LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.  
 
January 7, 2009
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Most Read

Blagojevich vs. the Senate

Navel-Gazing in the Grand Old Party

Yukking It Up at the Blago Show

Israeli Voices for Peace

Gauging Obama’s Silence on Gaza

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Tragedy Repeats Itself

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101
Vetting Sarah Palin

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Reports

Joseph Stiglitz on Recession

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on Jun 3, 2008
commons.wikimedia.org

By James Harris

Click here to listen to this interview.

James Harris: This is Truthdig. James Harris here with Nobel Prize winner and author of the new book, “The Three Trillion Dollar War,” Joseph Stiglitz. Some of you may recall that we did talk to his co-author, Linda Bilmes, about a month ago, and she shared with us some of the horrible economic realities around the Iraq war, around spending with this war. And we didn’t get on any particular administration too much, but we talked about some ways perhaps to recover, and we will do so again today with Mr. Stiglitz. But first I want to take a turn. All the papers—the Wall Street Journal has forecast, pretty much, the seventh [interest] rate cut [by the Fed]. People are losing homes at alarming rates. The economy is—to put it lightly—in shambles. What’s it going to take, and how long is it going to take, for us to rebound?

Joseph Stiglitz: I think it’s going to take a while. The IMF is actually talking about 2010. I think I’m basically on that side, you know, the pessimists that think, that ... it’s not going to be quick. Obviously, the answer depends in part on what actions government takes. The Fed is basically only in the mode of trying to prevent a meltdown, very little in fact in keeping the economy going, resuscitating the economy. They’ve admitted it’s going to take fiscal policy and, unfortunately, the administration is doing too little too late, and most of what they’re doing is not very well designed. So, unfortunately, it looks as if we will probably have to wait until January 2009 to begin to see any effective medicine. And since economic policies take six months, nine months, a year, 18 months, to have their full effect, we’re looking towards the end of 2009/beginning of 2010 before we start seeing the benefits.

Harris: You were a Clinton Cabinet member early on in the administration, and certainly recognized and remembered for your work there. So imagine—and I’m not trying to put you in a seat that you don’t want to be in—but if you were a member of a cabinet right now, what type of policies would you put in place to begin to show positive effects in 12 months or less?

Stiglitz: That’s a good question. I think first you begin with a very big stimulus package. I mean, let’s face it: the U.S. economy was being—you could almost say it was, like, on drugs: our savings rate went down to zero, we were taking out $900 billion a year in mortgage equity withdrawals, there was a housing bubble, and people were living off of that effect. That game is over and we’re going to need something else.

Now, when you think about what to do, there are two basic criteria. One is, what has the biggest bang for the buck? Especially important right now because we have a big deficit and we can’t afford to squander any more money. This war has been very, very costly and it’s been totally financed by deficit spending, and it’s drained the economy. And so this year we’re looking to a record level of deficits—close to half a trillion dollars or more—so we have to make sure we have the biggest bang for the buck. The biggest bang for the buck is increasing unemployment insurance. We have one of the worst unemployment compensation systems in the advanced industrial countries. 

A second example of big bang for the buck is—most states and localities have what they call balanced-budget frameworks: they can only spend their income. Their income is going down. Property-tax revenues are going down; income-tax revenues are going down. That means they’re going to have to cut back expenditures, and that’s going to have another, depressing effect on the economy that’s just beginning to work its way through the system. Again, aid to states and localities to help make up the shortfall. Not their own fault but because of mismanagement on the part of the federal government.  They ought to get some assistance to help that shortfall.

Those are the kinds of things that would stimulate the economy a lot, give us the biggest bang for the buck.

The second problem is, you want to have an eye on the long-run problems. The long-run problem in the United States is not too little consumption; it’s too much consumption.  Savings rate is zero. Not sustainable. And yet, what is the administration banking on at the center of its stimulus package? A tax cut encouraging people to consume even more.  Well, the fact is that many of them are not going to take those checks and say, “Boy, I’d better take that and put it in my savings account.” You know, credit card interest rates—credit cards are going to be tightening up. ... American households are very badly in debt. 

So that was just badly designed from the perspective of either maximizing the bang for the buck or addressing America’s long-run needs. Our real long-run needs right now are lack of infrastructure, underinvestment in R&D, underinvestment in education.

