How You, Mr. President, Can Speed the Recovery (The problems stated, and the solutions presented)

I'm aware that you're gravely concerned about the economy and the employment situation. Understandably so since your policies of fiscal and monetary stimulus have failed to create economic growth or employment. Yet despite such failures you advocate more of the same remedies in the face of their failure.

On Labor Day you announced new spending of $50 billion on infrastructure construction to create “jobs”. This is in addition to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act commitment of $499 billion for similar projects. According to your website, recovery.gov, only $296 billion of that amount has been spent, so why do we need more?

Yet the economy is stagnant, if not declining, unemployment is high and going higher, and credit is still largely unavailable to most American businesses even if they were willing to borrow. Homebuyer credits have failed to stop the decline in home prices and Cash for Clunkers has had no lasting effect on the auto or appliance industries.

I suggest that since existing policies have failed to revive the economy, your administration should try something different. I offer you several innovative policies that would actually speed a recovery and lead to higher employment.

High unemployment Declining output Credit freeze Surplus of housing and commercial real estate High private debt load High federal debt

Unless we understand the causes of our problems, solutions aren't easy. Because you place great emphasis on “what works” rather than economic theory, I'll get to the specific issues straightaway.

1. Economies can repair themselves without a lot of government help. History has proven this time and again.

2. Government interference in the repair process can hinder recovery or even make things worse.

4. Individuals can make better choices about what to do with their money than the government.

5. Economic growth only comes from private enterprise. The corollary of this is that the government can only spend money, not make money.

6. Since the government produces nothing, real growth and real jobs can only come from private enterprise.

7. If government spending is inefficient and if economic growth comes only from the private sector, then taking vast amounts of money out of private hands and putting it into government hands will hinder growth.

8. Government spending to revive an economy has failed wherever and whenever it has been tried.

9. More legislation increases uncertainty for businesses, making them reluctant to expand (called “regime uncertainty” in economic terms).

With these time-tested guiding principles in mind, here are some specific policies that you should immediately implement to allow the economy to quickly recover. They will “work”.

Cure the credit freeze by eliminating policies that cover up the fact that many of our banks are financially unsound. These policies generally relate to how banks value the assets that secure real estate loans, primarily commercial real estate (CRE) loans. These policies allow banks to overvalue their loan assets. These policies include “mark-to-make-believe” (rather than “mark to market”) and “extend and pretend”, each of which allow banks to maintain a fiction. If the actual values of these loans were realized, banks would be required to foreclose on these bad assets. By getting these loans off their books, they'd be able to recapitalize and become financial sound.

Why is this important? It's the only way to restore credit to small- and medium-size businesses and resolve the oversupply of CRE. Big businesses have plenty of credit from the big-money center banks. It’s the regional and local banks which finance the rest of us that are in trouble.

We've just gone through the world’s biggest financial bubble. During this bubble, projects that made no sense but for the cheap Fed money and the false appearance of paper prosperity were hugely over-produced. Now that the bubble has burst, we're in the mopping-up stage of recovery. Banks are reluctant to extend credit because they're unsure of their financial future. As long as banks hold on to these malinvestments, their balance sheets will remain clogged up and credit will remain restricted. Yes, more banks will go out of business; the process is never pretty but it's necessary. It's important to keep in mind that until this is done, millions of unemployed Americans will stay jobless longer.

If you allow banks to fail, as President George HW Bush did (mostly S&Ls actually), then there will be many foreclosed CRE projects that will need to be liquidated by the FDIC. Alan Greenspan, then the Fed chairman, for all his faults, did the right thing by urging the creation of the Resolution Trust Corporation, a separate entity whose function was to liquidate S&Ls and sell off the foreclosed assets from failed institutions. It actually worked pretty well and a huge slug of bad real estate, mostly apartments, were sold off to investors. The investors got great deals, but, more importantly, the economy recovered sooner.

The RTC dealt with 747 S&Ls with total assets of $394 billion. According to the latest FDIC report there are 829 “problem” banks with $403 billion in assets as of the first quarter of 2010. It's conceivable that this idea would work again.

Surveys reveal that the number-one problem for business is uncertainty created by the government. They've been hit with an onslaught of complex legislation, the consequences of which they don’t understand. This is called “regime uncertainty” in economic terms. The truth is, according to the surveys, that even if credit was available, businesses aren’t borrowing because they don’t know what the government will do to them next. Consider that three major pieces of legislation have been passed during your administration: the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the health-care bill, and the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul bill. Further, they're uncertain if their taxes will be raised.

