From: Travis
Subject: There's No Pain-Free Cure for Recession by Peter Schiff: WSJ
Date: Saturday, December 27, 2008,


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123033898448336541.html

 There's No Pain-Free Cure for Recession Belt-tightening is required by all,
including government. By PETER
SCHIFF<http://online.wsj.com/search/search_center.html?KEYWORDS=PETER+SCHIFF&ARTICLESEARCHQUERY_PARSER=bylineAND>
  As recession fears cause the nation to embrace greater state control of
the economy and unimaginable federal deficits, one searches in vain for
debate worthy of the moment. Where there should be an historic clash of
ideas, there is only blind resignation and an amorphous queasiness that we
are simply sweeping the slouching beast under the rug.
With faith in the free markets now taking a back seat to fear and
expediency, nearly the entire political spectrum agrees that the federal
government must spend whatever amount is necessary to stabilize the housing
market, bail out financial firms, liquefy the credit markets, create jobs
and make the recession as shallow and brief as possible. The few who
maintain free-market views have been largely marginalized.
Taking the theories of economist John Maynard Keynes as gospel, our most
highly respected contemporary economists imagine a complex world in which
economics at the personal, corporate and municipal levels are governed by
laws far different from those in effect at the national level.
 Individuals, companies or cities with heavy debt and shrinking revenues
instinctively know that they must reduce spending, tighten their belts, pay
down debt and live within their means. But it is axiomatic in Keynesianism
that national governments can create and sustain economic activity by
injecting printed money into the financial system. In their view, absent the
stimuli of the New Deal and World War II, the Depression would never have
ended.
On a gut level, we have a hard time with this concept. There is a vague
sense of smoke and mirrors, of something being magically created out of
nothing. But economics, we are told, is complicated.
It would be irresponsible in the extreme for an individual to forestall a
personal recession by taking out newer, bigger loans when the old loans
can't be repaid. However, this is precisely what we are planning on a
national level.
I believe these ideas hold sway largely because they promise happy,
pain-free solutions. They are the economic equivalent of miracle weight-loss
programs that require no dieting or exercise. The theories permit economists
to claim mystic wisdom, governments to pretend that they have the power to
dispel hardship with the whir of a printing press, and voters to believe
that they can have recovery without sacrifice.
As a follower of the Austrian School of economics I believe that market
forces apply equally to people and nations. The problems we face
collectively are no different from those we face individually. Belt
tightening is required by all, including government.
Governments cannot create but merely redirect. When the government spends,
the money has to come from somewhere. If the government doesn't have a
surplus, then it must come from taxes. If taxes don't go up, then it must
come from increased borrowing. If lenders won't lend, then it must come from
the printing press, which is where all these bailouts are headed. But each
additional dollar printed diminishes the value those already in circulation.
Something cannot be effortlessly created from nothing.
 Similarly, any jobs or other economic activity created by public-sector
expansion merely comes at the expense of jobs lost in the private sector.
And if the government chooses to save inefficient jobs in select private
industries, more efficient jobs will be lost in others. As more factors of
production come under government control, the more inefficient our entire
economy becomes. Inefficiency lowers productivity, stifles competitiveness
and lowers living standards.
If we look at government market interventions through this pragmatic lens,
what can we expect from the coming avalanche of federal activism?
By borrowing more than it can ever pay back, the government will guarantee
higher inflation for years to come, thereby diminishing the value of all
that Americans have saved and acquired. For now the inflationary tide is
being held back by the countervailing pressures of bursting asset bubbles in
real estate and stocks, forced liquidations in commodities, and troubled
retailers slashing prices to unload excess inventory. But when the dust
settles, trillions of new dollars will remain, chasing a diminished supply
of goods. We will be left with 1970s-style stagflation, only with a much
sharper contraction and significantly higher inflation.
The good news is that economics is not all that complicated. The bad news is
that our economy is broken and there is nothing the government can do to fix
it. However, the free market does have a cure: it's called a recession, and
it's not fun, easy or quick. But if we put our faith in the power of
government to make the pain go away, we will live with the consequences for
generations.
*Mr. Schiff is president of Euro Pacific Capital and author of "The Little
Book of Bull Moves in Bear Markets" (Wiley, 2008).*










-- 
*~@):~{>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to