole that we're trying to climb out of. It is a continuation of the foolish economic ideology that put us into this mess in the first place, i.e. supply side economics.

However if we must address the federal debt, we'll always have the option of taxing the rich (in honor of bank robber Willie Sutton) because that's where the money is and it is about the only place where you'll find any of it. People who live in glass houses should restrain themselves from throwing stones.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
journeyman steve
04:12 PM on 06/10/2010
I don't think most of the stone-throwers know that the house they live in is a glass one. Many of the opponents of the spending would be impacted by the lack of it, so there's a disconnection from reality on most people's part. However, there is a pretty open-faced conspiracy to confuse the public through mis-information, mis-direction, and personal attacks. Sadly, the average voter doesn't know when they're having a politically trained magician play the game of slight-of-hand. So the search for "rational" people is a pretty hard thing. Most people struggle with it in the best of times, so what can we folks who keep rational expect in these times that aren't anywhere near the best? Especially given the past 30 years of de-emphasizing social and soft sciences in public education in America? So few people take the time to study history, especially in this era when the practical side of historical studies is to reflect upon our current (depressing) quandries. People don't want to think about our problems twice, once in the context of "now" and another context of "then". While it used to be an escape to go to a movie, park or other quiet place, most people have to work too much now (dual breadwinner, mom and dad both work society), so we are all slowly going psychotic from stress without proper treatment or outlets.
photo
YouTubeJEFF9K
Big on the Big Picture.
08:35 AM on 06/10/2010
Why can't we get all of the world's economists together and poll them? If there are two courses of action it would be helpful to know that, say, eighty percent of experts choose plan “A”, ten percent choose plan “B”, and the rest choose “other”. Maybe we could have a worldwide “Experts Day” on which the results of polling of experts on issues like the economy, the environment, etc. could be announced. As things stand, there is so much “false equivalence” in reporting on important issues that people think all sides of an issue are equally weighted. Some experts, of course, are right more often than their peers. These people should be identified, and their opinions given special note.
08:25 AM on 06/10/2010
So... are we basically continuing two wars so we don't have the political fiasco of bringing back 100,000 (or whatever the current figure is) soldiers into unemployment? Keeping up government spending on even a useless sinkhole because it's good for the short-term economy?
photo
gentlewomanfarmer
Make hay while the sun shines.
07:12 AM on 06/10/2010
If the destruction of the Gulf isn't itself sufficient motivation, then our government must create the motivation for a new green/blue economy. All it has at its disposal is the power to tax. So give 50% - 100% tax deductions and/or credits (no caps) for:

- green/blue investments with a going-forward preferential rate for capital gains realized from those investments.

- green/blue R&D, above and beyond what is currently available.

- purchases of green/blue goods and services.

Funded by?

- Tax fossil fuel suppliers back to the Stone Age, domestic and imported. Big oil/gas will adapt or die - just like the human, plant, and animal life of the Gulf must do now.

- Big consumption taxes on gasoline, kerosene, home heating oil, diesel fuel, natural gas, and propane (and any other derivative I've neglected to mention) - to push energy demands in the right direction.

But those are the mechanics. We still need the "man on the moon" speech. Delivered by Obama, who is still the best orator going. Others are better writers, but I see the mission as, essentially, despite everything, to imagine our life on a green (and blue) planet, free from the environmental and economic devastation and the stranglehold of foreign entanglements that our energy demands have wrought. Imagine what we will have learned on the journey, about our land, sea, and air, about ourselves.

Mars, Schmars. Merge NASA into NOAA. We are not fit to explore other worlds while we are befouling our own.
07:20 AM on 06/10/2010
May I suggest. We need to expand our idea of infrastructure. Secretary Chu's “Weatherization Program” or NYTimews article http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/business/economy/18leonhardt.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=caulkers&st=cse is an excellent example of how government can create a market. Another way would be if the government raised the tax on foreign oil. Using a U-shaped model with the most tax breaks in the early years and the most taxes in the later years over a ten-year time frame. This at least has the potential to be deficit neutral and also add-in the 475 billion dollars a year spent in this country instead of abroad with the multiplier effect. Finally another way is to fix the infrastructure but not in the way that comes to mind. The movement of government documents from unstructured to structured and the creation of EHR for all medical records are highly labor intensive jobs that require XML but can be learned quickly by ex-factory workers, the creation of these would provide on the job training, could be done on second or third shift using the computers at our schools and since XML is the next large productivity tool for small and mediums businesses over the next decade the experience is needed by private industry.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Parvaneh Ferhad
05:46 AM on 06/10/2010
If you present the choices like that, the right choice obviously is A.
However, there may be - and I think there are - some more options on the table. The problem with A is that it may turn out that a few month or a year from now, you will be back to the exact same choice of pumping even more money in or letting it fold.
Maybe it's time to fundamentally re-think our socio-economic system and replace it with something decent. I'd say, yes, it's high time to do that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeffie Jeff
02:44 AM on 06/10/2010
When people don't have jobs they create jobs.

