TPMCafe
« How to create millions of jobs | Home | Corporate Citizens? Play Ball! »

The Second Great Depression Bogeyman

user-pic

Our political leaders continually assert that we should be thanking them that we are not in a second Great Depression rather than complaining about how bad things are. The second Great Depression theme came up repeatedly in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. It also featured prominently in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's defense of his handling of the AIG bailout.

While we should all be thankful that we are not in a second Great Depression, just as we should be thankful that the world has not been destroyed by nuclear war, the "Great Depression" defense is a tool of fools and liars. Exactly what set of events in the world would have given us a second Great Depression, defined as a decade of double-digit unemployment?

It is almost certainly true that if we had let the cascade of bank collapses continue in the fall of 2008, taking down not just Lehman, but also Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe.

But what would have prevented the Fed from subsequently flooding the system with liquidity and the government from boosting the economy and employment with large-scale jobs programs? There is certainly nothing obvious that would have interfered with these efforts to boost the economy and restore employment.

We do know how to create demand. It is really very simple - you just have to spend money; most people are willing to work for it. Since Keynes we have known how to create jobs and reduce unemployment in a downturn, even if politicians may lack the courage to act. There never was any basis for a fear of a second Great Depression. This is simply an invention by those who are trying to justify their disastrous economic policy. The second Great Depression line is then repeated by people who consider themselves to be knowledgeable about economics, but in reality don't have a clue as to what they are saying.

It is important to come to grips with this second Great Depression bogeyman since, obviously, anything is better than a second Great Depression. As long as people believe that our leaders saved us from this horror, then they won't be sufficiently outraged about a bailout that left Goldman Sachs and the rest of the Wall Street crew richer than ever. They also won't be nearly as angry as they should be about economic policies that are projected to leave us with excessive rates of unemployment for many years into the future. And the public will not be nearly as mad as it should be about the incredible ineptitude of policymakers and economists that allowed for this collapse in the first place.

The reality is that we got into this mess because of an overwhelming excess of greed and stupidity on the part of the Wall Street bankers and the people deciding economic policy. We continue to face excessive rates of unemployment because of a continuing reluctance to pursue policies that can restore the economy to health.

Very briefly, one of these policies is more government spending to create jobs. The government can employ people directly; it can give companies incentives to employ people, and it can give tax cuts that give people more money to spend. Mix and match in large enough quantities and we will get the unemployment rate down to more acceptable levels.

Similarly, the Federal Reserve Board can target a moderate inflation rate (3-4 percent) with its monetary policy. This would both lower real interest rates and help to alleviate the debt burden that is preventing many households from spending.

Another route to boost the economy would be to deliberately push down the value of the dollar against other currencies. This would boost US net exports and get our trade deficit closer to balance.

Finally, if we can't boost the economy to levels of output that support full employment, we can go the other way and adopt policies that encourage people to work fewer hours. Germany and the Netherlands have aggressively pushed "work sharing" policies that have kept unemployment from rising in the downturn. Thanks to work sharing, the unemployment rate in the Netherlands is less than 4.0 percent even though they have had a larger loss of GDP than the United States.

For political reasons, the president and Congress are reluctant to pursue these paths. However, a population that is suffering through double-digit unemployment may not be very sympathetic to the political concerns of its leaders.

However, the public will be hesitant to demand stronger action if they are convinced that they should be thankful that we have avoided a second Great Depression. So, it is important that the people know that they have nothing to be thankful for: our leaders wrecked the economy, end of story. It's time that they take the measures necessary to set things right, even if it is a bit unsettling to the Wall Street boys and other powerful interests.


229 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Deep Throat's advice to Bob Woodward to follow the money would also apply to the machinations of the government/financial sector last Fall.

Afterall, the 2nd Gilded Age has seen the richest 1 percent holding wealth valued at $16.8 trillion - $2 trillion more than 90 percent of the world's combined wealth. That's a helluvalot of money to 'follow.'

Facebook

What youre saying is completely true. I agreee with you
children health

Facebook

I do agree with all the ideas you have presented in your post. They’re very convincing and will definitely work. Still, the posts are very short for starters. Could you please extend them a bit from next time? Thanks for the post.by healthy families and child health plus

user-pic

Let us give thanks...that the power and obscene wealth of the uber-rich has been protected. Without them there would be no job creation...in eastern Asia where the workers can be paid next to nothing which means even more money for the wealthy to gamble with and put our whole economic system at risk. We are so fortunate, I dare say blessed, to have such caring oligarchs and people in government who truly appreciate them.

Amen...


Hey? Can they also take credit for there not being any large asteroid impacts on this planet that would wipe out life as we know it?

user-pic

Asteroid impacts have been prevented by allowing major sports stars to accumulate more wealth in one year of warming a bench than an average citizen can make in a lifetime. Let's give credit where it is due.

I think what people forget is that the gambling being done by "too big to fail" banks is benefiting the individuals doing the gambling, and benefiting them without any risk on their part. If your employee can obtain $10 million in a year of gambling it is quite a stretch to think that employee is looking after your interests above all. Those huge bonuses handed out by the banks are not decreased just because the banks lost billions of dollars as a result of the employee actions.

user-pic

You're right Hoppy! If you can get jsut as rich gambling with other people's money and losing it as if you would when you win what the hell difference does it make if you do a good job or not? Might as well have fun and bet all the longshots you run into. Besides, one of em might pay off and make up for all the bad bets that didn't.

user-pic

Hey they also kept the elephants out of Cleveland and blizzards from bringing Miami to a complete stand still. As well as preventing Malaria outbreak in Boise Idaho.


C

user-pic

"May your house be safe from tigers."

user-pic

lol

sometimes i think i must be on another planet.

user-pic

Don't forget to thank Rep Nancy Peloce, she single handly kept the Natives of American Samoa from being paid even the minimum wage.

user-pic

Well, well, water is still wet, the sun is still a bright shiny orb, and Hawaiian... uh, exsqueeze me, Inokeah, is still talking irrelevant nonsense.

For those wondering what Inokeah is going on about, here - compliments of the website My Right Wing Dad - you may read the e-mail message making the rounds on the wingut circuit on the topic of Pelosi and American Samoa. It's a classic, having been in circulation since at least October 2008.

And here's the actual story behind all this. The actual facts of the matter mostly exonerate Pelosi from any wrong-doing in this matter, but since the actual account is a bit complex, and requires a minimum amount of reading comprehension to understand nuance and the occasional big word, I could where ol' Inokeah might get bored and lost before getting two sentences into the actual account.

Inokeah, you just go paddlin' on those fine Hawaiian waters, or head on down to Wakiki and oggle the pretty tourist girls. Don't you worry your sweet li'l head about these difficult political matters, now.

user-pic

It just occurred to me that Inokeah might have no respect for Dems for the simple reason that they don't think really big in their acts of corruption and criminality. In that regard, another story involving the Western Pacific comes to mind, involving Jack Abramoff, the Northern Marianas island, Washington Republicans, and sexual slavery. Why, here's a fine account of it, right from this very blog.

Izzat the problem, Inokeah, that Nancy Pelosi was insufficiently evil to earn your respect? You should write her expressing your criticism; you never know, it might get a response!

Facebook

Thanks for your patience and sorry for the inconvenience!

Best regards, Mary, CEO of youtube to mp3

user-pic

"But what would have prevented the Fed from subsequently flooding the system with liquidity and the government from boosting the economy and employment with large-scale jobs programs? "

Um, President John McCain? We are playing "what if" here, right?

"We do know how to create demand. It is really very simple - you just have to spend money; most people are willing to work for it. Since Keynes we have known how to create jobs and reduce unemployment in a downturn, even if politicians may lack the courage to act."

You ought to know by now, never, never overestimate the ability of politicians to accomplish anything "simple". And never, never to underestimate their cowardice.

I'm sorry, but this is purely revisionist history. It amounts to asserting that since we didn't get into a 2nd great depression, it follows that nothing really needed to be done to head it off, and further, that anyone who asserts that something did need to be done to head off another depression is simply bullsh*tting us.

"The reality is that we got into this mess because of an overwhelming excess of greed and stupidity on the part of the Wall Street bankers and the people deciding economic policy. We continue to face excessive rates of unemployment because of a continuing reluctance to pursue policies that can restore the economy to health."

This is absolutely true, but it had Nothing to do with whether we had to do the bailout, or whether it was successful.
I find your prescriptions for fixing the joblessness problem compelling, these steps seem to me to be exactly the right steps to take to boost us back to full employment.

"However, the public will be hesitant to demand stronger action if they are convinced that they should be thankful that we have avoided a second Great Depression. So, it is important that the people know that they have nothing to be thankful for: our leaders wrecked the economy, end of story. It's time that they take the measures necessary to set things right, even if it is a bit unsettling to the Wall Street boys and other powerful interests."

