It's the Capitalism, Stupid
The Stewart-Cramer dialogs are pretty remarkable. Cramer is an interesting subject, but he requires an expertise in clinical psychology that I lack. He seems to be confessing and trying to cover up at the same time, out of mingled instincts of remorse and self-preservation. But we should understand him and CNBC as a symptom, not a prime mover.
The foundation issue here has been little noted, though Stewart half-consciously alluded to it periodically. To get the real, substantive, wonky background we actually have to go back to the Social Security debate.
One of the noteworthy documents in that controversy was a paper co-authored by the mighty triumvirate of Dean Baker, Brad DeLong, and Paul Krugman. At one point Krugman and Baker presented their material to an audience of gray eminences at the Brookings Institution, where Greg Mankiw had the opportunity to throw rocks. Which he did.
My one-sentence summary of the paper is that the stock market can't possibly be as good a long-run investment, relative to Social Security, as is commonly thrown about. At the time this was controversial. By 'good' I mean having a desirable mixture of low risk and decent return. As everyone should know, there is a trade-off between the two (risk & return, that is).
The average growth rate of the U.S. economy has been somewhere between three and four percent, after deducting inflation. Growth is a creature of growing labor supply, additions to the capital stock, and occasional hiccups (both positive and negative) from technological progress and who knows what else. In my view it is not well understood by economists. (I suspect I will not have to work hard to persuade you of that.) At any rate, in advanced industrial countries you would be foolish to expect sustained growth above five percent.
Even these numbers have an illusory component, since they do not account for depletion of the natural environment, the exhaustion of leisure time, and the sacrifice of other non-market amenities.
So it is idiotic to expect stocks to grow at double digit rates. In terms of 'fundamentals,' the value of stocks depends on the growth of profits from productive activity. Firms produce stuff that people want to buy. When you buy a stock you are buying an uncertain stream of future income. Some of this you may get in the form of cash dividends, otherwise you may reap capital gains. Alternatively, when you buy a bond you are buying a guaranteed share of a company's profits, but the company's survival is itself uncertain. Either way, you can't expect double digit returns on average for any sustained period of time.
Everything else is buying or selling in expectation of a short-term run-up or drop, respectively, in price, otherwise known as speculation. Your gain will be somebody else's loss, and vice versa. A huge accumulation of gains will end up as a big loss at some point. You can be lucky with a particular stock or with a particular portfolio for a particular period of time. You can be unlucky too.
The touts like to describe the popping of a bubble as "the destruction of wealth." But the basis for wealth -- natural resources, plant and equipment, skilled labor -- is untouched. It is only inflated claims to a level of wealth that could not possibly be conjured up that have been destroyed. Anybody who gauges our well-being by the progress of the stock market self-certifies as an imbecile and illiterate.
This is not new information. The interaction of bubbles in stocks, real estate, and more exotic financial instruments has been occurring since the dawn of capitalism. Read The Great Crash by Galbraith, or Panics, Manias, and Crashes, by Kindleberger. Any experienced person knows this history. When they tell you to buy the bubble, they're trying to ride it up before the pop, on your back. Or they are humoring your own delusion that you can ride it at someone else's expense. They know that leverage in a deregulated environment will end up as somebody else's problem. This is not new, nor is the industry of disseminating the message for the ears, and to the ultimate disadvantage of, the great unwashed.
The touts and authorities who conspire in this fraud are thoroughly, consciously at fault. They should all be hung by the balls, but they won't be, because they are still in charge. They run this.
It is tempting to look to Canada, which enjoyed sufficient regulation to protect its own banks from themselves. That is certainly a relevant model. But we have to go further afield than Baker-DeLong-Krugman to the old German to best appreciate what is going on here.
In this economic system, opportunities to profit from the expansion of enterprise become progressively limited as the system prospers. Capital becomes less scarce, returns on productive activity diminish on the margin. People with money to play with -- especially yours -- look for more exciting pastimes, and the manipulation of financial assets on the basis of huge leverage and the promise of socialized risk is it. This is not new.
