Value Added
How to Fix the Economy
Republicans and Democrats are doing little but screaming at each other. If they’d stop, they’d find the answers to our problems right under their noses.
By Steven Goldberg, Contributing Columnist, Kiplinger.com
July 14, 2010
- Comments
- Email This Article
- Print This Article
- Order a Reprint
Advertisement
During the riots sparked by the acquittal of the Los Angeles policemen who were videotaped beating Rodney King, King told news cameras, “People, I just want to say, you know, ‘Can we all get along?’”
I have that same wish for the government and the American people. Partisan politicians, the Internet, talk radio and cable television news seem to have robbed us of the ability to talk rationally about virtually everything.
We face huge problems with the economy and the budget deficit. At the Morningstar investment conference in Chicago in June, charts and graphs showing the federal deficit spiraling out of control in coming years were everywhere. In 15 years of attending Morningstar conferences, I’ve never before witnessed such a focus on the deficit -- nor so much gloom.
The odd thing is that what we must do to rectify our problems is simple. As Ronald Reagan liked to say, “There are simple solutions -- not easy ones.” I’m a Democrat, but Reagan had that right.
The U.S. economic recovery is slowing. Most economists still doubt we’re headed for a double-dip recession, but they’re slashing their estimates for growth in gross domestic product. Slower growth means unemployment could remain in the high single digits for years to come. People without jobs can’t spend much and often can’t pay their mortgages. It’s a vicious cycle.
A new stimulus bill makes sense. We don’t need another $787 billion package. But John Maynard Keynes was right. When the private sector contracts, government must temporarily provide the firepower to jump-start the economy. That the stimulus bill, a mix of spending and tax cuts, didn’t further boost the economy only demonstrates what a deep hole we were in. The best news about last year’s stimulus is that almost half remains to be spent.
What should Congress do? Enacting another $100 billion to $200 billion in new spending and tax cuts makes good sense. That would pay for extension of unemployment benefits, help states and localities prevent layoffs of teachers and other essential employees, as well as finance some tax cuts and other stimulus spending. It would ignite faster growth.
Cutting the budget deficit
But that’s just half the story. Thanks to the strength of the U.S. dollar --which should remain the world’s reserve currency for years to come -- we’re not being forced to enact the immediate budget cuts that much of Europe is under pressure to make. Those cuts will probably cause a double-dip recession in Europe.
But cut the budget we must -- and soon. China and Japan will not buy our Treasuries forever. Like any investor, they’ll insist that we get our financial house in order. The bond market, as we’ve learned, doesn’t always move gradually. It sometimes makes giant moves rapidly. Lead manager of DoubleLine Total Return Bond fund (DLTNX), Jeffrey Gundlach -- who compiled a terrific record at TCW before launching DoubleLine -- uses the apt phrase “tape bomb” to describe how abruptly bond and currency traders will turn on U.S. Treasuries. (See How to Play Treasuries for more from Gundlach.)
When will the tape bomb explode? We probably have a few years, but no one really knows. One thing is sure: If we continue our profligate ways, a tape bomb will explode -- and make the current recession look like a gnat bite. If we put our budget on a glide path towards a sustainable budget, we can defuse the tape bomb. As Ross Perot used to say, “It’s just that simple.”
Contrary to popular belief, the budget deficit can’t be brought down mainly by eliminating waste, fraud and abuse, and cutting welfare and foreign aid. More than 70% of the budget goes for defense, interest on the federal debt, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid (most Medicaid spending nowadays pays nursing-home costs for formerly middle-class senior citizens who have depleted their assets.)
We need to slow the growth of Social Security. When 65 was chosen as the retirement age in the 1930s, life expectancy was about 62 years. Today it’s more than 80 years and rising. We need to move the full retirement age from 67 (for those born after 1959) to about 70, and slide up the early-retirement age for collecting Social Security benefits from 62 to 63. These are hardly dramatic changes.
Health-care costs are the main engine of our future debt. We need panels of physicians and other medical experts to decide which fancy treatments make good medical sense -- and which don’t. These are not death boards. They are common sense. If you still want the latest unproven treatment, you’ll have to pay for it out of your own pocket. Ditto if you’re dying from heart disease and want a liver transplant.
Much more is required. The entire medical culture has to change. Doctor pay isn’t the main driver of medical costs; doctor decisions are.
The baby boomers are aging. The U.S. faces a demographic time bomb. That and increasing medical costs are the chief causes of the budget crisis.
