Please turn on JavaScript

Brooks Wilson's Economics Blog: Majority View of Economists on the Great Depression?

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Majority View of Economists on the Great Depression?

In recent weeks, I have heard many non-alarmist economists use the describe our current economic state as a depression. In a recent post, titled, "Deficit Spending on Infrastructure in a Depression--Posner," Richard Posner frequently refers to the current depression. At the Myron Scholes Global Markets Forum, Robert Lucas at one point stated that the current economic situation is not as bad as the Great Depression, and at another, referred to it as a depression.[1] Now dubbed Dr. Doom for predicting the financial collapse, Nouriel Roubini at the World Economic Forum in Davos was described by Bloomberg [2] as,

...more pessimistic than economists elsewhere. The IMF forecasts global growth of 0.5 percent this year and bank losses from toxic U.S.- originated assets of $2.2 trillion. By contrast, Roubini sees the global economy shrinking this year, and banks writing down at least $3.6 trillion -- compared to the $1.1 trillion disclosed so far.

The Great Depression has probably been studied more by economists than any other event in U.S. history, and with the unraveling of the financial system and deepening of the recession, it is again of interest. I believe that Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian, writing for the Wall Street Journal summarize the majority opinion of the affect of policy on the economy during the Great Depression.[3]

The goal of the New Deal was to get Americans back to work. But the New Deal didn't restore employment. In fact, there was even less work on average during the New Deal than before FDR took office. Total hours worked per adult, including government employees, were 18% below their 1929 level between 1930-32, but were 23% lower on average during the New Deal (1933-39). Private hours worked were even lower after FDR took office, averaging 27% below their 1929 level, compared to 18% lower between in 1930-32.

Some New Deal policies certainly benefited the economy by establishing a basic social safety net through Social Security and unemployment benefits, and by stabilizing the financial system through deposit insurance and the Securities Exchange Commission. But others violated the most basic economic principles by suppressing competition, and setting prices and wages in many sectors well above their normal levels. All told, these antimarket policies choked off powerful recovery forces that would have plausibly returned the economy back to trend by the mid-1930s.

[1] I am not aware of any economic distinction between the words depression and recession. While taking an undergraduate history of economics class, the professor, who shall remain nameless in case my memory is faulty, said that the word glut was used to describe a downturn in the business cycle until a particularly bad downturn at which point it was replaced by the word depression. Similarly, after the Great Depression, the depression fell into disrepute and was replaced by recession. I don't know if the history is correct, but I like it.

[2] Kennedy, Simon. "Roubini Sees Global Gloom After Davos Vindication (Update1)" Bloomberg, January 30, 2009.

[3] Cole, Harold and Lee Ohanian. "How the Government Prolonged the Depression," Wall Street Journal, February 2, 2009.

No comments:

Post a Comment