AOL Money & Finance

New Deal posts

Feed

Supply sider now believes fiscal stimulus leads to GDP growth

A victory of sorts, for Keynesian economics, and ultimately, for the American people.

Earlier this year author Amity Shlaes, who is a conservative and not a Keynesian, was a member of the chorus of market absolutists and conservative economists who opposed the U.S. government's fiscal stimulus package, on philosophical grounds: government spending doesn't stimulate the economy. (Shlaes should talk to automakers based in the U.S. about that one, particularly amid the 'cash for clunkers' fiscal stimulus plan.)


Continue reading Supply sider now believes fiscal stimulus leads to GDP growth

House Republicans take page out of Hoover's 1930s play book with spending freeze plan

Readers of this space know that the emphasis is placed on the economic, on commerce, and business trends, with a general avoidance of goings-on inside the beltway.

However, the financial crisis (which spawned federal bank bail-out legislation) and the nation's pronounced recession (which requires fiscal stimulus to end), has meant that things occurring in Washington once again have great relevance for investors.

And one current D.C. development must be evaluated: the House Republican leadership's decision to seek a federal spending freeze for the fiscal 2010 federal budget, The AP reported.

Continue reading House Republicans take page out of Hoover's 1930s play book with spending freeze plan

Money losers of 2008: The American homeowner, still sinking after the bubble burst

This post is part of our feature on Money Losers of 2008. See all 20.

For a second year in a row, American homeowners are among the biggest losers of 2008. In 2007, predictions were that American homeowners would lose over $103 billion. Now at the end of 2008 the number jumped to losses of $2 trillion as the value of homes continue to fall with no end in sight. As job losses increase, even more families will be forced into foreclosure.

Homeowners who bought at the top of the housing bubble between 2005 and 2006, could wait decades for the prices to reach that level again. People who must move for a new job or family crisis find they either have to come up with cash for closing (if they find a willing buyer) or they must walk away from the loan and give the house back to the bank either through foreclosure or through a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure.

The housing bubble that started to inflate in 2002 and burst in 2007 drove housing prices way out of the normal range. The normal ranges for housing prices track these measures:

  • Income: The house price should not exceed three times your average household income, which was true from 1950 to 2000. In 2006 the average household income was $66,600, so the average home price should have been about $200,000. But during that year the average home price was about $300,000.

Continue reading Money losers of 2008: The American homeowner, still sinking after the bubble burst

NYT's Krugman: Think economic momentum, not balanced budgets

New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman underscores that those who are thinking in terms of a balanced federal budget now are doing a serious disservice to the economy, and, by extension, to the nation.

It's important for the U.S. Government to return to a balanced budget when the economy returns to health, but it is critically important for Congress to approve a large fiscal stimulus to help the U.S. economy recover from the current recession, he said.

Sees danger of vicious cycle

That's because doing so will help end what Krugman argues is a vicious cycle of contraction that's beginning to play itself out in the economy. Rising unemployment will lead to further reductions in consumer spending, which will lead to further business cutbacks in production and more job cuts, which will lead to further reductions in consumer spending, contracting the economy even more, and so on. It's a destructive cycle that has to be stopped, and fiscal stimulus is part of the healing: it will get momentum headed in the constructive direction.

For those who doubt the harm that prematurely trying to balance a budget can do to the U.S. economy, Krugman offered FDR's premature attempt to balance the budget in 1937: it almost destroyed the New Deal and the economic recovery taking place in the nation at that time.

Continue reading NYT's Krugman: Think economic momentum, not balanced budgets

NYT's Krugman to President-elect Obama: Think big

New York Times (NYSE: NYT) columnist and Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman argues, in so many words, that, indeed, the United States must go back, to get to the future.

Krugman's advice for President-elect Barack Obama? Think big. Contrary to selected, conservative arguments about President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, the reason the New Deal had limited, short-term success was the fact that FDR's economic policies were too cautious, he said.

The New Deal: new life

The New Deal's long-term success and achievements, including the structural changes to the U.S. economy (including Social Security and bank deposit insurance), have proved to be both durable and essential, most economists, including Krugman, agree.

Hence, President-elect Obama should think big from the get-go, Krugman says, and avoid the mistaken belief that 'government spending made the Great Depression worse,' and Obama should move forward with a large fiscal stimulus to put people back to work, for work that needs to be done in these United States.

Continue reading NYT's Krugman to President-elect Obama: Think big

Once again, Keynes holds the keys to economic recovery

These days, investors have to search far and wide to find positive data points, let alone a positive outlook, for the U.S. and global economies.

And, without question, the financial crisis and slowing global growth, combined with previously weak economic fundamentals in the U.S., are indeed formidable obstacles to any investor's hope for optimism.

Still, perhaps the real the danger lies in not where we are but in denying where we can be, and that's where John Maynard Keynes comes in.

For those unfamiliar, Keynes, along with Milton Friedman and Karl Marx, are the three major philosophers of modern economics.

In the United States, policy markers since 1981 have favored market absolutism, Friedman's view, peppered by government intervention, Keynes' view, when needed.

More recently, during the current decade, market absolutists appeared to have had free rein. Some of these market absolutists are now arguing that 'the market should run its course' and 'recessions, even deep recessions, are an essential part of the business cycle,' etc. Don't believe any of it for a moment, Keynes would say.

Expansion is the normal condition

It was part of the genius of Keynes that he revealed to us that the natural state of the economy is expansion and that a downturn is "extraordinary imbecility." Further, Keynes also reminds us that recessions, or economic downturns, are not necessarily self-correcting.

