Hi, Mike,

You mention a concept that, the more I think about it, leaves me puzzled. It is 
the idea of a 'multiplier effect' usually expressed in the following way:  
"Every dollar spent on the Defense department budget is worth seven dollars to 
the economy." I think Ray expressed something similar with regard to the arts 
recently.  

Question, then, to everyone who might read this: do you know of any methodology 
that explains this notion of a multiplier effect?  It is hard for me to 
conceive of what the factual basis for such a notion is, or, if the general 
notion is valid, how one sector of the economy would have a higher multiplier 
than another.

I hope someone here can throw some light on this.

Cheers,

Lawry


On Aug 2, 2010, at 4:58 PM, Michael Gurstein wrote:

> Frankly I think this piece is complete and utter codswallop!  It is part of
> some sort of organized effort by the owners of the media all of whom are
> rich to ensure that Obama doesn't cancel the tax cut that Bush provided to
> his rich GOP friends.  It is really really hard to believe that the trickle
> down from the .05% who own the yachts, private jets and country club
> memberships would quite match in multiplier what would come from increased
> purchasing power in the hands of the bottom (or mid-range) folks who are
> increasingly strapped to pay for their trips to WalMart. The problem isn't
> that the wealthy aren't making the expenditures but rather that the US
> economy has been gutted of jobs and so the advantage of any expenditure just
> trickles through to China.
> 
> M
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lawrence de
> Bivort
> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 10:49 PM
> To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION
> Subject: Re: [Futurework] As spending by wealthy weakens, so does economy
> 
> 
> My guess is that wealthy people 'feel their wealth' in terms of the stock
> market; if the stock market rises, so will their spending. Except...
> 
> It may be that some portion of the wealthy and the upper middle class are
> cutting back as a matter of life-style and cultural maturation. This may
> involve the very notions of (excessive) wealth and (excessive) spending
> becoming contemptible. Personally, i like this cultural shift -- if it is
> taking place -- but recognize that it is bad for the traditionally defined
> US economy.  Keith has been returning to this notion of high-priced,
> innovative, attractive consumer items. He is concerned that there seem to be
> none on the horizon and asks whence the new high-end spending will come
> from. To his concern I would add the idea that even if such products were
> discernible, wealthy people might -- some of them -- simply have become
> bored with consumption and materialism.
> 
> When I think of the wealthy people I know, these speculations do not seem so
> far fetched. The values of the US counter-cuture of the 60s may be
> reemerging among those who were part of that on the 60s, who then went and
> got jobs and had kids and have seen them through university, and who now
> approaching retirement are remembering the values and dreams of the
> counter-culture.  (And, no, I don't mean drugs or those who think of, or
> experienced the 60s in those terms....!)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Lawry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 2, 2010, at 6:55 AM, Michael Gurstein wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Who knew?
>> 
>> M
>> 
>> 
>> Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer, On Sunday August 1, 2010, 2:09 
>> pm EDT
>> 
>> WASHINGTON (AP) -- Wealthy Americans aren't spending so freely 
>> anymore. And the rest of us are feeling the squeeze.
>> 
>> The question is whether the rich will cut back so much as to tip the 
>> economy back into recession -- or if they will spend at least enough 
>> to sustain the recovery.
>> 
>> The answer may not be clear for months. But their cutbacks help 
>> explain why the rebound could be stalling. The economy grew at just a 
>> 2.4 percent rate in the April-June quarter, the government said 
>> Friday, much slower than the 3.7 percent rate for the first quarter.
>> 
>> Economists say overall consumer spending has slowed mainly because the 
>> richest 5 percent of Americans -- those earning at least $207,000 -- 
>> are buying less. They account for about 14 percent of total spending. 
>> These shoppers have retrenched as their investment values have sunk 
>> and home values have languished.
>> 
>> In addition, the most sweeping tax cuts in a generation are due to 
>> expire in January, and lawmakers are divided over whether the 
>> government can afford to make any of them permanent as the federal 
>> budget deficit continues to balloon. President Barack Obama wants to 
>> allow the top rates to increase next year for individuals making more 
>> than $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000. The wealthy may 
