A Greek teacher carries a banner which translates as ‘Education for sale,’ during a protest in front of the Greek Parliament building in Athens on May 4. (Photo by: Dimitar Dilkoff/AFP/Getty Images)

Biting the Hand That Feeds

Capitalist elites attack what saved them: government.

BY David Moberg

Not surprisingly, in America, deficit hounds are baying that federal budgets threaten to turn the United States into Greece, and they are gearing up for attacks on Social Security, Medicare and other social programs.

Early last year, even free market fundamentalists confessed that capitalism was in crisis. A Newsweek cover trumpeted, “We are all socialists now.” Alas, the headline was mistaken: Government responses to the crisis did little to democratize economic power or challenge narrow market values, as socialism implies. The U.S. government had simply bailed out big finance with remarkably lenient conditions (and, even now, inadequate regulation) and had passed a large–but still insufficient–package of spending initiatives and tax cuts to keep the economy from collapsing.

This government intervention saved capitalism from itself. So one might expect some humility and gratitude for the public sector from the titans of finance. You would be wrong. Instead, those same financial elites, from Europe to the United States, now oppose deficit spending to stimulate the global economy–rejecting the thinking of British economist John Maynard Keynes, let alone Marx.

Capitalist elites are engaged in a frontal assault on government workers, on government regulation and on the social safety net. In other words, they are attacking social democratic institutions–the heart of the welfare state. In the United States they’re often joined by right-wingers, from the “Patriot movement” to Glenn Beck, who attack government itself.

The financial crisis has mutated into a fiscal crisis of governments, and the perpetrators of the economic crisis are back calling the tune. “A year ago, capitalism was wobbling,” says John Monks, general secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation. “It was saved by the taxpayer, saved by the public realm, saved by welfare spending and tax cuts. Banks were saved in particular, and now the private sector is headed back to business as usual. In the present circumstance, it’s almost, ‘Let’s get down to cutting back the role of the state and restore primacy of the market in as many places as we can.’ “

The ostensible problems are government deficits and accumulated debt, whether in countries like Greece or states like Illinois. But in their opportunistic attack on government, the business and politically center-right elites are taking advantage of the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression to push their long-term (and longstanding) political agenda to secure more wealth and power at the expense of working- and middle-class families. But with the notable exception of the global labor movement, even many political leaders of the mainstream left–from “new labor” in Britain to more conservative Democrats–are unwilling to adopt the full range of government policies needed to recover from the crisis or avoid a repeat.

Beyond their substantial political influence, the financial elite wields power through the bond market, where governments turn for deficit financing. Once the choice of conservative investors, since the 1980s bonds have become much more a means for speculation, more globalized, and more a tool of political influence, says University of Michigan economist Gerald F. Davis, author of Managed by the Markets: How Finance Re-Shaped America. Bond markets–in conjunction with bond-rating agencies–decide whether and at what cost governments can borrow. Governments now fear what bond markets might do as much as what they actually do.

At the moment, fear–used to bolster neoliberal political ideology–is driving conservatives’ demand for government austerity programs and deficit reduction, as well as general cutbacks in wages and worker protections (or, as mainstream economists say, labor market “rigidities”). First, the most vulnerable governments come under attack. Then even the more economically secure countries–like Britain, under a new Conservative government–cut budgets, workers, wages and services to reduce deficits and avoid a loss of investor “confidence.”

Yet government austerity and cuts in workers’ wages will simply reduce demand, slowing recovery from the Great Recession or even creating a second downturn. And weak recovery will bring lower tax revenues, continued pressure for austerity and difficulty repaying debts. In short, the medicine the financial markets and their political allies prescribe will make the global economy sicker.

Politicians now seem frightened of deficits, even though nearly all U.S. public opinion polls show voters are far less concerned about deficits than jobs and the economy. President Barack Obama has partly succumbed to this deficit hysteria, pumped up by conservative institutions like the Peterson Institute and some supposedly center-liberal forces like the Washington Post. After adopting a moderate Keynesian policy last year, in February he shifted course and created a conservative-dominated commission to propose how to reduce future deficits.

