|
Lawrence Summers is Obama's chief economic advisor and by all accounts a very
smart man. But if he is what passes for smart in the beltway then God help
America. Let's take a look at some of the brilliant Mr Summers' economic proposals.
He states that the future of the US economy depends on "more export-oriented
and less consumption-oriented" policies. Just in case you didn't get it, Summers
is proposing that the state direct the pattern of production and consumption.
This is called central planning. It is also pure hubris and betrays a total
ignorance of why state economic planning must always fail. The seminal works
of Mises, Hayek and Coase exploded the idea that economic direction by any
central authority could ever prove superior to the market process. As Coase
pointed out, state planning
is imposed on industry, while firms arise voluntarily because they represent
a more efficient method of organising production. In a competitive system
there is an 'optimum' amount of planning! (The Firm, the Market and the
Law, University of Chicago Press, 1990, p. 37).
Summers' idea that directing domestic consumption into exports will expand
the US economy should in itself have been enough to have him fired, that is
if the Obama team knew any real economics. Another term for economic growth
is capital accumulation, which in turn can only come out of savings. Put another
way, savings is the process by which the demand for consumer goods (present
goods) are directed into the production of capital goods (future goods) in
order to produce a greater quantity of consumer goods in the future. That exports
have nothing to do with this process should be obvious.
To direct greater production into exports means that capital goods that were
used to produce for domestic consumption are now to be used to satisfy foreign
consumption. For this to succeed domestic consumption must fall. In other words,
Summers is proposing a cut in American living standards.
There are basically two way in which this can be achieved. The first one involves
a devaluation of the dollar. A falling dollar raises import prices while lowering
the value of American goods in terms of foreign currencies. This should increase
the demand for American exports. Summers would expect this increase in foreign
demand to be met by exporters commanding more capital goods. Even the most
incompetent economist understands that this process involves a cut in living
standards.
Summers has left no doubt in my mind that he is aiming for a devaluation.
Allow the dollar to sink and export prices to fall without his pals in the
White House having to issue any economic edicts. To drive down the dollar he
needs more inflation at home. In this respect Bernanke, another Democrat, was
being most accommodating when he virtually doubled the monetary base overnight.
Despite the fact that Keynes was something of a hawk on inflation his disciples
have proved otherwise -- and Summers and Bernanke are no exceptions. This is
why Summers recently downplayed an expected surge in inflation despite the
massive increase in the monetary base. But once inflation begins to accelerate
further downward pressure on the dollar will become irresistible as prices
rise and the demand for imports rises. When this sort of thing happens the
central bank usually applies the monetary brakes. However, the possibility
that Obama -- with encouragement from Summers and other advisors -- might try
to impose prices controls instead of tightening the money supply should not
be discounted. Whichever policy is adopted the future looks grim.
Regardless of what Summers recently asserted the US was not on "the brink
of catastrophe" a few months ago. There was no awful "abyss" into which the
US economy was in danger of falling. The economy was suffering a huge financial
hangover, courtesy of the very monetary policy that Summers and Bernanke are
now defending. What needed to be done was for the enormous imbalances that
a criminally loose monetary policy had created to be liquidated. Bernanke and
Summers have stridently opposed this process. The result is that the economy
remains moribund while unemployment is still rising. Any inflationary fuelled
revival would be short-lived and the subsequent recession particularly painful.
There is no doubt that Summers believes the claptrap he is mouthing. When
he claims that the billions provided by Obama and spent by "state and local
governments" helped save the economy he means it, even though similar spending
programs have never worked before. And they certainly never worked for Roosevelt¹.
We have to look at where Summers is coming from. He's a Keynesian and as such
he still believes in the myth of demand deficiency and the discredited Keynesian
multiplier. On top of that he subscribes to Clark-Knight view that sees capital
as homogeneous and timeless. Hence capital becomes a permanent fund that reproduces
itself without the need for savings, which in turn makes capital consumption
impossible. Moreover, being timeless and homogeneous also means that capital
is amorphous which would make the economy a two-stage process, production and
consumption, instead of a highly complex structure consisting of stages of
production made up of heterogeneous capital goods.
This dangerous error is reinforced by the GDP approach which categorises consumer
spending as the most important economic activity. From there it is but a short
step to treating changes in consumption as being responsible for recessions.
But GDP is not gross at all: it is, in fact, it is a net product. To argue,
as orthodox economists do, that to include spending on a firm's inputs in the
national accounts would be double counting is nonsense. This is like telling
an accountant that he must not include the cost of inputs in the company books
because these are included in the prices of the firm's products².
While the likes of Summers are giving economic advice the future will continue
to be grim. Nevertheless, the economic fallacies that he clings to do not in
themselves justify Obama's ideological commitment to a massive increase in
the size of government, no matter how much damage it does to the country. Therefore
I must assume that Summers shares to a considerable degree Obama's leftwing
views about the US economy. Perhaps he is fantasising about a "permanent Democratic
majority" that will make him the country's economics czar.
1. America's
recession: learning the wrong lesson from the Great Depression
2. Defending the Austrian
explanation of why consumer demand does not drive the economy
|