This however, has nothing to do with taking those necessary steps. On the contrary, I find that the middling results of an insufficiently large original stimulus argues that it was nonetheless effective, and that a second stimulus is necessary. Hey, it worked last time! And No. "Our" leaders did not wreck the economy, end of story"! REPUBLICAN leaders and their chosen Goldman Sachs henchmen imbedded in our financial regulatory apparatus wrecked the economy. This all has nothing to do with whether we should be grateful to the politicians for "saving" us form another depression.


user-pic

Obfuscation.

user-pic


"But what would have prevented the Fed from subsequently flooding the system with liquidity..."

They did this with their 0% loans to the big financial institutions who then are charging credit card holders up to 30% to "borrow" that "free" money.

It is no wonder that financial institutions have shown the largest profits ever in the last completed quarter.
.

user-pic

On reading Dean I read 'extortion' (not the piddling Mafia-type extortion that the law frowns upon) but extortion on a truly grand scale - protecting the entire American economy from guaranteed ruin. When the Mafia practices it, it's illegal but when practiced sub-rosa by a cabal of government and the financial sector, it's legal?

user-pic

We always knew how to create jobs when corporations could employ workers in America's factories, but that is no longer the case, what with factories becoming an anachronism.

So social remedies are the answer, but "social" means "socialism" so it won't work in the USA.

More war would accomplish the same purpose, as in WWII, and the geniuses are working on that real hard.

user-pic

Do you think our armed forces personnel will be willing to serve 10 uninterrupted years on a battlefield? If so, then another war may be what we need, but God forbid we have a draft so that the rest of us have to get involved. We like our wars far away and fought by other people. Should we pick a good candidate country, flood them with military goods, then goad them into acting up, so we can have a war with them? It worked twice, so why not once more?

user-pic

I'll echo old Norman Mailer who said, "Fighting a war to fix something works about as well as going to a whorehouse to get rid of the clap."

On the other hand, WWII was the biggest fiscal-stimulus program in history...

user-pic

Actually, it was the biggest enforced savings program in history . . .

user-pic

Who or (what) was "forced" to save?

user-pic

Any American with an income -- because there wasn't anything to buy and the little there was was rationed.

Note: 15 million slaves ($60/mo. and all the world you can see from a foxhole) together with millions of Rosie Riveters vainly searching for a pair of nylons to spend those full employment wages on.

user-pic

Very succinct and clever description. It also helped that in 1945, the entire rest of the developed world had their industrial capacity bombed to smithereens kind of helped our manufacturers as well.

user-pic

Only if the "smitthereened" had the wherewithal (brass in pocket) to pay for what the manufacturers manufactured.

With the exception of the April 1948 Marshall Plan (taxpayers loaning money to themselves -- that is, vendor financing), did the smitthereened have the wherewithal?

user-pic

Good point. It made better sense than the treaty of Versaille.

user-pic

Interesting example of an historical view and a first-hand view. Our buying power was only limited by the unavailability of certain commodities but otherwise we bought with the same abandon we buy today.

Other than buying War Bonds (for the 'cause' not to 'save' money) why would we save to spend tomorrow when tomorrow we may be blown to smithereens?

user-pic

We always knew how to create jobs when corporations could employ workers in America's factories, but that is no longer the case, what with factories becoming an anachronism.

This is the truth that Washington and especially the republicans refuse to accept. Smaller companies are doing fairly well but they are not focused on making a zillion bits and pieces to sell to the masses either.

C

user-pic

WW II was massive government spending. So we temporarily use massive (non-war) government spending again. Then we deal with the deficit and debt after the economy is humming again.

user-pic

tlees2,
The economy is never going to "hum" again. Never. The good jobs aren't here even potentially in the quantity they used to be, because thanks to outsourcing and "free trade" the manufacturing jobs are largely gone. Gone. Never to return. They aren't here and they won't be here.

Now health care and a few other services? They're good. Raise your kids to be nurses. Or soldiers.

user-pic

I agree - unless we start using massive Keynesianism.

user-pic

Hey, at least I've heard Gates is ramping up the anti-China and anti-Russia warpaths.

http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2010/01/20/u-s-china-military-tensions-grow/

user-pic

Oh, good. Another knee-jerk critic of the Obama administration. You can't have too many of those.

user-pic

You don't seem to have addressed these few firms assuring the obligations of every other company and the cascading havoc each company's uninsured and unmet obligations would have created, including AIG's role.

Is that a simple issue too?

I hope you're right overall, because you're reciting a teabagger talking point and I'd hate for you to be careless in denying the president credit for keeping the planetary economy from cataclysmic failure as teabaggers and Republicans do.

user-pic

Dean's nailed it.

It's not an overstatement to say that it's one of the best if not the very best opinion piece he's written; he's outKrugmaned Krugman by a mile.

The idea that the PTB (Bernanke, Paulson, Geithner, et als.) saved the nation -- indeed the world -- from a "Second Great Depression" is self-serving spin where not pure propaganda. It's based on erroneous dogma spewed by Federal Reservists and their minions -- a quasi-religious faith in the theory of fractional banking (i.e., reserve balances=lending). But Dean has taken that insight further.

As long as an unsophisticated population continues to place its trust in conventional, academic financial theory, it will give wholy unwarranted authority to the very proponents of that theory whose otherworldly ideology let the credit bubble run out of control.

More importantly, those who actually understand what went wrong will have no voice, and there will be no reform.

Quaere. Who's to educate the citizenry -- if not the President who owns the bully pulpit? And I see no evidence that he has the intelligence or courage to fulfill that duty.

user-pic

Is that supposed to be a compliment to put Dean in the same camp as the moronic Keynsian Paul Krugman? Here is NYT's brightest in 2002 selling his double dip bogeyman as the economy was beginning an 84 month recovery.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/02/opinion/dubya-s-double-dip.html

To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble.

Should we really be taking advice from a cheerleader of the housing bubble?


user-pic

I'm not sure 1) whether Krugman was recommending the Fed create a housing bubble (he cites PIMCO's Paul McCulley for the idea) or 2) whether he's employing a bit of irony and/or tongue-in-cheek tone as he goes about the task of mocking Greenspan.

In the event Krugman was correct: the only way to avoid the double-dip recession we should have experienced back in 2002-3 -- the only way acceptable to the "Washington consensus" -- was to promote a credit bubble (housing was just the most available fodder to power the bubble).

I'm sure I needn't remind you how that turned out.

user-pic
I'm not sure 1) whether Krugman was recommending the Fed create a housing bubble (he cites PIMCO's Paul McCulley for the idea) or 2) whether he's employing a bit of irony and/or tongue-in-cheek tone as he goes about the task of mocking Greenspan.

If you read the article, he clearly was serious about creating a housing bubble in his usual "Why won't anybody listen to me, the sky is falling" tone.


In the event Krugman was correct: the only way to avoid the double-dip recession we should have experienced back in 2002-3 -- the only way acceptable to the "Washington consensus" -- was to promote a credit bubble (housing was just the most available fodder to power the bubble).
Well, I think it's clear he was not correct,...in fact, not only were he and Greenspan wrong, they were cataclysmically wrong. I'm not sure if you are floating a hypothetical, but with 911, the near collapse of the transportation industry, Wall Street itself shut down for nearly a week for the first time since the early part of the previous century, the cost of going to war in Afghanistan to go after Al Qaeda, and the need in general to reinvest in the military after Clinton cut it in half,...yes, it seems surprising that an economic plan could have been devised to avoid a double dip recession, but a plan was devised and as I said, there was an 84 month recovery and no double dip.



the only way acceptable to the "Washington consensus" -- was to promote a credit bubble (housing was just the most available fodder to power the bubble).
If by Washington consensus, you mean Krugman and the Keynsians, they were wrong if they believed that was the only answer. Bush Cut taxes and created a plan that was friendly toward small business. That was an "Acceptable" way and it worked. Krugman was a cheerleader for disaster.
I'm sure I needn't remind you how that turned out.
No, I am fully aware how the Housing bubble turned out and I think Krugman is aware too, but he just hopes nobody remembers how disastrously wrong he was about it when he was yelling about it from the mountaintop.

user-pic

Washington Consensus -- generally, Neo-Keynsians, among whom Krugman counts himself, criticized the Washington consensus. Larry Summers? Not so much.

user-pic

Seriously, who believes in the Washington Consensus given that China and India are examples of the direct opposite road to economic success.

user-pic

Bush cut taxes and created a plan that . . . worked.

Now, you're being silly.

When it comes to weighing the causes of the 84 month economic expansion, the effects of Bush's tax cuts (and pro-business policies) relate to the effects of the credit bubble as a flea's weight relates to the weight of the elephant on which it rides.

user-pic

Just stumbled on Arnold Kling explaining why you -- TJKing -- are misinterpreting Krugman's 2002 op-ed.

