The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

With the Tea Partiers

Gross Misconceptions

There is nothing mysterious about an economy recovering on its own — if politicians do not create needless complications and uncertainties.

This country is at a historic crossroads, and the path we choose can determine our future far beyond the next four years. Our children and grandchildren may someday bless us or curse us for what we do this Tuesday. Against that background, it is painful to see the petty talking points and gross misconceptions that seem to dominate this year’s election campaign.

Take the question of jobs. How many times have we heard about how many jobs have been added during the Obama administration? Yet few people bother to find out whether these are net additions to jobs — which is what is crucial.

The government can always increase some jobs, either directly by hiring more people or indirectly by policies that increase employment in particular industries or regions. But the real question is whether the government’s actions create more jobs than they destroy — that is, whether there is any net addition to jobs.

Yet who in the media even asks that question?

Instead, they focus on the unemployment rate. But people who have given up looking for a job are not counted as unemployed. The proportion of the working age population that is not working is higher now than it has been in many years.

Another gross misconception on the job front is that jobs created during a given administration are a result of the policies of that administration, as are any other signs of economic recovery. But this assumes that the economy is incapable of recovering on its own, without government intervention.

Yet the American economy recovered from downturns on its own for more than a century and a half, until President Herbert Hoover intervened after the stock market crash of 1929. Indeed, this was one of those bipartisan interventions so much hoped for by the media — and the results were catastrophic.

The media misconception today is that what we need to speed up economic recovery is to end gridlock in Washington and have bipartisan intervention in the economy. However plausible that may sound, it is contradicted repeatedly by history.

Unemployment was never in double digits in any of the 12 months following the stock market crash of 1929. Only after politicians started intervening did unemployment reach double digits — and stay in double digits throughout the 1930s.

There is nothing mysterious about an economy recovering on its own. Employers usually have incentives to employ and workers have incentives to look for jobs. Lenders have incentives to lend and borrowers have incentives to borrow — if politicians do not create needless complications and uncertainties.

The Obama administration is in its glory creating complications and uncertainties for business, ranging from runaway regulations to the unknowable future costs of ObamaCare and taxes. Record amounts of idle cash held by businesses and financial institutions are a monument to the counterproductive effects of Barack Obama’s anti-business policies and rhetoric. That idle money could create lots of jobs — net jobs — if politics did not make it risky to invest.

We often hear that President Obama inherited the worst recession since the Great Depression. But just how do you define that? By how high the unemployment rate went? By how long the recovery takes? Or don’t you bother to define it at all?

The annual unemployment rate was as high under Ronald Reagan as it has been under Barack Obama. The difference is that Ronald Reagan did nothing, despite media cries for action, and Barack Obama did virtually everything imaginable, to the cheers of the media. The economy recovered a lot faster under Reagan.

If this is “the worst recession since the Great Depression,” it is the worst solely in terms of how long it is taking to recover. But how long this has lasted is precisely what critics of Barack Obama are complaining about. Yet clever political rhetoric turns Obama’s failure into an excuse for failure.

Contrary to political and media spin, President Obama did not “inherit” his unemployment from President George W. Bush. The annual unemployment rate never got above 6 percent during the eight years of President George W. Bush’s administration.

Unemployment has never been that low under President Obama. Passing the buck backwards is a very poor excuse — especially for someone using “forward” as his campaign slogan.

COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM

About the Author

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His website is www.tsowell.com. To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (11) |

Quartermaster| 11.6.12 @ 6:32AM

Liberals are nothing if not overgrown children. They repeatedly demonstrate their immaturity by calling for things that have never worked in the past and will never work in a fallen world.

Aristocat| 11.6.12 @ 6:47AM

Adding government jobs is counter-productive because they take money away from the private sector, which is the source of all government revenue. So what is the net loss of private sector jobs under Obama?

JD| 11.6.12 @ 11:51AM

Children demand to eat nothing but candy, but when they eat the candy they get sick.

Then they complain that they are not getting what they want because they did not want to be sick.

Liberals are like children in this way. They demand foolish things but do not realize that what they get is what they asked for. Instead, they blame us.

jothepro| 11.6.12 @ 6:59AM

Thank you Mr. Sowell for being one of my guiding lights for over 25 years. You inspire and your intelligence has been my reward...

2Anglico| 11.6.12 @ 8:35AM

Government IS the problem. Obama could not make 1 gallon of gasoline out of a barrel of oil if his LIFE depended on it. And yet, way too many people look to him to do "something" about gas prices.
On what basis does Obama deem himself an "expert" on health insurance?
Don't let the screen door hit you on your way OUT!!!

Harry the Horrible| 11.6.12 @ 9:28AM

Our children are going to curse us anyway.
They are born with weight of $200K+ of national debt on their shoulders, and it grows every day. Assuming, of course, they get past Planned Parenthood.
Then there are the trillions more in "unfunded liabilities" that may come due.

The sad fact is that the USA can't continue to exist in its current state. We're going have to accept that we can't pay people to simply exist.

Von Mises Jr| 11.6.12 @ 9:49AM

Dr. Sowell is not only correct theoretically, but descrived in detail in "The Forgotten Man" and "FDR's Folly."
For a short and inexpensive analysis you can purchase Lawrence Reed's "Great Myths of the Great Depression" for $2 at http://feestore.myshopify.com/. There are other classics there as well such as "I Pencil."

If Obama is re-elected, you will see the Second Great Depression. Buy gold and guns.

Petronius| 11.6.12 @ 10:12AM

Another taste of minutia. The nut of contemporary polity is the pet hate of the lower order of society: the Fact that Life IS COMPETITION. And the world of commerce is grounded in it. All these ignorant, indolent, incompetent, infantile weenies Hate it. Couple that with the evaporation of unskilled employment and you get their mob laying siege to Wall St. If the adults win at the polls today, every suburbanite should watch his back.

SUBVET| 11.6.12 @ 10:55AM

LANDSLIDE.......today.

Please enjoy this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsa4uLmTw0M

WhiteBikerTrash| 11.6.12 @ 2:02PM

Okay, lets compare a couple of depressions in the past with what we are coming up on today.
The depression of 1920-21.
You never heard about it? Yes, worse than the "Great Depression" except what the Government did. President Warren G. Harding (The first black President) cut Federal spending and taxes, cutting the top taxes the most. This brought about what we know of as "The Roaring 20s" Isn't it weird that we were never taught about it?

Now, the depression within a depression 1937.
Things were starting to turn around in the Great Depression. But Deficit spending had ballooned the Federal debt to a worrisome amount. So to fix this problem FDR got Congress to pass a huge tax increase. The economy again flopped. Things got worse than the initial depression.

January 1st 2013 taxes will go up more than the increase of 1937 it will cost your employer an added $3,000.00 to keep you on the payroll and your Federal taxes will go up 15%

Would you rather be living in 1922s economy or 1938s economy in 2013?

Ralph Novy| 11.7.12 @ 5:39AM

Wow.

What a stunning misreading and misrepresentation of American economic history.

Barely a jot of truth in it.

Counterfactuality like this cannot be unintentional.

Shame!

More Articles by Thomas Sowell

More Articles From With the Tea Partiers

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/06/gross-misconceptions

ADVERTISEMENT

Most Popular Articles

Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?

Jeffrey Lord | 5.20.13

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy | 5.17.13

The Liberal Union Behind the IRS

Jeffrey Lord | 5.16.13

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn | 5.17.13

It's.The.Law

Ross Kaminsky | 5.20.13

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg | 5.17.13

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

ADVERTISEMENT