|
January 2009 By David Galland
Managing Editor,
The Casey Report
On several occasions of late, I have read or heard the phrase, "We
are all Keynesians now," an erudite way of expressing the idea that
the free market is dead. And that the fate of the global economy now
relies almost entirely on pragmatic measures yet to be taken by
governments, most notably that of the United States. Given that the word "pragmatic" is often used to describe President
Obama, it appears that the man of the hour has arrived just in the
nick of time.
Not to be a spoilsport, but there is much wrong
with this latest entry in the thick and well-worn journal labeled
“Popular Delusions.”
First and foremost, the idea that the world's largest debtor nation
should be stood up as role model is laughable. That is like hiring
the town's serial bankrupt to run the bank. Putting aside the irony,
the inherent conflict of interest destroys any U.S. credibility as
an honest broker in the current scenario. Secondly, while the incoming team has done a superior job of
spinning pragmatism into the Obama brand, it is another thing
altogether to actually demonstrate the quality when the shoe leather
hits the fast-moving pavement. And, if you think about it, even the word defies definition. I have
heard Obama supporters comment lately that “if the private sector
won’t spend money, then the government has to.” Like beauty,
pragmatism, it seems, is in the eye of the beholder. In the current
context, what Team Obama might consider pragmatic – soaking the
successful, slapping on an energy tax, revving up the money engines
ever higher – might be considered by others to be very un-pragmatic.
Even so, adopting the optimistic spirit of America’s new era, we’ll
credit the incoming president and all those who surround him as
pragmatics, in the sense that they are the best sort of men and
women who can be counted on to make intelligent and, well,
pragmatic choices in the face of a rapidly eroding global
economy. Unfortunately, no sooner do we hand Team Obama a laurel than we have
to point out a rather large and ugly fly in the otherwise nicely
scented ointment. It is this: if the word pragmatic isn’t used as an
adjective in direct association with the word “dictator,” then it
becomes all but meaningless. That’s because even if Mr. Obama is a pragmatic, the same can hardly
be said of the American public, which, according to the law of the
land, are the purported owners and – through the ballot – operators
of the economy. To use one easily understood example, a pragmatic president might
look at the insurmountable obligations hanging over the Social
Security program and decide that, at the least, some form of means
testing might be applied to recipients. But the voting bloc of
American elderly, readily ginned up into an elevated emotional state
by the AARP and other special-interest groups, assures that anyone
proposing even modest modifications to the program will be loudly
shouted down and find themselves in heavy waters come the next
election. And I’m not referring just to the next presidential election cycle,
which won’t kick off for another two years… but to the next
congressional election of November 2010, less than two years hence.
In that election, 1/3 of the Senate and 100% of the House of
Representatives will be up for grabs. With only history as my guide, I’m going to hypothesize that few of
Mr. Obama's supporters in Congress, avid though they may be, will be
willing to make their reelection campaigns more difficult by
supporting unpopular legislation… no matter how pragmatic. Sure, maybe they’ll inch a little way out on the limb during a brief
honeymoon period, but once the 24-hour-news-as-entertainment
channels start in with a vengeance, cracks in the coalition of
collectivists will begin to appear and Team Obama will turn from
making “hard choices” to the “easy giveaways” the American public
requires in exchange for continuing to support his party come
November 2010. After that, we move seamlessly into the next presidential election
cycle, and things will go downhill from there. Of course, this situation is not unique to the Democrats – rather,
it is an intractable and, in time, terminal disease of our
late-stage democracy itself. Even ignoring the near impossibility of organizing consistent and
sensible government policies in a rapidly degrading democracy, the
whole idea that a government can effectively manage an economy –
Keynes’ central theme – just doesn’t hold water. Despite hundreds
and maybe thousands of experiments along those lines, none has shown
any real durability.
There have been some examples, however, of long-term free market
successes, the most powerful being the early, laissez-faire days of
the United States. There are lesser examples such as Dubai in recent
decades, or Hong Kong under the British – economies where the
operating manual was thin and almost entirely supportive of wealth
creation and free markets. Were they perfect? No, because there is
no such thing as a perfect world. But in terms of creating the
wealth needed for a society to advance to a more refined stage, they
performed exceptionally well.In sharp contrast, today’s freshly minted Keynesians call for
increased penalties on success and a steep ramping up of regulation,
the very opposite of the prescription needed. There is another problem with the utopian aura now surrounding Team
Obama, and it’s simply that government doesn't produce anything
tangible. So when it comes time to "manage" the economy, government
is left with only a couple of tools. One is to force you and me to
use our time and capital for purposes they view as important. Bush,
for example, felt invading Iraq was a priority. Naturally, Team
Obama has a slate of fresh ideas on the best use of your money, and
say they want even more of it. I take umbrage at the notion that I
should open my wallet even further for "the public good," especially
when the perceived public good so often runs contrary to my own
beliefs. For instance, on principle, I am against war – it is always
the innocents that suffer the most. And I am against the creation of
new and expensive regulatory structures, a government specialty. The other tool available to Team Obama is, of course, the creation
of money. And we are now hearing a steady drumbeat that we the
people should pay no attention to the deficits for the next few
years. To which I can only wonder, “Isn’t that exactly what’s been going on
for the last eight years?” It sure seems that way, considering the unprecedented levels of debt
already overhanging the economy.***
There has rarely, if ever, been a period of time where the economy
of the U.S. has been more politicized. Today it is not enough for an
investor to paw through the fundamentals and correctly identify the
best – or worst – sectors or even individual companies to be
invested in or to avoid. Success depends equally, and maybe even
more so, on correctly anticipating what actions the government is
likely to take (or not) in regards to any particular enterprise.
Take GM, for example, whose rise or demise depends to a large part
on the question whether the government will prop it up.
The FREE special report
Obama’s Newer Deal by Casey Research analyzes the
economic and political climate of the incoming Obama administration,
providing a “weather forecast” that can help you prepare your assets
for a rainy day. Get it now – no cost, no obligation – by
simply clicking here.
Subscribe to
our FREE monthly E-zine and keep up with the latest Trends and
Inflation information. And receive a Free copy of "15
Ways to Beat 95% of Investors".
Return to Articles Home Page
|