Take Off the Muzzle and the Economy Will*Roar

cawacko

Well-known member
For those that think 2% growth is the new normal there are fortunately others who disagree.




Take Off the Muzzle and the Economy Will*Roar


In his Saturday Wall Street Journal essay “Why the Economy Doesn’t Roar Anymore”—illustrated with a big lion with its mouth shut—Marc Levinson offers the answer that the “U.S. economy isn’t behaving badly. It is just being ordinary.” *But there is nothing ordinary (or secular) about the current stagnation of *barely 2 percent growth. The economy is not roaring because it’s muzzled by government policy, and if we take off that muzzle—like Lucy and Susan did in “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe”—the economy will indeed roar.

It is of course true, as Levinson states, that “faster productivity growth” is “the key to faster economic growth.” But it’s false, as he also states, *that it has all been downhill since the “long boom after World War II” and “there is no going back.” The following chart of productivity growth drawn from my article in the American Economic Review shows why Levinson misinterprets recent history. Whether you look at 5 year averages, statistically filtered trends, or simple directional arrows, you can see huge swings in productivity growth in recent years. *These movements—the productivity slump of the 1970s, the rebound of the 1980s and 1990s, and the recent slump—are closely related to shifts in economic policy, and economic theory indicates that the relationship is causal, as I explain here*and here*and in blogs and opeds.*You can also see that the recent terrible performance—negative productivity growth for the past year—is anything but ordinary. *

Writing about the 1980’s and 1990s, Levinson claims that “deregulation, privatization, lower tax rates, balanced budgets and rigid rules for monetary policy—proved no more successful at boosting productivity than the statist policies…” The chart shows the contrary: productivity growth was generally picking up in the 1980s and 1990s.* It is the stagnation of the late 1960s, the 1970s, and the last decade that is state-sponsored. *To turn the economy around we need to take the muzzle off, and that means regulatory reform, tax reform, budget reform, and monetary reform.


https://economicsone.com/2016/10/16/take-off-the-muzzle-and-the-economy-will-roar/
 
Slap even the most luxurious shade of lipstick on this pending, porcine presidency, and it's quite likely to remain a porker.
Except for extreme media s a v v y I haven't seen in Trump a level of sophistication we might expect necessary to lift our entire economy without doing more harm than good.
 
Slap even the most luxurious shade of lipstick on this pending, porcine presidency, and it's quite likely to remain a porker.
Except for extreme media s a v v y I haven't seen in Trump a level of sophistication we might expect necessary to lift our entire economy without doing more harm than good.
But have you actually been right with any of your predictions up to now, Scot Adams got it right back in March!!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-dilbert-explains-why/?utm_term=.c0ca09f37b06


Sent from my Lenovo K52e78 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
"Predictions"?
My comment is about what I have not seen in Trump.

Even Trump's campaign team was a bit of a jumble.

So far I like Trump's choice of Gen. James Mattis. Most of Trump's other pics leave me concerned.
 
To invoke an analogy: the economy is like a smoldering fire with a wet blanket over it and Barack is standing next to it with his foot on the blanket.

Trump is going to come along and elbow Barack out of the way and remove the wet blanket. Then the fire will take off.

The point is Trump doesn't need to be an economic genius: genius isn't a requirement for lifting regulations on a Hyper regulated economy and energy sector.

And if that holds true and everything else remains equal [no significant foreign policy missteps] democrats are going to have little if any success in 2018 and Trump will likely go two terms.
 
For those that think 2% growth is the new normal there are fortunately others who disagree.




Take Off the Muzzle and the Economy Will*Roar


In his Saturday Wall Street Journal essay “Why the Economy Doesn’t Roar Anymore”—illustrated with a big lion with its mouth shut—Marc Levinson offers the answer that the “U.S. economy isn’t behaving badly. It is just being ordinary.” *But there is nothing ordinary (or secular) about the current stagnation of *barely 2 percent growth. The economy is not roaring because it’s muzzled by government policy, and if we take off that muzzle—like Lucy and Susan did in “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe”—the economy will indeed roar.

It is of course true, as Levinson states, that “faster productivity growth” is “the key to faster economic growth.” But it’s false, as he also states, *that it has all been downhill since the “long boom after World War II” and “there is no going back.” The following chart of productivity growth drawn from my article in the American Economic Review shows why Levinson misinterprets recent history. Whether you look at 5 year averages, statistically filtered trends, or simple directional arrows, you can see huge swings in productivity growth in recent years. *These movements—the productivity slump of the 1970s, the rebound of the 1980s and 1990s, and the recent slump—are closely related to shifts in economic policy, and economic theory indicates that the relationship is causal, as I explain here*and here*and in blogs and opeds.*You can also see that the recent terrible performance—negative productivity growth for the past year—is anything but ordinary. *

Writing about the 1980’s and 1990s, Levinson claims that “deregulation, privatization, lower tax rates, balanced budgets and rigid rules for monetary policy—proved no more successful at boosting productivity than the statist policies…” The chart shows the contrary: productivity growth was generally picking up in the 1980s and 1990s.* It is the stagnation of the late 1960s, the 1970s, and the last decade that is state-sponsored. *To turn the economy around we need to take the muzzle off, and that means regulatory reform, tax reform, budget reform, and monetary reform.


https://economicsone.com/2016/10/16/take-off-the-muzzle-and-the-economy-will-roar/
So we have more crash and burn business cycles? That's exactly what happens when free market fundamentalism is given a free reign. Sure the economy roars for a little while then crashes and destroys far more lives. Sorry but the historical track record of you laissez faire capitalist is almost as bad as communist. Ultimately it produces anticompetitive trust and monopolies and boom and bust cycles that devastates the economy.
 