Keynes also believed that the market economy, in the form of mixed capitalism, could survive only if it earned the support of the public by raising living standards.

Continue reading Once again, Keynes holds the keys to economic recovery

Dollar falls across the board as bailout plan's details emerge

What's the first price Americans are likely to pay for the U.S. Treasury's proposed $700 billion bailout to stabilize the financial markets? Higher prices for imported goods and higher domestic inflation, currency traders say.

The dollar Monday fell against the world's other major currencies as institutional investors and other currency traders started to come to terms with sheer size of the U.S. Government's proposed intervention.

The dollar fell about 1.1 cents to $1.4608 and $1.8442 versus the euro and British pound, respectively, and about one-half yen to 106.38 versus Japan's yen in midday Monday trading.

Cites laws of economics

Currency trader Andrew Resnick told BloggingStocks Monday that unless the laws of economics have been suspended, the dollar's direction, short-term, is likely to be lower.

"This is going to be a large expenditure of public funds. We can't tax our way out of it. And if [Republican Party presidential candidate U.S. Sen. John] McCain is elected, we won't tax our way out of any of it, so that leaves two options, borrowing or printing money," Resnick said. "The currency market right now believes it will be mostly borrowing, which means more dollars in supply, forcing the dollar lower."

Resnick added that he presently has dollar-short positions in the euro / dollar, dollar / yen and British pound / dollar currency pairings.

Continue reading Dollar falls across the board as bailout plan's details emerge

Could U.S. economy, American people tolerate more government intervention?

Could the U.S. economy tolerate, and, equally significant, will the American people push the nation's chief executive, the president, in the direction of more government intervention?

The view from here is: probably not. Everything in the American ethos and culture speaks against it.

Unlike in France, where the French Government is simply, "France," Americans, for the most part, view their government -- save defense spending -- usually as part of the problem, not the solution. 'Government is best which governs least' is a longstanding Americanism. And most investors/readers know about candidates who say they want to "get the Washington bureaucrats off the backs of the American people" and "clean up the mess in Washington!"

Americans are anti-central government, and they are anti-state (they generally dislike the limited federal government that exists). In the United States, it is always private first, public second.

Continue reading Could U.S. economy, American people tolerate more government intervention?

Stupid question: Can the U.S. handle more housing stress?

Sometimes -- but by no means always -- the stupid questions are the most illuminating.

Tuesday's 'stupid question' concerns stress and the U.S. economy. Namely, could the U.S. economy handle more housing stress? Or, put another way, what would the U.S. economy look like with another round of major write-offs for housing-related losses?

"It's not an economic model we want to project, but project we must," economist David H. Wang said. "First, for one thing, another round of large write-offs would, as they say, end all doubt regarding a U.S. recession. We would record negative GDP for Q3 and Q4, at minimum, most likely for Q1 2009 as well."

"Second, you're looking at additional consolidation in investment banking and commercial banking," Wang said. "Third, there would be considerable U.S. Government involvement, the scope and amount of intervention by the U.S. Treasury and Fed [U.S. Federal Reserve] is difficult to specify, until the size of the problem is known."

It's hard to identify a silver lining in the above, but Wang found one, "but we don't want to go there," he said. Another series of large, housing-related write-offs "would most likely propel Congressionally-backed, federally-directed structural changes in banking, mortgage finance, securities, and financial regulation," Wang said.

"It's one thing if the nature of the bailout is another $50 or $100 billion. But if it amounts to the takeover of a large bank or Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM) and Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE), the American economy would see its biggest changes since the New Deal," Wang said. "These changes would most likely end, once and for all, the 'heads-the-banks-win/tails-the-government-pays' banking system. You'd most likely see a two-tier banking system."

Not the 'end of the beginning' for housing losses?

Moreover, there are signs that it's not 'the end of the beginning' regarding housing and credit market stress, at least in the view of the former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund.

Continue reading Stupid question: Can the U.S. handle more housing stress?

A $1.6 trillion market in the waiting -- the needed investment in infrastructure

Every once in a while there's a compelling research report issued in the Concrete Canyon that goes virtually unnoticed. Wall Street, so often caught up in the mood of the market 'right now,' sometimes drifts past data and fails to fully-publicize information that reveals fertile ground and investment opportunities.

That may have been the case with U.S. Global Investors' infrastructure report.

The report, entitled "Infrastructure: A Global Opportunity for Investors" notes that $41 trillion will be needed to modernize urban water, electricity, and transportation systems globally, during the 2005-2030 period, according to an estimate by Booz Allen Hamilton. In the United States, the figure is $1.6 trillion, according to research by the American Society of Civil Engineers. There are two distinct but massive infrastructure tasks: in emerging markets, a massive build-out to support growth; in the United States and the developed world, a focus on repair and replacement, according to U.S. Global Investors.

Continue reading A $1.6 trillion market in the waiting -- the needed investment in infrastructure

Symbol Lookup
IndexesChangePrice
DJIA+203.5210,226.94
NASDAQ+41.622,154.06
S&P 500+23.781,093.08

Last updated: November 10, 2009: 06:38 AM

BloggingStocks Exclusives

Hot Stocks

DailyFinance Headlines

Latest from BloggingBuyouts

WalletPop Headlines

AOL Business News

BioHealth Investor Headlines

Sponsored Links

My Portfolios

Track your stocks here!

Find out why more people track their portfolios on AOL Money & Finance then anywhere else.

BloggingStocks Partners

More from AOL Money & Finance