A bit late but was sure you'd want to hear the conservative viewpoint. So there it is.

user-pic

Well, if you think Krugman is "moronic", which adjective would you use to describe George W. Bush?

user-pic

Retired

user-pic

"submoronic"?

user-pic

Ellen, I can't understand your argument. You may not like fractional-reserve banking, and may think that our banking laws shouldn't permit our economy to rely on it so heavily, but the fact is that our economy is heavily dependent on fractional-reserve banking. Perhaps bad banking laws and traditions permitted the construction of a house of cards; but a house of cards it was.

Baker is not trying to convince us only of the sensible position that we shouldn't have built a house of cards. He's trying to convince us that no such house of cards existed. Or else he is trying to convince us that because there are various house-of-cards rebuilding tools available to government policy-makers, all the people who were warning about the impending house of cards collapse were "fools and liars". But he brings nothing to the table that even comes close to evidence for his claims, other than the same stubborn, reality-avoiding obstinacy he was peddling here back in those days.

I shouldn't be surprised with more of this blind-leading-the-blind mob stupidity, I suppose. This site, and its Reader Post fountain of oracles, was rife in 2008 with some of the most insane, backward, economically illiterate, goofball crackpottery that could be found any where on the internet. Along the same lines, recent discourse in the "progressive" camp of economic luddites constantly confuses these two easily distinguishable propositions: (a) that it is a bad thing to have an economy in which there are many financial firms that are too big to fail; (b) that our economy didn't actually contain any entities that were two big to fail. Proposition (a) is a serious and defensible claim; proposition (b) strikes me as a dangerous delusion, and if the people running our government had believed this in late 2008, they might have plunged us into something far more catastrophic than we have already faced.

user-pic

I responded -- in the appropriate style -- to your rant below before reading this comment. Here, I intended to adopt a different style.

I do not like or dislike "fractional-reserve banking." I dismiss it out-of-hand as a cart-before-the-horse academic theory which is wrong empirically and worse, wrong as a basis of governmental policy, a policy which relies on increasing or decreasing bank reserves in the expectation of controlling/influencing bank lending.

Banks lend when they think there's profit to be made and thereafter, via interbank lending, Eurodollar and CD markets, or loans obtained directly from the Fed, secure the reserves they're legal required to hold. The Three Cs (sometimes given as Five Cs), not the amount of bank reserves, determine bank lending and its secondary effect, an increase or decrease in the money supply.

The current situation (banks holding huge amounts of Fed sponsored reserves while the amounts of loans to firms and consumers go down and down) should surprise no one -- well no one except Bernanke, Geithner, Summers -- and worse for us, Obama.

For a quick discussion, see The Roving Cavaliers of Credit

user-pic

OK, Ellen, suppose that it is true that we don't live in a neoclassical fractional-reserve system, but in a credit money system as described by Moore, and suppose that the money supply does not exceed debt, but that debt exceeds the money supply. Then that would explain why the fed-sponsored introduction of reserves are not producing the additional loans.

But this supposition adds nothing at all in support of Baker's contention that we were not on the verge of a depression in the fall of 2008. One can clearly have a collapse of credit and a depression in either type of system. You can still have a rapid cascade of defaults and failures in a credit-money system. And it can also be the case that government and central bank action is necessary simply to slow down the cascade of defaults and failures, and runs on deposits, even if that action doesn't stimulate as much additional lending as neoclassical economists would hope.

So I still say that Baker gives us zero evidence for his claims that we were not on the verge of a depression in the fall of 2008, and that government and central bank action had no role in averting such a depression.

user-pic
As long as an unsophisticated population continues to place its trust in conventional, academic financial theory...

I don't think it's as much that we put our trust in this hocus-pocus as much as these fancy-pants financial theorists are put in our throats - and shoved downward. Because the FED, and its appointive chairmanship, is a generation away from voter accountability, we're mostly helpless bystanders as the next well-connected egghead with the "right" credentials, who's attended the right parties and kissed the right hams, steps up to help take us to economic hell. The unsophisticated out here, who wouldn't know a Gucci from a Goya, have minimal input in looting committed by our betters.

user-pic

It is amazing to me that once a person gets a degree in economics, he forgets the simple fact that anyone, any company, or any government cannot continue to spend 120% of their income indefinitely. Borrowing that extra 20% every year eventually must lead to insolvency.

The economists at the Federal Reserve and advising Congress have totally forgotten this basic fact.

Expect the next bubble to burst to be the Federal Deficit. That has been the biggest ponzi scheme ever thought of - borrowing more and more money to pay off higher and higher past debts.

The Federal Reserve has been keeping interest rates down in order to keep the cost of the National Debt withing reason, but those interest rates are now as low as they can go - 0% to major banks.

Where do we go from here? Paying banks for borrowing money from the Federal Reserve, or to double digit inflation because there is more money available that there are goods to purchase?

What other options are there? Canceling the debt like GWB intimated he was planning to do with the Social Security Fund - all those worthless pieces of paper in West Virginia, or starting a war over the non-payment of the USA's debt to China?
.

user-pic

A Ponzi scheme presupposes a limited amount of money. Eventually the scheme has to collapse. Our Government can create money ex nihilo: indefinitely. That's the difference.

user-pic

Yes. That is the position and the road taken by Zimbabwe, a nation now experiencing massive inflation and by Germany in the 1920's and 1930's where it eventually let to the takeover by Hitler. That is really what is needed in the USA.

Just create all the money you need to run a spendthrift government by printing massive amounts of paper money. It is cheap since it only costs about 2 cents to print a $100 bill and the effects are not immediately felt since it takes some time for the costs of goods to rise to match the amount of money available to buy those goods.
.

user-pic

I repeat, an economist is a person who can't tell you tomorrow why what he predicted yesterday didn't happen today. Economics is not a science - no matter how much economists try to palm it off as being one.

user-pic

Wrong. Economics is a science.

It is just that the "economists" in charge of the US Government's economy are like the "Creationists" or like those other "scientists" who are saying that human activity has no effect on the world's atmosphere and climate.

They are putting the wishes of their political or religious masters ahead of any real science.
.

user-pic

I think that what we avoided was pushing most financial firms into declaring bankruptcy. Once they did that, due to a cascade of failures to meet obligations and/or to settle payments with each other, the electronic payment system would cease to exist. SWIFT would cease to exist. FedWire would still be there, but there would be no computers at the FIs to receive the messages.

At that point, there could be no flooding of a non-existent payment system with liquidity. And client of the FIs could not withdraw deposits, get loans, etc, until the bankruptcy courts had resolved the mess. This would likely take months at least and millions of lawyer-years of litigation.

user-pic

Right!

So that means that Dean, with all his accolades here notwithstanding, is *totally* wrong.

Not much else to say.

user-pic

. . . there would be no computers at the FIs [financial intermediaries?] to receive the messages.

Hey. . . Tony. Citibank's bankrupt. Quick, rent some U-Hauls. Time's wasting. We got lots of z990s to pick up before dawn.

user-pic

z990s in NYC? How quaint! No wonder citi is screwed up.

By now the remaining ones should all be in non-descript buildings in suburban or rural locations.

The only IT systems in the city should be server and compute farms to support local workstations and trading apps.

user-pic

Just trying to smoke you out, Merrill -- you . . . you backroom Simon Legree.

Seriously though -- does your fulsome knowledge of modern banking practices come at the cost of a certain loss of perspective caused by being a gear in the machinery of the industry?

A fish doesn't notice or take into account the water in which it swims.

user-pic

My understanding of banking practices was mainly gained in an attempt to figure out why they were so technologically backward and resistant to change. Much of the time I was the fish out of water. My relationship with the industry was terminated after several years, and while it lasted, it mainly focused on applying expertise gained elsewhere to systems on the retail side, not investment banking.

Perhaps I was overwhelmed by the breadth and complexity of the global financial system.

But I have the feeling that a Harvard or Princeton economist would have no more understanding of a CitiGroup or Deutsche Bank than an MIT or Stanford computer scientist would have an understanding of an AT&T or Deutsche Telekom.

user-pic

I agree with the general policy thrust Mr. Baker proposes, but I have a slightly different take on the whole notion of whether our gloriously corrupt leaders saved us from another great depression. My personal preference would be for the government to adopt a policy of hiring people to work for the government as was done so effectively during the great depression and also to establish a direct mortgage lending program of very low interest mortgage loans to any and all American homeowners on their primary residence. These two policies would have the greatest direct impact on our most pressing economic problems: unemployment and the foreclosure crisis. But I digress...

My point in this comment is that I don't think they saved us from another great depression at all. I believe we are in the midst of one right now and we're going to be in it for a much longer time than necessary if the boys at the top continue to refuse to admit it. A decade of double digit unemployment? I think we're easily going to experience that unless something drastic is done since the current unemployment rates are obviously inaccurate and we're currently experiencing something close to 20% unemployment nationwide. Prolonged economic deprivation for millions of American families without knowing how long it will last or if they will ever recover? I think that is exactly what is going to be happening if the government doesn't quickly act to prevent this eventuality but I have no faith at all that they will.

