Growing up in the Cold War, we tended to look at Russia as a nightmare slave society that was utterly and completely foreign to anything Americans knew or could possibly know, absent some kind of invasion.
If I were to summarize the American propaganda message of the time it would be this: We are free, they are not, and that’s why we are rich and they are poor. And, man, did they look poor to our eyes. I could never understand it: How the heck does a once-great people put up with a government that is so obviously and apparently driving the whole population down, year after year?
Well, welcome to 2012 America. Have a look at the extremely scary Federal Reserve report, the Survey of Consumer Finance. If you have the stomach for it, read it yourself. The bean counters have put together the most broad and deep look at the finances of the median family. It turns out that the median American family is financially falling off a cliff, despite (or because of!) the trillions spent trying to prevent this from happening.
The short summary:
It’s actually difficult to come up with a metaphor to fully capture the grim reality here. We could fall back on the farmer that is eating the seed corn held for next year’s planting. Or perhaps we could imagine a household that is feeding the fireplace with shingles from the roof. In short, this is not a sustainable pattern of family finance, and it is currently driving American wealth straight down.
To the extent we are not entirely aware of this, there can only be two reasons. First, the proliferation of debt finance is providing a temporary illusion. Second, the technological revolution came just in time to vastly increase the efficiency of just about everything industry and households do, thereby enabling more blood to be extracted from the economic turnip than anyone ever thought possible.
Take away those two factors and the true impoverishment of the American family would be undeniably obvious and produce a political reality that would be more revolutionary than anything we’ve seen in any existing lifetime.
We are surviving, and even somewhat thriving, despite the fact that we are getting ever poorer. This is an interesting economic paradox. The tools that we work with today — cloud computing, instantaneous communication, the time cost of operations reduced from years to minutes — have saved us from something that might have made the Great Depression seem miniscule by comparison.
Technology is so wonderful that it can actually serve as a kind of mask for underlying decline. Imagine a fisherman at a lake that has a systematically declining population of fish. He had been using a cane pole to fish, but one day, someone invents a digital fish finder and gives him a boat. This vastly expands his daily catch. It feels like prosperity, and it’s true that his time is much better spent, but the underlying reality is still there. Eventually, the fish population will die out.
Another feature of the world since 2008 is that government and the central bank has pulled every conceivable lever to prevent what has happened from happening. It has not only failed to accomplish that end. It has actually forestalled the necessary liquidation that would have created a clear path forward for the rebuilding of prosperity. All of the interventions have stopped the readjustment process, squandered trillions of dollars and cultivated a regulatory thicket that chokes the life out of all but the hardiest — or most politically connected — of capitalistic enterprises.
Imagine an alternative scenario: The bust of 2008 was permitted to happen. Bad banks and financial institutions were allowed to go bankrupt. No sector was saved. Housing prices plummeted. Fannie and Freddie took their lumps. Government slashed spending. The entire economy was deleveraged.
The effects would have been shocking, but temporary. Workers would have shifted from failed sectors to newly profitable ones. Consumers would have pulled back and had every incentive to save as never before. The poor could have afforded homes. Actually, homes would have become marketable as never before. The new savings would have funded investment, and the rebuilding of prosperity would have been massively aided by the great technological revolution.
Alas, this is not the reality we face. Instead, we are experiencing right now something very similar to what has always vexed, not just the Soviet Union, but every society burdened by a catastrophically large and intrusive government. We are getting poorer. And we are putting up with it. For now.
Jeffrey Tucker,for The Daily Reckoning
I'm executive editor of Laissez Faire Books and the proprietor of the Laissez Faire Club. I'm the author of two books in the field of economics and one on early music. My main professional work between 1985 and 2011 was with the MIses Institute but I've also worked with the Acton Institute and Mackinac Institute, as well as written thousands of published articles. My personal twitter account @jeffreyatucker FB is @jeffrey.albert.tucker Plain old email is email@example.com
There is one sector that benefits tremendously from the current situation and that is the federal government. I question whether they are “trying to prevent it” or whether it is actually the best of all possible worlds for them.
Excellent except to say that so many articles are written with the presumption that the Fed is doin’ it for the people.
It is really quite obvious, given the history of fiat money, that the Fed is representing the Banksters.
The Fed is doing it “to” the people!
“The effects would have been shocking, but temporary.”
no, they would have been immediate and permanent. the two single biggest problems we face are 1) the top of the fiat debt currency ponzi and 2) citizen depopulation. neither of these problems have been addressed, or will be addressed any time soon, and they are both primary and decisive.
“I question whether they are “trying to prevent it” or whether it is actually the best of all possible worlds for them.”
ah, someone is beginning to get it!
two questions for you.
1) what is the end result of all this?
2) who would want that, and why?
gman: 1. Hyperinflation, panic, riots, martial law, more centralized control. 2. The rulers want to move us toward OWG. With the collapse of the $ they will create a new fiat currency used by North America but controlled by the International Banking Cartel.
There have been quite a few disappointing numbers in the global economy recently. But as these numbers are just economic "snowflakes" building toward a financial avalanche. All you need is one to push it over the edge. And as Dave Gonigam explains, the deciding snowflake may come from Switzerland. Read on...
After the 2008 financial crisis, little could be heard over the deafening cries of "mission accomplished." And while the Fed's massive QE program seemed to work, the question remains: for how long? Addison Wiggin explains why the next round of QE will fail miserably, paving the way for the IMF to step in with something called "special drawing rights." Read on...
Global warming is one of the most debated subjects of the last few years. But regardless of whether you're a "true believer" or a merely an unconvinced skeptic, there are significant ways to make serious money from this controversial topic. Today, Addison Wiggin brings you three of them. Read on...
Under the auspices of benefiting public health, the government has been administering medication to you and your family for generations. But is it really necessary? Or worse... Could it actually be harmful? Chris Campbell takes a closer look at this, and other personal health decisions the feds don't trust you to make...
Commodities have been in freefall lately. Everything from corn to soy beans to precious metals is headed lower right now. But is this just a brief downturn, or is this the beginning of a long-term trend? Greg Guenthner explains, with a closer look at one specific precious metal that could snap back violently before heading lower. Read on...
The inflation vs. deflation debate is a heated one. Heck, it almost brought Peter Schiff and Harry Dent to blows. But at the core of this debate is a common misunderstanding of the nature of both inflation and deflation. Today, Jim Mosquera seeks to explain each... and which one the U.S. is more likely to experience. Read on...