As all Austrians should be aware, recessions themselves only come about as a reaction to the unsustainable tempo of the preceding Boom, writes Sean Corrigan. Pursue inflationism, frustrate the market, extend socialism, adopt protectionism, embrace militarism, extirpate thrift, expropriate the Middle Classes, consume capital--and ignore the Austrians!--that is the way to turn a recession into a depression.
Overall economic efficiency does not concern GDP growth per se, writes DW MacKenzie. It concerns the satisfaction of consumer demand. Increased military spending does not directly satisfy consumer demand. Nor do increased deficits and monetary stimulation substitute for market forces. They only set in motion another round of cyclical economic trends.
To most, the strong housing market has "saved" the economy by providing consumers with fresh purchasing power and housing gains have helped cushion many from the withering blows of the stock market’s decline.
But the housing boom is not an unmitigated good.
The NBER says the recession ended 20 months ago, but where is the recovery? The labor market is not responding, and growth is weak and ambiguous. Christopher Westley offers an explanation of why this supposed recovery looks different from previous ones.
You buy a stock and the price goes down. Who accepts the liability for losses? The purchaser of stock, of course, who must always bear in mind that stocks are never foreordained to go up or down. As painful as they are, investment losses are necessary to work off the excesses of a bubble, and to re-allocate capital to more promising business ventures.
Any upturn whether in economic statistics or in the stock market is almost certain to follow the patterns not of economic recovery but rather a mini-boom. There is no way that this particular boom, as pathetic as it is, can be sustained for a long time, unlike the boom of the late 1990s. In fact, the Fed's recent actions can only force more malinvestments which themselves will have to be liquidated in the future.
While one hopes that this current sorry situation does not metastasize into a full-blown calamity reminiscent of the Great Depression, there are some not-so-obvious but important issues that need to be raised if we are to climb out of this economic mess.
This year marks the 70th Anniversary of the National Industrial Recovery Act, FDR's planning legislation that created the National Recovery Administration, the NRA. Henry Hazlitt saw precisely what the NRA would lead to, and after a dispute with the The Nation that resulted in his losing his position as literary editor, he wrote the following brilliant attack for the American Mercury.
Sustained long-term economic growth, of course, is good for human health and life expectancy. But what about the business cycle when government generates periods of overly speculative investing and even stock market hysteria followed by unemployment and bankruptcy? What are the health consequences of an economic frenzy fueled by money creation?
As the Austrian explanation of the business cycle has gained adherents, the debunkers too want their voice heard. At the heart of Edmund Phelps's misrepresentation of Austrian business cycle theory is his capital theory and a lack of an appreciation for the important role of saving in the wealth creation process. Robert D. McTeer makes a similar error in his defense of Keynes's paradox of thrift.
