Skip to main content

Most of the time, in political history and in economics, things travel along a fairly predictable and relatively stable pathway. Debate is contained within a fairly narrow set of conventional and familiar choices. When it comes to economic policy, the Federal Reserve can lower interest rates or raise them a little. The government can pump a little more spending into the economy or a little less depending on the rate of growth. The economy generally starts moving again relatively quickly after a recessionary slowdown. In terms of political history, the more progressive party and the more conservative party have periods where one or the other is more powerful, but they each tend to have enough power to slow each other down, to check and balance each other. They resolve their legislative differences through a pattern of competition and compromise that is, again, fairly predictable and stable, and in periods of national crisis they come together and get big things done.

These long periods of relative stability and predictability aren’t nirvana — most people's quality of life and economic condition may not be getting better and might be getting gradually worse, as we have seen in the last 30 years of our country's history. And lots of problems tend to go unresolved in these periods as well, as they don't tend to be periods of major reforms or progressive advance, and people on the bottom end of society don't tend to get lifted up. But stability and predictability at least keeps society chugging along, the economy keeps moving, and citizens have a sense of what they can expect from their government.

Every so often, though, things get so out of whack that we come to a moment of maximum crisis. In these moments, conventional wisdom not only doesn't work but actually makes things far worse. It happened with our economy in the Great Depression of the 1930s, and it happened with our political system in the Civil War era of the 1850s-60s. We are now, on a worldwide scale, in such an economic moment. What is even scarier is that increasingly it feels like we are simultaneously moving toward such a moment in our political system as well. At least in the 1930s, the political system worked well: voters kicked out the political party who had screwed things up, and the new government got things done that helped lift us out of the depression. And at least in the 1860s, the economy was functioning reasonably well in the Civil War era.

Right now, it feels like both our economy and our politics are increasingly dysfunctional, and that is an incredibly dangerous place to be.

Whatever happens next in our country's politics, the economy has become completely derailed. We stopped maintaining the tracks, we stopped checking the brakes and engines on the train, and we have a hell of a crash on our hands. Between the U.S. and Europe, our answer has been to keep bailing out banks (when countries who owe a lot of money to bondholders are bailed out, it isn't the people or government of that country that is bailed out, it is the bankers who own the bonds) hoping that one more bailout will solve things. When government spending goes up and tax collections go down because of the terrible economy, and the bankers demand we "tighten our belts,” it just makes things worse. The Federal Reserve, which has already poured tens of trillions of dollars into saving the banking system, and already has kept interest rates at historically low numbers for years, is mostly out of weapons to fight this battle.

The train has already wrecked, but there's another locomotive with weak brakes coming full speed down the same track.

The only answer is to reject conventional wisdom economics, and start to look at big ideas that go against the established economic ideology, the ideology dominated by the Chicago school economists who believe that free markets solve all problems and that bankers are the masters of the economic universe. Both Europe and the U.S. need to take off the chains that tie us to these monstrously big megabanks, and their utterly corrupt ratings agencies. These enormous banks, far more than any other institution, caused the big train wreck of the economy with their too complex financial "innovations" and their big housing bubble, and now they are making things far worse by using their political and market power to force round after round of government austerity programs and bailouts. It is the big banks as well that have created the black hole of a housing market where prices continue to drop, more and more homeowners are going underwater on their mortgages, and foreclosures continue unabated. That black hole of housing will keep this country locked into a flat-lined economy for as far as the eye can see, unless and until policymakers finally stand up to the bankers and force them to write down those mortgages.

It is, in fact, writing down debt — major amounts of it — that will be the biggest thing that helps this economy recover. We need less debt in our entire economy, and rather than kowtowing to the ones that wrecked the train by one bailout and self-defeating austerity program after another, we should be demanding that they write down a very large share of the debt they themselves helped create- in housing, in government debt, in our trade debt, and in other forms of debt. We need to do something else that bankers hate as well: encourage just a little bit of inflation. Worrying about inflation overheating when you have this amount of economy-wide debt, and the biggest danger in front of you is deflation from a dead economy, is quite literally insane. If inflation went to 4 or 5 percent, it would be a good thing right now because it would make all that debt easier to pay off, and it would mean that the economic engine would start running again.

Finally, we need to focus our efforts — focus like a laser beam, as my old boss Bill Clinton used to say — on creating good jobs with good wage levels. Continually cutting spending in a moment like the one we are in now is utterly self-defeating, because every time you cut, more jobs are lost, more income and the spending that fuels the economic engine is lost. Right now is exactly when we need to be rebuilding our falling-apart infrastructure, hiring more teachers, investing in more job training and R&D, and helping the industries of the future get a solid start here in America. Not just the best but in fact the only way to balance our federal budget in the long run, as we learned in the 1990s, is for every American in the workforce to have a job, a job whose wages are heading up not staying flat.