No new laws are required to allow the economy to recover. I urge you to speak to businesses and tell them that we Americans trust their ability to drive our economy, and that your administration will enact no new laws that will create greater burdens on their ability to expand, borrow, hire, and reap profits.

While your administration has gamely tried to convince us that you've created jobs, we know that's fiction. The CBO report and claims by prominent economists have no credible evidence that any real jobs were created. If it were the case that government could create jobs then there would be no need for the private sector. Of course you know well that history has proven that policy to be a disaster. Only private enterprise can create a real job. Having the government pay people to work isn't a “job” in the same sense as a job in the private sector. When a business hires employees, it's because somewhere down the line consumers want the end product of their productivity. The job created by the business is generated by economic activity until consumers decide otherwise.

If the government pays someone to do something, it isn’t generated by economic activity. When the money stops, the job stops. That's been the case of all of fiscal stimulus spending. While someone is earning money from the government, the money to pay them comes from taxes, which ultimately can only be generated from private enterprise.

If the government takes money out of the economy to pay people to do things it wants done rather than let the economic forces of private enterprise work, then businesses that create real jobs will have less money with which to expand their businesses. You should consider what the person from whom the money was taxed was going to do with the money. It would aid recovery to let private enterprise keep their money.

With historically high debt loads, job uncertainty, a lack of retirement funds, and declining home values, is it not reasonable for people to increase savings? Urging people to spend at this time runs counter to people’s innate sense to take care of themselves. While people are trying to repair their financial condition after the housing and credit bubble, urging more spending is reckless advice. People are rightly using their common sense.

There are two substantial benefits to saving. It allows families to reduce their debt burdens. Once they pay down their debts, they will be more willing to spend without the fear that they will end up homeless. Saving also creates the new capital that will be required for businesses when they decide to expand. It's not as if the Fed can just print dollars to create wealth and capital; wealth can only come from savings.

Policies that encourage spending -- such as Cash for Clunkers, homebuyer credits, or various tax credits for government-favored projects -- only encourage spending and thus reduce savings. Furthermore, they appear to have no lasting economic impact.

In light of the detriment to the economy of giving the government more of our earnings right now, an increase in taxes would be harmful to a recovery. While we face a serious deficit in the federal budget, the only way to pay down national debt is to have a vigorous growing economy and a reduction of government spending. With the right policies put in place, lower taxes would help create economic growth.

Fed policies to expand the money supply to create inflation will eventually succeed. Thus they're planting the seeds for perpetual stagnation and inflation. To prevent this new disaster, the Fed should immediately raise the Fed funds rate and stop new attempts at quantitative easing. This will have an immediate positive impact. First, it will encourage saving as people seek higher, safer returns on their capital. Second, it will unmask malinvested projects, clear away the burden of their related debt load, and allow capital to be redirected to profitable ventures. Third, it will prevent the rise of inflation, which robs savers of their wealth. Fourth, it will prevent the creation of a new destructive stagflationary cycle. Fifth, as in the Volcker era, greater savings and low inflation will eventually lead to new economic growth and higher employment.

I strongly urge you to adopt these innovative solutions to solve our nation’s desperate economic problems.

My dear lil’ Jeff,
You’re assuming that he actually wants to do something about it.
He and his minions want to intentionally wreck the economy.
You’re casting your pearls before swine, hon.

Let’s just say for the sake of argument that Obama wants a recovery (suspend your skepticism for a while), do you think the suggestions presented by the author are SOUND and WORKABLE ?

More simply stated ...

The Austrian School’s Seven Commandments:

You cannot spend your way out of a recession.
You cannot regulate the economy into oblivion and expect it to function.
You cannot tax people and businesses to the point of near slavery and expect them to keep producing.
You cannot create an abundance of money out of thin air without making all that paper worthless.
The government cannot make up for rising unemployment by just hiring all the out of work people to be bureaucrats or send them unemployment checks forever.
You cannot live beyond your means indefinitely.
The economy must actually produce something others are willing to buy.

The Obama administration has no intention of spurring overall growth in the economy.

For those like Obama, increased economic activity just increases the misery; more people getting "rich" at the expense of the poor.

It's not that these people are unaware that tax cuts targeted to the private sector will spur growth, they are acutely aware, it's just not their goal to spur growth without first controlling who wins and who loses.

They also feign ignorance that lowered taxes and increased GDP results in higher revenues; they know it, but for true believers, revenues are chump change, they want control of the whole economy.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.