Yet even if Obama is not promoting another much-needed big stimulus, he is at least still committed to smaller stimulus policies, unlike Republicans and a growing number of conservative Democrats, most notably Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), who in early June killed a crucial bill that would have extended unemployment benefits, saved state and city jobs and created new jobs.

Obama has also challenged European leaders to maintain stimulus policies, but the euro crisis–starting in Greece–has spooked virtually all of them. In a dramatic shift from last fall, both conservatives holding power in the major economies and some social democratic leaders have proposed austerity plans. European labor unions have led the opposition. Monks, for example, shares other labor leaders’ “despair and alarm at the prospects of growth in Europe as all countries, not just those in distress, move to cut their budgets.”

The GIIPS group

Clearly, the former Greek government seriously mismanaged its affairs. But so did international investors who loaned it money. The other countries in the troubled GIIPS group–Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain–did not suffer from the same kind of misrule. Both financial markets and economic pundits had considered Ireland and Spain as exemplary until the spread of the Eurozone crisis, including growing worries about Greek sovereign debt default.

In any case, the main problem plaguing these countries is not individual states’ finances but the worldwide financial crisis that hit in 2008. The recent euro crisis also stems from failures in the design of Europe’s currency union. In addition, European governments are slowly turning away from social democracy toward a more American, free-market, and finance-centered economy–an economy that as it becomes more American becomes less egalitarian.

When the euro was introduced in 2002, investors grew more confident about the GIIPS countries. Interest rates dropped, demand and debt increased, and current account (trade) balances worsened. Foreign capital flowed in, expanding financial services and housing–and producing price bubbles. According to former World Bank economist Uri Dadush, now at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, this was done at the expense of manufacturing and production of goods or services that could be traded.

When the crisis hit, the American-style bubble model of growth collapsed; GIIPS nations were left with few alternative ways to grow, prospects now worsened by European austerity. In some cases, but less so with Ireland and Spain, they face high ratios of debt to GDP. After the Socialists won power in Greece last October, they discovered that their predecessors had concealed the size of the deficits and debt–with the help of Goldman Sachs–and began to slash deficits. But credit rating agencies that had approved Greek debt changed their minds; investors lost confidence in Greece’s ability to pay debts, and Greek borrowing costs surged.

If Greece had borrowed in its own currency, it could have adjusted with a steep devaluation. But it had no control over its money, and eurozone rules prohibited bailouts of fiscally troubled governments. With German public opinion hostile to helping Greece, Chancellor Angela Merkel delayed a bailout as Greek protestors took to the streets over budget and pension cuts. But German and French banks held so much Greek debt that a default could have provoked a multinational banking crisis.

In May, eurozone leaders and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) finally arranged a €110 billion bailout of Greek debt, followed by a €750 billion fund for future crises. But the conditions imposed–including deep budget cuts, regressive taxes and “flexible” wages–are likely to deepen Greece’s deflationary recession, leaving the country both poorer and owing a higher proportion of its economic output to creditors for years. Bondholders most likely will have to restructure that debt eventually–taking a loss and stretching out payment.

The loans that the European Central Bank and the IMF made available to Greece momentarily, at least, stabilized European finances. The problem is speculators, such as hedge funds, could start a run on the debt of yet another country, such as Spain or Italy. That prospect pushes governments to cut budgets and incomes, even though none is as weak as Greece’s. But competition among European countries to grow by cutting wages and social benefits would be a downward spiral for the region’s economies, and for workers especially. It would slow recovery, and at the same time, it would give corporations and financial markets the upper hand.

America’s deficit hounds

Not surprisingly, in the United States, deficit hounds are baying that federal budgets threaten to turn the United States into Greece. They are gearing up for attacks on Social Security, Medicare and other social programs. But as Paul Krugman argues, the United States is no Greece. It can repay its debts, and even now investors seek out U.S. government bonds as a safe haven. Short-term deficits boost the economy and in large part pay back their cost with a more robust, earlier recovery.

The United States faces some longer-term budget issues, but popular debate distorts even those. Contrary to deficit hawks’ assertions, Social Security is secure through at least 2044 (and longer if taxes are collected on incomes above the current cut-off). Rising healthcare costs are a real problem, but could be solved with a single-payer plan.

