
White House Economic Adviser Lawrence Summers is taking issue with those who are convinced the U.S. economy in the intervention era will achieve decidedly lower rates of GDP growth -- the so-called 'new normal' economy. "I would be very reluctant to accept the idea that the American economy no longer has the potential to grow rapidly," Summers told Bloomberg News. "The American people have not become less capable of entrepreneurship. They have not become less dedicated to hard work, and the productive potential of this economy has not declined."
Summers added that there has been a "substantial return to more normal conditions" but also underscored that the administration and other policy makers have a great deal of work ahead before U.S. economic conditions can be considered satisfactory.
Economic Analysis: And how. The U.S. economy is short about 10-12 million jobs, more than 7.2 million of which have been lost during the current recession. Again, as noted, even though the causes of the recession were in place long before the Obama Administration started, President Obama and the Democratic Party, the majority party in Congress, are now responsible for fixing the economy. If job growth does not begin soon, the Democrats in November 2010 will lose more than the typical 12-16 House seats the party in power in the White House historically loses in an off-year Congressional election. The Democrats would also likely lose 2 or 3 Senate seats, if the job market and economy do not improve substantially over the next nine months.
On the new normal, Summers' points about the flexibility of the U.S. economy, and about the entrepreneurship and hard work of the American people are valid. The problem is, if the 'frugal consumer' trend continues, that does not bode well for robust U.S. GDP growth, short-term. That's because high-GDP growth implies high consumption: it's an unresolved issue concerning whether the U.S. economy can grow robustly with a sustained moderation/decline in consumer spending.
Further, as the U.S. economy becomes based more on production, quality of life, and infrastructure concerns, and less on consumer goods, it can achieve adequate growth, but that transition will take several years, if not a half-decade. And in the meantime, the contraction -- and in some cases elimination -- of sectors and related structural changes point to job churn and dislocation -- the stuff of modest growth -- the 'new normal' - not robust growth.
What would invalidate the 'new normal' analysis? The appearance of new sectors - new engines of growth - as catalysts for both job growth and the expansion of commercial activity. So far, they have not appeared.
- -
Financial Editor Joseph Lazzaro is writing a book on the U.S. presidency and the U.S. economy.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-10-2009 @ 8:34AM
Richard Ballard said...
I can not attribute US economic stagnation to the 'frugal consumer'. The recurring monthly US trade deficit drains capital from US job creation, while US workers' relatively high wage rates encourages overseas manufacturing. IMO government policies deliberately encouraging creation of high value US jobs is one solution. Richard Ballard http://www.myspace.com/rjballard