From Keynesianism to Socialism


Pages: 1 2

The Office of Management of Budget published its Mid-Session Review July 23, forecasting Federal outlays and tax revenue to 2020. The numbers presented showed that the Obama administration has transformed government finance far beyond the immediate need of stimulating the economy to pull the country out of a major recession. Obama has locked the country into dangerously high structural deficits that will persist even after the economy resumes normal growth.

The deficit in 2012 is estimated at $911 billion and the deficit in 2020 at $900 billion. These massive deficits are not the result of lingering effects from the recession. The OMB’s economic assumptions are:

“The growth rate is projected to rise to 4.3 percent in 2012 and 4.2 percent in 2013 as the economy returns closer to its potential output level. Beyond 2013, real GDP growth is projected to moderate, declining gradually to 2.5 percent per year in 2018-2020.”

This growth rate is within normal parameters for a mature economy like that of the United States.

The OMB sees a 5.2 percent unemployment rate in 2020. But the return to normalcy will not bring about the “fiscal responsibility” President Barack Obama talks about and which financial markets need. The deficit in 2020 will still be 3.8 percent of GDP, a level normally associated with recessions, not prosperity.

The OMB’s review takes a potshot at the George W. Bush budgets, noting: “The previous Administration’s decisions not to pay for three large domestic initiatives (the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 and the Medicare prescription drug benefit of 2003).” Yet, the highest debt-to-GDP ratio of the Bush years prior to the economic downturn that exploded the 2009 budget was 3.5 percent in 2004. So the OMB considers it to be a triumph of fiscal responsibility to reduce the normal deficit to somewhat higher than the worst year of the previous administration.

The OMB also states,

“Because of the unsustainable nature of the Government’s medium-  and long-term fiscal outlook….The result of the [National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform] recommendations will be annual deficits that are approximately equal to 3 percent of GDP. Deficits of this size will stabilize the ratio of debt to GDP. Most economists consider this to be necessary for fiscal sustainability as debt and interest payments rise only as much as economic growth, rather than rising as a share of output and the budget over time.”

Yet, a deficit-to-GDP ratio of 3 percent is not reached by 2020 under current assumptions. And even if it does become the standard, it will still be higher than “normal” years in the past.

Tax revenues in 2020 are forecast to be $1.9 trillion higher than in 2012. Government spending will also be $1.9 trillion higher, so there is no effort to use rising revenues to cut the deficit. Every new dollar taken in will be spent. GDP in 2020 is supposed to be $7.7 trillion higher than in 2012, which means the government will be taking and spending 24.7 percent of the nation’s growth over those years, a much higher share than in the past. In 2020, Federal outlays will be 23.5 percent of GDP, compared to the average of 20.2 percent of GDP during the 20 years prior to the 2009 downturn.

The economic theories of British economist John Maynard Keynes have taken a beating from conservatives during the debate over fiscal policy. Keynesianism has long been synonymous with deficit spending. But Lord Keynes cannot take the rap for (or be used to justify) Obama’s policies. Keynes’s ideas about macroeconomics came to prominence during the Great Depression. His purpose was not to replace capitalism but to save it. As Herbert Stein summed the matter up in his classic The Fiscal Revolution in America “It was accepted policy that we should run deficits in depressions, that we would not raise taxes in depressions in an attempt to balance the budget, and that in severe depressions we would raise expenditures, at least for relief and probably for recovery.” Stein’s book came out in 1969 when he was a member of President Richard Nixon’s Council of Economic Advisors. Soon his boss would acknowledge “We are all Keynesians now.”

Pages: 1 2

  • Michael Petek

    Get hold of Robert Skidelsky's book 'The Return of the Master.' Skidelsky, the biographer of Keynes, states that the heart of his theory is the irreducible uncertainty of the future, which unhinges the entire neo-classical approach. He also states that Keynes was not a nationaliser, nor even a regulator, and that he held that a government budget should normally be in surplus.

  • Gamaliel Isaac

    Keynes was a lot more socialist than people recognize. He also advocated absurd economic ideas that have cause economic problems since they have been adopted. Hazilitt wrote a book exposing what was wrong with Keynes as did Hunter Lewis. Every economist should read Hunter Lewis's book as should anyone trying to understand what's wrong with the Keynesian policies Obama is pursuing.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/The_Inquisitor The_Inquisitor

    I suggest readers get ahold of "The Failure of the 'New Economics'" by Henry Hazlitt. He analyzes Keynes's tome chapter by chapter. Keynes sounds like the ravings of a madman. I can't believe anyone takes him seriously.

  • Michael Petek

    Henry Hazlitt could refute Keynes only if he could prove that a cardinal (eg 60 per cent) or ordinal (more likely than not) probability distribution can be assigned to any future event.

  • USMCSniper

    Keynes' particular depravity was the sexual abuse of little boys. In communications to his homosexual friends, Keynes advised that they go to Tunis, “where bed and boy were also not expensive.” As a sodomistic pedophiliac, he ranged throughout the Mediterranean area in search of boys for himself and his fellow socialists. Taking full advantage of the bitter poverty and abysmal ignorance in North Africa, the Middle East, and Italy, he purchased the bodies of children prostituted for English shillings[See Lytton Strachey, A Critical Biography, Michael Holyroyd, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, two volumes]. Such Leftist hypocrites then, as now, issued loud denunciations against poverty, imperialism, and capitalist immorality. However, for their own degenerate purposes, they eagerly sought out the worst pockets of destitution and backwardness to satisfy their perverted purposes through sexual enslavement of youngsters.. In degenerate areas of the Mediterranean, on the other hand, they found a pervert’s Utopia where the bodies of children could be purchased as part of a cultured socialist’s holiday.

    • scum

      Thanks God the Right has never been involved in child predatory activities. Oh, wait a minute, I forgot about the millions fondled by the Catholic Church and the Boy Scouts of America. Sniper, put your rocket back in your pocket, dude.

      • USMCSniper

        Most Homosexuals love their "chicken bait" (young hairless bed boys) and deny thet they are pedofiles of course. Me doth think you object too much,…. ehh… twinkle toes?

      • glpage

        What makes you think the homosexual, pedophile priests were conservatives?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/FBastiat FBastiat

    "Where Keynes Went Wrong: And Why World Governments Keep Creating Inflation, Bubbles, and Busts" by Hunter Lewis

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/kwg1 kwg1

    Hayek, Von Mises et al have no trouble scuttling Keynes. Go to http://www.mises.org and do the research AND THEN COMPARE against not only Keynes theory but the effects of its implementation since it has been followed worldwide from the early 1900's!

    Keynes is IMHO persona non gratta!