Diplomacia e Relações Internacionais
Os EUA estão ficando cada vez mais parecidos com a Europa, graças à Obamanomics, diz este prêmio Nobel de economia, Robert Lucas. Concordo.
Quando o Estado investe em mais welfare, em lugar de laissez-faire, a tendência é mais distributivismo e menos produtivismo. Ou seja, menor crescimento da produtividade e da inovação, e mais lazer e prazeres para todos.
Vão caminhar para menos riquezas e cada vez mais déficits públicos.
Em outros termos, para satisfazer os desejos de consumo da atual geração, vão sacrificar as perspectivas de bem-estar das gerações futuras, que deverão ser convidadas a pagar a conta.
Convidadas não é bem o termo: serão obrigadas a fazê-lo...
Bem, sempre tem chineses milionários dispostos a financiar esse desperdício.
O único problema será a obrigação de trabalhar para os chineses no futuro.
Nada que os chineses também não tenham feito em favor dos ocidentais durante dois séculos.
Assim vai o mundo...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
The Disappearing Recovery
By DANIEL HENNINGER
The Wall Street Journal, JULY 13, 2011, 7:28 P.M. ET
What if the weak recovery is all the recovery we are going to get?
Barack Obama, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell have been performing an intricate scorpion dance over spending, taxes and the debt ceiling, premised on the belief that this is the deal that would ignite the recovery.
But what if it's too late? What if that first-quarter growth rate of 1.8% is a portent of the U.S.'s long-term future? What if below-normal U.S. GDP is, as the Obama folks like to say, the new normal?
Robert Lucas, the 1995 Nobel laureate in economics, has spent his career thinking about why economies grow, and in particular about the effect of policy making on growth. From his office at the University of Chicago, Prof. Lucas has been wondering, like the rest of us, why, if the recession officially ended in the first half of 2009, there hasn't been more growth in the U.S. economy. He's also been wondering why this delayed recovery resembles the long non-recovery years of the 1930s. And he has been thinking about the U.S. and Europe.
What if the weak recovery is all the recovery we are going to get?
In May, Bob Lucas pulled his thoughts together and delivered them as the Milliman Lecture at the University of Washington, an exercise he described to me this week as "intelligent speculation."
Here is the lecture's provocative final thought: "Is it possible that by imitating European policies on labor markets, welfare and taxes, the U.S. has chosen a new, lower GDP trend? If so, it may be that the weak recovery we have had so far is all the recovery we will get."
The Obama-will-turn-us-into-Europe argument is a staple of the administration's critics. Prof. Lucas's intelligent speculation, however, carries the case beyond dinner-party carping.
The baseline reality for any discussion of where we're headed is that from 1870 to 2008, the U.S. economy has had average GDP productivity growth of about 3% and about 2% on a per-person basis. Despite displacements—wars, depressions—we've always returned to this solid upward trend. From 1870 till recently, real income per person has increased by a factor of 12—"an ongoing miracle," Prof. Lucas notes, "mainly due to free-market capitalism."
The Obama economists like to argue that this recession was the greatest meltdown since the Depression. Prof. Lucas agrees. Most recessions, he says, are not very important events. This one, though, has taken U.S. GDP almost 10% off its long-term growth trend. The only downturn comparable to this in the past century is the more than 30% decline during the Depression.
What discomfits him is the similarities in the policy choices that accompanied both delayed recoveries. By 1934, the Depression's banking crisis had been resolved, "yet full recovery was still seven years away," he said in the Milliman lecture. GDP stayed more than 10% below trend. "Why?" The answer, he says, was growth-suppressing policies, such as the Smoot-Hawley tariff, cartelization, unionization and, "most important but hardest to measure, FDR's demonization of business."
By the end of 2008, he notes, the primary storm of the financial panic was essentially over. We did get spending declines in GDP in that year's last quarter and in the first quarter of 2009. "But there is a world of difference," he says, "between two quarters of production declines and four years!" The persistence of growth 10 percentage points below its long-term trend line is troubling.
He credits the current Federal Reserve with avoiding the mistakes of the Depression, properly acting this time as the lender of last resort. With the financial side essentially in order and the recovery stalled, Prof. Lucas sees public-policy analogies to the 1930s: "The likelihood of much higher taxes, focused on 'the rich'; medical legislation that promises a large increase in the role of government; financial legislation that assigns vast, poorly defined responsibilities to the Fed and others."
The consensus assumption, however, is that the U.S. economy will return to its century-long growth trend. Prof. Lucas asks: "Is this really the case?"
Forgotten in most discussions of the U.S.-Europe comparison is that for the first 70 years of the 20th century, continental Europe's growth rose alongside that of the world-leading U.S. and U.K., especially after World War II. Through the 1960s, he says, there was every reason to expect a common, high living standard for all of us. Then, "in the 1970s, their catch-up stalled."