If deficits persist, however, the government could easily raise revenue by imposing a financial transactions tax or a tax on large accumulations of wealth. And cuts could be made in the sacrosanct military budget, from the money spent on war (now officially more than $1 trillion in Iraq and Afghanistan) to the half billion dollars for a new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter engine the president, Pentagon and Air Force don’t want–but Congress may buy.

Only the federal government can run deficits (all states except Vermont balance budgets each year), but Congress seems unwilling to use its fiscal power to aid the states in any meaningful way. So in the United States the front lines of the battle over the public sector are now in state and local governments, especially states like California and Illinois, where the recession has compounded longstanding budget shortfalls (as it did in Greece).

Despite federal aid that saved tens of thousands of jobs nationwide, state and local governments, including school districts, have eliminated 231,000 jobs since 2008. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), these cutbacks have slowed economic growth by half a percent in the first three months of 2010. CBPP also estimates that if Congress fails to extend Medicaid relief to states, the United States will lose 900,000 public- and private-sector jobs. With the steepest drop in state revenue since the Depression, CBPP projects that states will have to come up with $610 billion by cutting budgets or raising taxes in order to make up for losses from fiscal year 2009 through 2012. That virtually neutralizes the boost to the economy from last year’s stimulus package.

The pain is bad across the country, but worst in states where the local economy plummeted (like Michigan) or where governments have poorly managed their finances (like Illinois). In the Land of Lincoln (and Blagojevich), “there have been looming structural problems for decades, but the recession magnifies them,” says Anders Lindahl, the spokesperson for AFSCME (public employee union) Council 31. “Smoke and mirrors that concealed the day of reckoning are not working any more.”

Illinois’ smoke and mirrors includes not paying bills–now approximately $6 billion worth–and underfunding public employee pension plans (now $78 billion in debt and the worst funded in the country). In roughly 10 hours last March, the Democratically controlled legislature created a two-tier pension system that raised retirement age for new hires. Though the savings won’t appear for years, they were booked into this year’s budget.

In a state already near the bottom in terms of the number of state employees per capita, Illinois has 15,000 fewer state workers than in 2002 (and like city and county workers, many take off unpaid furlough days). Local governments have also been laying off teachers, bus drivers and other workers. An anticipated 20,000 teachers will be without work this fall.

With one of the lowest levels of tax as a share of personal income (and the sixth-most regressive tax regime), Illinois revenue covers only half the $26 billion budget dependent on state taxes. Budget problems worsened in the past decade as Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich opposed any tax increase, and key Democratic legislative leaders were too politically timid to act. “In a recession there’s not enough money in every state, but in Illinois we were deep in the hole before the recession–and the recession put us more in the hole,” says Hank Scheff, the AFSCME state research director.

With such skimpy, underfunded budgets in many states, state workers might seem a dubious target. The right, however, has made public employees the villains of the fiscal crisis, their putatively huge paychecks and pensions likened to “leeches” on the public coffers. But taking into account public workers’ higher average education and age, two recent studies–one from the Center on Economic and Policy Research and the other from the Center for State & Local Government Excellence–concluded that state and local employees earn less than their private counterparts (even calculating in public workers’ often superior pensions).

We should remember that government–especially big government–stabilizes the economy, as the late economist Hyman Minsky demonstrated: It can run deficits at the federal level. It provides consistent, countercyclical employment and contracts. It regulates the economy–though not enough. And most of the time, government makes society more egalitarian and protects the needy or vulnerable, actions that also serve to strengthen the economy.

But having turned government into a means for its own survival–after dragging the global economy over the precipice–the financial sector has turned its crisis into a crisis of the state. In doing so, they have undermined one of the main instruments that helps capitalism survive and in turn, to a lesser extent, helps working people survive. The crisis demonstrated the need for stronger regulation of the economy, especially financial markets, as well as a larger role for the public sector. But in both Europe and the United States, the mainstream left parties were unwilling or unable to take advantage of the opportunity–and necessity–posed by the crisis. Too bad we aren’t really all socialists after all.

