Almost everyone who can get a quote in the newspaper or five minutes on TV has a solution to the global economic meltdown. These range from more financial regulation to stimulation of housing to government programs to create new jobs.
The head of the IMF put all of that into context with his opinion that spending by nations around the world to help get it out of a deeper and deeper recession has not been nearly enough. According to Reuters, "The IMF has called for fiscal stimulus -- higher government spending and temporary tax cuts -- worth $120 trillion, or 2 percent of global annual economic output, to fill the gap caused by slumping private demand following the credit crunch."
The view is, to a large extent, mirrored by the plan Obama has suggested. Spend money now even if it puts the government into a huge debt hole. But, does it make any sense?
One of the greatest causes of the failing economy is that the consumer does not have access to enough money. Most analysis stresses that this is a lack of access to credit, but that is only a piece of the story. Consumer spending is based on credit and the core earning strength of people who have jobs. If the salaries earned across the U.S. economy stay flat and prices move up, the system is almost bound to get into hot water because spending power keeps falling.
Running a federal budget deficit means borrowing from the taxpayer. That money may not have to be paid back next year, but within a few years high taxes will probably be the only way to cover the gap. Higher taxes mean less money in the consumer's pocket for spending. Low consumer spending could cause another recession.
In other words, solving the problem today just pushes the consequences a few years down the road.
Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
12-21-2008 @ 4:27PM
jd said...
Exactly right, Douglas. The simple and correct answer to the global economic crisis is a libertarian one: Let failing institutions fail, let the markets adjust values on stocks, securities and currencies, and let the people who got in over their heads sink into oblivion. A similar reckoning has had to occur every few generations with other economic crises. Why should this be any different? It gores my ox that we are giving special treatment to institutions and individuals who thought they could ride the wave of credit forever without paying up now and then.
12-21-2008 @ 5:05PM
sherry said...
This past year the exorbitant cost of fuel nearly destroyed our economy and seriously damaged our society. That one single factor alone affected every single facet of our economy and society. Filling up at the pump broke most family budgets alone. Added to that was the financial burden of sharp increases in every consumer product because the increased cost of fuel was passed on through the production and shipping of such products. Utility companies sought and were granted record price hikes further straining the family budget. WE cut back, cut out frills, for some that was not going out to eat any longer, cutting off the home phone and only using the cell. Shutting the cable off, or maybe going longer to replace things that really need replaced like the family car, tires, clothing etc. Sadly some have had to go so far as to cut out necessary medications just to keep a roof over their heads. Day after day sad stories are on the news about animal shelters bursting at the seams as families either lost their homes or can no longer feed their pets. Cutting back further reduces consumer spending which results in even more jobs lost. While we are so busy doing the happy dance at the pumps at the lower gas prices OPEC is planning to cut production until the reach their desired 75-100. per barrel price. My electric bill went up 16% during the height of this, now they are talking about reducing it 4% since fuel is back down. What happened to the other 12%? Groceries have not come back down and most are in smaller packaging so we are paying more for less. Freddie and Fannie have taken most all the blame for our society's economy. Of all the homes I have seen lost in FL and I have seen many and many more in the process none have been due to an adjustable mortgage like the media likes to portray, they have been due to lack of employment. Those who do still have a job have seen tremendous cutbacks in hours available which cuts their check, some in half. WE need to use some of these stimulus/bailout dollars to make America Energy Dependent. It would cost the equivalent of 60 cents a gallon to charge and drive an electric car. The electricity to charge the car could conceivably be generated by solar or wind. If all gasoline cars, trucks, and suv’s instead had plug-in electric drive trains, the amount of electricity needed to replace gasoline is about equal to the estimated wind energy potential of the state of North Dakota.What a win -win situation it would be for our nation to create clean, cheap electricity, create millions of badly needed new green collar jobs and at the same time we could reduce and eventually eliminate our dependence on foreign oil. I just read a fascinating and profound book by Jeff Wilson called The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence Now. The plan outlined in his book would save this country from financial ruin as well as get us out from under our dependence on foreign oil. I encourage all to read this book, especially our politicians.
12-21-2008 @ 6:35PM
Kw said...
It will take a while for the US to switch over to natural energy. Those in charge need time to figure out where They should put Their money so that They can profit from it the best way possible. We as those who are just making ends meet will just have to wait.
12-21-2008 @ 10:26PM
edneedstoknow said...
Sherry, I agree with the Obama funding of alternative energy, but they have to be careful. The push for ethanol to reduce pollution and cut foreign oil demand has been a disaster. Farmers are being paid a subsidy to grow crops for ethanol reducing the feed crops. The result has been a rise in the cost of all meat, milk, eggs, cereal,etc.
Unfortunately, those price increases hurt the lowest paid first.
Second, the cost of transportation is driven by the cost of diesel, which is priced significantly above gas, and shouldn't be.
Third, the funding of alternative energy for autos would decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and provide an opportunity to force companies federally funded to manufacture in the US. The same goes for companies building inexpensive solar alternatives for homes. We need a growing manufacturing base in the US.
12-22-2008 @ 12:25AM
BHarrison said...
The eventual solutions will be a mix of "higher taxes", and "inflation" to reduce the effective debt . . . and the poorer one is, the harder they will be impacted by these two factors. That is just the "way of the world", isn't it?
The wealthy will become wealthier; and the poor poorer; that's just an economic fact of life.
12-22-2008 @ 12:04PM
Karl said...
The trouble is the big globalist oil bankers run everything and it doesn't much matter what people think. They want to maintain their exclusive system at all costs and squelch any attempt to change anything. They are the FED, the big private banks who control markets, the money and energy supplies and foreign policy. Folks like David Rockefeller the Godfather behind the scenes for decades and his Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commision run the show here. We never were a "Democracy" anyway and the Queen still rules England. We're just the little schmucks they never listen to.