Ten Years Later

At RealClearMarkets Jeffrey Snider takes note of the tenth anniversary of the financial crisis that brought about the Great Recession:

Using subprime as an excuse meant making a monetary event seem like something else, an exogenous factor beyond the scope of monetary policy. Irresponsible lending practices sounds just plausible enough to keep anyone from seeking the right answers, and maintaining Economists in the business of political authority. Inertia.

So, ten years later we still wait for recovery having supposedly avoided “the collapse of the global financial system.” In every one of those years the Federal Reserve Chairman appears in front of Congress, twice at each House, and declares how the economy is getting back to normal – only to be overshadowed by more events that equally have nothing to do with subprime mortgages.

Many people now speak of the US economy in particular as if it is booming. They do so, however, from only one piece of evidence: the unemployment rate. The number itself is uncorroborated by any other data, especially wage growth, therefore in the absence of corroboration it is supplemented by a plethora of anecdotes. Most of them either refer to some imagined labor shortage (again easily refuted by wage and income data, income data which declares rather than suggests alarmingly decelerating labor markets to nearly nothing the past three years, including every month so far of 2018) or the idea of globally synchronized growth.

This latter concept is actually based on the belated acknowledgement that something hasn’t been right about the world’s economy since, well, July 2008. In 2017, for the first time all the major systems were positive at the same time. How tiny little subprime managed to keep them from accomplishing this “feat” for a decade is another huge mystery.

Our economy doesn’t need more regulation, less regulation, additional stimulus, higher taxes or lower taxes. It needs a 12 Step Program. We haven’t even acknowledged that we have a problem yet.

4 comments… add one
  • Ben Wolf Link

    It wasn’t really working before 2008. We just papered over the defects and contradictions with, well, paper.

    Feudal economies began with production. The serf raised the stock and grew the crops, with the surpus transferred to the lord. The surplus was then liquidated by selling it to the merchant. Production both made finance possible and provided a natural limit to its expansion.

    Capitalism reverses this. It begins with finance, by getting capital from a bank or investor, and this is in theory used to produce, to hire workers, build the workplace, acquire the materials needed to produce.

    In theory. But finance under capitalism isn’t naturally constrained by productive capacity. It can keep growing whether output does or not, and this is precisely what happened in the two decades prior 2008. Real growth greatly slowed at the same time Big Finance was having its coming out party and shifting a huge portion of global profits to itself, suppressing business formation, wages and technological innovation as production was starved of capital.

    Nobody wants to deal with this, assuming it’s possible to do so.

  • It can keep growing whether output does or not, and this is precisely what happened in the two decades prior 2008.

    That comports reasonably well with my interpretation of events but I think we’ve had some actual increases in output over that period, particularly during the mid 1990s, something I attribute to the capital system working as it should have at least in part during the 1980s and early 1990s.

    I also believe that deadweight loss has become a substantial contributor to our slow growth but that’s a somewhat different subject.

  • Ben Wolf Link

    That’s correct, and I didn’t mean to imply there had been no productive growth, only that finance could consume a greater and greater share of the economy whether it happened or not.

    And it doesn’t mean capitalism is unique in having contradictions. All systems have contradictions within them and are eventually overwhelmed by them. Feudalism endes when the contradictions within it could no longer be maintained just as slavery did. The Soviet state capitalist system was so deeply conflicted it spun apart after only sixty years.

    I think capitalism is at that point but almost nobody wants to dicuss it.

  • Roy Lofquist Link

    “Many people now speak of the US economy in particular as if it is booming. They do so, however, from only one piece of evidence: the unemployment rate. The number itself is uncorroborated by any other data,”

    “Atlanta Fed lowers U.S. second quarter GDP view to 4.5 percent”

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy-gdp/atlanta-fed-lowers-u-s-second-quarter-gdp-view-to-4-5-percent-idUSKBN1JN2AS

    Uncorroborated.

Leave a Comment