War
Socialism
by
David Gordon
by David Gordon
The
key thought that underlies Obamas recovery plan is simple.
The cure for severe recession lies in trying to grow the economy.
Spending and investment have fallen off; the government, accordingly,
must take up the slack. By doing so, well get the economy
going again.
Defenders of
this view assail those who contend that government spending simply
crowds out private spending, exerting little or no positive effect.
Precisely the problem, say Keynesian economists like J.
Bradford deLong at UC Berkeley, is that private spending has
not sufficed to bring back prosperity. Is not a dollar spent by
the government at least as good as a dollar spent by private enterprise?
At least as good because some economists of this persuasion
allege a government spending multiplier. A dollar spent
by the government, the claim goes, generates additional spending
by those who receive the money.
Economists
like Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich von Hayek would challenge this
argument at its central premise. In the Austrian
view, what counts is not the level of total spending but how prices
are related; in particular, the relation between prices of capital
goods and consumption goods is of crucial importance. As Hayek remarks
in The Paradox
of Savings: In principle, therefore, any portion,
however small, of the total money stream ought to be sufficient
to take up the consumption goods produced with the other portions,
so long as, for any reason, the demand for consumption goods does
not rise suddenly in relation to the demand for means of production.
This view seems to me entirely convincing; but, unfortunately, explaining
it requires a venture into fairly difficult economic theory. And
an escape from this venture lies ready at hand.
The
key notion in the Obama plan can be exploded in a much simpler way,
one independent of Austrian theory, though entirely consistent with
it.
According to
the spending theory, government spending adds to production.
It does not crowd out private spending. In a recession, there are
hypothetically unemployed resources; and these can be brought into
production without causing a loss elsewhere.
As suggested
earlier, Austrians would object to speaking of unemployed resources
while omitting price. But even on its own terms, the spending argument
fails. It wrongly moves from the claim that government spending
need not lessen private spending and investing to the much stronger
claim that it will not do so.
Read
the rest of the article
Copyright
© 2009 Taki's Magazine
David
Gordon Archives
|