In short, the only way to combat the new depression that we're in, and IMHO we are in one, is to act decisively and quickly before the problems become so overwhelming that they will be impossible to reverse in any reasonable time frame.

user-pic

Bogeyman?

While we should all be thankful that we are not in a second Great Depression, just as we should be thankful that the world has not been destroyed by nuclear war, the "Great Depression" defense is a tool of fools and liars.

Here is the "Fearmongerer in chief" warning that if we don't support his pork spending stimulus we will fall into the abyss forever.

"This recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse,"


He also threatened that if we don't support Obamacare we will go "bankrupt".

We did as he wanted and we now have 5 million jobs lost, Double digit unemployment, and have sunk deeper into the crisis, and he pocketed our money and won't answer our phone calls.

...a tool of fools and liars. Indeed.

user-pic

I was thinking about putting similar quotes from Obama's Feb. 2009 and Jan. 2010 addresses to Congress but I see you have already done so.

My reason, though, was not the same as yours. I want to understand why Dean Baker is apparently being so chicken, using terminology like "our leaders," and not just coming out and saying that President Obama is either liar-in-chief, or the dummy-in-chief being fooled by his advisers. I want to understand why he won't go there, does he have some other explanation for Obama's statements and policies? He says For political reasons, the president and Congress are reluctant to pursue these paths. Isn't he doing something similar in avoiding the Obama word?

user-pic

I think he isn't saying Obama because he means more than Obama and partiularly Bernanke though there are others.

user-pic

And, come to think of it, I think also he's talking about all the congressional D's that are using that line of argument too. So it's a theme that he is going after, one that is being pedaled by more than just Obama.

user-pic

As Senator and then as President, Obama voted for nearly every penny of the Deficit that he now claims will kill us all. He carries more blame than any of the other congressmen or Bush for that matter.

user-pic

I don't think there is much of a mystery as to why political leaders are reluctant to take on the most powerful owners and aggregators of capital in the country, AA. The latter own the country. Everyone can understand the personal and political dangers inherent in challenging the bosses.

But Baker's final paragraph is gibberish. He says:

However, the public will be hesitant to demand stronger action if they are convinced that they should be thankful that we have avoided a second Great Depression. So, it is important that the people know that they have nothing to be thankful for ...

This seems the exact opposite of what ordinary good sense would recommend. It is because the public believes that we narrowly averted the worst kind of economic catastrophe imaginable that they are still motivated to do something major in the way of financial reform. If they conclude, on the other had, that the warnings of possible collapse and ruin of the country's capital system was just a big phony lie, then they are also likely conclude that the whole thing was just a fake emergency hawked to squeeze bailout dollars out of the taxpayer. Not only will they conclude that there is actually no pressing reason to rework and re-regulate the financial system, and break up institutions that are too big to fail; they will also conclude that the only thing we did wrong in 2008 was not letting the system collapse and unwind itself into pieces we could pick up later.

user-pic

So, Dan, *I* both believe that it was a phony emergency to extort tax-payer funds AND that we should reform the financial sector.

For some reason you think this is an irrational set of beliefs...

WHAT?!

user-pic

Frank Luntz's new memo, which Republicans are already adopting, is designed to tie these threads together: Bank Bailout, Bad; Regulatory Reform Tied to Bailouts. Ergo: Reforms Bad.
It seems to be working; many were hoping that Chris Dodd's final days would be spent as a Crusader for tough new rules. Nope; he has signaled that his committee may drop Warren's Consumer Financial Protection Agency, AND the 'Volcker Rule.'


user-pic

I don't think dems' corruption should be put down to a popular revolt against reform that can be attributed to Luntz' talking points.

The dems have a worse-than-nothing set of reforms because they are corrupt. You need look no further.

user-pic

Good grief, you know I don't! It looks like I tied the two together. I've watched the goddam White House as it skirted real regs. I meant that Dodd in this instance has folded almost completely; insiders say he wants a final bill to go on his record, and doesn't want to push for anything that a few Republicans won't vote for.
That dashes some foolish hopes that he would do the right thing, not just pretend to do the right thing, like on credit card 'reform.'
It wasn't primarily to Republicans the Banking lobbyist money went; and it was predominatly pro-business Dems who have gotten elected to Congress in the past few cycles.

user-pic

Plus, Luntz's talking points came out yesterday; the Corporatist Dems have been balking all along without his help. But it will make it less likely that people will push Congress or the Senate for reform. Plus, Melissa Bean in the HOuse:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/02/melissa-bean-a-democrat-b_n_400993.html

I believe I also heard an interview with Elizabeth Warren in which she said that had the banks not been bailed out, there would have been catastrophic failure.

user-pic

Hey Wendy, I really don't have much time for these 'establish-the-narrative' type considerations. But Baker is right on the basic problem of the-powers-that-be managing to convince people that they should basically be happy to be alive, that Bernanke is some kind of friggin hero, that incompetent bankers getting bumper bonuses is just the way of the world, that the worst of the crisis is over, etc.

That otherwise intelligent people are bitching about this basic point in Baker's column is truly depressing.

Just my opinion, I guess. No links nor hyperlinks. Sorry.
;0)

user-pic

I blew my communication again! I was trying to say Warren agreed there WOULDN'T have been catastrophe for the world, just maybe for the banks. And Bean is the tough Dem who won't let good reform through in the House; she steers all the new ConservaDems, who have veto power.
We're on the same side here; I am having brain trouble lately with typing and transposing letters, and seeing my errors in what I type. As far as a depression, this is one for many, if not most Americans. There doesn't seem any will to fix the economy past a temporary fix for Wall Street; reform will be a joke as bad as credit card 'reform,' and they know we can't do a fucking thing about it.
And thank you for no citations for your opinion!

user-pic

Please define "Obamacare."

user-pic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obamacare

Try Google or if that doesn't help, Yahoo works well too.

user-pic

We did as he wanted . . . .>

Actually, we didn't -- compare the proposed stimulus bill with the bill as enacted.

user-pic

OK, fair enough. It would be more accurate to say we did what the Democrats wanted at the behest of their party leader Barack Obama. No house Republicans voted for it and only 3 GOP Senators.

I'm not sure which of the many manifestations Obama proposed for a stimulus plan you are referring to, but before taking office, he recommended a $175 Billion plan that featured immediate tax benefits for Small Businesses and private sector job creation. The bill in congress was quadruple the cost and focused primarily on the public sector.

Now a year and nearly 5 million lost jobs later, he is reluctantly returning to the private sector focus and small business focus.

It is ironic that when he felt he had to say what the public wanted to hear, he had a more responsible plan, when he took office it exploded into a monster of pork that we now know scared the crap out of the American people, and now that he feels he has to be responsible to the will of the people, he is returning to a more responsible plan.

It is disturbing when you have a leader who knows the lest about how to solve our problems and who for a year didn't really care. I think it explains why people are saying we have a "deficit of trust".

user-pic

As this is seemingly another formidable TPM Article and similar formidable replies and with room for speculation, I humbly thank you all and humbly and briefly re-package and re-mention some of my previous concerns and continue to suggest the following approach and applications towards proper and forthright solvency endeavors.

As 'In God We Trust' is written on our US Currency and as a I presume a reasonable person would concur that the enactment of the Death Penalty and/or threats thereof is not supported by any proper and forthright Democracy, Law and/or Religion. I therefore suggest that proper and forthright oversight and accountability be applied and then the much needed resolves to the US and World Economic concerns would have a more fair and equal ability to the resolves and solvency concerns and hopefully more fully fullfill the avenue towards the endeavors of a Peace for All.

Thank you.

user-pic

Re: the "cascading effect" critics (Overreach This, and Merrill for example).

I'm too lazy to re-read Baker, but I think what he is saying is that these guys got us into the mess so they are culpable. Not exactly an endorsement for claiming we should have done otherwise (i.e. bailout). He does say this for example

It is almost certainly true that if we had let the cascade of bank collapses continue in the fall of 2008, taking down not just Lehman, but also Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe

The rest of his piece is in the present tense, meaning that he is prescribing what we should do now.

He does imply that had we not bailed out the banks it would NOT have lead to a Second Great Depression, but I have not heard otherwise from critics of his piece. That things would have gotten worse than they are now he explicitly states. What he is denying is that it would have lead to a "Second Great Depression".

user-pic

Oh spare me.. had we done nothing, let the bank's collapse, we would actually be in better stead than we are now. People with actually intellectual acumen stated that the government should have gone in, forced total disclosure, and forced the bad banks to go belly up, and performed restructuring, but that's about it. Face it, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, RBS to name a few, were not US owned banks, and AIG and Citibank, not majority US owned any longer. Citi, owned by the Saudis, and AIG, majority owned by Indians all helped create the mortgage crisis, in fact, German owned Deutschebank was the first bank at the trough demanding to be able to sell mortgages to those who were not qualified to acquire them. We bailed out foreign owned banks, and that money went over seas, as it did when we bailed out Goldman Sachs and others like them. The fat bonuses that GS bankers in the UK and Europe are receiving, are paid for by US taxpayers.

