Friday, November 11, 2011

Austerity is Wrong: Austerity Is Toxic for the Health of the Economy

(This is the body of a letter sent to our Congressman, Xavier Becerra. Xavier Becerra is one of the twelve members of the Supercommittee on Deficit Reduction.)

Austerity moves in the United States and other parts of the world are counterproductive to economic recovery. Austerity takes away money from the middle and working classes, as well as from the poor. If you want to stimulate the economy, you don't take money from people who produce, create and consume. When money is taken away from the middle and working classes and from the poor, money is taken away from the productive segment of the public; the economy rather than being stimulated is ground to a halt. A severe depression will result.

Whereas money in the hands of the wealthy for the most part rests in idle holdings and does little, if anything, for the benefit of anyone.

Representatives sincere about the well-being of the American people should realize that the only motive for the implementation of austerity measures on the part of conservatives is to create economic failure, so that the current administration can be blamed and so that they, the conservatives, can assume power during the next election.


Anonymous said...

Couldn't agree more!

It is so true. The term "impose austerity" is just a euphemism for "impose misery." Many people don't realize that yet, but ask someone like my mother who lived through the Depression as a teenager. It's misery.

Those on Wall Street who caused this mess should be tried and meted the same punishment that would be given them had they robbed the banks through any other way.

As William Black says, the best way to rob a bank is to own one.

Anonymous said...

Change will come when more and more people recognize the truth of what you are saying.
-- Howard

B said...

In the field of economics, we would say that less wealthy people, who have less ability to consume things, have a higher marginal utility of consumption. In other words, they derive a lot more benefit and pleasur out of the last dollar they get than somebody really rich. To the extent that redistribution programs don't discourage people from contributing to society, they likely make society as a whole better off ("welfare-improving").

In boom times, one can make more of a case for decreasing government spending on welfare programs and the like, because in boom times there is work to be found by those willing to do it. The problem in times like these is that even people who are putting in A LOT of effort to find work -- and who are good, hard workers -- are not finding jobs to support themselves with. Therefore it seems that the potential concern about people being disincentivized to find work is not as relevant during times like these -- because not providing more of a safety net will not increase most unemployed individuals' likelihood of joining the workforce.

Anonymous said...

Thank you, B. I am glad to learn that your professional perspective on the issue supports the common sense argument I am trying to present --Howard

Harmon said...

I am beginning to think that we should speak of imbalance instead of inequality. The latter (equality) is obviously too metaphysical for most. Since the world of humans is included in the world of nature as a totality, there is much more palatable evidence of the deleterious effects of imbalance to call upon when viewing that 'lower natured' ecology (as long as it's not global warming!); and perhaps much less to take personally as an affront to those who claim to have raised themselves up by their own hairs. "It's science stupid!" Oh what a web....

I also have contemplated the virtuous realities of Freedom and Equality, and that very malleable notion of the, "pursuit of happiness". Actually all three (3) are subject to ego interpretations. Here I am not only speaking of the natural ego's considerations (which is difficult enough), but that of the general ruler of the throne: the false ego. So the question is, what aspect of human reality is trying to "finger" this all out?

Good for you taking the time and reminding our elected leaders of that big ol' elephant sitting in the room of those of recalcitrant bent in the halls of power, uh, I mean service. Thanks Howard for the post.

Howard said...

Yes, Harmon, if those running the financial show were not overwhelmed by their false egos, I would not have needed to write the letter.