John Texeira’s letter (“Bidenomics led to inflations, increased costs,” Nov. 9) is an attempt to gaslight us about how our economy is doing. Inflation is down to about 3 percent. Europe is still dealing with 8 or 9 percent. Much of the inflation we have now is price gouging. We are at near full employment, and the experts say we need about 1 million immigrants a year to keep up.
It wasn’t Bidenomics that caused this inflation, it was Putin of Russia and M.B.S. of Saudi Arabia agreeing to cut oil production because they both hate Biden and want Trump back in the White House because he is an authoritarian like them. And they are doing it again just in time for the next election.
It’s true that the national debt is $33.6 trillion. But this isn’t Biden’s debt, it is Trump’s. Trump spent like a drunken sailor on leave and the GOP-led Congress aided and abetted. Just use Google to look at the GDP since 2000.
Conservatives and corporations have been enamored with the laissez-faire philosophy of governmental noninterference in business since Jefferson brought this idea from France. This idea was fleshed out by Milton Friedman and won him the Nobel prize in 1976. It came to be known by Classical or Chicago economics or as George H.W. Bush called it “Voodoo economics.” Augusto Pinochet of Chile hired Friedman to set up his economy. It was a disaster there as it has been every time it’s been tried. Reagan took us off of Keynesian economics and put us on this “Voodoo” economics, which has been a 40-year Ponzi scheme that has wiped out half of the middle class while creating a billionaire class that buys Supreme Court justices and politicians at will.
Bidenomics is just a return to sensible Keynesian economics, the economics that brought us and the world out of the Great Depression after laissez-faire caused it. Classical economics has a fatal flaw: greed. When there are no governmental controls, greed takes over. Even Greenspan admitted as much after the 2008 economic meltdown.
Dan Dennis
Orcutt
This article appears in Nov 30 – Dec 10, 2023.
Dan? Everything you said…is backwards.
Where to start? “Keynesian” economics (for whatever theoretical benefits it might have, and ignoring its failures) has certainly never been practiced in the US. Its thesis is to run government deficits at times of insufficient demand, and run surpluses at times of excess demand. Like every other theory, this one is used by government to run continuous deficits…and never surpluses. Why would that be? Because government gains power by spending money to buy votes. The current administration, at the time of massive pent up demand (created by…often fraudulently diverted…Covid subsidies), deficit spent even more, resulting in massive inflation.
As for “capitalism creating greed,” one wonders where the world would be without it. I note that “socialists” seem to favor more money for themselves as often as do “capitalists.” “Greed” is simply the behavior of humans always trying to better their condition. The only people who appear free of “greed” are the very young, who aren’t yet faced with economic choices, and the very old, whose resources are more than necessary for their remaining lives. Everyone else is “greedy” in that they want more for themselves and their families. And that motivation, since the beginning of time, has caused people to work diligently to better their condition.
In the end, “capitalism” appears to be the most successful economic system for any society, while we have not yet seen a socialist country which has been economically successful. (And, to the extent you raise “Nordic” countries; Denmark has no minimum wage, and all of the Nordic countries have fewer business and employment regulations than those suffered by Americans).
John Goodrich
San Luis Obispo, CA
“‘Keynesian’ economics (for whatever theoretical benefits it might have, and ignoring its failures) has certainly never been practiced in the US”
I think you are mistaken here. During the late 1930’s when the economy was still floundering, FDR’s advisers, notably Harry Hopkins and Henry Wallace, urged the president to eschew a balanced budget and the type of austerity that FDR’s other advisers recommended and run budget deficits with a redistribution of income away from the wealthy.
They took their ideas from the British economist John Maynard Keynes. This Keynesian approach worked well between 1938 and the bombing of Pearl Harbor. In fact, the economy showed over 8% growth in both 1939 and 1940, even before the country began preparing for war. I mean, the war certainly helped the U.S. economy in the 40’s and afterward, but it was FDR’s government spending that ultimately pulled the U.S. out of recession.
Some have also argued that Eisenhower took a page from the Keynesian playbook in the the 1950’s to help build the interstate highway system. The Eisenhower Administration ran deficits six of his eight years in office, finally making a concerted effort to balance the budget in 1960.
After Eisenhower, only LBJ considered Keynesian ideas with his commitment to a Great Society. His plans were squashed by the Vietnam War and the rise of Nixon in 1968. Most all of the presidents since then have practiced some form of neo-liberal economic philosophy, notably Ronald Reagan. Ironically, the most successful president who practiced Chicago School policies was Bill Clinton who ran budget surpluses between 1998-2000. Not surprisingly, the gap between rich and poor has grown consistently since Reagan took the White House in 1981. In 1980 the richest 10% of Americans earned nine times more than the bottom 10% while today they earn almost thirteen times more.
“And, to the extent you raise “Nordic” countries; Denmark has no minimum wage, and all of the Nordic countries have fewer business and employment regulations than those suffered by Americans”
This idea is a favorite talking point of conservatives. It’s not total lie, but certainly needs context. For example, more than 70% of workers in Nordic nations belong to unions. In the U.S. that number is 11%. Moreover, Nordic nations have robust public sectors and far more state ownership than the U.S. Here’s a great article about it:
https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/2018/…
Dan Dennis, You are spot on with your accurate historical description of how trickledown economics has destroyed most of what was the middleclass, and created an oligarchy of the greedy ultra-rich.
And we should also remember that Reagan’s Fed Chair Alan Greenspan was the star pupil of Ayn Rand and her selfish libertarian philosophy. Trickledown economics has always been a Ponzi scheme.
Dan, I’m with you (and Scott Jenkins) on this – your OpEd is spot on, but don’t expect tunnel-vision Republicans to ever admit to it. Decades ago, when most products were manufactured here in the USA, many CEO’s provided generous benefits such as 6% matching 401K savings contributions, employee-compensated tuition plans, two or three-week paid vacations, and wages elevated enough to easily purchase a modest home in most areas. Big shifts in generosity began to take place between 1995 – 2001 during an economic collapse (Ref.: https://money.cnn.com/2015/10/28/retiremen…). By then, most of the middle class were on their own. The “trickle-down” flow evolved into a slow motion drip irrigation system. And yes, all due to American Greed. I look forward to reading future articles that you no-doubt will post. Thanks in advance for your insight.
“1995-2001…economic collapse”
Gee, I was alive but do not recall. In fact, I remember the exact opposite. During the 90’s, thanks mostly to the Clinton administration, GDP doubled and unemployment dropped to 3.8%. For the whole 1992-2000 period, nearly 24 million jobs were created and hourly wages increased by a strong 10.1% between 1996 and 2000. In addition, Clinton turned in three straight balanced budgets at the end of his second term which would be quickly squandered by the 2003 Bush tax cuts and the insane idea to invade Iraq and Afghanistan.
So refreshing to read commentary based on facts vs the tiresomely false GQP/maga nonsense