If you need to have your lips attached to the HoOTUS's ass, perform the spectacle elsewhere.

user-pic

oops, accidently hit enter and submitted the entry before finishing.

We have untold millions of American citizens homeless and destitute because of the corruption of the HObama administration. In fact, like during the first great depression tent cities are now named after our corrupt president, Obamavilles. Incidently, I'm not letting off Obama's brother by another mother, George W. Bush off the hook, because the untold millions I referred to, have been those added to the homeless population since the pimp in chief took the whitehouse last year. Perhaps to an elite moron like Baker, the dire poverty and suffering of good and decent American citizens is insignificant, but then again, what else have we gotten from the scumbags affiliated with this administration, except frequent suggestions of "let them eat cake".

user-pic

Dude. Don't be a racist douchebag here. It won't fly.

-- ARG

user-pic

Actually I don't anyone could say what would have happened had we let 'em fail. Maybe we would have avoided a true depression. But then again, the global economy as it is now is relatively new. The economic crisis wasn't just happening here in the good ole U S of A, but all over the globle. The countries of the European Union were bailing out their banks, etc. Had all the governments sat back and let the crisis play itself out, the way the plethora of complex interconnected economic systems would have played out would be the same as trying to predict the weather conditions 6 months from now in Omaha.

user-pic

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Franklin D. Roosevelt.

user-pic

Dean Baker offers a solution to a problem that NOBODY ELSE has has any solution to offer. Everyone else seems content to let unemployment fester at 10% or so for another couple of years. Along with a few piddling gestures of "concern".

The CBO hasn't bothered to estimate the effectiveness of Dean's proposal. Jared Bernstein, Vice President Biden's chief economic policy advisor says Dean's proposal is "worthy of consideration". But by whom? Is the White House studying Dean's proposal? If so, they're keeping it a deep, deep secret.

Meanwhile, Larry Summers has said it would be better to create jobs from growth (which ain't going to happen) than to simply create jobs. You see, it's a matter of priorities. Growth means bigger profits for corporations and more tax revenues for the Treasury. Employment through work sharing only benefits the poor working schmucks.

Is it my imagination or are people only interested in fixing blame and not in finding solutions? I'm not adverse to fixing blame to the extent that it disqualifies the culprits from being the sole source of policy options. But the next step is more important. Consider and discuss the untainted alternative policy option!

user-pic

Or --

fixing blame to the extent that [it induces the citizenry to] disqualif[y] the culprits from being the sole[?] source of policy options.

And such a turn away from cultish dependency is greatly to be welcomed.

user-pic

Baker's suggestion that jobs be stimulated by government spending is a good one, but only if the government spending results in creating new assets of lasting economic value instead of more consumption. Otherwise, the effect of government spending will be transitory and leave us in a worse positioon, with more debt, than before.

There is also no permanent solution unless the trade imbalance is corrected. As suggested, a weak dollar policy is appropriate, but would have to be done with care. The danger is that foreign investors will sell US debt instruments, increasing effective interest rates, and snuffing out any recovery. There is also the problem that the Yuan/Dollar ratio is fixed by the Chinese. Accordingly, a modest shift towards a weak dollar policy should be accompanied by a set of non-tariff restrictions on imports. The restrictions should be designed to be effective without breaking WTO rules (well not very much, just as much as others do).

user-pic

"There is also the problem that the Yuan/Dollar ratio is fixed by the Chinese."

Can you explain why only the Chinese have the authority to fix the Yuan/Dollar ratio?
.

user-pic
We do know how to create demand. It is really very simple - you just have to spend money

Geezus, what a moron! This is the guy who claims he saw the bubble, understood it would burst, and responded by selling his house and moving into his mother's closet.

Contrast that with John Paulson, who also saw the bubble, understood it would burst, sold short with his own and investors money, and made nearly 7 BILLION dollars for himself while almost everyone else was losing their shirts (or hiding in mommy's closet).

Forget Baker. Let's here what Paulson recommends. If anyone understands the economy its him.

user-pic

No I think a better source of information would be Willie Sutton

You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can get with just a kind word.
Willie Sutton

Go where the money is... and go there often.
Willie Sutton

user-pic

But what would have prevented the Fed from subsequently flooding the system with liquidity and the government from boosting the economy and employment with large-scale jobs programs? There is certainly nothing obvious that would have interfered with these efforts to boost the economy and restore employment.

This seems like a astoundingly weak and somewhat stupid and fraudulent argument. First, Baker provides no argument at all in this post that the country was not on the verge of a depression in late 2008. Of course the government would have stepped in to do the things he mentions. That's because we would have been in a depression. But Baker wants to make pedantic heavy weather of the fact that it would probably not have been a "great" depression, since he is apparently defining a "great depression" as a depression that lasts at least ten years, and that in turn seems to require defining "depression" as "deep economic downturn in which the government does nothing to dig the country out".

"Depression" is a vague term, but don't most economists just define a depression as an extremely severe economic downturn that is not a result of normal declines related to the business cycle?

And shouldn't it be clear, even to blogospheric morons like us, that a depression that lasted five years, or two years, or even one year, would still be really, really fucking bad ... and something to be avoided at almost any cost?

I find Baker's blog-pandering argument, and all the go-along, no-nothing commentary that follows, to be completely unconvincing. If Baker wants to convince us that we weren't on the cusp of a catastrophic collapse of faith and credit, and accompanying cascade of defaults, foreclosures and personal and business bankruptcies that would have dwarfed even the profound downturn we actually have experienced, then he needs to show us some fucking numbers and deal with actual historical events, and not just point out that the obvious and irrelevant fact that once in a depression, governments have various tools available for getting out of them. Obviously, government efforts to dig out would have happened. But some economic holes are much, much deeper than others.

user-pic

Where, pray tell, did a self-described "blogospheric moron" such as yourself get the idea that the economy was on the "cusp of a catastrophic collapse of faith and credit"?

From the former CEO of Goldman Sachs and his tag-a-long friend? Two men whose every prescription and prognostication advanced over the prior 18 months were proved mistaken and who had every reason to dissemble? Or from that great Friedmanite and financial deregulator and his number one boy, the current Secretary of the Treasury?

Odd to put so much faith in the words of Republican operatives and Democratic corporatists such as they.

user-pic

I totally agree, and I find this whole post and associated comments, for the most part, very unhelpful and inaccurate, and in fact, bizarre.

This is *teabagging* anti-Obama talking point!

"Why, he didn't do nuthin'!!"

Yeah, I already heard that account from a guy carrying a poster accusing him of being Pol Pot. Whose bus fare was paid for by some industrialist robber baron who doesn't want to pay taxes. How fortunate for them that we're doing their bidding right here, of all places!

user-pic

There is a sickening feeling of injustice that accompanies the thought that those at the top who got us into the mess (and in general are a bunch of greedy bastards who place profits over people) were bailed out and allowed to get even wealthier. As a result, there is the impulse to believe that they should not have been bailed out in the first place. That we could have made them suffer in the name of justice and survived economically as a country.

But the fact is that there is no way to prove one or the other what would have happened. There is no computer model that could generate the resulting cascade downward, and exactly how the recover would unfold. Too many variables (especially since it was global in nature), to many choices that would be made by too many humans during a crisis sitution.

In the end, this is part of what Obama was talking about last Friday, when he discussed the demonization process. Those on the left have so demonized the corporate elite that it cannot be believed that anything that would benefit them might have been (and I stress the might have been) necessary.

user-pic

Three thing I would offer to try to factor into your musings about this, Camus:
Paulson and Bernanke required ALL the Big Banks to take TARP funds; their reasoning was that it would hide which banks needed the bailouts, and the obscurity would prevent panic.
The initial request for a bill was, I think, a single page; was later turned into several. They issued the money, and paid par value for the debts, essentially not even requiring them to take a haircut for their idiotic mistakes or possible fraud.
The Bankers and Paulson have continually either lied or feigned ignorance about counterparties receiving bailout funds.
And oops-gotta stretch to four:
Paulson's decision not to bailout Lehman is one of the murkiest parts of the debacle, rivaling his and Bernanke's insistence that some Banks buy out Other Banks, creating less Even Much Bigger/Can't Fail Banks.

user-pic

BTW I have heard the rationale that Paulson was personally impatient with Lehman whom he had insistently warned earlier to avoid growing risks, and who politely ignored his warnings. This narrative thus runs that he was so infuriated he couldn't/wouldn't bring himself to act in their "defense".

user-pic

So we completely disagree here, which is fine.