So that’s where I would begin.

Harris: Let’s pause there, because that’s a lot. Giving someone $600 to right the wrongful economic policies of your country seems to be a problematic approach to fixing the economy.

Stiglitz: It’s laughable. You’re telling me that we’re seeing a meltdown in our financial markets, we’re seeing 2.2 million Americans are going to be losing their homes, and with that their life savings, and you’re telling me that you’re going to send a $600 check? That won’t even make up for the loss in their income since the last recession. The median American household has a lower income today—adjusted for inflation—than in 1999. There’s been growth in GDP, yes, but it’s all gone to the people at the top. And anybody looking at the reality of the American economy .... it’s not a success story as viewed by the vast majority of Americans. You have to say, what does it mean to be a successful economy? Does it mean to make one person richer and richer, or does it mean an economic system that delivers, year after year, increases in income to the majority of Americans? And—like it or not—our system hasn’t been doing that.

1   2   3   NEXT PAGE >>>

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.

Previous item: Using Communion as a Weapon

Next item: What Makes McCain Tick?

Jump to Comments

Advertisement


Elsewhere: .

Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By Give hope a chance?, June 10, 2008 at 7:11 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

This was obvious even before we went to war, but it makes me feel guilty ... because I think I have had more opportunities to write and comment - and have not.  I think I am a little stupified ... stupified at how little our federal legislatures have actually done.  They really are caught up in another version of the world where political gain is much more important then meaningful, correct and real constituent support.  I fail to understand how they miss the connection between money spent in Iraq and money therefore not available to their districts ... via pipeline appropriations etc.  It makes the difference come elections.  Certainly one of the issues right now is the connection between the war and our economy is not being effectively made.  Further - the flow of taxes ends up in a bating game.  The worse one, however, is the way vets are being treated.  They KNOW they underfunded, and have done so consistently for years.  And what they have created (for lack of a better word) is a very complex system that is driven on a value system of frustrating vets so that they will not pursue benefits.  Further, there are so many levels of this that they almost have to present their case in pretty close to what is a court.  They can spend years trying to get a hearing for PTSD .. or, for an illness that the military will NOT admit exists.  Here is something more sad ... the largest case load for offices representatives and senate will be the military.  And that I can tell over many years, very little has been done.  I think we need to make a really strong case for giving vets their benefits WILL stimulate the economy!  ...

Report this

By Arabian Thoroughbred, June 5, 2008 at 2:46 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

How sadly true this short comment of yours, purpolewolf!

Report this

By purplewolf, June 5, 2008 at 9:39 am #

Welcome to the newest third world country-AMERICA! Home of the bankers and the Land of the homeless.

Report this

By purplewolf, June 5, 2008 at 9:37 am #

Welcome to the newest third world country-AMERICA!

Report this

By elwood p.dowd, June 5, 2008 at 5:08 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

The only true statement to ever come out of any Bush family member was during the ‘88 primary campaign when 41 called it voodoo economics. Keynesian economics and the New Deal worked. Real, decent paying jobs have to go to the people- and not to the corporate moneymen who will pay barely minimum to illegal immigrants here, and foreign workers in out-sourced factories overseas. The deregulation and privatization highway that we have been speeding down since Reagan has to be detoured, or we are doomed.

Report this

By particle61, June 4, 2008 at 4:10 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Stiglitz is right!

While the MSM focuses on changing the focus- the bank run blog reports daily on the current economic crisis and its financial and social consequences

published by the editors of redstateupdate.net
funny, frightening, free since 2005
and a new gwbush comic weekly