Unless government policy has so strangled the economy that they either don't have savings or the money they make from unemployment provides them with greater stability than striking out on their own.

Small businesses were started by people who took a chance.

Right now, everything is so screwed up and unstable who wants to take a chance?
photo
WASanford
I think, therefore I am mad as hell!
10:00 AM on 06/10/2010
That sounds like pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps. It sounds good and would be a proud achievement, but it seldom works in real life. The banks that would be lending money to start up small business are still having to deal with nonperforming mortgages, and are thus constrained in their ability to lend to small business. Our economy has been effectively monkey-wrenched. It's going to be a good while before we manage to fix it. Thank you, Wall Street!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeffie Jeff
12:17 AM on 06/12/2010
Why are going right back to borrowing?

One business owner I know started his business with 10,000 saved from years of corporate work. 8 stores bringing in NIBITDA 200K/month. Oh, crap, you didn't save money? Maybe start saving now?
11:59 PM on 06/09/2010
The Fed will just "Print more money"!

Helicopter Ben will come to the rescue! LOL
photo
WASanford
I think, therefore I am mad as hell!
10:08 AM on 06/10/2010
A dollar can be had for the cost of the paper and ink, assuming you have the authority to print it. It doesn't cost any more to print a $20 bill than it costs to print a $1 bill. That goes for denominations all the way up the scale.

Article 1, Section 8, of our Constitution gives Congress the authority to create money. To that end, the Federal Reserve Banks should be nationalized and used to establish a rational monetary policy.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Turukano
In 20 years, everyone will say they voted Obama
04:34 AM on 06/11/2010
Great idea San ..... if you want us to fall into the worst Depression of all time
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jjsardo
Proud liberal in a red state.
08:38 PM on 06/09/2010
Well, I think you've got Bernanke coming around. Now if you can get Summers and Geithner we might put together a program.

Of course, we do need the president on our side. He seems to be standing aloof on so many issues.

What happened to fire in his belly? He campaigned like tiger. Now he seems more like an observer than a doer.

At least you aren't giving up.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
journeyman steve
04:14 PM on 06/10/2010
Yes, I've seen that. It seems to be his ties to the people and companies that funded his 2008 Presidential Election campaign. He sold a part of his soul and is now adrift. I hope he finds himself quickly. Otherwise we'll end up with an uninformed populist extremist, and truly horrible things will happen, not just 5 years of anemic growth, but actually 8-10 years of a hardship never seen in this world.
04:47 PM on 06/10/2010
He's not adrift. He knows exactly what he's doing: just what his masters tell him to.
08:29 PM on 06/09/2010
I plan of voting socialist in 2012.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WSUShocker
11:06 PM on 06/09/2010
Me too! It's really the only way!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Valkyrie Ice
Writer for H+ Magazine, and commenter at random
08:00 PM on 06/09/2010
To Mr Reich, and indeed all readers of this thread, and anyone at all interested in economics, I recommend reading this book:

http://www.thelightsinthetunnel.com/LIGHTSTUNNEL.PDF

Regardless of your political beliefs, or economic beliefs, I strongly recommend reading this book as a necessary companion to any discussion of economics.

Automation is one of the strongest factors facing us in the next decade in regards to our ability to restore our economy. Globalization, even outsourcing affect our economy to a much lesser degree than automation does, and understanding how it can impact the economy is essential to any discussion about recovery from the recession.

Simply put, if you do not account for automation, it doesn't matter what theory you believe in, it is based in erroneous information. This book provides a clear, concise and easy to understand discussion of automation, and the very real dangers it presents to any recovery that does not take it into account.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PrometheanSalvation
Bringing fire to cleanse the land.
08:17 PM on 06/09/2010
I haven't read the book, but I have been saying much the same about technology's influence in the work place for quite a while now. Thank you for the link.
12:05 AM on 06/10/2010
I certainly think that has been and will be a factor. I remember in the 1950s all my aunts and uncles were saying "These machines are going to replace us someday" They were right since manufacturing hit a high of 19 million jobs in the US in 1979 and has been dwindling ever since. What I have been wondering of late is the level of job loss that may occur as computers start to replace computer positions, which have been decentralized to a large extent so far. To what extent is the computing of 20 years from now going to influence the work force which has been engaged in computing. I dont know but it seems that just like machines of 50 years ago replaced manufacturing jobs so too could new kinds of computing replace computing jobs of today
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Valkyrie Ice
Writer for H+ Magazine, and commenter at random
11:17 AM on 06/10/2010
If you are interested in exactly how quickly computers are likely to evolve in the next decade, I recommend reading this article I originally had published in H+ Magazine and have mirrored in my blog: http://valkyrieice.blogspot.com/2010/05/graphene-is-next.html

Graphene based computers could be up to 1000 times faster than current silicon. And if they develop plasmonic computers which use quantum electron waves instead of particles, they could be a 1000 times faster than that.