Just let my record on this be clear:

To some people, sure, it can't be proven that *not* stepping in would have been ruinous. But I do not agree that such is a reasonable position justifiable in logic.

And it would be easy to produce the computer model you describe. You could attack that model, of course, with your variables, just like you can say there is no proof that O.J. murdered his wife. But in my opinion, and that of leading economists, it's at that level. It was a Bush program by the way, and people on the left playing games with this bear a responsibility when we get bad government as a result of careless thinking. JMHO.

user-pic

To some people, sure, it can't be proven that *not* stepping in would have been ruinous. But I do not agree that such is a reasonable position justifiable in logic

ehem.

The logic that applies to such arguments is the logic of counterfactuals which is dangerous territory in logic.
Counterfactuals such as "If the sugar cube had been dropped into the beaker of warm water, it would have dissolved" are pretty solid given all the chemical and physical theory supporting it (not to mention the strong inductive evidence for it).

But the counterfactual "had we not bailed out the banks, it would have lead to a Second Great Depression", alas does not stand on such firm ground as the sugar cube case.

We will never know what would have happened. The path not taken does not rise to the level of an empirical datum.

The best we can perhaps do, is generate a probability distribution of what outcomes are more probable. But even this is questionable in this case since there is no agreement as to how to rank the models in order of likelihood.

Does that mean that we are not allowed to speculate? No. Let's not be so hard on each other and our different intuitions.

The path actually taken has the presumptive edge because its results are known with certainty, while alternative paths must remain vulnerable to doubt and contention.

user-pic

And "ehem" right the fuck back at you.

I have already said that it can be proven to the satisfaction of many such as yourself, though it's highly nihilistic, not respected, and completely unfair to the people who had to make the tough decisions. So you're the one being (at best) hard. It also can't proved to many people's satisfaction where Obama was born -- we know.

user-pic

To some general extent, has it and does it continue to appear that the (illegal) corruption and immoral practices and procedures within the policy's, practices and procedures is the primary 'To Big To Fail' Application? (such as Repeal of Glass Stegal, Habeus Corpis, Death, Torture and Cruel and unusual application and punishment Prevention Laws, Representation Obligations, ecetra and the implementation of the 2000 Commodity, Futures Act, Gramm Billings Act, FISA Suppression, Illegal wiretaps, Death and/or coerced threat thereof, Torture, ecetra, ecetra).

Is it not time to well do Something much more meaningful within the seemingly Primary concerns in the correct direction towards 'Oversight and Accountability' and as mandated by our US Constitution, Bill of Rights and Civil Rights? and not continue to apply the seemingly illegal and corrupt practices, policy's and procedures.

user-pic

This whole mess happened for two reasons...greed and stupidity. Greedy bankers, greedy mortgage brokers, greedy corporations like AIG, greedy politicians, and greedy homeowners, and the stupidity of all of them to think the free ride was just going to go on forever...

There were red flags that were ignored, even when people in the know pointed them out. People that discovered their houses were ATM machines exacerbated the situation. But so many people were getting so rich, they didn't stop to think about what the long term ramifications might be.

To think that we were not on the very brink of a global financial collapse is foolhardy. Whether or not the right things were done to mitigate the damage is for people much smarter than I am to figure out. It is a very bitter pill to swallow that the people who caused this are reaping the benefits of the solutions, but I think those who wish we had just let it happen are seriously underestimating the damage that would have been done, had the government done that.

During the last depression, this was a different country. There were significant numbers of people who lived in rural communities, and were much more self-sufficient than we are today.

Additionally, we did this to the whole world, not just ourselves. We had an obligation to keep the whole world from suffering as a result of our mistakes.

The most frustrating part of it from my perspective is that congress doesn't seem to be in much of a hurry to re-regulate, which makes me crazy. If we have one lesson we should be learning from this, it is that people, especially in the form of corporations, will do whatever they can do to get more money, more money, more money, and need to be regulated. Unfortunately, since we are all people, it requires letting the foxes guard the henhouses, and other foxes guarding the foxes.

As I have mentioned in other comments on other blogs, I fear this is the beginning of the end of this wonderful experiment we call America. The transition into what we will become next is already scary, and I fear it will only get scarier.

user-pic

Even though I have only briefy read your blog comment reply comment, I thought it would be appropriate for me to thank you for sharing your concern(s). Although, hopefully we will (sooner than later) all be on the (continuing) road to peaceful resolves and with successful accomplishments and that hopefully will be without the many horrific senarios that we presumably all have some presumable awarenees of their possible and/or presumable to some seemingly extent realities, applications and/or their possible and/or presumable existence.

user-pic

I don't dispute something needed to be done to address economy at that time. I question whether in addressing the problem and 'save the economy' did we need to save the wealth of the uber-wealthy and in fact allow them to profit from their malfeasence? I dispute the narrative that anything noteworthy was accomplished. There were other ways of addressing the problems but we were rushed into a $1T+ giveaway to the people who put our economy at risk. There was no reason to rush and there is no reason to think the people who did are savants who 'saved us' and no reason that we need to continue to listen to them...

user-pic

President Obama in his Nashua, New Hampshire town hall meeting 2/2/10, approx. 2:10 pm est, on the bailout being something that had to be done, that now:

...nobody's worried about another great depression, like they were just a year ago, the worst of the storm has passed....

user-pic

Everyone agrees that without TARP there would have been an enormous cascade of failures, defaults, bankruptcies, which would have affected business and government worldwide.

But most posters to this thread, including Baker at its head, think that government could have stepped in and saved the interests of blacks, gays, workers, and white liberals (especially Jewish white liberals) while allowing most everyone else to lose everything, be completely destroyed, and forced to become manual laborers in a newly constituted CCC.

This government is the same one that is constantly vilified by these posters as dysfunctional, corrupt, undemocratic, etc., etc., etc. on multiple other threads. Somehow the catastrophe would magically transform it into an agent of a just God, protected against the forces of evil by armies of guilt-mongering, finger-wagging, anti-war progressives.

Honestly, the lot of you are completely mad.

user-pic

If the root problem is political-economic then the focus shd be on changing the political-economic incentives for those in power thru strategic election reform.

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/a/n/ankotp/2009/10/move-over-healthcare-pass-the.php

dlw

Facebook

Wall Street bankers and the people deciding economic policy. We continue to face excessive rates of unemployment because of a continuing reluctance to pursue regards Stainless Steel Bracelets

Facebook

The second Great Depression line is then repeated by people who consider themselves to be knowledgeable about economics, but in reality don't have a clue as to what they are saying regards College Address

Facebook

Great Depression, just as we should be thankful that the world has not been destroyed by nuclear war, the "Great Depression" defense is a tool of fools and liars. Exactly what set of events in the world would have given us a second regards Bankruptcy Lawyer NY

Facebook

thanks invention by those who are trying to justify their disastrous economic policy. The second Great Depression line is then repeated by people who consider themselves to be knowledgeable about economics reagdrs Magic secrets

Facebook

We do know how to create demand. It is really very simple - you just have to spend money; most people are willing to work for it. Since Keynes we have known how to create jobs and reduce unemployment in a downturn, even if politicians may lack regards Outdoor Portable Grill

Facebook

As Senator and then as President, Obama voted for nearly every penny of the Deficit that he now claims will kill us all. He carries more blame than any of the other congressmen or Bush for that matter. regards Hole In One Prize Insurance

Facebook

There were other ways of addressing the problems but we were rushed into a $1T+ giveaway to the people who put our economy at risk. Loan Modification

Facebook

I am to figure out. It is a very bitter pill to swallow that the people who caused this are reaping the benefits of the solutions, but I think those who wish we had just let it happen are seriously underestimating the damage that would have been done. Karate Belt Rack

Facebook

Thanks a lot. Your comments and thoughts expressed over here are very remarkable and nice. Keep posting.
Quick loan with fast approval

Facebook

There were other ways of addressing the problems but we were rushed into a $1T+ giveaway to the people who put our economy at risk. GPS Tracking

Facebook

I dispute the narrative that anything noteworthy was accomplished. There were other ways of addressing the problems but we were rushed into a $1T+ giveaway to the people who put our economy at risk.  Signs of Bacterial Vaginosis

Facebook

am to figure out. It is a very bitter pill to swallow that the people who caused this are reaping the benefits of the solutions, but I think those who wish we had just let it happen are seriouslyOnline Games kostenlos

Facebook

I could where ol' Inokeah might get bored and lost before getting two sentences into the actual account...regards..
thecsialliance

Facebook

It is a very bitter pill to swallow that the people who caused this are reaping the benefits of the solutions, but I think those who wish we had just let it happen are seriously underestimating the damage that would have been done
Speeding Fines Offences