State and local governments need to tighten their belts, too. They can no longer afford the generous pensions and retiree health-care benefits provided to so many public employees.
Spending cuts alone won’t solve our problems. We need higher taxes. Federal taxes currently stand at 15% of GDP -- the lowest they’ve been since 1950. Increasing taxes only on the wealthy won’t cut it, either. The middle class will have to pony up, too.
We can no longer pretend that deficits don’t matter. They matter enormously. And if we don’t work together to defuse the debt bomb, the U.S. faces ruin. Can we all get along?
Steven T. Goldberg (bio) is an investment adviser.
Topics:
- Comments
- RSS
Permission to post your comment is assumed when you submit it. The name you provide will be used to identify your post, and NOT your e-mail address. We reserve the right to excerpt or edit any posted comments for clarity, appropriateness, civility, and relevance to the topic.
View our full privacy policy


Reader Comments (17)
Posted by: Diogenes at 07/14/2010 06:32:57 PM
If it had been disclosed up front that the author was a Democrat, I wouldn't have wasted time reading it. No new taxes!!!
Posted by: Bob Askey at 07/14/2010 09:58:36 PM
Steven Goldberg, like the discredited John Maynard Keynes, thinks we can spend ourselves rich. If we "save or create" 3 million jobs, and it costs us another dumb "stimulus bill" of another $300 billion, how many dollars per job is that? Do the math - and you will see that Goldberg is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Posted by: FoonTheElder at 07/15/2010 09:43:41 AM
Your life expectancy argument is wrong. Life expectancy was 62 because so many children died in infancy. "For Social Security purposes, the correct question is not how many live to age 65, but rather how long those reaching age 65 live thereafter. Here the numbers are not as dramatic. In 1940, men who survived to age 65 had a remaining life expectancy of 12.7 years. Today, a 65 year old man can expect to live not quite three years longer than he might have in 1940, or 15.3 years beyond reaching age 65. For women, the comparable numbers are 14.7 years beyond age 65 in 1940; 19.6 years in 1990. Clearly, despite the common misconception that we’re all living a dozen or so years longer than the 65-year-old retiree did 70 years ago, it’s just not true." dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/7/10/882664/-Zombie-Social-Security-lies:-Retirement-age-must-be-raised-because-people-are-living-longer If you truly want to cut the deficit, and most politicians do not, you can move to single payer healthcare and bring U.S. costs inline with every other developed country saving $1 trillion per year. (310m people x $3200 per person). And of course, we never discuss why the American taxpayer has to foot the bill for 50% of the world's military when all we receive from it is the opportunity to make the world safe to outsource jobs to China & India. Contrary to propaganda, the taxes paid by the wealthy are not much higher than everyone else when you look at the percentage of ALL taxes (not just the federal income tax) divided by ALL income. ctj.org/pdf/taxday2009.pdf
Posted by: eric at 07/15/2010 06:54:41 PM
I just about disagree with everything Goldberg wrote. I am very close to the US and many State budgets and the majority of the expenditures are social programs and Medicare and Medicaid. There was a spike in defense spending, but eliminating that will be no means solve any problems. If you raise Social Security to 70, you might as well call it a tax and not a benefit because if you do live that long will only benefit from it for a couple of years. Also, decisions from doctors are not the problem, it's how we deliver health benefits and putting more responsibility on the patient....
Posted by: jobless at 07/15/2010 07:34:35 PM
cut 'defense,' push for transparency...eliminating waste, fraud and abuse will most surely help US workers work harder and longer than any other industrialized nation...the rich, the elite need to step up. you want simple, it is simply time to do the right thing
Posted by: Dan Stark at 07/15/2010 07:44:48 PM
The last stimulus package was nothing but a pay-back to political favors received....and did very little to seriously stimulate the economy. Way to many pork, no-job producing things were included. I don't beleive that the government can now, nor has EVER, gotten us out of a recession. The only thing that they can do to get us going again is to make predictable what they are going to do to business going forward. Right now most businesses are sitting back waiting to see what is going to happen. What we CANNOT do is to continue to spend willy-nilly like there is no tomorrow. Any Congressman or Senator that continues to vote for this irresponsible spending will be voted out of office...no matter what party he represents.