A 20% to 40% gap in income levels emerged between the U.S. and Europe, reflecting a lowered European work effort. In Prof. Lucas's view, that gap represents the cost (largely taxes) of financing a larger welfare state from 1970 onward. Other economists, he says, have cited a 30% loss in GDP per person in Western Europe since the 1970s.
The U.S.'s projected long-term welfare costs, including the new health-care law, are the justification the Obama economists give for pushing spending to 25% or more of GDP. The tax increase the president is fairly shrieking for this week isn't for the August debt limit. It's for the next 25 years.
"If we're going to move to a European welfare state," says Prof. Lucas, "we're going to have to pay a European price." And that price could be a permanently lower level of GDP per person. The U.S.'s amazing 100-year ride would slow.
Among the many things any such drop in GDP will siphon away is America's relentless productive vitality. "So much new happens in the United States," Prof. Lucas says. But will it still?
Write to [email protected]
- Debt And Growth - Editorial Wall Street Journal
Debt and Growth Editorial The Wall Street Journal April 29, 2013 Perhaps you've read that America's debt burden is no longer a problem. Former White House economist Larry Summers says the U.S. should borrow even more money today because interest...
- Rogoff-reinhart: Sorry, Recoveries Are Not So Different...
Sorry, U.S. Recoveries Really Aren’t DifferentBy Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth S. Rogoff Bloomberg News, Oct 15, 2012 Five years after the onset of the 2007 subprime financial crisis, U.S. gross domestic product per capita remains...
- Eua E Brasil: Retomadas E Retomadas (mediocres)
A despeito do fato de que os dirigentes econômicos estejam condenando as "medidas recessivas" na Europa -- como se ela pudesse escolher entre crescimento e recessão -- e recomendando estímulos ao crescimento na Europa e nos EUA, e proclamando que o...
- Economistas Esquecem, Inclusive Paul Krugman
Aos que apreciam Paul Krugman, o artigo abaixo serve para retificar algumas de suas ligeirezas. Depois que ele deixou de ser economista, para ser colunista do NYTimes, ele perdeu sua habitual presteza com os dados, e talvez até a honestidade intelectual....
- Tributando "ricos" E Pobres: Uma Receita Para A Estagnacao
Este debate, mutatis mutandis, vale para o Brasil também, embora nosso vício em tributar demais, e tributar errado, seja muito mais grave do que nos EUA. Paulo Roberto de Almeida OPINION Get Ready for a 70% Marginal Tax Rate By MICHAEL J. BOSKIN The...
Diplomacia e Relações Internacionais
Um importante alerta do economista Robert Lucas sobre a "retomada" americana
Os EUA estão ficando cada vez mais parecidos com a Europa, graças à Obamanomics, diz este prêmio Nobel de economia, Robert Lucas. Concordo.
Quando o Estado investe em mais welfare, em lugar de laissez-faire, a tendência é mais distributivismo e menos produtivismo. Ou seja, menor crescimento da produtividade e da inovação, e mais lazer e prazeres para todos.
Vão caminhar para menos riquezas e cada vez mais déficits públicos.
Em outros termos, para satisfazer os desejos de consumo da atual geração, vão sacrificar as perspectivas de bem-estar das gerações futuras, que deverão ser convidadas a pagar a conta.
Convidadas não é bem o termo: serão obrigadas a fazê-lo...
Bem, sempre tem chineses milionários dispostos a financiar esse desperdício.
O único problema será a obrigação de trabalhar para os chineses no futuro.
Nada que os chineses também não tenham feito em favor dos ocidentais durante dois séculos.
Assim vai o mundo...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
The Disappearing Recovery
By DANIEL HENNINGER
The Wall Street Journal, JULY 13, 2011, 7:28 P.M. ET
What if the weak recovery is all the recovery we are going to get?
Barack Obama, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell have been performing an intricate scorpion dance over spending, taxes and the debt ceiling, premised on the belief that this is the deal that would ignite the recovery.
But what if it's too late? What if that first-quarter growth rate of 1.8% is a portent of the U.S.'s long-term future? What if below-normal U.S. GDP is, as the Obama folks like to say, the new normal?
Robert Lucas, the 1995 Nobel laureate in economics, has spent his career thinking about why economies grow, and in particular about the effect of policy making on growth. From his office at the University of Chicago, Prof. Lucas has been wondering, like the rest of us, why, if the recession officially ended in the first half of 2009, there hasn't been more growth in the U.S. economy. He's also been wondering why this delayed recovery resembles the long non-recovery years of the 1930s. And he has been thinking about the U.S. and Europe.
What if the weak recovery is all the recovery we are going to get?
In May, Bob Lucas pulled his thoughts together and delivered them as the Milliman Lecture at the University of Washington, an exercise he described to me this week as "intelligent speculation."
Here is the lecture's provocative final thought: "Is it possible that by imitating European policies on labor markets, welfare and taxes, the U.S. has chosen a new, lower GDP trend? If so, it may be that the weak recovery we have had so far is all the recovery we will get."