David Moberg, a senior editor of In These Times, has been on the staff of the magazine since it began publishing in 1976. Before joining In These Times, he completed his work for a Ph.D. in anthropology at the University of Chicago and worked for Newsweek. He has received fellowships from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the Nation Institute for research on the new global economy. He can be reached at davidmoberg@inthesetimes.com.

More information about David Moberg

  • Reader Comments

    It’s PIIGS, not GIIPS.

    Capitalism had nothing to do with the current government created mess.  Capitalism has nothing to do with a managed economy.  Capitalism is not Keynesianism.  Capitalism is not Monetarism.  Capitalism is not Cronyism.  Capitalism is not Mercantilism.

    Capitalism wasn’t failing because what was failing wasn’t capitalism.

    The bailouts didn’t save jobs.

    Posted by Ayn R. Key on Jul 29, 2010 at 1:21 PM

    Ayn R. Key is right!

    “Capitalism wasn’t failing because what was failing wasn’t capitalism.”

    The following statement is pure NONSENSE!

    “This government intervention saved capitalism from itself. So one might expect some humility and gratitude for the public sector from the titans of finance. You would be wrong. Instead, those same financial elites, from Europe to the United States, now oppose deficit spending to stimulate the global economy—rejecting the thinking of British economist John Maynard Keynes, let alone Marx.”

    Wake up!  The same people are now in charge of fixing the problem who CAUSED it.

    The government intervention saved the elite of the Corporate/Banking & Governmental Elite.

    They used taxpayer dollars to keep those too big in the driver’s seat, the bureaucratic crooks available for more of the same.  (FDIC, SEC, Fanny&Freddie;, rating agencies, and the Congressional Banking Committee)

    Some key players were/are: Alan (There is no bubble—low rates are good) Greenspan, Henry (higher margins) Paulson, Robert (Bye-bye Glass-Stealgall Act) Rubin, and now (helicopter money dropper) Ben Bernanke.

    They systematically did away with regulations, raised their own ability to buy on margin, lowered the requirements to get mortgages and raised the amount loaned to well over six-figured amounts. Packaged crap with caviar and pronounced it AAA.

    You say, “The crisis demonstrated the need for stronger regulation of the economy, especially financial markets, as well as a larger role for the public sector. “

    We’ve just had a large dose of “regulation reform” dumped on us which will further hamper any real capitalist (small business employers) from expanding or possibly from remaining in business.

    This is to be added over approximately the next five years on top of the huge cost of health care increases.

    It’s not how much is spent — it’s HOW it is spent and WHO gets the resulting benefit.

    If a $trillion dollars had been spent on infrastructure like our falling bridges (remember Minneapolis?), a national public transport system (coast to coast fuel savings), restoring border security (preventing exploitation of cheap labor), reforming the health insurance industry — people could afford to pay for their own medical coverage without the bureaucratic drag of government.

    All of the above followed a two decade dismantling of our manufacturing capacity (which was real capitalism at its best) while the CEOs cashed in their stock options and bailed out in their Golden Parachutes.

    Posted by whattheheck on Jul 30, 2010 at 5:11 AM

    The Greek government did in fact mismanage the economy, but not in the sense that free market critics claim. The policies of the Greek government were not Keynesian or “socialist” but free market oriented. As on analyst explains;

    “Fiscal policy was pro-cyclical; revenue declined substantially from 2000-2004, despite annual GDP growth averaging 4.5 percent during these years. Taxes, already below the European average level (around 44% of GDP), were slashed. Public spending rose rapidly after 2007, mainly in response to the economic slowdown and then recession…It is against this background that the Greek government, newly arrived in office, decided in favor of reporting correct deficit and debt numbers. In October 2009, the deficit for 2008 was revised upwards from 5% to 12.5% of GDP while the projected deficit for 2010 also went up from 3.7% to 12.5% of GDP and later to 13.6% of GDP. Financial markets did not appreciate this effort at transparency by the newly elected Greek government. Nor did the public warning of the central bank governor of Greece for banks to be careful in buying Greek sovereign debt and using it as collateral in liquidity operations with the European Central Bank go down well. From November on, Greece was hit by several speculative waves, bidding up the interest rate on sovereign debt to exorbitant levels, at times exceeding 10%.”