Any job which can be broken down to a set of rules is susceptible to automation. This includes Doctors, Lawyers, Investment Bankers, Cashiers, Salespeople, and eventually almost every job currently done by a human.

This is not a far off possibility. The current crisis was caused in large part because high speed computer automation of stock trades allowed the derivatives market to build far beyond what would have been possible with merely human operators, with that much more damage done when it collapsed.

We SERIOUSLY need to understand that JOB are disappearing far faster than they are being made. Even China and India are being threatened as Voice Recognition systems are growing more sophisticated and such technologies as electronics printing develop.

We are one global market. and Automation affects the world. We must recognize this, and adapt to it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Legs2
07:42 PM on 06/09/2010
The President's recent 6 month moratorium on drilling could be the catalyst for the "double dip". I spent 12 years raising millions for conservation in connection with The Nature Conservancy so I know the effects of the Gulf oil spill to the environment. But, I am also a realist. When we all see the downturn in the economy and the loss of jobs created by this 6 month moratorium, we are going to be amazed. I say, "We ain't seen nothing, yet."What will happen in the ensuing months is deepwater rigs will move from the Gulf for Brazil and China. These countries are begging for companies to explore their oil reserves. I have already read that one company has plans to pull 3 rigs out of the Gulf. I looked up one company. They have 13 rigs affected by the moratorium. They stand to lose $1, 166 billion if this moratorium stands for 180 days. The average contract on a rig for deep water is 5 years. Once these rig companies leave the Gulf they won't even think about returning until at least 2016 if ever. There won't be any replacement rigs because it takes several years for these large rigs. Again, jobs will be shipped out of America.
photo
HMDMSR
Workers of the world, unite!
07:54 PM on 06/09/2010
Do you have an estimate on how many jobs might be lost?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PrometheanSalvation
Bringing fire to cleanse the land.
08:21 PM on 06/09/2010
Yeah, let's stick with that whole short term fixes at the expense of long term solutions.
photo
JayDDrew
Facts are neither conservative or liberal.
09:41 PM on 06/09/2010
Agreed. Here's the time for American entrepreneurs to step forward and start building those windmills and solar panels. Start retraining those oil field and rig workers. There's your next stimulus package right there.
While you're at it, remeber how the majoirty of oil take out of American ground and American water is sold used overseas, so it's not bringing down the price of fuel in America? How about a tax on oil going into and out of country and tax breaks to big oil for keeping our oil here? We've given them tax breaks for everything else, why not something that helps us rather than helping ol men?
By the way, 77% of France's energy comes from nuclear. While it does have it's own set of problems, it still would cut down a bit on our use of foreign oil. And don't we have the best and brightest? Can't we come up with a lot more alternatives?
07:17 PM on 06/09/2010
Yeah, but Reich--all you have is us dishing out more debt to get us stumblingly through the next 24 months or whatever. After that, we end up here again--right here. We just did what you said and it got us--right here--looking at more debt. This isn't an answer to the problem. It's putting off the answer to the problem. And when we get to the answer, we'll have a lot more debt to deal with, too, so the problem will be worse.

Even though you're the smartest guy out there who anyone listens to, and you are, you still think some sort of magic economic engine is going to start up out of thin air and blaze the American economy boldly into the next decade. Let's just keep piling up debt until that magic engine kicks in, and then everything'll be all right.

Somebody sometime is going to have to start staring down the barrel of the actual reality--ain't so such engine coming along. We've reached a saturation point in terms of consumption. AMERICANS CANNOT CONSUME ANY MORE. So there isn't any consumption-driven engine gonna kick in!

We are going to rethink and reshape our economy from the ground up and the inside out, and the first thing we're going to have to do is stop measuring success in terms of overall GDP (which is just a measure of overall consumption). When someone starts speaking that language, it's time to start listening.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Turukano
In 20 years, everyone will say they voted Obama
07:22 PM on 06/09/2010
Agreed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PrometheanSalvation
Bringing fire to cleanse the land.
08:25 PM on 06/09/2010
I agree, we need to completely re-think the way the economy works. However, I do think that there are more economis super engines out there, they are just based on sustainability instead of consumption. Fanned.