Unexpectedly!

A compilation of headlines. What’s amazing to me is that none of them were in any way unexpected to me, because I’ve recognized the high level of economic nincompoopery at the highest levels of government for years. It’s a shame our intellectual betters (just ask them) in the media can’t figure it out.

[Update a while later]

Gee, I guess I’m smarter than the head of the Fed, too:

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke told reporters Wednesday that the central bank had been caught off guard by recent signs of deterioration in the economy. And he said the troubles could continue into next year.

“We don’t have a precise read on why this slower pace of growth is persisting,” Bernanke said. He said the weak housing market and problems in the banking system might be “more persistent than we thought.”

You don’t say.

[Update a few minutes later]

Hard to argue with this:

As an economist, if I were working for a foreign government and were to design a package of policies to destroy a country’s economy, I would design a plan very similar to what we’ve undertaken in the U.S. over the past 18 months.

If we pursue another economic stimulus of similar size to the previous one, we may as well condemn the economy to another 10-20 years of recession.

Not only will it not work, but it will significantly add to an already grave debt problem. Stimulus is what keeps entrepreneurs from creating new jobs and products. It makes them nervous, because we have to raise taxes in the future to pay for stimulus spending, and this makes for a very uncertain business environment.

You could make a similar statement about space policy. As the preface to the book I’ve been working on for a while begins: “Imagine that extraterrestrial aliens had secretly contacted the White House and U.S. Congress after the Apollo landings, and told them under dire threat that humans were to never again venture beyond low earth orbit, but that the public was not to know this, and to make sure that their successors were aware as well. If it were the case, how would space policy have been much different for the past four decades?”

[Update a few minutes later]

More thoughts from VDH:

Two thoughts: One, the latest Democratic idea of borrowing even more money is de facto proof that all the bailouts, borrowing, vast increases in unemployment and food-stamp monies, Obamacare, etc., have done nothing but terrify employers, who are holding off buying and hiring. And, second, when one adds in the National Labor Relations Board roguery, the presidential quips about the wealthy, the Chrysler creditor mess, the nonstop spread-the-wealth, already-made-enough-money demonization of those who make over $200,000, etc., we are witnessing a sort of psychological stasis in which millions of employers are shrugging and collectively sighing, “I think I’ll pass until this crazy outfit is out of here.”

It can’t happen soon enough.

5 thoughts on “Unexpectedly!”

  1. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke told reporters Wednesday that the central bank had been caught off guard by recent signs of deterioration in the economy. And he said the troubles could continue into next year.

    I’ve been surprised at all of the economic happy talk for the past year or two. Not seeing many signs of recovery here and I doubt ours is an isolated case.

  2. Well, for decades they’ve been deluded by the Marxists, who rooted all wealth creation in the consumer and his magical “demand,” which by merely existing calls forth from the void innovation, creative labor, and the correct concentration of capital. Apparently by merely wishing hard enough, Tinkerbell can be made to live.

    They have long forgotten — do not even now remember the existence of — the inventor, the insightful capitalist, the technological tinkerer, the captain of industry, and all the other productive people — who actually make things.

  3. President Obama’s biggest mistake was keeping President Bush’s economic team. The folks like Bernanke and his Wall Street banker friends created this mess, why would you expect them to know how to fix it?

  4. Carl,

    You do know that consumption as the driver of economics dates to Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations don’t you? And that the market decides how to satisfy it. If that means new inventions so be it, but technology advances by market pull, not by pushing innovations on it.

    Marxist economics by contrast is on the modes of production and argues that you should produce what consumers should have, not what they want. So your comment makes no sense.

Comments are closed.