SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Will Obama Ever Say What He Should About the Jobs Crisis?

THE VITAL CENTER AUGUST 25, 2011

Will Obama Ever Say What He Should About the Jobs Crisis?

The Congressional Budget Office’s semi-annual update on the budget and economic outlook, out on Wednesday, offers sobering news about the next few years. The report’s economic analysis begins by observing that “[t]he slow pace of the current recovery is broadly consistent with international experience of recoveries following financial crises.” The authors cite key impediments to renewed growth—the burden of household debt, the need for financial institutions to restore their capital bases, lack of business confidence, and the glut of vacant homes left over from the construction bubble. Then comes the punch line: Unemployment will barely decline between now and the end of 2011, and is likely to stand at 8.5 percent in the fourth quarter of 2012. Even with more vigorous growth beginning in 2013, we won’t return to full employment (about 5 percent) until the end of 2016. At various points, the authors stress that these unemployment projections are based on the economic outlook as it stood in early July and do not take into account negative events since then. If anything, labor market conditions could turn out to be even tougher than yesterday’s report suggests. 

Against this gloomy backdrop, it’s good to hear that President Obama plans to give a major speech on economic growth and job creation soon after Labor Day. While we can’t rule out the possibility that the congressional super-committee may roll some of his proposals into an overall deficit reduction package, it seems more likely that the president will be setting the stage for a general election argument about the best way forward for the beleaguered U.S. economy. It’s all the more important, then, for him to embed his proposals in a credible narrative about the sources of our current predicament and the overall strategy for escaping it. (For purposes of concision, I’ve framed most of what follows in first-person prose, as though the president were speaking directly.)

On the diagnostic front, Obama should stress the following themes:

1. In recent decades we’ve become addicted to consumption at the expense of production. But we can’t indefinitely consume more than we produce. The vast American consumer market has sustained growth in foreign countries, but now it’s time to focus on the investments and innovations needed to make those countries into markets for what we make.

2. In addition, we became infatuated with financial manipulation at the expense of the real economy. Not only did a rising share of profits go to the financial sector, but also many of our most talented young people were diverted from other careers in the productive sectors of the economy. We focused too much on financial innovations, some of which severely damaged our economy, and not enough on innovations in products and services.

3. Homeownership is central to the American dream. But we should see our homes as what they are—places to live and raise our families, not as ever-rising assets that we can use to finance consumption and replace savings. During the past decade, too much capital and debt flooded into the housing market, and prices rose to unsustainable heights. The inevitable crash was devastating.

4. Because growth in wages and household income slowed dramatically, many families resorted to excessive debt to maintain their standard of living. Between 1980 and 2007, the debt burden on average households in relation to their income more than doubled. This line of credit couldn’t go on forever, and when it stopped, millions of families were left exposed. 

5. Let’s face it: For decades, income and wealth in the United States have become more unequal. For some people, this is a moral issue; for others, even mentioning it smacks of “class warfare.” But the key point is that it has become a drag on our economy. As far-sighted corporate leaders saw as early as the 1920s, if working families couldn’t afford to buy what businesses were selling, the engine of economic growth would grind to a halt. By the end of that decade, it did. The same is true today.

6. And yes, we lost control of the federal budget. We can argue forever about why that happened. But what matters is fixing the problem so that we can restore confidence at home and abroad.

When it comes to what should be done, Obama should say we need to attack the problem on every front and do everything we can to reorient our economy toward economic growth and job creation. While the economy was once in the emergency room, today it is barely out of the ICU, and recovery is much too slow. Here are the key proposals he could offer:

1. Budget deficits this year and next are much less important than what happens over the next decade. We need a balanced, binding, and enforceable plan to stabilize our debt as a share of the economy within the next ten years, not the next two. I’m sending such a plan to the congressional super-committee today. It draws from the Simpson-Bowles Commission, other bipartisan groups, and leaders of both political parties.

2. We need pro-savings, pro-investment, pro-growth tax reform. It’s time to close the loopholes that drive up tax rates and push capital in unproductive directions. We need to cut the subsidies that promote debt over savings. And it’s usually the case that if you tax something, you get less of it. That’s why we should extend the payroll tax cut that’s already in place. In the long run, we should replace some of the tax on labor with revenues that don’t reduce incentives to hire new workers.