Facebook

I dispute the narrative that anything noteworthy was accomplished. There were other ways of addressing the problems but we were rushed into a $1T+ giveaway to the people who put our economy at risk.
Virtual assistant services

Facebook

I could where ol' Inokeah might get bored and lost before getting two sentences into the actual account...regards..
Dog Breeders

Facebook

Use this page to your friend told you. I am constantly followed. To receive more information about this topic the following internet sites can follow.  HCG Diet

Facebook

he second Great Depression line is then repeated by people who consider themselves to be knowledgeable about economics reagdrs
funny facebook status

Facebook

Wall Street bankers and the people deciding economic policy. We continue to face excessive rates of unemployment because of a continuing reluctance to pursue regards
sniper games online

Facebook

Your blog provided us with valuable information to work with. Each & every tips of your post are awesome. Thanks a lot for sharing. Keep blogging. NY Divorce Attorneys

Facebook

Depression line is then repeated by people who consider themselves to be knowledgeable about economics reagdrs
mortgage calculator

Facebook

The second Great Depression line is then repeated by people who consider themselves to be knowledgeable about economics reagdrs
Cerebral Palsy

Facebook

The second Great Depression theme came up repeatedly in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. It also featured prominently in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's defense of his handling of the AIG bailout.
best payday loans

Facebook

The second Great Depression line is then repeated by people who consider themselves to be knowledgeable about economics reagdrs
fishing games

Facebook

I have to say. Very seldom do I see a blog thats both educational and entertaining, and let me tell you, you’ve hit the nail on the head. Dating Sites

Facebook

The second Great Depression theme came up repeatedly in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. It also featured prominently in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's defense of his handling of the AIG bailout.
Top Ten List

Facebook

Depression theme came up repeatedly in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. It also featured prominently in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's defense of his handling of the AIG bailout.
driving games

Facebook

The very idea of framing a discussion of the Haitian earthquake with a comparison of Jews as opposed to Haitians is so ass backwards, it boggles the mind.  European Business

Facebook

mm ..I agree - unless we start using massive Keynesianism ! Best regards


how to win the lottery

Facebook

Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. It also featured prominently in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's defense of his handling of the AIG bailout.
Los">http://www.donate-car-for-charity.com/states/los_angeles_car_donation_information.php">Los Angeles car donation

Facebook

The very idea of framing a discussion of the Haitian earthquake with a comparison of Jews as opposed to Haitians is so ass backwards, it boggles the mind. donate">http://www.donate-car-for-charity.com/states/los_angeles_car_donation_information.php">donate car Los Angeles



Facebook

The very idea of framing a discussion of the Haitian earthquake with a comparison of Jews as opposed to Haitians is so ass backwards, it boggles the mind.

paydayloans

Facebook

The very idea of framing a discussion of the Haitian earthquake with a comparison of Jews as opposed to Haitians is so ass backwards, it boggles the mind.


payday loans instantly

Facebook

The very idea of framing a discussion of the Haitian earthquake with a comparison of Jews as opposed to Haitians is so ass backwards, it boggles the mind.
car donation

Facebook

thanks Great Depression theme came up repeatedly in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke Browsergames

Facebook

The very idea of framing a discussion of the Haitian earthquake with a comparison of Jews as opposed to Haitians is so ass backwards, it boggles the mind.

cash loans usa

Facebook

Yes! this the fact that as you say.... "So, it is important that the people know that they have nothing to be thankful for our leaders wrecked the economy, end of story. It's time that they take the measures necessary to set things right."Now we should have to do something.
Attorney Reviews

Facebook

Haitian earthquake with a comparison of Jews as opposed to Haitians is so ass backwards, it boggles the mind.
protein powder

Facebook

Yes! this the fact that as you say.... "So, it is important that the people know that they have nothing to be thankful for our leaders wrecked the economy, end of story. It's time that they take the measures necessary to set things right."Now we should have to do something
Bowtrol

Facebook

I don't like Brooks but my guess is that he laudably avoided mentioning Jewish financial successes precisely to avoid invoking these stereotypes. Leather Dog Collars

Facebook

Yes! this the fact that as you say.... "So, it is important that the people know that they have nothing to be thankful for our leaders wrecked the economy thanks penimaster

Facebook

Our political leaders continually assert that we should be thanking them that we are not in a second Great Depression rather than complaining about how bad things are. The second Great Depression theme came up repeatedly in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. It also featured prominently in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's defense of his handling of the AIG bailout.
Mirrored Bedside Cabinets

Facebook

The very idea of framing a discussion of the Haitian earthquake with a comparison of Jews as opposed to Haitians is so ass backwards, it boggles the mind.
instantpaydayloans

Facebook

leaders continually assert that we should be thanking them that we are not in a second Great Depression rather than complaining about how bad things are. The second Great Depression theme came up repeatedly in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. It also featured prominently in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's defense of his handling of the AIG bailout.
Cash For Junk Cars Massachusetts

Facebook

just like the most incredible jewelry. Utilizing the silver because the principal materials, Tiffany jewelry just isn't so pricey when comparing with platinum or gold ones available in the market.male chastity

Facebook

Depression rather than complaining about how bad things are. The second Great Depression theme came up repeatedly in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. It also featured prominently in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's defense of his handling of the AIG bailout.
Dogs For Sale

Facebook

Depression rather than complaining about how bad things are. The second Great Depression theme came up repeatedly in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. It also featured prominently in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's defense of his handling of the AIG bailout.
External Hemorrhoid Treatment

Facebook

I think what people forget is that the gambling being done by "too big to fail" banks is benefiting the individuals doing the gambling, and benefiting them without any risk on their part. If your employee can obtain $10 million in a year of gambling it is quite a stretch to think that employee is looking after your interests above all.
cashusa

Facebook

Great Depression theme came up repeatedly in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke. It also featured prominently in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's defense of his handling of the AIG bailout.
fire protection jobs

Facebook

The colour schemes are lovely, you have made this page very attractive. But I did not like the stuff too much, you really need to improve on it. shooting games

Facebook

Afterall, the 2nd Gilded Age has seen the richest 1 percent holding wealth valued at $16.8 trillion - $2 trillion more than 90 percent of the world's combined wealth. That's a helluvalot of money to 'follow.'
New York Divorce Lawyer

Facebook

Asteroid impacts have been prevented by allowing major sports stars to accumulate more wealth in one year of warming a bench than an average citizen can make in a lifetime. Let's give credit where it is due.
masters in education

Facebook

The aim of PublicACTA is to raise the public’s concerns, seek improvements to the Agreement, and provide an opportunity for people to connect and discuss the issues. The output will be an agreed statement that the public and interested organisations can sign up to, to be delivered to New Zealand government negotiatorsWelding Machines

Facebook

ACTA is to raise the public’s concerns, seek improvements to the Agreement, and provide an opportunity for people to connect and discuss the issues. The output will be an agreed statement that the public and interested organisations can sign up to, to be delivered to New Zealand government.
Divorce Attorney NYC

Facebook

defense is a tool of fools and liars. Exactly what set of events in the world would have given us a second Great Depression, defined as a decade of double-digit unemployment Payday Loan Debt Consolidation

Facebook

The American People are getting tired of hearing about George W. Bush in all of our President's speeches. If he does not stop, it will become his legacy.
Andrew

Facebook

It will organize from the grassroots: in homes, on campuses, and on the web. It will offer a new social contract whose main points are as follow. restaurant accounting service

Facebook

Deep Throat's advice to Bob Woodward to follow the money would also apply to the machinations of the government/financial sector last Fall.
New York Divorce Lawyer

Facebook

ACTA is to raise the public’s concerns, seek improvements to the Agreement, and provide an opportunity for people to connect and discuss the issues.
Divorce Attorney New York

Facebook

Thanks thankful that we are not in a second Great Depression, just as we should be thankful that the world has not been destroyed by nuclear war, the "Great Depression" defense is a tool of fools and liars. Exactly what set of events in the world would have given us a second Great Depression masters in health informatics

Facebook

ACTA is to raise the public’s concerns, seek improvements to the Agreement, and provide an opportunity for people to connect and discuss the issues.
Front Pocket Wallet

Facebook

Thanks Great Depression, just as we should be thankful that the world has not been destroyed by nuclear war, the "Great Depression" defense is a tool of fools and liars. Exactly what set of events in the world solar panels

Facebook

Thanks It is almost certainly true that if we had let the cascade of bank collapses continue in the fall of 2008, taking down not just Lehman, but also Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe. mortgage calculator

Facebook

Fed from subsequently flooding the system with liquidity and the government from boosting the economy and employment with large-scale jobs programs? There is certainly nothing obvious that would have interfered with these efforts to boost the economy staubsaugers

Facebook

The second Great Depression theme came up frequently in the debate over the reappointment of Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke.
Paydays loan | Bad credit loans