    http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/greece-imf-2010-07.pdf

    The massive budget cuts that the EU and the IMF is demanding of the Greek Government in exchange for the “bailout” is actually harming the growth potential of the Greek economy as all such austerity packages do. The bailout is simply a shift of debt from the private banks to which it is owed to the public because the bailout will guarantee the repayment of the big banks. The authors of the study explain further;

    “The 110 billion euros now being lent to Greece by the IMF and European governments will be mainly used to pay back the banks and institutional investors who are now holding Greek debt. Banks, insurance companies and pension funds are the real beneficiaries. The possibility of Greece defaulting on the payment of interest and principal that is due should now be excluded for the next three years.”

    The Greek people will pay the price. Much of the Greek debt wasn’t the result of discretionary spending but of automatic stabilizers that respond to the consequences of the recession itself caused in part by US financial excesses. The stagnation and deflation that may result will possibly spread to the rest of the EU. This will affect the US and the rest of the world.

    Fiscal crisis is generally the result of the state’s attempt to cope with the social costs of corporate profit maximization. The chronic unemployment, tax cuts for the rich, budget cuts and low real wages and stagnant effective demand is the result of corporate strategies of profit maximization at the expense of society. Massive borrowing delays the crisis generated by lower standards of living and the potential stagnation caused by lower real wages and lower taxes but at the same time it expands the financial system and creates speculative bubbles. Instability is the result. The contradictory nature of late capitalism can no longer be coped with by financial manipulation. The chickens have come home to roost and addressing the inequalities and crises generated by the system itself must be addressed directly by those most adversely affected.

    Posted by cabdriverinchicago on Jul 31, 2010 at 11:06 AM

    Moberg is a Marxist/leftist/liberal/progressive/whatever-he-currently-calls-himself.  Consequently, Moberg’s only priority is the ultimate victory of his totalitarian philosophy, which he hopes to ride to a place of honor in the new nomenclatura. As Marx taught, dishonesty is a tool to destroy honest values and install a dishonest totalitarianism. 

    Examples of Moberg’s dishonesty abound in this article, mainly about the nature and definition of capitalism.  Moberg quotes “Newsweek” and John Monks, general secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation, on the nature of capitalism, which is like quoting a pair of whores on the nature of virtue. 

    The first observation on American capitalism is that it is the most productive, wealth-generating economic system ever devised.  Marxists have long since given up on taking a feudal society such as Russia and turning it into a Marxist Utopia.  Marxists now try to capture a commodity-rich country such as Chile a few years ago or Venezuela now and use their wealth to finance a Marxist revolution.  Unfortunately, due to the nature of Marxism, Marxist Chile went broke in spite of its vast copper assets and Marxist Venezuela is now going broke in spite of its vast oil assets,  We now have two different scenarios in which Marxism is an abject failure; neither feudalism nor commodity wealth can provide the basis for a functioning Marxist utopia. 

    Moberg’s article further details the abject failure of the Marxist experiment in industrialized Old Europe, and blames it on - capitalism!  Moreover, Moberg blames current economic problems in the USA on capitalism, even though the Democrats’ Unaffordable Housing Project, the immediate cause of the recent economic crash, was both fraudulent and anti-capitalist.

    If you want a detailed portrait of capitalist successes and statist failures over time in the USA, I refer you to the DOW monthly charts from 1900 to present.  A brief study of the chart will present some amazing insights to our economy.

    http://stockcharts.com/charts/historical/djia1900.html

    From this chart, the economy has shown steady capitalist growth from 1900 to 1920, from 1945 to 1965, from 1983 to 1995, and from 2003 to 2008.  In each case the markets have rebounded from a sharp downturn or from a period of stagnation.  These periods were marked by minimal government interference in the markets, and maximal growth in the wealth created.  Quality of life and quantity of wealth was greatly enhanced from 1900 to 2010, marked by improvements in food, clothing, housing, communication, transportation, and recreation for all citizens, but by far the most growth occurred during the periods of unfettered capitalist activity.  .