So we have more crash and burn business cycles? That's exactly what happens when free market fundamentalism is given a free reign. Sure the economy roars for a little while then crashes and destroys far more lives. Sorry but the historical track record of you laissez faire capitalist is almost as bad as communist. Ultimately it produces anticompetitive trust and monopolies and boom and bust cycles that devastates the economy.

We don't have laaissez faire capitalism in this country. We have nothing close. And have you ever seen an economy anywhere on the globe that never has up and downs? That was a rhetorical question, it doesn't exist.

And Mott, you're too smart to embarrass yourself with that last statement. You are comparing the results of capitalism and communism. Just stop
 
And Mott, you are also arguing we don't need tax reform in this country. Not sure how you say that. You're arguing essentially the gov't can never go too far in regulating and no regulations passed need updating. You have zero complaints either with the Fed
 
My comment is about what I have not seen
"typical, then......" #7
Quite true.
I'm in distinguished company.
"Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud. His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. ... playing the members of the American public for suckers. He gets a free ride to the White House. And all we get is a lousy hat." Mitt Romney

"I think it's time for him [Donald Trump ("R"-NY) Republican 2016 presidential candidate] to look like a serious candidate for president." Majority Leader McConnell (R-KY)
 
We don't have laaissez faire capitalism in this country. We have nothing close. And have you ever seen an economy anywhere on the globe that never has up and downs? That was a rhetorical question, it doesn't exist.

And Mott, you're too smart to embarrass yourself with that last statement. You are comparing the results of capitalism and communism. Just stop
We don't have Trump yet.
 
For those that think 2% growth is the new normal there are fortunately others who disagree.




Take Off the Muzzle and the Economy Will*Roar


In his Saturday Wall Street Journal essay “Why the Economy Doesn’t Roar Anymore”—illustrated with a big lion with its mouth shut—Marc Levinson offers the answer that the “U.S. economy isn’t behaving badly. It is just being ordinary.” *But there is nothing ordinary (or secular) about the current stagnation of *barely 2 percent growth. The economy is not roaring because it’s muzzled by government policy, and if we take off that muzzle—like Lucy and Susan did in “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe”—the economy will indeed roar.

It is of course true, as Levinson states, that “faster productivity growth” is “the key to faster economic growth.” But it’s false, as he also states, *that it has all been downhill since the “long boom after World War II” and “there is no going back.” The following chart of productivity growth drawn from my article in the American Economic Review shows why Levinson misinterprets recent history. Whether you look at 5 year averages, statistically filtered trends, or simple directional arrows, you can see huge swings in productivity growth in recent years. *These movements—the productivity slump of the 1970s, the rebound of the 1980s and 1990s, and the recent slump—are closely related to shifts in economic policy, and economic theory indicates that the relationship is causal, as I explain here*and here*and in blogs and opeds.*You can also see that the recent terrible performance—negative productivity growth for the past year—is anything but ordinary. *

Writing about the 1980’s and 1990s, Levinson claims that “deregulation, privatization, lower tax rates, balanced budgets and rigid rules for monetary policy—proved no more successful at boosting productivity than the statist policies…” The chart shows the contrary: productivity growth was generally picking up in the 1980s and 1990s.* It is the stagnation of the late 1960s, the 1970s, and the last decade that is state-sponsored. *To turn the economy around we need to take the muzzle off, and that means regulatory reform, tax reform, budget reform, and monetary reform.


https://economicsone.com/2016/10/16/take-off-the-muzzle-and-the-economy-will-roar/

 
Cawacko, deserve some sort of award for banning Desh from this thread. She has a 15+ post thread going in which she is having a conversation with herself about your topic. Makes for decent entertainment on this rainy morning.
 
Cawacko, deserve some sort of award for banning Desh from this thread. She has a 15+ post thread going in which she is having a conversation with herself about your topic. Makes for decent entertainment on this rainy morning.

LOL. I actually put her on ignore so I'm missing her usual amazing insight into what makes an economy go. Any chance you could share some cliffs? :)
 
No. I got an honorable mention on that thread for that last post. Most is just her usual stuff with some cut and paste and some links from various (mostly left leaning) sources. I think the gist is that a roaring economy inevitably leads to a crashing economy. Typical gloom and doom.
 
No. I got an honorable mention on that thread for that last post. Most is just her usual stuff with some cut and paste and some links from various (mostly left leaning) sources. I think the gist is that a roaring economy inevitably leads to a crashing economy. Typical gloom and doom.

Interesting that talking about ways to get the economy going is considered a bad thing.
 
So how do you know that Trump's actions will not amount to what Mott described?
Isn't that what is being proposed?

Mott uses lassiez faire as a straw man like we are going to have a Somalia like regulatory system.
 
Back
Top