3. I meant what I said in my State of the Union address: To win the future, we need to make smart, targeted investments in those areas where the market won’t—in education, basic research, and infrastructure. And to do that, we’ll have to reduce spending in areas less directly related to growth and innovation.

4. We need to break down barriers to new business formation—the key to innovation and job creation. My administration has reviewed, and endorses, the comprehensive agenda developed by the Kauffman Foundation, which is doing the best work anywhere on entrepreneurship. And we’re going to work with the congressional leadership to write its recommendations into law.

5. We can’t grow as fast as we need to unless we can sell much more to other nations. Last year I set a goal of doubling our exports by the middle of the decade. We’re on track to do that, but we can’t reach our goal unless we complete action on trade treaties that have been stalled much too long. And we have to get serious with countries that use unfair regulation and currency manipulation to keep our goods and services out.

6. Finally, we have a choice: Either we wait three or four years for households to reduce their debt burdens and regain their balance, or government and business can find a way of working together to accelerate the process, which would boost growth. I want to speed things up. But we can’t do that as long as so many families are coping with mortgages they can’t afford. Let’s face it: A lot of big financial institutions made unwise decisions, and so did a lot of households. A lot of wealth that existed only on paper has disappeared and won’t come back anytime soon—and maybe not ever. Many of you think that these people and firms deserve to live with the consequences of their bad decisions. The problem is, the whole country is paying for their mistakes with slow growth and high unemployment. So let’s get lenders and debtors together with government to work out a better way of sharing the burden. We’ll all win if we do.

This is an ambitious agenda, Obama should conclude: But you didn’t send me or anyone else to Washington to meet big problems with puny solutions. Some pundits are talking about today’s conditions as the “new normal,” others are predicting a lost decade. We don’t have to accept this diminished future. But we won’t fix the economy until we change course. As long as I’m your president, I’ll focus on doing just that.

William Galston is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a contributing editor for The New Republic.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 9 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

9 comments

I think most of this is right, and it should be his focus. Also, I believe that the themes Galston speaks about can be linked to past endeavors. HCR was, in part, aimed at inequality. Financial reform was about the banks. And Obama's SOTU was "Win the Future." The economy might be too weak for us to win re-election, but Obama should do this for the betterment of the country. Some of these points have been debated, though. I asked Mark Thoma about the decline of consumption thesis, and he believes that when growth gets better and so forth, consumption will return to its place. Moreover, Larry Summers and Peter Diamond have expressed concerns about the impact of writedowns on creditors. Much as many of us are ambivalent about the banks, there might be adverse effects if they can't lend in the future, say Diamond and Summers. Whether or not they're right, and there are some smart detractors (Vernon Smith and Paul Krugman), it is something that can't be thrown to the wind. I favor principal writedowns. These considerations and debates might tamp down. But I think with Galston and CenteredPolitics saying "go big" and push hard for key ideas, Obama should challenge the nation on those terms. Moreover, polling shows voters are likely responsive to some of these arguments. e.g. Alliance for Manufacturing Survey.

- darklayers

August 25, 2011 at 2:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Re-industrialize with some import replacement - like major appliances and sheets and towels! might want to push for the plan described in today's NYT about making it much easier to lower mortgage interest rates to existing homeowners NOT in distress, like me. BoA would get reduced profits by lowering my rate from 6.375% to 4.375%, but I would have the money to continue to maintain my house, as long I did not have to also spend $3500 in new closing costs. The benefit of today's low interest rates are NOT getting to the consumer. Why is my credit card APR on purchases at 11% and cash advances at 19% when I have a high credit score? My demand is constrained because I do not want to use any more savings than I have to. Might want to add "END AGEISM" in firing/hiring. Not that Obama has ever said a kind word about anyone over 50...but we are the worst hit by longterm unemployment, no matter what we re-train for at our own expense. I tried desk-top publishing, Geographic Info Science, and master's degree for teaching. Same old, same old "over-qualified, my favorite was being repeatedly told I was too smart to be a teacher in NYC. What an insult to the students, and other teachers, but it was code for "no more 50-something". I expect the stock markets to nosedive as Obama speaks, further depressing my remaining savings.

- K2K

August 25, 2011 at 8:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Look on the bright side, K2K - markets will surely rebound the next time your hero Rick Perry will threaten to lynch Ben Bernanke or Timothy Geithner.