Report this

By johnnyfarout, June 4, 2008 at 8:41 am #

As I was reading this article I thought to myself, “How many books and articles have I read like this one?” Perhaps dozens; now one more that shows again, the rich have been running the country and this is what we get. Disturbingly this slap happy talk Stiglitz is pushing here may be far off the mark of our pending future. No longer can we talk just about the consequences of the last 30 to 35 years as if it has only to do with a problem to be “fixed”, and a way for the USA to see “morning again”. Once Reagan removed the solar panels from the White House roof, the church bells that were heard all over America were knelling, “for whom”. The presidency since has become ever more the office of oppressive reaction across the world, stomping down on whatever the bankers and oil men point out as “a problem for portfolio growth”. But beyond this the planet has a reality of its own. One shrugged away as if the only real things are Federal Reserve Notes and how many are flowing into the pockets of the ruling elite class. Abstractions have replaced realities. Fantasies are the new raison d’être. The fantasy that the world as created by the imperial Western system can go on and on and only needs a few “fixes”. The spiral of fixing has careened out of control. “What’s good for GM is good for America.” may well be a sad epithet. The huge efforts expended in the last 100 years to pump dry the oil fields and spew the exhaust into the atmosphere and rivers and lakes and oceans is the political and economic nightmare mankind is waking up to. As a species we may not be able to recover. We needed to start that morning Reagan watched his powers in action on America’s symbolic roof. That may have been our last chance politically, environmentally, and economically. They knew it then and we know it now. The crushing of the working classes’ organizations is the second sad bell knelling the last hurrah; sensible public transportation, S&L;’s, unions, and now their houses, and their gas guzzling cars, going each one as federal reserve notes accumulated at the top of the teetering colossus of deception. As if keeping them out of the hands of those who make things work was the most rational effort civilization could make. Let’s take some Prozac with that martini lunch; let’s have a beer with that president who is on the wagon and chokes on pretzels in the country’s basement. Who can go on with this? All the notes are violently discordant. Oh the irony of such clever boys and girls having this systemic crime lead us all so far astray; is it us who stand, gladius raised in hand and shout: “We, who are witnessing this tragedy end, salute you!”?

Report this

By Ed Harges, June 4, 2008 at 8:10 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Matthew Rothschild, editor of the venerable “The Progressive” and of Progressive.org lambastes John McCain as “John McCAIPAC”.

It’s clear that a fanatical dedication to a militarized and domineering Israel makes McCain “tick”, but why this is so begs a larger question: why does the far right get to define what it means to be “pro-Israel” or “anti-Semitic”?

Rothschild doesn’t count as a “major Jewish leader” because you see, his views on the middle east are somewhere to the left of Attiila the Hun. This puts him closer to actual Jewish opinion in America, but in direct opposition to the “major Jewish organizations”.

Rothschild writes (by the way, Howard: this is how you quote a person at reasonable length, giving proper credit and a link):

“When John McCain went before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) on June 2, he could not have been more obsequious to this group that has done more than any other in the United States to block a just solution to the Palestinian quest for statehood.

”...Israel doesn’t really want peace, and McCain was telling AIPAC that this is just fine by him.”

http://www.progressive.org/mag_wx060308

Report this

By elwood p.dowd, June 4, 2008 at 6:19 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

And the neocons were able to create this disaster by simply using fear. The American people should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this to happen. We have squandered our children’s futures,while enriching a select few, all to fight this absurd war on terror. FDR was right.

Report this

By GoldenT, June 4, 2008 at 4:44 am #

The pigs at Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley who have brought us this mess ought to be crushed. Pressure your congressional representative to close the London loophole.

Speculation is the driving force putting the cost of life’s essentials out of reach. Any other “explanation” simply is a contemptible lie told on behalf of the aristocracy propping up the British Empire ... the same liars who brought us WMD in Iraq and all the other crap jammed down the throats of a free people by a bunch of Tories inside and outside the beltway.

Mr. Obama, you can have your “special relationship” with these two-bit thugs if you wish, but this Democrat is NOT voting for you.

Mr. Dodd, your Public-Private partnerships are only a solution if you possess some strange love for Benito Mussolini.

Mr. Frank, that freak Rohatyn is no American. He is only all too good at abusing the People. May he hang you.

Ms. Pelosi, get gone. You had your chance to be Henry Clay and YOU BLEW IT.

Listen, no matter who you freaks impose as our next President, Wall Street, mother England’s child, is FINISHED.

And a new Franklin Roosevelt will rise…

Report this

By Arabian Thoroughbred, June 3, 2008 at 7:22 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

So it’s the war stupid! And more so it’s a war based on lies, deception and plain evil. The economy might relatively recover after one or two years, but how are you going to fix millions of shattered lives, mostly in Iraq, but also at home!

Report this

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!






Notify you when others comment on this article?


Are you a human?
Retype the word you see here.


Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.

 
Season's Greetings From Truthdig
 

 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.