It has nothing to do with either George Bush or Federal government borrowing or tax cuts, contrary to the credulous Obamatons' slogans. You getting taken to the cleaners is as lawful as summer following spring.
I was as credulous as anyone. When the Dow was over 14,000 I was looking at my home equity and 401(k) and feeling mighty fine. And I had read the BDK paper and I knew about the housing bubble. But like a coke addict I couldn't resist getting just a little more.
I need to be protected from myself, and so do you. But we are not all guilty. It's up to the authorities to provide some modicum of protection for us from our worst instincts, just like we try to stop people from jumping off the roofs of buildings and tell our kids to eat their spinach.
Don't call it paternalism. Call it enlightened collective self-interest. Do you feel sufficiently enlightened?




















If read carefully, you will note that the paper shows a motive for large holders of capital (e.g., banks) to actively drive down the savings rate. (Hmmm, the savings rate wouldn't fall would it?) As the savings rate falls, the dividends remain constant or grow.
An implication is that this "correction" we are experiencing will leave the wealthy even better off than they were before.
March 13, 2009 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is a great financial planning argument for preserving Social Security in its present form as a lifelong annuity funded by contributions during working years -- diversification.
I like my 401K. I even believe it'll make me money in the long run. But I don't want just my 401(k). Social Security will pay me no matter what happens to the stock market. That's what diversification requires. Financial planners know this. They view Social Security as an asset class.
March 13, 2009 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except that Social Security isn't funded by "contributions during working years." Indeed, it's not funded, at all.
It is, has always been, and will always be paid by transfer payments from current workers to current retirees -- as it should be.
March 13, 2009 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't that what "funded" would mean here?
Workers get a promise of future payments (from future taxes) in some proportion to their current contributions (payroll taxes). That an individual's current contribution is neither held nor invested in the usual private sense seems irrelevant. That someone else's future taxes pays for the future payment is the point of the system.
All investment involves risk. Investing in the SS system (paying payroll taxes) involves the risk that the SS payouts will change from what one might linearly extrapolate from current trends. That is, don't expect your expectations to provide your retirement income according to your current fantasies.
If money is fungible, then clearly it doesn't matter whose money you get out at age 65 relative to your money you put in now.
March 13, 2009 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
No; that's not what "funded" means.
And a further "no"; there is no "promise of future payments" -- if by the word "promise" you mean more than "Promises, Promises."
March 14, 2009 8:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
promise means entitlement
Why not try stating your reasoning instead of posting empty denial re "funded"?
March 15, 2009 1:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
...what is the ratio now, read some that for every person of working age now, there are 5 people qualified for SS; and by 2017, the ratio will be up to 1 (working) and 8 (collecting SS).
They've already up the age limit for collecting full benefits and by 2017, we will have to work from our wheelchairs that may not fit into the office cubicle....
March 14, 2009 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rotwang - edifying and entertaining as usual.
March 13, 2009 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or is the answer darker? A man who managed a very large portfolio of investments (very, very large) once said to me “There is no such thing as a financial advisor. If you don’t know what to do with your money, you don’t deserve to have it.” Money is as they say fungible. Once you have eaten and paid your bills, what you have left over is something that can become many things. You have to choose. If you choose to give your money to a stranger and ask only that he give it back with interest, well, you’ve chosen to gamble. Good luck.
March 13, 2009 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, the complications of modern investment in "the markets" have made gamblers out of most all of us who have had savings to invest. A friend mentioned giving over $10K to someone he knows to invest for him. The guy said the company has very low debt and PE of 9. Neither could be confirmed at Yahoo! Finance. Not to mention that the stock's long term trend has been stepping down by 80% for two years since it went on the exchange. My friend said he didn't have time to research such things carefully.
So he's gambling.
At the least the sector has long term promise if oil prices rise...
March 13, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent analysis Rotwang (as usual)!
