I don’t fully agree with the author’s view published in an article yesterday in NY Times News Services. The author may be right on some aspects, but I have something more to point out. The US economy suffers from under-savings- that’s what I mean. They might have spent much, but saved too less. Those spending- quite rightly pointed out by the author, may be ascribed to military expenditures or homeland securities which however, can be well justified given the post 9/11 security concerns. But on healthcare, it’s like an odd-even puzzle. Can’t say those were too wasteful either.
Well so, things aren’t going as though they seems to be somewhere between a ‘tough bargain for a simple deal’. That was all mandated, and all which was required to keep ticking the hopes of a turnaround show. But to speak, The Whitehouse now seems to have become the hotbed for some diplomatic DJs. Indeed, perhaps they could go all the Gaga way...for some good music.
The economy continues to weaken. Productivity is slowing down. It’s not that about always having a whole piece of cake.
Well so, things aren’t going as though they seems to be somewhere between a ‘tough bargain for a simple deal’. That was all mandated, and all which was required to keep ticking the hopes of a turnaround show. But to speak, The Whitehouse now seems to have become the hotbed for some diplomatic DJs. Indeed, perhaps they could go all the Gaga way...for some good music.
The economy continues to weaken. Productivity is slowing down. It’s not that about always having a whole piece of cake.
And not even that of forever having some good luck. It’s about morality which even a moron knows well.
• Indeed, President Obama still occupies important place in the hearts of the millions, not only in America, but in the entire world. And so is the reason he is trying hard to bring in some change-both in policies and practices. These days, he has but very few options except for a dip in the pink, well, you need to go into debt first. That’s the norm these days, yet unavoidable.
What is avoidable and can be averted is-a ‘hard luck’ for America from ever hanging in an innovation and productivity shortfall, as also, to avert a potential disinflationary shock. Well, let’s go a little deeper, down the line, a few decades ago, and review how things got fared up in those fair days.
USA had experienced post-war high unemployment rate a couple of times earlier, so it’s not unusual, and it peaked from 6% to 10.5% by the mid 1982. What was unusual was that, inflation was already double digit by 1979!
That was Volcker era, and he left a legacy. For three years following 1979-1982, the ultimate policy target of the Fed was to contain inflation. Well, inflation though did come down to 5%, but unemployment rate rose to double digit (10%). One retort led to another facade!
So what did the Fed try?
Under Fed Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, they returned to previous interest-rate operating maneuvers and initiated a managed program which reduced unemployment rate to 6%. A decade and a half later, it was 4.7% by 1997, at the same time, when the Euro zone unemployment rate stood at 12% (even now, they aren’t better off yet). So, what brought down the rate? Did they “pass-off” the triad to Europe? Well again, this assumption is moronic.
Actually, the expansionary monetary policy of the Fed during the 1972 led to inflationary build-up. Following this, there were two oil-price shocks- from 1973-74 and 1978-79. But before that, the Vietnam War led to price acceleration due to demand surge. And the counter-inflationary monetary policies led to four successive recessions, starting from the summer of 1969 to most notably of the 1972-76.
So, if on one hand easy monetary policy led to inflation, countering that led to high unemployment rate on the other. And yet again, you need to be back on the same track. But things took different shape from the beginning of the new millennium. Low interest rate, coupled with low inflation triggered a huge credit boom. And when the rates rose, everything fell off. And it’s heading for a stagflation right now which actually never happened in the USA before.
So far, and so well. The Fed seems to be already “fed-up” playing the cat-and-mouse game of “chasingflation”- once inflation, then again unemployment rate, and yet again disinflation. The Fed nowadays is just hoping for 'baby one more time- come back inflation' and we will do the rest! But now, Dr. Bernanke is more concerned with the macro-economic stability for the time being, after so much of economic and financial market chaos. Note that he is armed with a more powerful economic but rather diplomatic stuff- the Fed Fund Rate.
• Dr. Bernanke belongs to the aristocracy of those star economists who have under their credit more than a dozen publications on the cause and effects of recession. So, it’s good to see that the whole of his tenure as Fed Chairmanship has been much devoted to experiencing what a grand recession feels like in practice.
So, it’s a great paradox of who will win the next election? But that doesn’t mean to give up to the political chores. Whoever wins, rationality has to be restored. Since, the synonym (other meaning) of the word “Republican” means “Democracy”, so, that’s all about the two face of a single coin. And that’s democracy after all, in a re-elected republic state. President Obama isn’t happy at all with all those diplomatic leg-pulling politics well adapted by the Republicans, to which, he accused them of holding back developmental initiatives.
