President-elect Obama wants to spend several hundred billion dollars in each of the next two years building infrastructure, retrofitting public and private buildings to increase energy efficiency, and aiding state and local governments in dealing with budget shortfalls. He thinks that this spending will boost the economy and reverse its steep decline. Obama is exactly on the mark with his plan.
The job numbers released last week removed any possible doubt that the economy is facing an extremely sharp recession. The Labor Department reported that the economy lost 533,000 jobs in November. Upward revisions for the prior two months raised reported job loss over the last three-months to 1,256,000 jobs, the second highest in the post-war period.
Even this figure likely understates the extent of job loss, since the Labor Department imputes jobs for new firms into its data. Its formula for this imputation actually shows new firms generating more jobs in September to November of 2008 than in the same three months of last year. This imputation will be corrected next fall, and the adjustment could easily raise the pace of job loss by more than 50,000 a month.
The November data was striking because the job loss was so widespread across sectors. Construction and manufacturing continued to be hardest hit, but retail, finance, and transportation also had large job losses. The only sector that continues to create jobs at a healthy pace is health care.
In addition to the lost jobs, the average workweek continued to shrink. The index of hours worked has shrunk at an 8.0 percent annual rate over the last three months. This would imply the equivalent of 11.2 million jobs lost over the course of a year.
This rate of job loss will push the unemployment rate over 7.0 percent by the beginning of 2009 and above 8.0 percent by the middle of the year. Without effective stimulus, the unemployment rate would likely cross 9.0 percent before the end of 2009 and could exceed 10 percent in 2010.
Fortunately, effective stimulus is item # 1 on President-elect Obama’s agenda, as he announced in his speech last weekend. His proposal would spend several hundred billions of dollars on ready-to-go infrastructure projects such as road and bridge maintenance and school repair. He would also devote funds to extending broadband reach and to pay for energy-conserving retrofits of public and private buildings. The latter plan involves a huge expansion of already-existing programs.
These proposals will quickly get people back to work and inject more money into the economy. They will also provide lasting benefits in the form of better transportation, safer schools, and reduced energy use.
The key question is whether the proposed package will be large enough. The economy is in a virtual free fall, as consumers are sharply curtailing spending in response to the loss of $6 trillion in housing wealth and more than $8 trillion in stock wealth.
In addition to the plunge in consumer spending, the bubble in non-residential construction has burst, which means that all segments of the construction industry are now contracting. State and local governments are also making cutbacks, and trade is likely to be a drag on growth as the surge in the dollar makes our exports less competitive and worldwide recession reduces demand.
For these reasons, we will need to spend considerably more money to boost the economy than what President-elect Obama outlined in his package. Additional spending should include aid to state and local governments to offset revenue shortfalls, increased spending on unemployment insurance, food stamps, heating oil assistance and other programs to help laid off workers through the slump, and health care.
It appears as though President Obama will try to get a health care reform bill through Congress in the first year of his presidency. While a health care package will almost certainly save money over the long-run by wringing waste out of the system, it will cost money in its first years as coverage is extended to cover the uninsured and new systems of payments and cost control are established. Given the economy’s current weakness, these upfront expenses can be another source of stimulus to the economy.
We could also take advantage of the downturn to promote efforts to make workplaces more family friendly with paid family leave and sick days. While these measures can largely pay for themselves in the long-run, adjusting business practices can be a cost that smaller businesses are ill-equipped to bear in the short-run.
The federal government can promote family friendly workplaces by extending temporary tax credits, either directly or through state governments, to help smaller businesses meet stronger standards. The 40-hour work week ended up being one of the dividends from the Great Depression. Rules that guarantee workers some amount of paid family leave and paid sick leave should be a dividend from the current downturn.
It would be difficult to spend too much on stimulus given the steepness of the current downturn. We should try to ensure that the money is well-spent and that it will produce lasting benefits for people and the economy. This appears to be exactly President Obama’s agenda.
— This article was published on December 8, 2008 by The Guardian Unlimited.
Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC. Dean previously worked as a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute and an assistant professor at Bucknell University. He has also worked as a consultant for the World Bank, the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress, and the OECD's Trade Union Advisory Council.
ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.
Donate