So stop listening to these Wall Street bankers and their entirely corrupt ratings agencies that rated thousands of derivative deals and credit default swaps AAA when they were pieces of absolute junk. Stop listening to the crazies who think we can cut our way to prosperity, because it has never worked and won't work now — especially now. We need a strong and expanding middle class far more than we need big Wall Street banks with good balance sheets and big bonuses for their execs.  

The ancient Israelites had something they called "the year of our Lord" where all debts were forgiven. In Jesus' very first sermon, he announced that he had come to "bring good news to the poor, proclaim liberty to the captives, bring the blind new sight, set the downtrodden free, to proclaim the year of our Lord.” We need some good news for our poor (which more and more of us are becoming). We need liberty for the captives of big banks and right-wing economic policy. We need the new sight that comes from taking off the blinders of the conventional wisdom that is strangling us to death. We are all downtrodden except for a very wealthy set of elites who are trying to economically enslave us, and we need to be set free. And we most assuredly need a modern version of the year of our Lord, where unsustainable debt is written down by these bankers who have had their run of the store for far too long. It is time for big, bold new ideas that will clean up the train wreck, rebuild the tracks and engine, and finally get it moving again. And it would help a lot if those new ideas were motivated by these kinds of 2,000-year-old values.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  First We're Only a Location, Not a Country Now (10+ / 0-)

    In the 1860's, in the 1930's, we were still a country. Almost all the money and markets were domestic. In the early 20th century most shipbuilding was for the Great Lakes trade not oceanic international trade.

    Both the political system and the economy were largely trapped here dependent on the people and on all interests for labor and consuming in the markets, and for donation and voting support at the polls.

    We don't have that now; we very purposely liberated our biggest businesses and financial forces from residency and dependence on the US. They don't need us to do particularly well, they can afford to fight us as their opposition and even enemy, to get the kind of deals they want.

    And that means that their representatives in government have the same incentives.

    You can't run a country as a country when you formally decide to stop doing it, and dismantle the incentives and protections that make its forces depend on the welfare of the country.

    It becomes just a location.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Mon Aug 08, 2011 at 07:16:53 AM PDT

  •  Excellent diary. (5+ / 0-)

    I really like your premise that it is incredibly dangerous to have an economic crisis and a political crisis at the same time.

    Oh . . . terrifying diary as well.

    It is a do things about injustice.... It helps to have a goal. I've always tried to have one.--Ted Kennedy, True Compass

    by Timaeus on Mon Aug 08, 2011 at 07:24:30 AM PDT

  •  Big bold idea (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cassandracarolina, koNko, Cliss

    The corporations and wealthy are not spending their money. Every boom economy is fueled by investment. Every bubble separates the wealthy from their capital, it doesn't matter to them that just a few win, they want a shot at it. We have reached the point of structural stasis, there are no expanding investment opportunities, and the consumer sector is shrinking, especially if you include housing. The diarist is right on in talking about inflation. If we could inflate wages along with prices that would be excellent as we would be getting rid of excess debt in the time honored way, inflation and growth.

    So here we go, a bold idea. Tax the hell out of high incomes and profits and spend the money on the infrastructure and new technologies. If the wealthy won't spend it then we should spend it for them. This would work in short order. The important rule here is that the money MUST be spent in areas that create jobs, build the infrastructure and advance technologies as in green energy. In the 50s the top income tax bracket was over 90%. Almost no one paid that as they would prefer to invest their income in their businesses rather than take excess profits or salaries. It made more sense to hire more workers then give it to the government in the form of taxes.

  •  How do you write down debt (0+ / 0-)

    You do not own?

    One problem in this situation is the debt crosses national boundaries.

    Another is that even if debt were to be forgiven or the creditors shaved bare, new capital creating new debt is required and where would that come from?

    This is why taxation is necessary to create revenue streams.

    May I ask you if it is fair to default on debt held by sovereign funds from countries where the citizens have lower incomes, pay higher taxes and save more to let borrowers who have higher incomes pay lower takes and save little or nothing off the hook because they have squandered the money lent and it is inconvenient to face the consequences?

    Per capita GDP of China is below the 100th rank in the world and yet it supports the government of the US where the most wealthy pay similar or lower effective tax rates than the lowest bracket, yet you seem to suggest it would be acceptable to default on these obligations to wipe the slate clean?

    And then what?

    At the very least, this seems to conflict with your own assessment of the situation.

    The following linked article raised an open question to Michele Bachmann and now I direct the question to you and the floor: What About Honor?

    Modest Proposal: Tax the Wealthy.

    What about my Daughter's future?

    by koNko on Mon Aug 08, 2011 at 10:21:09 AM PDT

  •  Awesome Diary, (0+ / 0-)

    you nailed it.  Just horrible - an absolute catastrophe of morons in charge of credit ratings.  And it worked!  they were able to peddle their garbage.  At least for a while.  Until the charade became obvious.

    I think the most important thing folks can take away from this is - caveat emptor.  Buyer beware.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site