The Obama-will-turn-us-into-Europe argument is a staple of the administration's critics. Prof. Lucas's intelligent speculation, however, carries the case beyond dinner-party carping.
The baseline reality for any discussion of where we're headed is that from 1870 to 2008, the U.S. economy has had average GDP productivity growth of about 3% and about 2% on a per-person basis. Despite displacements—wars, depressions—we've always returned to this solid upward trend. From 1870 till recently, real income per person has increased by a factor of 12—"an ongoing miracle," Prof. Lucas notes, "mainly due to free-market capitalism."
The Obama economists like to argue that this recession was the greatest meltdown since the Depression. Prof. Lucas agrees. Most recessions, he says, are not very important events. This one, though, has taken U.S. GDP almost 10% off its long-term growth trend. The only downturn comparable to this in the past century is the more than 30% decline during the Depression.
What discomfits him is the similarities in the policy choices that accompanied both delayed recoveries. By 1934, the Depression's banking crisis had been resolved, "yet full recovery was still seven years away," he said in the Milliman lecture. GDP stayed more than 10% below trend. "Why?" The answer, he says, was growth-suppressing policies, such as the Smoot-Hawley tariff, cartelization, unionization and, "most important but hardest to measure, FDR's demonization of business."
By the end of 2008, he notes, the primary storm of the financial panic was essentially over. We did get spending declines in GDP in that year's last quarter and in the first quarter of 2009. "But there is a world of difference," he says, "between two quarters of production declines and four years!" The persistence of growth 10 percentage points below its long-term trend line is troubling.
He credits the current Federal Reserve with avoiding the mistakes of the Depression, properly acting this time as the lender of last resort. With the financial side essentially in order and the recovery stalled, Prof. Lucas sees public-policy analogies to the 1930s: "The likelihood of much higher taxes, focused on 'the rich'; medical legislation that promises a large increase in the role of government; financial legislation that assigns vast, poorly defined responsibilities to the Fed and others."
The consensus assumption, however, is that the U.S. economy will return to its century-long growth trend. Prof. Lucas asks: "Is this really the case?"
Forgotten in most discussions of the U.S.-Europe comparison is that for the first 70 years of the 20th century, continental Europe's growth rose alongside that of the world-leading U.S. and U.K., especially after World War II. Through the 1960s, he says, there was every reason to expect a common, high living standard for all of us. Then, "in the 1970s, their catch-up stalled."
A 20% to 40% gap in income levels emerged between the U.S. and Europe, reflecting a lowered European work effort. In Prof. Lucas's view, that gap represents the cost (largely taxes) of financing a larger welfare state from 1970 onward. Other economists, he says, have cited a 30% loss in GDP per person in Western Europe since the 1970s.
The U.S.'s projected long-term welfare costs, including the new health-care law, are the justification the Obama economists give for pushing spending to 25% or more of GDP. The tax increase the president is fairly shrieking for this week isn't for the August debt limit. It's for the next 25 years.
"If we're going to move to a European welfare state," says Prof. Lucas, "we're going to have to pay a European price." And that price could be a permanently lower level of GDP per person. The U.S.'s amazing 100-year ride would slow.
Among the many things any such drop in GDP will siphon away is America's relentless productive vitality. "So much new happens in the United States," Prof. Lucas says. But will it still?
Write to [email protected]
loading...
- Debt And Growth - Editorial Wall Street Journal
Debt and Growth Editorial The Wall Street Journal April 29, 2013 Perhaps you've read that America's debt burden is no longer a problem. Former White House economist Larry Summers says the U.S. should borrow even more money today because interest...
- Rogoff-reinhart: Sorry, Recoveries Are Not So Different...
Sorry, U.S. Recoveries Really Aren’t DifferentBy Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth S. Rogoff Bloomberg News, Oct 15, 2012 Five years after the onset of the 2007 subprime financial crisis, U.S. gross domestic product per capita remains...
- Eua E Brasil: Retomadas E Retomadas (mediocres)
A despeito do fato de que os dirigentes econômicos estejam condenando as "medidas recessivas" na Europa -- como se ela pudesse escolher entre crescimento e recessão -- e recomendando estímulos ao crescimento na Europa e nos EUA, e proclamando que o...
- Economistas Esquecem, Inclusive Paul Krugman
Aos que apreciam Paul Krugman, o artigo abaixo serve para retificar algumas de suas ligeirezas. Depois que ele deixou de ser economista, para ser colunista do NYTimes, ele perdeu sua habitual presteza com os dados, e talvez até a honestidade intelectual....
- Tributando "ricos" E Pobres: Uma Receita Para A Estagnacao
Este debate, mutatis mutandis, vale para o Brasil também, embora nosso vício em tributar demais, e tributar errado, seja muito mais grave do que nos EUA. Paulo Roberto de Almeida OPINION Get Ready for a 70% Marginal Tax Rate By MICHAEL J. BOSKIN The...