Seems to me there are some basic and common sense principals that were completely ignored despite the fact that any intelligent person could have (and many did) point out that where we are now is the logical outcome of granting far too much power to business leaders and the investor class (or as I like to think of them the predator class)and concomitantly glorifying the benefits of unfettered greed.
As you point out, it isn't as though this hasn't happened plenty of times before. It isn't as though this very outcome was not clearly foreseeable. Drunk with and under the complete spell of unfettered greed, those who should have been responsible were not. This would include policymakers, legislators, businessmen, bankers, investors and regulators.
Our system of government is predicated on the fact that power in too few hands always and without exception is a bad thing and ends up creating a tyranny or worse. The founders new well of the inability of rulers to restrain themselves from the abuse of power. We have failed to understand that this is equally true in all aspects of life and particularly the economy. Power corrupts! Absolute power corrupts absolutely! Making things worse on the economic front, businesses and corporations are intended to work as efficiently as possible and there are as few restraints as possible on the excercise of power amongst those in authority in businesses and corporations. Thus, lacking the more serious checks and balances of three branches of government, it is logical and true to point out that the abuse of power in business is far more likely and inevitable than it is in government and the present circumstances illustrate that better than any other thing I can think of.
Capitalism, left to itself, simply cannot restrain it's negative tendencies. It is impossible. Capitalism's logical conclusion is self-destruction.
As a system, it is essentially born and bred to have bipolar personality disorder. When the mania of boom times (or bubbles)take hold of capitalism it is exhilarating, everyone feels great, has lots of energy and takes risks that would otherwise be viewed as irresponsible or even insane. When those risks payoff the mania does not subside but in fact encourages us to take even more and greater risks as our confidence grows and our delusional belief that nothing will ever go wrong deepens. When the disasterous conseqences of those insane/irresponsible actions become clear and the mania suddenly disappears a dark depression sets in. A pall comes over the entire capitalist system which becomes sluggish and difficult to get moving again. The extreme high of the mania (bubble) is matched only by the extreme low and hard impact of the crash of depression.
Any competent medical professional will tell you that bipolar disorder can be successfully controlled. It can be and needs to be controlled through a combination of medication and therapy. If the bipolar patient is not medicated and getting therapy, the patient will experience serious and even disasterous problems with consequences that not only imapct the patient but everyone in their professional and personal lives. For the bipolar patient known as capitalism the medication and therapy is known as regulation. Ongoing Democratic Socialism of the kind all our close allies have is also a necessary method of controlling and regulating the inevitable downside of capitalism. Without this, capitalism will always end up taking off on a self destructive binge that results in a spectacular crash or series of crashes that not only have longlasting negative consequences, but that completely negate any benefit of the mania portion of the natural boom/bust cycle. Eventually, the cycle of mania and depression can end up leading to the death the bipolar patient.
What is absolutely clear is that capitalism is a system that requires significant regulation if it is to operate in a manner that remains beneficial to society while preventing it's penchant for self destructive excess. The highs and manias and bubbles of the Laissez-faire approach are not worth the inevitable catastrophic crashes it results in. This is a lesson our nation and the world learned as a result of the Great Depression and which we sadly unlearned over the last 25-30 years. We, as a generation have many challenges before us but one of the most important is that we must make sure that this never happens again.
I am absolutely convinced that the crash is not over by any means, that it is ongoing and that we are definitely entering a new depression. I fear our government's policies particularly toward the banking and financial sectors are inadequate at best, but more likely just wrong and serve to actually exacerbate the problems we have and will have in coming years. It seems clear to me that neither the new administration nor all but a very, very precious few in the media or the elite classes generally understand exactly how bad the situation is or the real nature of it. Nor do the understand that this catastrophe makes a radical reordering necessary and that attempts to simply tweak on the margins of the existing system which has so badly failed us is unacceptable and will not work.
