From: Louis Proyect

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/03/hbc-90006718
Six Questions for Richard Posner on Capitalism and Crisis

By Ken Silverstein

 The Crisis of
Capitalist Democracy, Posner argues that the current global crisis
has proven that market economies suffer from inherent instability,
which only smart government regulation can curb.

^^^^^
CB: For being such a genius, it sure took him a long time to figure
this out. Next he may learn that the inherent instability can't be
curbed.

But I shouldn't be so snotty. If this guy can switch , who knows ...

^^^^^

1. The general wisdom is that you switched from a laissez-faire
approach to one that accepts the role of government regulation to
stabilize the economy. What has changed your view of capitalism?

This has really been only since September 2008?since the crisis,
when I took another look at everything.

^^^^^^^
CB: Wow. I guess Alan Greenspan took another look at everything, too,
since he likes the Swedish model now that he's has no power.

^^^^^^^^

 There was erroneous
monetary policy and much too low interest rates, which encouraged
excessive borrowing. And then there?s this very lax regulation of
financial institutions, which reflects a failure to recognize that
the financial industry is very unstable and requires regulation.
It is connected to everything in the economy?consumers and
businesses alike depend on it?so when it collapses, you?ve got
real problems. A lot of people failed to see that.

^^^
CB: Is this guy a straightfaced comedian, or what ?

^^^^^

The financial
backbone of the economy is a corner of capitalism that requires
more intrusive and careful regulations than a lot of economists
thought. Because of the centrality of credit in a capitalist
economy, a capitalist economy is inherently unstable. This
instability can become catastrophic unless you have something in
place to mitigate it. Unfortunately no one seems to have very many
great ideas on how to do this.

^^^^^^^^
CB: Lets send him a complimentary copy of _Capital_ ( and one of _The
Invention of Capitalism_)

^^^^^

-clip-

3. You argue we?re in a depression, not a recession. Is this
distinction merely semantic for you, or do you think the current
crisis is far deeper than generally believed?

I think it?s far deeper. Just look at our financial situation:
we?re like Greece. There is this complete fiscal incontinence,
huge deficits and no way of reversing the situation. We?re kept
alive by the fact that the dollar is the international reserve
currency?even when international companies are not dealing with
the United States, a great many transactions around the globe are
conducted in dollars rather than in local currency. And their
central banks hold dollars, too. So as long as the world is
holding loads of dollars, we?ll be okay because we can borrow them
back. But it?s a very, very unstable situation. That?s one reason,
and another is that unemployment has really frightened people, and
it is causing significant political problems. You can see it in
all this turmoil in congress and the protests and the emergence of
the Tea Party.

^^^^^
CB; He sounds genuinely worried.  That would seem to be a good thing.

Of course , the problem with unemployment is not that people's lives
are fucked up by it,  but that they may cause political problems.

^^^^^

4. You mention the Weimar Republic?s collapse into fascism during
the Great Depression several times throughout the book, not as a
direct parallel to the U.S, but to show that economic conditions
affect political outcomes. How will this crisis affect the U.S.?

^^^^^
CB: Wait a minute. This guy is just trying to scare people into
becoming Democrats.  I know this trick. I learned about it from Lou.

^^^^^

Normally during a crisis people turn to the government for
salvation. In the Thirties, it was a matter of prestige for the
government to save the country from what they conceived to be the
failures of private enterprise. But now, somehow, people are
turning against the government. I think it?s because this
administration has not been successful in explaining to people why
these bailouts and the deficit spending are central methods of
promoting economic recovery.

^^^^^
CB: Max, does this admin understand deficit spending ?

^^^^^

 And I don?t think it?s reasonable to
expect most Americans to understand the complex workings of
macroeconomic policy. But, to some extent, I think their instincts
are accurate that there is something wrong with the federal
government running these trillion-dollar deficits, or that the
total national debt is growing at a rate of over a trillion
dollars a year. So people?s sentiments are understandable, but it
creates this great turmoil. You have this tremendous mistrust of
government that makes it very hard to address these economic
problems. We don?t seem to have the political will to raise taxes
significantly enough to pay off old spending or even to resist new
deficit spending. There don?t seem to be any brakes on this
vehicle hurdling toward an ever-greater deficit.

^^^^^
Carrol, tell this novice commie that if nobody pushes it, it won't fall

^^^^^^

5. What is the current state of the ?Chicago School?? Has Milton
Friedman fallen from grace?

What happened is that ideas that seemed to be largely confined to
the University of Chicago, which were considered rather fringe,
conservative ideas?most of those ideas have become orthodox, and
the University of Chicago has become indistinguishable from other
large schools everywhere. But now there is some reaction against
these ideas that there has been excessive government regulation in
the economy and that financial markets are self-regulating.

^^^^
CB: My lands alive ( like my Grandmother used to say)

^^^^

 I do
not think that the economists at the University of Chicago who
specialized in macroeconomics and financial structures have
contributed very much to the thinking about the current crisis.
There?s a major exception to this, which is Raghuram Rajan. He is
listened to a lot and has a lot of good ideas. He?s one of the
skeptics of excessive deregulation. So he?s riding high now.

6. Did Obama appoint the right people to handle the recovery and
also to build regulatory structures?

Yes and no. I think from a substantive standpoint he did, in the
sense that he appointed Timothy Giethner, a very experienced and
able person. He also reappointed Bernanke, who I said in the book
made a really terrible mistake and contributed in a really big way
to the collapse, but on the other hand has managed to oversee the
recovery, economically. He?s a good economist. So a lot of these
appointments i think were good substantively, but not good in
terms of public relations?they are not good communicators. They
don?t seem to have a handle on the significance of communication.
It turns out that communication is quite vital.


^^^^^^^
CB: Another revelation.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to