Well, I don’t believe this, neither do I doubt.
Still, someone might have learned somehow, something from Anna Hazare- only, the place and the cause isn’t so cogent. But the timing was perfect.
Even if the global markets are fighting among themselves for more genial financial innovation and reforms, the real reform perhaps awaits from the general mass of America, through her people and practice.
Put that all together, you may still get a full one and a year half to observe how things get going, either gaga way, or a way out. The politico may have to take very often, rough and tough decisions, rather few “hard decisions” with some “soft bargains” just to make sure that America doesn’t fall back into an extra double-dip recession( a giant recession with a smaller one free!), and this cannot be some discount shopping anyway, since that would be too awful for the global economy at large.
• Indeed, President Obama still occupies important place in the hearts of the millions, not only in America, but in the entire world. And so is the reason he is trying hard to bring in some change-both in policies and practices. These days, he has but very few options except for a dip in the pink, well, you need to go into debt first. That’s the norm these days, yet unavoidable.
What is avoidable and can be averted is-a ‘hard luck’ for America from ever hanging in an innovation and productivity shortfall, as also, to avert a potential disinflationary shock. Well, let’s go a little deeper, down the line, a few decades ago, and review how things got fared up in those fair days.
USA had experienced post-war high unemployment rate a couple of times earlier, so it’s not unusual, and it peaked from 6% to 10.5% by the mid 1982. What was unusual was that, inflation was already double digit by 1979!
That was Volcker era, and he left a legacy. For three years following 1979-1982, the ultimate policy target of the Fed was to contain inflation. Well, inflation though did come down to 5%, but unemployment rate rose to double digit (10%). One retort led to another facade!
So what did the Fed try?
Under Fed Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, they returned to previous interest-rate operating maneuvers and initiated a managed program which reduced unemployment rate to 6%. A decade and a half later, it was 4.7% by 1997, at the same time, when the Euro zone unemployment rate stood at 12% (even now, they aren’t better off yet). So, what brought down the rate? Did they “pass-off” the triad to Europe? Well again, this assumption is moronic.
Actually, the expansionary monetary policy of the Fed during the 1972 led to inflationary build-up. Following this, there were two oil-price shocks- from 1973-74 and 1978-79. But before that, the Vietnam War led to price acceleration due to demand surge. And the counter-inflationary monetary policies led to four successive recessions, starting from the summer of 1969 to most notably of the 1972-76.
So, if on one hand easy monetary policy led to inflation, countering that led to high unemployment rate on the other. And yet again, you need to be back on the same track. But things took different shape from the beginning of the new millennium. Low interest rate, coupled with low inflation triggered a huge credit boom. And when the rates rose, everything fell off. And it’s heading for a stagflation right now which actually never happened in the USA before.
So far, and so well. The Fed seems to be already “fed-up” playing the cat-and-mouse game of “chasingflation”- once inflation, then again unemployment rate, and yet again disinflation. The Fed nowadays is just hoping for 'baby one more time- come back inflation' and we will do the rest! But now, Dr. Bernanke is more concerned with the macro-economic stability for the time being, after so much of economic and financial market chaos. Note that he is armed with a more powerful economic but rather diplomatic stuff- the Fed Fund Rate.
• Dr. Bernanke belongs to the aristocracy of those star economists who have under their credit more than a dozen publications on the cause and effects of recession. So, it’s good to see that the whole of his tenure as Fed Chairmanship has been much devoted to experiencing what a grand recession feels like in practice.
So, it’s a great paradox of who will win the next election? But that doesn’t mean to give up to the political chores. Whoever wins, rationality has to be restored. Since, the synonym (other meaning) of the word “Republican” means “Democracy”, so, that’s all about the two face of a single coin. And that’s democracy after all, in a re-elected republic state. President Obama isn’t happy at all with all those diplomatic leg-pulling politics well adapted by the Republicans, to which, he accused them of holding back developmental initiatives.
Well, I don’t believe this, neither do I doubt.
Still, someone might have learned somehow, something from Anna Hazare- only, the place and the cause isn’t so cogent. But the timing was perfect.
Even if the global markets are fighting among themselves for more genial financial innovation and reforms, the real reform perhaps awaits from the general mass of America, through her people and practice.
Put that all together, you may still get a full one and a year half to observe how things get going, either gaga way, or a way out. The politico may have to take very often, rough and tough decisions, rather few “hard decisions” with some “soft bargains” just to make sure that America doesn’t fall back into an extra double-dip recession( a giant recession with a smaller one free!), and this cannot be some discount shopping anyway, since that would be too awful for the global economy at large.
No comments:
Post a Comment