Our elites in every category have failed us miserably and have forfeited any claim they once had to the power they wield in our society. It is not only the banks that are bankrupt. The leadership of our society is bankrupt, incompetent and culpable for the disasterous consequences that have befallen the nation and the world. This would include the business, government, media, journalistic, opinion leading, wealthy classes all of whom have either been actively involved in and profiting from the widespread fraud and unrestrained greed or who were morally complicit via their inaction and failure to do anything at all to prevent what they understood very well was going on. They have all utterly failed to lead the nation in a responsible manner and to keep us stable, secure and prosperous. Right now we are none of those things.
In short, capitalism in it's entirety has, once again and quite precitably, failed and spectacularly so. This inevitable failure not only requires extraordinary permanent changes in the operation of our economy but of our society in general.
We must radically and permanently change the power and wealth distribution in our society and return to a far more level playing field where the inevitable and impulsive greed of predatory wealth is once again restrained from harming itself and everything else on earth. We must radically change the general services, benefits and support we, as a society, provide for ourselves by way of education, infrastructure, health care, and more. We must once and for all time adopt as part of our creed that the purpose of our society is to benefit the citizens who comprise the society. It is not to benefit the rich and powerful nor is it to benefit the interests of corporations and other predatory institutions at the expense of humanity. The pursuit of profit for it's own sake instead of being harnessed for the benefit of humanity is a malignant thing as we all can see.
If we fail to grasp the necessity of radically transforming our economy and our society we will be dooming future generations to exactly the same sort of economic cataclysm we are only entering into now. Our predecessors tried to spare us this fate via the New Deal, Fair Deal, New Frontier, and Great Society programs they established to blunt the excesses of capitalism. As time went on, progress on establishing more and greater such safequards occured in tandem with unprecedented prosperity for the common people of the nation as well as the predator classes. Over the past generation, the most powerful amongst the predator classes and their enablers in our political and governmental system managed to dismantle or eviscerate many of the aforementioned programs designed to protect us from the destructive excesses of capitalism. It is no coincidence that the prosperity of the common people began to stagnate and then decline in tandem with the halt of continuing social and economic progress and the dismantling of those mechanisms designed to ensure the prosperity of the common people. Thank God for the programs and safeguards that withstood the assault of the economic barbarians!
Now, it the task of our generation, to restore and rebuild the safeuards of the past and to institute new ones that will make the future of our children and grandchildren and posterity more secure. Some, but by no means all, of the essential new safeguards and supports we can no longer do without are:
1. A single payer national health care system the mission of which is to provide for, protect and maintain the health of every America. This system will be paid for with the tax dollars of our citizens and our businesses. The sole objective of this health care system will be provision of the best possible health care for all our people. We know this is the answer to the health care crisis. Any solution other than single payer will solve nothing and only prolong the excessive costs of the current system and it's failure to provide health care for our people.
2. A progressive system of taxation that requires the predator classes to pay their fair share in return for the many benefits society provides them with.
3. Restoration and encouragement and expansion of a strong system of worker run labor unions representing the common people with their employers and allowing them a voice in the workplace.
4. Establishing permanent indexing for minimum wages nationally so that the minimum wage will rise automaticaly with the cost of living in the future instead of being held hostage to the whims of polticians in Congress as it has been in the past. The negative effects of the depression of wages over the past 30 years is only now becoming apparent as workers who have been unable to save and who are barely making it are not in a position to bale out the predator class by spending more since they are so obscenely underpaid!
5. Investing in our public education system from early childhood through post-graduate level learning for the good of all our people, regardless of income. The health of our economy and of our democractic republic depends upon a well educated population.
6. Establishment of agressive/radical measures to reverse global warming to preserve the benefits of this nation for our posterity as it was preserved for us. America's natural resources, moderate climate, rich soil and abundant wildlife have been the foundation for our prosperity since the days of the pilgrims. If we don't preserve this for the future we will have failed completely in our obligation to do for them what was always done by past generations: passing along to the future an America better than the one we were given.