Posted by: Nomen at 07/15/2010 08:25:27 PM
Mr. Goldberg, after complaining about "Partisan politicians, the Internet, talk radio and cable television news", you go and parrot their simplistic answers and solutions. The only thing being avoided is the truth. First, we need good paying jobs but after years of outsourcing and corporate skimming of maximum profits there just aren't many. Now that our economy has been forced into the service sector we find that millions of those jobs have been given to illegal workers. Financial and government leaders like to point their fingers at average Americans who have lived above their means and gone into debt while ignoring CEO, bank, and Wall Street excesses along with Washington's rampant vote buying deficits. Then, you suggest that the average person should make this right by delaying retirement and paying more taxes??? Spouting that federal taxes are the lowest since 1950 doesn't cut it either. As an average middle class person I recently tallied up ALL my taxes, licenses, and fees from all sources. The number came out near 50% of my income. Out of my remaining 50%, I have to pay for increasingly higher priced utilities, insurance, medical costs, and food. So, before giving "simple" suggestions for solving this country's economic problems, you need to truly comprehend what those problems are. The longer that everyone avoids and denies the truth, the more horrible the outcome.
Posted by: Jeremy at 07/15/2010 10:23:02 PM
Or we could just stop our useless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. With all the money we'd save there it would be close to closing the budget deficit.
Posted by: Bob at 07/16/2010 12:56:13 PM
Keynesian economics has been discredited and fails whenever it's used (i.e. the "New Deal" was a big flop). The answer IS simple: CUT TAXES, REDUCE SPENDING and for goodness sakes, LET THE FREE MARKET WORK!!
Posted by: Tim at 07/16/2010 01:25:22 PM
Go here and sign this petition for tier 5 benefits to be included in the new package. It will make a difference...thepetitionsitedotcom/1/we-need-a-tier-5-federal-unemployment-extension
Posted by: Nugg at 07/16/2010 05:08:31 PM
Thanks for the excellent post. Unfortunately, comments like Diogenes' reflect one of the points you make about rationality, or the lack thereof...the comment is internally incosistent. The author disclosed he was a Demoract in the 4th paragraph, and did not make his point regarding raising taxes (disputed by Diogenes) until the penultimate paragraph. So, despite knowing the author was a Democrat, the reader DID "waste time" reading the entire article....And the only place Keynes as been "discredited" is in the right-wing bubble, and by such Nobel Laureates as Bill O'Reilly (in his "Fact-Free Zone), Glen Beck, and John Boehner.
Posted by: Jim of Brooklyn Park, MN at 07/17/2010 01:14:46 AM
Well, Mr. Goldberg, the Democrats enjoy a commanding majority in both houses of Congress as well as owning the White House. Who needs to argue when when one has the ability to fix what's broke? The simple fact is that their spend-thrift policies have done nothing to either stabilize or fix the the current economic situation. What President Obama, Representative Pelosi, and Senator Reid have succeeded in doing is to increase our budget deficit and to lead this nation into further debt--minus the fix they promised. These elected officials have, as well, succeeded in foisting upon our grandchildren a financial debt burden that formerly rested upon the shoulders of this generation as well as the one to follow. The piper will have to be paid. Shame on these people for mortgaging the future of those who had nothing to do with the financial mess they helped create and feed.
Posted by: BillyCrash at 07/17/2010 09:15:41 PM
We economists agree in govt stimulation during weak economic periods. Where we disagree is that the left wants to have direct government spending which inherently is corrupt and bureaucratic, (not to mention outright theft of assets from one group and giving to another), and conservatives instead want to let people keep more of their own money via tax cuts, and allocate that to whatever part of the economy they so choose - which is a much more effective means to stimulation, (not to mention it's not theft). The right is right on this one. I as one, am tired of reaching across the isle. Time for the conservative way (and that's not the same as the Bush policies which other than tax cuts were mostly moderate-to-leftist stupidity).
Posted by: nick at 07/17/2010 10:10:05 PM
What must rational people do to get through to big hearted people like the author that the government doesn't really create anything?
Posted by: J Mail at 07/23/2010 09:47:47 PM
NO NEW TAXES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: BaconFist at 08/16/2010 09:54:47 PM
...What is he doing giving personal financial advice???
Posted by: Klaus at 09/15/2010 02:11:03 PM
It appears we can not get along... with all the yelling and screaming no sensible legislation is coming out of Washington either. So how about something simple the economy, the number of workers paying taxes, corporations paying taxes, those are the things that could be corrected by linking the unemployment rate to the tariffs on goods and services coming into our country. It may be an unpopular decision at first but in the long run would provide motivation to keep jobs within our borders. It's just an idea like using feedback to regulate.