Barack Obama is committing the same mistakes made by policymakers during the Great Depression, according to a new study endorsed by Nobel laureate James Buchanan.
His policies even have the potential to consign the US to a similar fate as Argentina, which suffered a painful and humiliating slide from first to Third World status last century, the paper says.
There are “troubling similarities” between the US President’s actions since taking office and those which in the 1930s sent the US and much of the world spiralling into the worst economic collapse in recorded history, says the new pamphlet, published by the Institute of Economic Affairs.
In particular, the authors, economists Charles Rowley of George Mason University and Nathanael Smith of the Locke Institute, claim that the White House’s plans to pour hundreds of billions of dollars of cash into the economy will undermine it in the long run. They say that by employing deficit spending and increased state intervention President Obama will ultimately hamper the long-term growth potential of the US economy and may risk delaying full economic recovery by several years.
Argentina? [url=http://new.kendallharmon.net/wp-content/uploads/index.php/t19/article/22542/#364121]Now where have we heard that before?[/url]
FDR’s policies were an economic disaster, but a complete political success. Why do you think the porkulus was such a high priority for Obama?
Well, another economist would [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/06/magazine/06Economic-t.html?_r=1&em;]disagree[/url] with these two.
As it was, FDR didn’t apply [url=http://delong.typepad.com/egregious_moderation/2008/12/john-maynard-ke.html]Keynes[/url] until the war.
It seems that the authors of the pamphlet would prefer Somalia or Pre-Lulu Brazil to Argentina. I’d prefer the Netherlands, myself.
It’s nice to see this analysis in a major paper. People may begin to at least discuss whether the direction we’re taking is constructive.
I have to point out that tax increases started under Hoover, and also increased tariffs. The big centralized spending under FDR was the final straw leading to a miserable decade.
Lulu? How about Lula. And take it from someone who lived in Brazil in the wake of its big borrow-and-spend binge: It was almost exactly what Chairman Obamao has in store for us: Nationalized industries, massive but useless public works boondoggles, well-larded welfare bottomless pits and all funded with immense borrowing from outside the country. This was all pumped up by Brazil’s own version of Juan Peron, Getulio Vargas, who was, like Peron, an admirer of Benito Mussolini.
It was only later, under guys like Cardoso, that Brazil jettisoned its dirigiste economy and insane policy of import substitution and finally stabilized its currency and economy. To his great credit, Lula has had the wisdom to keep those policies in place…not what I would have expected from what I saw of him back in the 1980s.
[blockquote]I have to point out that tax increases started under Hoover, and also increased tariffs. [/blockquote]
And massive public spending.
Having quickly read up on the Argentinian economy, I have to say I see little or nothing in common with any American economic policy. Indeed, I have long since grown tired of the economic theology, in which it seems that all theories are adhered to be faith alone.
One of the more depressing facts of current American political life is the level of hysteria about a man whose policies, when it comes down to it, are pretty conservative as “liberals” go. Compared to the kind of stuff done by the Argentinian government, Obama’s acts are by comparison wildly free market. I’ve given up hope for any kind of intelligent political debate in the face of all the wild exaggeration (not to mention the whispering campaigns).
Hasn’t the Argentine government just effectively nationalized the TV rights for football (soccer)? Apparently the Argentine government has discovered a new right – the right to watch soccer. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=ai8h0lPprCTY