    But a close look at the graph reveals several interruptions to the capitalist progression and wealth creation.  Two prominent interruptions were economic bubbles where the DOW shot up abnormally in the late 1920s and again in the late 1990s.  If you are not aware of the nature and significance of economic bubbles, you might want to read up on them: Dutch Tulip, South Sea, Mississippi, and more recently Japan 1991 are good examples.  Economic bubbles typically result in inflated prices and devastating crashes; Japan has not recovered from their 1991 bubble from that day to this.  The Roaring Twenties Bubble resulted in the Great Depression that lasted twelve years, and was only ended by America’s entry into WWII..

    Posted by scorp on Aug 2, 2010 at 8:04 PM

    Continued.

    The Dot.com Bubble lasted four years from 1996 to 1999, during which time the DOW rose from 6000 to 12000.  Chairman Greenspan sounded the alarm when the DOW was at 6000 by calling it “irrational exuberance”, but neither Greenspan nor President Clinton, the only two people on earth who mattered, did anything to stop the Dot.com Bubble, which crashed in January 2000.  The NASDAQ then lost $2.5 trillion before Clinton left office, and the markets and government revenues were in freefall by the time Clinton was out.  Naturally, the Democrats still blame President Bush for the collapse of the Dot.com Bubble that occurred one solid year before President Bush was inaugurated. 

    The Dot.com Bubble was the third largest bubble in history after the Roaring Twenties Bubble and the Japanese Bubble of 1991.  The most interesting thing about the collapse of the Dot.com Bubble as compared to the collapse of the Roaring Twenties Bubble and the Japanese Bubble was how little damage the Dot.com Bubble did.  Both the Great Depression and the Japanese Crash featured government meddling, including restricted trade and higher taxes that we now realize destroy economic activity.  The Dot.com Bubble produced minimal damage because President Bush stopped government interference in the markets and restored capitalism, and the recession was mild and short-lived. 

    Bubbles are the result of stupidity, but there are other market interruptions that are quite deliberate.  Again referring to the DOW chart, the DOW peaked right at 1000 in 1967 and stayed at that level or lower for the next fifteen years.  What happened?  Well, LBJ’s Great Society happened.  LBJ and the Democrats began taking massive amounts of capital out of the economy and pissing it away, primarily on the War on Poverty.  The War on Poverty did absolutely nothing to alleviate poverty, but it had a devastating effect on the economy and on the national debt; after wasting $6.6 trillion on the War on Poverty, the national debt stood at $5.9 trillion.  For thirty years, 1965 to 1995, the War on Poverty utterly wasted a total of $6.6 trillion, an average of $220 billion per year, depriving the economy of investment capital and assuring minimal growth.  President Reagan restored capitalism by restoring capital to the starving markets, and the Reagan recovery took off like a rocket, only to be interrupted by the Dot.com Bubble twelve years later. 

    The fourth great interruption to the phenomenal march of capitalist prosperity was the Democrats’ Unaffordable Housing Project that forced the loan of trillions of dollars of taxpayer money to people who were in no position to repay the loans.  This was a housing bubble but on a rather modest scale compared to the Japan Bubble 1991 or the Dot.com Bubble 2000.  Regardless, the uncertainty triggered a worldwide markets crash that approached $50 trillion at one point, and is not finally resolved.  We know that government interference in the market place creates and prolongs economic hard times, and Obama is interfering in the marketplace on a much greater scale than FDR or LBJ ever dreamed of.  So expect more bad times until we get back to an honest capitalist system and prosperity is restored. 

    Every complaint that Moberg has about capitalism is foolish and irrelevant.  Marxists have created and/or prolonged economic problems, whether the problem was created by stupidity, as the economic bubbles were, or deliberate, as the War on Poverty or the Unaffordable Housing Project were.  The one good thing about Obama is that Americans now understand how deceitful and malevolent Marxists are.

    Posted by scorp on Aug 2, 2010 at 8:06 PM
  • extended discussion >>>Continued...

    Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 25 posts.