Automobile exhaust is the factor we can most easily control in combatting global warming and the gowing emission of greenhouse gases. The first and most effective measure must be mandating that all automobiles and most trucks be emissions free within 5 years. It can be done. We put a man on the moon in a similar time frame. It is simply a matter of political will.
7. Restoring American democracy by establishing publicly funded elections for all political offices in order to remove the influence of the predator classes from politics and level the playing field so that politicians do not depend upon the predators for reelection funds and the needs and concerns of the people are once again foremost in the minds of our elected officials. The corrupt system now in place will never and can never serve the public interest. It serves only the special interests of the powerful and wealthy and must be forever dismantled. The longer it is allowed to exist the greater is the peril to the liberty of the common people.
8. At minimum the Fairness Doctrine that served our nation so well must be restored for the electronic media. Also, all the major media conglomerates must be smashed and broken up so that no national corporation, international conglomerate or other concern or group of concerns can control the flow of information available to the public in the manner we have seen in the past 10-15 years. Media companies must remain local and regionally owned and operated. Diversity of ownership must be maintained if democracy is to be restored and thrive in America once again. A citizenry whose information is as truncated and controlled as that which corporate media now provides is a dangerous thing as we have seen very specifically in the debacle of the Iraq War and on other major issues confronting our nation in recent years.
The failure of our political and economic system as it has existed was inevitable. That need not be the case in the future. Unless we want another such episode like the one we are now enduring, but even bigger and more devastating, we must make sure that radical changes and measures are put in place to prevent it ever occuring again.
March 13, 2009 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
oleeb,
excellent post.
March 13, 2009 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
oleeb, may I recommend http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/dikkday48yahoocom/2009/03/universal-canon-of-ethical-blo.php ?
March 13, 2009 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
C'est la vie!
March 14, 2009 12:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Call it what you will. It's still paternalism.
March 13, 2009 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you have a point?
March 13, 2009 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I gather you're not quite up to interpreting my elusive, erudite, eclectic, generalist, humanist, populist, leftist perspective.
March 14, 2009 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well truly, Ellen, who is?
=D
March 14, 2009 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ellen, you forgot "circuitous".
March 15, 2009 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
This all started with Reagan. Reagan would spin out these folksy stories about how there was too way much regulation such as OSHA demanding that employee work bathrooms have 6 rolls of toilet paper on hand at all times. People started talking about how government was the problem and all these regulations had to be eliminated. Wall Street jumped on board and looted the nation. Most of Reagan's stories turned out to made up.
March 13, 2009 6:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Our current mess is a classic example of regulatory failure. A perfect storm of self-aggrandizement, neglect, and incompetence, have destroyed unimaginable amounts of wealth and will. Congress failed, the SEC failed, the Fed failed, and the CFTC failed. They all failed, and now you are paying the price. Notice I said "you", not "we."
Of course it's paternalism. As for enlightened, how are the other "enlightened" nations doing? Unless they have oil, they are in worse shape than we are. Don't believe me? See how well the dollar is doing. It's not because we are so great, it's because they are doing so poorly.And oh yeah, going Galt is a corporate thing also. You know it as offshoring.
March 13, 2009 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure how the OP meant "need to be protected from myself, ... up to the authorities"
It does look like he's relinquishing his own moral authority. But conscious mindfulness is what the self needs to protect it from its "incompetence", it is the authority in each of us. Relying on strangers for protection is iffy.
I think the OP means to say that humans are social animals and need to be able to depend on each other, thus kinships and community solidarity, but you're right to challenge how it was said as if calling for a benevolent dictator to run things.
March 13, 2009 9:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
My exact words were "it's up to the authorities to provide a modicum (emphasis added) of protection . . . "
From that you fellows paraphrase with such terms as wishing for someone to take care of me, relinquishing moral authority, wanting a benevolent dictatorship . . . "
In the interests of better dialog, try and grapple with nuance, if you can!
March 14, 2009 8:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, those are not your exact words, those are some of the relevant words from your post.
When criticizing a comment for lack of nuance, please don't make yourself out to be a fool by missing the nuance of the comment. Perhaps you'd care to reread my comment in re shooter for its meaning instead of as an excuse to try to be a bigger fool!
March 15, 2009 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
"No, those are not your exact words, those are some of the relevant words from your post."
You mean, 'who are you going to believe, me or your lyin eyes?'
Dialog is overrated.
March 16, 2009 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
More sophistry.
March 14, 2009 1:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Our current mess is a classic example of regulatory failure. A perfect storm of self-aggrandizement, neglect, and incompetence, have destroyed unimaginable amounts of wealth and will. Congress failed, the SEC failed, the Fed failed, and the CFTC failed. They all failed, and now you are paying the price.
I think you meant to emphasize "neglect." The Bush administration made it a priority to abandon regulation everywhere it could.
Unless they have oil, they are in worse shape than we are. Don't believe me? See how well the dollar is doing. It's not because we are so great, it's because they are doing so poorly.
When the euro began circulating in 2002, one euro was equivalent to one US dollar. It now costs $1.29 to buy a euro. That would seem to indicate, by your metric, that the EU has done about 30% better than we have for the past 7 years.
March 13, 2009 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
March 13, 2009 9:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, Bush era efforts to regulate were largely fake and stringing together excerpts out of context is usually lying in such situations.
March 13, 2009 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
March 13, 2009 9:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Hey Hey . . .
You still working on that third eye of yours?
~OGD~
March 13, 2009 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Has the euro appreciated or depreciated against the dollar in the past seven years? I am simply employing your metric.
As to the Democrats' responsibility, I agree to some extent. One conservative is almost as bad as another where it comes to economic principles. And certainly you will not try to deny that Messrs. Reagan, Bush, and Bush fought mightily to encourage deregulation, will you? It's practically the keystone principle of the now-disproven conservative canon.
March 14, 2009 7:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
The euro has hugely depreciated against the dollar as of late. That's all one needs to know for the moment.
As for excessive deregulation, we've had one Dem Pres in the midst of Reagan, Bush and Bush. I'm not suffering for the lack of regulation, how about you? If Rubin hadn't deigned to eschew regulation we probably wouldn't be in the soup. And the effort by W to rein back Fannie and Freddie was stymied by Dems. That doesn't quite fit the scenario you cling to, does it?
I can appreciate the rush to regulate and shed personal responsibility. It leaves you with someone to blame when something screws up. Hope that makes you feel better when looking at your financial statements. Heh.
March 15, 2009 9:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
The euro has hugely depreciated against the dollar as of late. That's all one needs to know for the moment.
This is a rather silly assertion, isn't it? How about if I just say, "Liberals in Congress caused last week's stock market rally -- a 10% increase! That's all one needs to know for now." I'd be scourged for failing to support such an outrageous statement, wouldn't I?
I'm not suffering for the lack of regulation, how about you?
As usual, the wrong questions yeild wrong answers. The correct question would be "Is the country suffering from deregulation?" The answer to that seems fairly obvious. Maddoff. Immune murderers in Iraq. Diseased peanuts. Lack of airliner inspections. No negotiations for Medicare Part B prescription prices. Toxic assets. Carpal-tunnel syndrome engendered by typeing so many examples of how the country is suffering from deregulation by the recent kleptocracy.
I can appreciate the rush to regulate and shed personal responsibility. It leaves you with someone to blame when something screws up. Hope that makes you feel better when looking at your financial statements. Heh.
Yes, that's irritating. It follows no logic and makes no debating point, but it is irritating. So allow me to offer my congratulations to you for producing a third-rate imitation of a fourth-rate Limbaugh. Why not stop back when you actually have a point to make?
March 15, 2009 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing to add, Rotwang, except thanks for the post and the link to the Marxist archive. Looks like lots of light reading.
March 13, 2009 9:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent.
March 14, 2009 1:20 AM | Reply | Permalink