Expanding Government, Declining Economy

USA Today reports "Benefit Spending Soars to a New High". 'Benefits' being the euphemism for 'Welfare', now that there is no shame in being on the dole. In any case, state and federal welfare payments are now one-sixth of Americans' income.

As the Depression grinds on, there will be considerable pressure from all sides to maintain and expand 'benefits'. These 'benefits' will have to come out of taxpayer pockets, one way or another. Since visible taxes will probably not be raised enough to cover the swollen 'benefit' roles, there will be some of that hidden tax coming down the pike - inflation.

Redistributing income, up to a point, may have some merits. But if the productive elements of society - most of whom are having a fairly rough time of it lately, too - are overburdened with increasing taxes, there will be further decline in economic activity.

As we have discussed repeatedly before, there is a range of government spending in an economy which is optimal, and spending below or above that range is destructive. At present, government spending at all levels (according to the helpful folks at usgovernmentspending.com) is a 45.2% share of the economy as a whole. This is up from a 37% share in the last fiscal year.

The rate of increase in the share is a whopping 22%! If the share were to increase at that rate for just another two years, the USA would end up two thirds of its economy (mis)managed by the State - a comparable level to Eastern Europe in the Soviet era. And probably with similar results.

Of course, the Nation's leaders are emphatically stating that since recovery is around the corner, there will be no need for further increases. We beg to disagree on the recovery part. Recovery is not around the corner. Whatever spin may be being put on 'the numbers' - they are in fact truly terrible.

In the face of Great Depression II, Mr. Obama's administration will not be able to resist expanding 'benefits', as well as bailing out and nationalising banks, insurance companies, car makers, airlines, airplane makers, and God-only-knows who else.

We believe, with some confidence, the deeper Uncle Sam dives into the economy, the worse the economy will perform. Since the leadership seems infected with some sort of intervention mania, we also anticipate that the lack of recovery will promote ever-larger bailout and 'recovery' schemes. These in turn will hurt the economy even more. We can't anticipate how long these destructive cycles will continue, but probably long enough to turn the USA into a dramatically poorer nation.

Redistribution Worsens a Depression

A common theme of government attempts to 'turn this troubled economy around' is merely redistribution: taking money from taxpayers, and giving it to selected recipients; taking toxic assets, and replacing them with Treasury bills; taking private companies, and nationalising them (to some degree or other). In one way or the other, this process represents capital and income forcibly moved from one possessor to another.

For example: Ben Bernanke, Federal Reserve Chairman, recently announced that he is going to expand the Fed's balance sheet as much as necessary (scroll down to the speech's fifth paragraph from the bottom). He also said that the balance sheet would have to shrink in the future... but not to worry about such things now (same link, third paragraph from bottom).

This amounts to simply moving a problem hither and thither, rather than actually solving it. By definition, this is Lemon Socialism: taxpayer money reallocated by the government to support failed or failing enterprises. In essence, lemon socialism takes the bad decisions of a few, and forces the majority to pay for, and suffer the consequences of, those decisions.

As these enterprises have proven unsustainable, such 'zombie-ification' represents considerable misallocation of capital. This, in turn, means that incomes will be generally forced lower by the disruptive economic effects of the 'zombie' enterprises. Falling incomes are part and parcel of all depressions, and so such misguided government bailouts will only serve to worsen the 2007 Depression. Lemon socialism shenanigans are doomed to failure; however, Mr. Bernanke's Soviet-style speech makes clear he will try it anyway.

President-elect Barack Obama comes from a different bent. His economic recovery plan is redistributive from a populist perspective, meaning he will look to prop up the lifestyles of the broadest majority of people at the cost of a few. The simplest demonstration of this is by lowering taxes on 'the poor,' and simultaneously raising taxes on 'the rich;' one can throw in another tax rebate cheque or two for good measure. In a way, one can think of populist redistribution as the opposite of lemon socialism.

A more specific example, though, is the Hubbard-Mayer plan: if passed by Congress next year, this plan will make available to any house-buyer a 30-year mortgage of up to 95% of the house's value, all for a low, low 4.5% fixed interest rate. Estimates put the up front cost of this program at conservative $3 trillion.

Though the mortgage plan is certain to be broadly popular, it is a very, very bad idea: mortgage interest represents someone's income. It's not a fanciful thing, because the interest a bank charges does eventually become someone's means of living. By lowering the 30-year fixed rate mortgage from 6.1% (this year) to 4.5%, money is being pulled out of the economy, lowering income, and since falling income is the essence of a depression, this will exacerbate the 2007 Depression. The math: take 4.5% from 6.1%, and one gets a difference of 1.6%. Take 1.6% of $3 trillion, and one sees that this program alone will take away $48 billion of real income per year. Poof.