>> be keeping some money on the sidelines due to uncertainty over whether 
>> or not they will soon face higher taxes.
>> 
>> The Standard & Poor's 500 stock index has tumbled 9.5 percent since 
>> its high-water mark in late April. Home values fell 3.2 percent in the 
>> first quarter, according to the Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller 20-city 
>> home price index.
>> 
>> Think of the wealthy as the main engine of the economy: When they buy 
>> more, the economy hums. When they cut back, it sputters. The rest of 
>> us mainly go along for the ride.
>> 
>> Earlier this year, gains in stock portfolios had boosted household 
>> wealth. And the rich responded by spending freely. That raised hopes 
>> the recovery would strengthen.
>> 
>> No longer. The dizzying plunge on Wall Street in May and June and 
>> lingering stock market turbulence have shrunk Americans' wealth. The 
>> Dow fell 10 percent for the April-June quarter. The broader Standard & 
>> Poor's 500 index dropped 11.9 percent. And the rich are once again 
>> more cautious about spending, economists say.
>> 
>> The affluent went back to tightening their belts in June after months 
>> of vigorous showing. Data from MasterCard Advisors' SpendingPulse 
>> showed luxury spending fell in June for the first time since November. 
>> The decline followed a solid rise in sales revenue earlier in the 
>> spring.
>> 
>> "It isn't a good omen for the consumer recovery, which cannot exist 
>> without the luxury spender," said Mike Niemira, chief economist at the 
>> International Council of Shopping Centers.
>> 
>> At the same time, government reports show shoppers as a whole cut back 
>> on their spending in both May and June.
>> 
>> Companies have responded by refusing to step up hiring. The housing 
>> market is stalling. And Americans are seeing little or no pay raises. 
>> It adds up to a recipe for a grinding recovery to slow further.
>> 
>> And it helps explain why economists expect the rebound to lose 
>> momentum in the second half of the year. Especially if the rich don't 
>> resume bigger spending.
>> 
>> "They are the bellwether for the economy," says Mark Zandi, chief 
>> economist at Moody's Analytics. "The fact that they turned more 
>> cautious is why the recovery is losing momentum. If they panic again, 
>> that would be the fodder for a double-dip recession."
>> 
>> That's because whether they're saving or spending, the wealthy deliver 
>> an outsize impact on the economy. What's not clear is whether they 
>> will remain too nervous to spend freely again for many months. That's 
>> what happened when the recession hit in December 2007 and then when 
>> the financial crisis ignited in September 2008.
>> 
>> As their stock holdings and home values sank, the affluent lost 
>> wealth. Their jobs weren't safe, either. Bankers, lawyers, accountants 
>> and mortgage brokers were among those getting pink-slipped. Those who 
>> did have jobs feared losing them. Neither group spent much.
>> 
>> Instead, Americans' savings rate spiked. And most of the increase came 
>> from the richest 5 percent, according to research by Moody's 
>> Analytics.
>> 
>> In the first quarter of this year, stocks rebounded, layoffs slowed 
>> and the rich were spending again.
>> 
>> But now the rich are building up their savings and splurging less on 
>> discretionary items. That's starting to show up in softer sales at 
>> upscale retailers, such as Neiman Marcus and Saks Inc. It's because 
>> people like Angeli Gianchandani, 40, have cut back.
>> 
>> She used to hit the mall every two weeks -- flicking through the racks 
>> at Saks or Bloomingdale's and returning home with a new frock. Not 
>> anymore. She's limiting her splurges now. The downturn in the stock 
>> market has played a role.
>> 
>> "Rather than spending more money, I'm keeping more," says 
>> Gianchandani, who lives in New Jersey.
>> 
>> Even with recent losses, household net worth has risen 13 percent from 
>> its bottom during the recession. Net worth -- the value of assets like 
>> homes, checking accounts and investments minus debts like mortgages 
>> and credit cards -- grew 2.1 percent in the first quarter.
>> 
>> However, net worth would have to grow 21 percent more to regain its 
>> pre-recession peak. In the meantime, don't expect the wealthy to 
>> suddenly start spending lavishly.
>> 
>> "The affluent -- as their wealth goes down -- they'll become more and 
>> more conservative," predicts David Levy, chairman of the Jerome Levy 
>> Forecasting Center.
>> 
>> Associated Press Writer Anne D'Innocenzio in New York contributed to 
>> this report.
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Futurework mailing list
>> [email protected] 
>> https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Futurework mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Futurework mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework


_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to