Monday, December 01, 2008

Further Musings On The Great Economic Collapse Of 2008: Are We There Yet?

Is the economy finally stabilizing after an historic free fall that has begged comparisons with the Great Depression?

Not really when you consider that the financial markets continue to be wildly volatile, bank lending has slowed to a trickle, there still is no bottom in sight to the housing price collapse, consumer spending is a fraction of its former self and . . . (drum roll, please) a second wave of mortgage defaults is breaking on the shore, this one involving commercial properties such as shopping malls and hotels.

Which means its boom time for bottom feeders like liquidators.

* * * * *
Wrapping one's head around the numbers involved in the various bailout packages is migraine inducing, let alone understanding what a trillion bucks represents, and this headache is made much worse as it becomes obvious that throwing money at the crisis has become an end in itself.

But how about this for putting things in adjusted-for-inflation perspective: The total of the bailouts to date cost more than than the Marshall Plan, Louisiana Purchase, Apollo lunar program, savings and loan bailout, Korean War, New Deal, Iraq war, Vietnam war, and NASA's lifetime budget -- combined.

In other words, the largest outlay in American history.

* * * * *
I have long been fond of saying that economists are the second oldest profession, but that's unfair to hard working prostitutes everywhere.

These whores with bar charts are so shameless that it's difficult to detect even a modicum of embarrassment, especially when it comes to the Bush administration economists who missed the biggest economic story of our times.

As it is, taxpayer are being played for saps,. And while it's hard to root around in the debris for underlying causes when the house continues to burn out of control, these guys seem to think that fighting the conflagration absolves them from allowing it to start in the first place.

* * * * *
Speaking of whores, you can't turn around without bumping into a story about how Main Street families have had to cut way back on spending, but what about all those filthy rich guys who have stables of mistresses?

According to a new survey, more than 80 percent of multimillionaires who had extra-marital lovers planned to cut back on their gifts and allowances. Nevertheless, only 12 percent of these cheaters said they plan to give up on their lovers altogether for financial reasons.

* * * * *
President-Elect Obama's announced intention to create 2.5 million by 2011 as the centerpiece of his stimulus plan seems really ambitious.

That is until you find out that almost four million workers will enter the labor force during that period -- if there are jobs for them, and combined with people who have lost their jobs this year that comes to five million jobs.


* * * * *
And now for something completely different: Employees of the Peer Bearing Company of Waukegan, Illinois, have long received a turkey each Thanksgiving in keeping with a tradition established by the owner Spungen family.

But when the Spungens sold the ball bearing maker to a Swedish company, they didn't take the money and run, instead awarding $6.6 million in year-end bonuses to Peer's 230 employees. Family members signed two thank-you cards to each employee, one in Spanish and one in English, expressing gratitude for "the loyalty and hard work of our employees over the years."

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hello Shaun,

Your blog is one of the few on my short read-every-day list.

Resisting (with difficulty) the inclination to rant at length on how our economy got where it is, or the likelihood of salvation coming from vast redistributions of wealth from the taxpayer to those responsible, may I suggest a fix:

Recessions and depressions are the result of lack of trust. Trust in corporations and institutions of course, but, mostly, trust in having an adequate income for the foreseeable future. No one with any wits is going to buy a car, a house, Christmas presents, or anything else he can do without if he isn't reasonably sure that he'll still have his job next month or next year. (Nor is he going invest in securities that may be worth half as much tomorrow. But that's another issue.)

How do we fix this? By having guaranteed, long-term, at parity up to, say, $50,000 per annum, unemployment insurance. Call it "trickle up".

Yes, it will be abused, everything is, but the costs of abuse will be trivial compared to the costs of the current bailouts (which are fixing nothing).

And, of course, any abuse will empower the right-wing claque to howl and scream and bray, and spread fear and dissension. But they will anyway: in their minds wealth flowing towards the poor is Socialism, wealth flowing to the affluent is Their Just Due.

It will also be called unfair. Is social security unfair? Is corporate executive compensation 500 times the average worker's wage unfair? Who do you know that's 500 times as productive as you? That's another issue and I'd love to debate it, but what I want to propose here is something that can work.

Even if employers contribute nothing, the costs of such a program, at current unemployment levels, should be less than those of the Iraq war. And that would be money far better spent than that we're spending on bailouts.

Regards to you and your friend.

Mark Scattergood
Portland, OR

Anonymous said...

You're right about the jobs. Part of our current problem, in fact, is that job creation never really kept pace with people joining the workforce. This problem was compounded by people whose jobs went away back in 2001, people who lost jobs post-Katrina that never rematerialized, and the fact that the jobs we had offered wages that didn't keep pace with inflation as under-measured by the Feds. Gee, that couldn't have anything to do with people not having money to pay the mortgage, could it?

But you know what? I've been beating this drum since 2004, and nobody wanted to listen. Even people who know better treat job creation as a net figure. And although it does account for layoffs, it does not account for new workers. Every month we don't create 150,000 new jobs, we end up behind.