Last week I
tried to make a simple point. Our government needs to prioritize and focus. My
preference is to focus on economic growth and security. My assumption is that either
candidate once elected with an earnest goal of promoting growth could find
enough support to make progress. My second assumption is that a truly positive
outcome would take a lot of focus wherein other issues would have to be put on
a back burner. I got lots of responses and advice from you. So let me deal with
some of that here.
First, even
if I am wrong, I am not going to move to another planet. So forget it.
Second, some
of you believe that neither party is capable of focusing on economic growth to
the exclusion of other policies. And I agree with you. I can’t see them jumping on the growth wagon either.
Whatever party wins and wins enough clout in Congress will begin by immediately
jabbing its collective finger into the eye of the other party. If Democrats win
the first thing they will do is to make abortion available to women who are not
even pregnant. And Republicans in their first 24 hours in power will make it
legal for kindergarten kids to carry loaded military weapons to class. Okay I
jest, but you get the point. I doubt either party is capable of taking over
without at least a few na na nas. This will not put anyone in the mood to
join hands in even a few off-key gumbayas for economic growth.
But it is
worth talking about. Why can’t one side just stick to making us all a little
richer?
Third, even
without the predictable eye jabbing, can both parties find a way to agree on an
economic growth plan? Again, I am not sure they can do that. What is the best
way to promote stronger economic growth that will lift most boats? Fuzzy seems
to have a very large boat and I don’t even have a boat. So it sounds pretty
challenging.
Okay forget
boats for a moment. Here is a wild and crazy suggestion for thinking about a
solution. Step 1. Recognize that no party in the discussion will get everything
they want. It’s called compromise. If you are like Mr Cruz and won’t play
unless you can use your own Tom Brady-signed under-inflated legal pad, then go home and don’t participate. Step 2. Write down all the credible
policies that could conceivably improve economic growth in the US in the next
few years. Yes, write them all down. Step 3. Prioritize all these possibilities
in terms of a realistic appraisal of their impacts on economic growth. To do this step each side
could pick a few economists who they believe are not wing-nuts and who could actually
sit in a room for more than 7 minutes with economists on the other side of the
aisle. Step 4. Put these economists in a locked room with only kimchi, soju, a
photo of Margaret Thatcher, and only one week’s supply of Charmin. Step 5.
Watch the magic happen and make sure that government legislates anything that
a majority of these economists agree to. Step 6. If all that doesn't work go back to step 1.
It sounds crazy
but let’s face it, crazy is about all we have today. If any process was to
lead to an even half-way intelligent set of economic policies, we would
benefit. So as to totally not cop-out on some details of policies let me end by
offering some suggestions.
· Evaluate the full set of government
regulations that negatively impact productivity and labor supply. Those that
create the largest detriments should be eliminated for a period of three years.
· Cut some fat out of every government
program. Use that fat to fry some really nice pork chops. Or use it for
infrastructure.
· Do something about spending on Social
Security and Medicare. Use those cuts to give some targeted tax cuts and/or
subsidies that would directly enhance the replacement of worn out machines,
software, and so on.
· Create tax cuts or subsidies that
would make it easier for poor people to work and safely provide for their
children. More spending on training and retraining would fit here too.
· If any of the above leads to
short-term increases in the government deficit or national debt, then permit
deficits as high as 5% of GDP for two years. If the growth policies work, the deficit will automatically go back to tolerable levels.
I probably
missed something so let me know. That list is provided to show that there are ways
to get this done. It is not meant to be exhaustive. Notice that I have
attempted to be flexible. If you have read some of my past musings you know
that I harp consistently about deficits and debt. In the above I am acknowledging
that a compromise might involve a temporary increase in the latter. Wow – I may
need a visit to my JD bottle once that gets out. But compromise is compromise.
I want to see people seriously ponder economic growth. If we stick to “my way
or the highway” I can’t see us making any progress. What do you think?
It will never happen. Both parties think that trade is a negative, both want an expansion of government, and both want an increase in taxes. The Democrats want more social services and higher income taxes. The Republicans pay lip service to growth but want higher tariffs, more regulation (i.e. Glass Stiegel) and more control over trade. The Democrats pay no attention to growth other than growth of government.
ReplyDeleteKinda disappointing. What happens when we tax and regulate entrepreneurship out of business? What happens when the incentives to invent and produce are blunted? What a boring world. Even Janis Joplin wanted to be paid well for her work.
DeleteLar, when that happens, we get "Atlas Shrugged" in reality.
DeleteWhile I am not optimistic about cooperation in Washington, this election cycle's bizarre characteristics, accompanied by Brexit, might provide some impetus for elected members in both parties to accept that the electorate is truly fed up with both sides more or less equally. Keeping one's job appears to be the utmost priority in D.C. and to achieve this less than laudable goal, this may really be the time when post-electoral cooperation is at least imaginable. I will not be holding my breath. JCB
ReplyDeleteThis blog does not have health insurance so please do not hold your breath. Somehow ideological purity will have to take a backseat to actual results in the way of economic growth. I don't know how that is going to happen. Today reelection seems to be more related to decibels than deliberation.
DeleteOk...go back to regulations. My company is having and FDA audit this week. We distribute x-ray devices and sensors. We have to prepare a application for FDA approval of the products we sell or if another manufacturers makes the product we have to be added. This means that the same product may have 20+ submissions for the same device. The FDA admits this is stupid but will not change. Multiply this times 10 regulated FDA products and thing of the size of the regulatory office just in this small niche. Is this a R or D thing? Paid for by our taxes but a system that has a lot of fat.
ReplyDeleteNice example Hoot. I am sure you have lots more. We all want intelligent regulation but is it clear that today's government regulation is anything like we hoped for? I am guessing it misses the mark like my extra point in the Key West game.
DeleteHey, Prof, even Janis didn't want to buy her own Mercedes Benz. She cried plaintively to the Lord for Him to buy her one. Obviously, she was a democrat.
ReplyDeleteBut all her friends drove Porsches, she must make amends.
DeleteI agree. Overregulation is rampant. Trade is essential despite pollution in india and china...training is essential but outcomes/ $ is mandatory...free college is crap. Free welding school makes sense. How do we retrain coal miners? I don't see economists in a room together as much as it's mandatory that we grow beyond 2%. Republicans have committed suicide since trump is the manchurian candidate...God help us.
ReplyDeleteThanks Bill. I hope all is well with you! I just saw an article about some of Nick's teams after I graduated -- they were really fabulous.
Delete