Facebook

Depression coming over and again a big reason for economies getting worse day by day. With inflation rate going up, it is becoming for a common man to meet all the daily needs.
Cheap hotels in Valencia Spain

Facebook

being done by "too big to fail" banks is benefiting the individuals doing the gambling, and benefiting them without any risk on their part. If yourMax Studio Shoes

Facebook

Thanks if we had let the cascade of bank collapses continue in the fall of 2008, taking down not just Lehman, but also Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe. Signs of Bacterial Vaginosis

Facebook

I am happy to find so many useful information here in the post, we need develop more strategies in this regard, thanks for sharing.
sports degrees online

Facebook

I am happy to find so many useful information here in the post, we need develop more strategies in this regard, thanks for sharing.
sports administration degree

Facebook

Fed from subsequently flooding the system with liquidity and the government from boosting the economy and employment with large-scale jobs programs? There is certainly nothing obvious that would have interfered with these efforts to boost the economy and restore employment. medical malpractice lawyer in michigan

Facebook

well no one except Bernanke, Geithner, Summers -- and worse for us, Obama
casino en ligne

Facebook

Thanks defense is a tool of fools and liars. Exactly what set of events in the world would have given us a second Great Depression, defined as a decade of double-digit unemployment Denver Cosmetic Dentist

Facebook

collapses continue in the fall of 2008, taking down not just Lehman, but also Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe.
buy car insurance

Facebook

ACTA is to raise the public’s concerns, seek improvements to the Agreement, and provide an opportunity for people to connect and discuss the issues. masters in criminal justice

Facebook

Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe. masters in criminal justice

Facebook

2008, taking down not just Lehman, but also Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe. masters in criminal justice

Facebook

Thanks subsequently flooding the system with liquidity and the government from boosting the economy and employment with large-scale jobs programs? There is certainly nothing obvious that would have interfered kindle chargers

Facebook

I agree with your Blog and I will be back to check it more in the future so please keep up your work. I love your content & the way that you write.
Pictures of Thrush

Facebook

I shall keep reading it every time I feel low or lost. This article boosts my mind from thinking only positive and helps me to work towards living a positive life.
casino en ligne

Facebook

I'm happy I found this blog! From time to time, students want to cognitive the keys of productive literary essays composing. Portable pa system
casino en ligne

Facebook

If there is high prevalency of homelessness in a country, it means that the government cannot work well.
casino en ligne

Facebook

It was very well authored and easy to understand. Unlike additional blogs I have read which are really not tht good. I also found your posts very interesting. In fact after reading, I had to go show it to my friend and he enjoyed it as well!
penny auction sites

Facebook

Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe.

Facebook

Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe.
mba in healthcare

Facebook

Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe.
mba in healthcare

Facebook

Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, along with many smaller banks, that the current downturn would have been more severe.
mba in healthcare

Facebook

If there is high prevalency of homelessness in a country, it means that the government cannot work well.
masters healthcare administration

Facebook

When done correctly refinancing with cash-out can actually result in reducing your expenses each month than you're paying at the moment and can wipe out the debts that are holding you back right now.
auto insurance companies

Facebook

According to the original watches, and you can't distinguish the original and the fake watches when you look at the surface of the watches.
auto insurance companies

Facebook

According to the original watches, and you can't distinguish the original and the fake watches when you look at the surface of the watches.
auto insurance companies

Facebook

I agree with your Blog and I will be back to check it more in the future so please keep up your work. I love your content & the way that you write.

penny auction

Facebook

Thanks Congress are reluctant to pursue these paths. However, a population that is suffering through double-digit unemployment may not be very sympathetic to the political concerns of its leaders. Schwinn 420

Facebook

Thanks It is really very simple - you just have to spend money; most people are willing to work for it. Since Keynes we have known how to create jobs and reduce unemployment in a downturn, even if politicians may lack the courage to act. There never was any basis for a fear of a second Great Depression. homemade solar panels

Facebook

Thanks come to grips with this second Great Depression bogeyman since, obviously, anything is better than a second Great Depression. As long as people believe that our leaders saved us from this horror, then they won't be sufficiently outraged about a bailout that left Goldman Sachs and the rest of the Wall Street crew richer than ever. easy click commissions

Facebook

Thanks It amounts to asserting that since we didn't get into a 2nd great depression, it follows that nothing really needed to be done to head it off, and further, that anyone who asserts that something did need to be done to head off another depression is simply us. EPS Format

Facebook

hi webmaster, your blog page’s theme is impressive and loving it. Your writes are stunning. Make sure you keep up the good work. Greets. mobile merchant account

Facebook

Since Keynes we have known how to create jobs and reduce unemployment in a downturn, even if politicians may lack the courage to act.
Bankruptcy attorney New York

Facebook

Might as well have fun and bet all the longshots you run into. Besides, one of em might pay off and make up for all the bad bets that didn't.
Bankruptcy lawyer NY

Facebook

Might as well have fun and bet all the longshots you run into. Besides, one of em might pay off and make up for all the bad bets that didn't.
Bankruptcy lawyer NY

Facebook

Keynes we have known how to create jobs and reduce unemployment in a downturn, even if politicians may lack the courage to act.
Bankruptcy attorney New York

Facebook

the power and obscene wealth of the uber-rich has been protected. Without them there would be no job creation...in eastern Asia where the workers can be paid next to nothing which means even more money web hosting

Facebook

Thanks the public will be hesitant to demand stronger action if they are convinced that they should be thankful that we have avoided a second Great Depression. So, it is important that the people know that they have nothing to be thankful for: our leaders wrecked mulberry clutch bags

Facebook

I am a lover of reading news online Thanks for writing a complete .
Houston web developer

Facebook

Keep up the good work guys!!! And continue making blogs that are very useful for everybody. God Bless!! 3
Houston web developer

Facebook

Thanks academic life relies on us! However, we should surely do all available to get a peak of academic career and custom academic papers writing firms will assist university students doing it. Such firms give an opportunity to buy the best custom essay and it can makefatcow coupon

Facebook

Thanks Germany and the Netherlands have aggressively pushed "work sharing" policies that have kept unemployment from rising in the downturn. Thanks to work sharing, the unemployment rate in the Netherlands is less than 4.0 percent even though they have had a larger Belleville boots

Facebook

Thanks Germany and the Netherlands have aggressively pushed "work sharing" policies that have kept unemployment from rising in the downturn. Thanks to work sharing, the unemployment rate in the Netherlands is less than 4.0 percent even though they have had
motorcycle vest

Facebook

unsure of street signs in any neighborhood but their own, people who can't read don't want to venture much beyond their own neighborhood.
pre-tied bow ties

Facebook

Thanks anything is better than a second Great Depression. As long as people believe that our leaders saved us from this horror, then they won't be sufficiently outraged about a bailout that left Goldman Sachs and the rest of the Wall Street crew richer than ever Video Marketing Robot

Facebook

Thanks to work sharing, the unemployment rate in the Netherlands is less than
Houston SEO

Facebook

Your article is good. Thanks for your sharing, it is very helpful to me. Let me think a lot, I will be waiting for your more English articles. Have a good time.
Costume Wigs

Facebook

Thanks Great Depression bogeyman since, obviously, anything is better than a second Great Depression. As long as people believe that our leaders saved us from this horror, then they won't be sufficiently outraged about a bailout that left Goldman Garage Door Repair Frisco

Facebook

Thanks It is really very simple - you just have to spend money; most people are willing to work for it. Since Keynes we have known how to create jobs and reduce unemployment in a downturn, even if politicians may lack the courage to act top forex brokers

Facebook

I really liked the post and great tips..even I also think that hard work is the most important aspect of getting success keep it up :)
Seattle Honda

Facebook

There are four difficulty levels and a good deal of customizable options that allow you to dress up (or down) your rock star avatar, and the game allows you play both bass and guitar.
Texas VA Loans

Facebook

Thanks boost the economy would be to deliberately push down the value of the dollar against other currencies. This would boost US net exports and get our trade deficit closer to balance.dietas para adelgazar rapido

Facebook

Great Depression bogeyman since, obviously, anything is better than a second Great Depression. As long as people believe that our leaders saved us from this horror como conquistar a una mujer

Facebook

It amounts to asserting that since we didn't get into a 2nd great depression, it follows that nothing really needed to be done to head it off, and further, that anyone who asserts that something did need to be done to head off ID Scanner

Facebook

I think also he's talking about all the congressional D's that are using that line of argument too. So it's a theme that he is going after, one that is being pedaled by more than just Obama. Web Hosting India

Facebook

this post bookmarked and i definitely preferred a few things i examine. will truly take a note of it as well and in addition move through the some other discussions 1-payday-loans.com

Facebook

something to the effect that by making the mistake of holding elections amid a population that suffers from poor education, an absence of civic institutions, and no tradition of the rule of law, you will wind up with Hamas logonloans.com

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address