- wildboy

August 25, 2011 at 8:59am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The themes are right. Imposing on labor the cost of retirement security and health care security for seniors has to be one of the dumbest ideas ever, and it's about time somebody stressed the point. As for too much debt, Michael Milken taught us (inadvertantly) that favoring debt over equity (Milken recapitalized many companies with debt) is the recipe for financial disaster, and that was over 25 years ago (in the last financial crisis). These two ideas are for long term improvement. As for the two ideas for short-term improvement, the payroll tax holiday extension and the home mortgage write-down, I am not optimistic; good ideas, but I'm just not optimistic they will be adopted. The payroll tax holiday, of course, is but a snap-shot of the long-term idea of lifting from labor the cost of retirement security and health care security for seniors. The political problem is that Republicans love payroll taxes because they are regressive, and they aren't going to agree to lift them, either temporarily or permanently, unless and until the income tax becomes more regressive. Indeed, what the Republicans want is an end to progressive taxation (by, for example, the adoption of a flat tax (such as the payroll tax) to replace the current progressive income tax). That would be their "grand bargain". As for the home mortgage relief, I don't see how we can consider imposing the cost on the financial sector at a time when it's reeling, with Bank of America's very survival in doubt. The alternative is, of course, to spread the cost of a write-down on everybody. For that to have any chance politically, the write-down would have to be across the board, without regard to the debtor's income or debt relative to the value of the home. A much simpler alternative would be to send everybody a check for, say, $10,000. That way we would avoid all those transaction costs and fees, and the stimulus would be immediate.

- rayward

August 25, 2011 at 9:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Right on K2K, I'm in exactly the same place you are....over 50, recently laid-off, trying to get into a new career of self-employment that has insufficient demand (read: not enough customers) 'cuz of the Bush Depression. Hang in there, dude.

- desertdog

August 25, 2011 at 5:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

good luck to you desertdog. you need incredible resilience in this ageist country when consumers are paralyzed in the absence of leadership. when I was trying the re-education track, at my own expense, I also tried four different new business concepts in 2001-02. Finally focussed on the teaching degree. gave up even trying a year later, in 2006. I think the worst moment was in 2003 when NYC rejected me for one day a week summer internship in GIS "because the younger staff were intimidated by me" - I was the ONLY applicant who was a native-born American actually living IN NYC. NYC residency is a basic preference for any city job.

- K2K

August 25, 2011 at 6:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K@, good luck to you, too. I've been reading your posts for about 2-3 years now. Always found them humorous and insightful. My situation is laid out in a comment posted to the Bloomberg v. Women article yesterday. Won't bore you with it here except to say that I tried to take the bull by the horns last year in the face of my new found employment predicament. Took 80 hours of additional professional education at considerable expense to myself, got certified in my chosen field (mediation), have been volunteering at the court every Friday to help the lawyers and judges clear debt collectioon cases and do some personal marketing, but so far, very few paying prospects. I also have the added responsibility of caring for an elderly parent in my home as well as continuing financial support to qa twenty-something (thankfully, employed) daughter. It's a struggle, but I just try to keep smiling.

- desertdog

August 25, 2011 at 7:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Did I miss something, or did you leave out an emphasis on what I would have expected to be the central focus: a job-generating stimulus? In addition, while I agree with parts of your analysis, as a narrative it is far too Obama-esque. Too many big words and too little assignment of responsibility to mainly Republican policies going back 30 years.

- Thunderroad

August 25, 2011 at 11:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

desertdog - I cannot find a Bloomberg v Women post here at TNR to read your full comment, but I think you made an excellent choice to become a mediator, depending on what state you live in. There was a tv show in the past year about a female mediator at the law firm her recently deceased father had founded. In real life, my impression is the lawyers really do not want to use mediators, not in New York. I appreciate that you find my comments humorous and insightful. Thank you. >Half the time I am trying to explain something, which never fails to enrage the rabid partisans in TNR-world. well, I am kind of excited. I was fairly certain the Berkshire Hills were hurricane-free. As a Miami native, I know what to expect, and I can not believe I may actually be taping my picture windows tomorrow if the forecast holds. FWIW, one ounce of 100% cocoa, used for baking, is an effective anti-depressant, if you can handle the bitter taste.

- K2K

August 26, 2011 at 6:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close