or
Why I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the Bailout
______________________________________________
All over the media we are learning about how well the stimulus is working. The stock market is rapidly approaching 10,000 again. Bond rates are dropping. Economic contraction was at 1% in the second quarter, drastically improved from the 6.4% of the first quarter. We will soon hear new unemployment figures which will likely be up a tenth of a percent to 9.6%, and this will be lauded as a peak in the unemployment rate (it won't be mentioned that this exceeds the worst scenario used in the stress tests, or that the stimulus was supposed to cap unemployment at 8%, or that underemployment is likely more than double that rate).
Economists, think-tanks, and New York Times columnists will all be pointing out "signs of recovery" and will begin using terms such as "v-shape recovery". In other words, we will be hearing about "recovery" more often than a physical therapy patient.
No better example of the success story of the stimulus than the cash for clunkers deal. Just recently, this successful and popular program just received another two billion dollars, effectively tripling its original outlay. It is impossible to deny that this has been a boon to the auto industry: according to government officials, 180,000 vehicles have been sold as a result.
I am sure anyone who had the misfortune of reading this can see the dark cloud of gloom hanging over my words. You are asking yourself, "Brad, with all of this wonderful information, why should I not think of this as an unqualified success?"
Funny you should ask.
The purpose of this stimulus program and others is to spur consumption by increasing demand. The government, however, cannot created demand within the private sector. It can merely shift demand around in time. With the "Cash for Clunkers" program, we do not see a real increase in demand, rather people are simply shifting priorities and sacrificing other expenditures to purchase their car this year. This simply means that those who would buy a car this year buy a car this year, and those that would buy a car next year buy a car this year. So we have a seen a shifting forward in demand. What happens when this next $2 billion dollars runs out, however? Will we see all of those individuals who shifted their car purchase ahead a year make another vehicle purchase? Surely not. We can expect to see the bubble in car purchasing burst with some very bad effects. At this point, however, I would not be surprised to see ongoing subsidizing of car purchasing extended indefinitely.
Now, there a counter has been offered up to the likelihood of a drop off in car sales, but it also opens an entirely new can of moral worms. We will see if your indignation builds as much as mine as I explain it to you.
Our economic saviors: Fence-sitters.
According to this
article, these people have made "Cash for Clunkers" a "hit". Instead of those people who would be purchasing cars out of need in a normal car ownership cycle, we are seeing a car buyer that we would not normally see, for example:
"Mike Ward, an attorney from rural eastern Virginia, had no plans to replace his 1995 Ford Explorer, known to his family as the 'dog car' because they used it to drive their dogs around."
Many people, like Mike, are using the cash for clunkers deal not to replace their primary vehicle, but rather to give them the incentive to replace that third vehicle that they just really don't want to deal with. You see, Mike would not normally have replaced this old vehicle, but repairs were getting expensive, and apparently Mike's dogs were simply not being transported in enough comfort. So Mike put tax-payer dollars to good use:
"Ward drove the 80 miles to a Lexus dealership and bought a midsize SUV for $40,000 after discounts."
That's right. That is the secret to the success of the cash for clunkers deal.
"Dealers say buyers are predominantly older drivers who own more than one vehicle and have a clunker to spare.
'These were not people that we would see normally,' said Jim Paul, co-owner of four Pontiac-GMC-Buick dealerships near Minneapolis, suggesting sales at his showrooms could return to normal when the program expires rather than drop off, as some economists have suggested."
So our wonderful government, as usual, has brought about an economic recovery by subsidizing the wealthy and spurring unnecessary debt spending.
The basics of this are simple. Before the "Cash for Clunkers" deal, there were many people who were wanting to buy new vehicles, but simply would not use them enough to make the expenditure worthwhile. With the governments help, these individuals were able to overlook the costs they would be taking on for owning a car even while they were not using it.
Now we find ourselves in a bad position. Either we have simply taken on a great deal of debt as a nation to postpone the crisis, or we have taken on a great deal of debt as a nation to pay for the wealthy to store a car in their driveway as opposed to a showroom. This particular bailout either did nothing, or paid people to not use cars.
So while we may have seen an increase in spending, it does not follow from a real increase in consumption or demand. It is just useless spending, investing in capital that will show no return.
Increased useful consumption and real demand can only come from increasing real wages. People can only truly purchase and consume more if they are more productive and increase their wages. Real economic recovery would come from a growth in productive capital. We do not see either.
First, real wages are dropping. June was the 9th month in the last ten in which salaries and wages have dropped. June also showed the biggest drop in income in four years.
And as for productive capital, not only are cars now being paid for to go unused by the government, but the government is taking older cars off the road. The real damaging side effect of this deal, depending on your viewpoint, is the fact that this is rapidly driving up the costs of used cars and almost completely shutting off the flow of car donations. This means cars that would actually increase the productive capabilities of this country, by providing reliable primary transportation, are becoming more and more difficult to come by.
This stimulus is a dramatic shifting of vehicles from productive use to unproductive use. This is the way it is with all government stimulus simply because government cannot be productive on its own, it can only shift production.
This stimulus is a dramatic shifting from saving and responsible spending to credit spending. This is the way it is with all government stimulus because government cannot hope to imitate all natural and healthy spending patterns.
This stimulus is a dramatic shifting of wealth from those living off modest incomes to those with incomes to spare. This is the way it is with all government stimulus as the wealthy will always have the resources necessary to exploit government handouts.
Stimulus packages do not save the economy for all people; stimulus packages save the economy for the wealthy and powerful.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace