ECONOMY
Documents & Texts from America.gov
13 March 2009 Responding to an Historic Economic Crisis: The Obama Program
Remarks of Lawrence H. Summers, Director of the National Economic Council
Brookings Institution, Washington, DC
I am glad to be here. This morning I want to describe our understanding
of the root of our current economic crisis, talk about the rationale
for the Administration's recovery strategy, and connect our longer-term
economic strategy to the central objective of sustained and healthy
expansion.
Economic downturns historically are of two types. Most of those
in post-World War II-America have been a by-product of the Federal
Reserve's efforts to control rising inflation. But an alternative
source of recession comes from the spontaneous correction of financial
excesses: the bursting of bubbles, de-leveraging in the financial
sector, declining asset values, reduced demand, and reduced employment.
Unfortunately, our current situation reflects this latter, rarer
kind of recession. On a global basis, $50 trillion dollars in global
wealth has been erased over the last 18 months. This includes $7
trillion dollars in US stock market wealth which has vanished, and
$6 trillion dollars in housing wealth that has been destroyed. Inevitably,
this has led to declining demand, with GDP and employment now shrinking
at among the most rapid rates since the second World War. 4.4 million
jobs have already been lost and the unemployment rate now exceeds
8 percent.
Our single most important priority is bringing about economic recovery
and ensuring that the next economic expansion, unlike it's predecessors,
is fundamentally sound and not driven by financial excess.
This is essential. Without robust and sustained economic expansion,
we will not achieve any other national goal. We will not be able
to project strength globally or reduce poverty locally. We will
not be able to expand access to higher education or affordable health
care. We will not be able to raise incomes for middle class families
or create opportunities for new small businesses to thrive.
And so today, I will explain the rationale behind the President's
recovery program and our strategy for long-term economic growth.
Our problems were not made in a day, or a month or a year, and they
will not be solved quickly. But there is one enduring lesson in
the history of financial crises: they all end.
I am confident that with the strong and sound policies the President
has put forward and the passage of time, we will restore economic
growth and regain financial stability, and find opportunity in this
moment of crisis to assure that our future prosperity rests on a
sound and sustainable foundation.
First, I'd like to describe how best to think about this crisis.
One of the most important lessons in any introductory economics
course is that markets are self-stabilizing.
* When there is an excess supply of wheat, its price falls. Farmers
grow less and others consume more. The market equilibrates.
* When the economy slows, interest rates fall. When interest rates
fall, more people take advantage of credit, the economy speeds up,
and the market equilibrates.
This is much of what Adam Smith had in mind when he talked about
the "invisible hand."
However, it was a central insight of Keynes' General Theory that
two or three times each century, the self-equilibrating properties
of markets break down as stabilizing mechanisms are overwhelmed
by vicious cycles. And the right economic metaphor becomes an avalanche
rather than a thermostat. That is what we are experiencing right
now.
* Declining asset prices lead to margin calls and de-leveraging,
which leads to further declines in prices.
* Lower asset prices means banks hold less capital. Less capital
means less lending. Less lending means lower asset prices.
* Falling home prices lead to foreclosures, which lead home prices
to fall even further.
* A weakened financial system leads to less borrowing and spending
which leads to a weakened economy, which leads to a weakened financial
system.
* Lower incomes lead to less spending, which leads to less employment,
which leads to lower incomes.
An abundance of greed and an absence of fear on Wall Street led
some to make purchases - not based on the real value of assets,
but on the faith that there would be another who would pay more
for those assets. At the same time, the government turned a blind
eye to these practices and their potential consequences for the
economy as a whole. This is how a bubble is born. And in these moments,
greed begets greed. The bubble grows.
Eventually, however, this process stops - and reverses. Prices
fall. People sell. Instead of an expectation of new buyers, there
is an expectation of new sellers. Greed gives way to fear. And this
fear begets fear.
This is the paradox at the heart of the financial crisis. In the
past few years, we've seen too much greed and too little fear; too
much spending and not enough saving; too much borrowing and not
enough worrying. Today, however, our problem is exactly the opposite.
It is this transition from an excess of greed to an excess of fear
that President Roosevelt had in mind when he famously observed that
the only thing we had to fear was fear itself. It is this transition
that has happened in the United States today.
What is the task of policy in such an environment?
While greed is no virtue, entrepreneurship and the search for opportunity
is what we need today. We need a program that breaks these vicious
cycles. We need to instill the trust that allows opportunity to
overcome fear and enables families and businesses to again imagine
a brighter future. And we need to create this confidence without
allowing it to lead to unstable complacency.
While the economy is falling far short today, perhaps a trillion
dollars or more short, we should never lose sight of its potential.
We have the most productive workers in the world, the greatest universities
and capacity for innovation, an incredible amount of resilience,
entrepreneurship, and flexibility, and the most diverse and creative
population of any major economy.
One striking statistic suggests the magnitude of the opportunity
that is before us in restoring our economy to its potential. Earlier
this week, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, adjusting for inflation
according to the standard Consumer Price Index, was at the same
level as it was in 1966, when Brookings scholars Charlie Schultze
and Arthur Okun were helping to preside over the American economy.
While there could be many ways to question this calculation, that
the market would be at essentially the same real level as it was
in 1966 when there were no PCs, no internet, no flexible manufacturing,
no software industry, and when our workforce was half and our net
capital stock was a third of what it is today, may be regarded by
some as the sale of the century. For policy-makers, it suggests
the magnitude of the gains from restoring sustained economic growth.
Producing recovery and harnessing these opportunities, however,
will depend upon the choices we make now. This is what the President's
program sets out to achieve.
Towards this end, the President is committed to an approach that
moves aggressively on jobs, credit and housing, thereby attacking
the vicious cycles I described earlier at each of their key nodes.
In this effort, he has insisted that we all recognize that the risks
of over-reaction are dwarfed by the risks of inaction.
The first component of the President's program is direct support
for jobs and income to engage the multiplier process in favor of
economic expansion. Increases in income lead to financial repair
which supports further increases in income. Rising employment will
lead to rising spending, which leads to further increases in income
and employment.
The Recovery and Reinvestment Act is the largest peacetime economic
expansion program in the country's history. It will inject nearly
$800 billion into the economy, ¾ of it within the next 18
months. The Council of Economic Advisors' estimates suggest that
the Recovery and Reinvestment Act will save or create 3.5 million
jobs. It will at the same time do some of the work that the nation
has needed done for a long time-doubling renewable energy capacity
in the next 3 years, supporting middle class incomes, modernizing
ten thousand schools, and making the largest investment in the spine
of our national economy - the nation's infrastructure - since Dwight
Eisenhower's investment 50 years ago.
Already, its impact is being felt by cops and teachers who would
have been laid off but whose jobs have been saved-it may retain14,000
teachers in New York alone. It will, for most American workers,
be felt in the coming weeks as withholding schedules are adjusted,
in continuing unemployment insurance benefits and health benefits
for hundreds-of-thousands of workers who already would have done
without, and in contracting already underway with respect to tens-of-billions
of dollars of infrastructure projects across the country.
It is surely too early to gauge the broader economic impact of
the President's program. But it is modestly encouraging that since
it began to take shape, consumer spending in the US, which was collapsing
during the holiday season, appears, according to a number of indicators,
to have stabilized.
The second major portion of the President's strategy is the financial
stability plan. It is directed at addressing the vicious cycles
associated with de-leveraging and credit contraction. A strong flow
of credit is necessary because factories need it to buy equipment,
stores need it to stock their shelves, students need it to attend
college, consumers need it to buy cars, and businesses need it to
meet their payrolls.
The approach rests on two pillars: The first is a trillion dollars
for financing or purchasing mortgages, student small business loans,
and other financial instruments through the TALF (or what is now
called the Consumer Business Lending Initiative), the GSEs, and
public-private investment facilities that Secretary Geithner will
be detailing in the weeks ahead.
Reactivating the capital markets is essential to realistic asset
valuation, to restarting nonbank lending, and to enabling banks
to divest toxic assets when they judge it appropriate.
The second pillar of the program is assuring that our banking system
is well capitalized and in a position to lend on a substantial scale.
The stress tests now underway will enable a realistic assessment
of the position of each different institution and appropriate responses
in each case to assure their ability to meet their commitments and
lend on a substantial scale. And as the President said in his joint
address to Congress, "When we learn that a major bank has serious
problems, we will hold accountable those responsible, force the
necessary adjustments, provide the support to clean up their balance
sheets, and assure the continuity of a strong, viable institution
that can serve our people and our economy."
As a result of government interventions in the financial markets,
key credit spreads are already substantially narrower than they
were last fall. There are some indications that the expectations
of future actions have been a positive in reducing credit costs
in a number of key areas. It is our hope and expectation that further
support for capital markets, transparency with respect to the condition
of banks, and infusion of capital into the banking system, will
create virtuous circles in which stronger markets beget stronger
financial institutions, which beget stronger markets, leading ultimately
to financial and economic recovery.
The third component of the President's recovery strategy is addressing
the housing market. The vicious cycle of rising foreclosures leading
to declining home prices, leading to rising foreclosures - must
be contained. This problem is at the heart of our economic crisis.
Through direct interventions, using the GSE's to bring down mortgage
rates and make possible refinancings for credit-worthy borrowers
who have lost their home equity as house prices decline, and through
setting standards and providing significant financial subsidies
for measures directed at payment relief to prevent foreclosures,
we are achieving several objectives.
Housing wealth and its contribution to expenditures is being maintained.
And critically lower mortgage rates mean more income for consumers,
and function like tax cuts in support of consumer spending. Depending
on market conditions the administration's program may save American
households more than 150 billion dollars over the next 5 years.
Taken together, these steps to support incomes, increase the flow
of credit, and normalize housing market conditions address each
of the vicious cycles that is leading to decline.
With the passage of time, it will permit the re-engagement of the
normal processes of economic growth: rising incomes and employment,
greater credit flows, increased spending, a stronger US economy
and a stronger global economy. They will reinforce crucial dynamics
that will also operate to promote recovery.
For example, about 14 million new car sales are necessary for replacement
and to accommodate rising population growth. Yet car sales are now
running at an annual rate of about 9 million. New household formation
requires something like 1.7 million new housing units a year and
housing starts are now running about 400,000 a year. Once the inventory
is worked off, investment will increase. Historical experience suggests
that rapid inventory decline such as we have observed in recent
months is followed by increased production to rebuild inventories.
Of fundamental importance is ensuring that we do not exchange a
painful recession for another unsustainable expansion. That would
not only be irresponsible - it would be counterproductive. We have
seen what happens when we pursue policies that produce short-term,
instead of durable and sustainable growth.
We have seen housing prices reach unsustainably high levels and
credit spreads reach unsustainably low levels in the middle of this
decade. And we saw bubbles in technology in the late 1990s.
Bubble driven economic growth is problematic because of disruption
and dislocation - affecting those who took part in the bubble's
excesses and those who did not. And, it is not entirely healthy
even while it lasts. Between 2000 and 2007 - a period of solid aggregate
economic growth - the typical working-age household saw their income
decline by nearly $2000. The decline in middle-class incomes even
as the incomes of the top 1% skyrocketed has a number of causes,
but one of them is surely rising asset prices and the fact that
financial sector profits exploded to the point to where they represented
40% of all corporate profits in 2006.
Confidence today will be enhanced if we put measures in place that
assure that the coming expansion will be more sustainable and fair
in the distribution of benefits than its predecessor. That is why
the President has priorities that go beyond the immediate goal of
containing the downturn and promoting recovery.
An overhaul of our financial regulatory system is one such priority.
In little more than two decades, we've witnessed the stock market
crash of 1987, the Savings and Loan scandals, the decline of the
real estate market, the rapid decline of Asian markets, the collapse
of the NASDAQ telecom bubble, Enron, Long Term Capital Management,
and today's crisis. This is roughly one crisis every 2.5 years.
We can and must do better.
There is room for debate about how regulation should be enhanced,
but not about whether we can stay with the status quo. Treasury
Secretary Geithner will be laying out the Administration's approach
in some detail in the coming weeks and the President is eager to
take this issue up with his fellow leaders at the April G-20 meeting.
While the discussion can get pretty technical quickly, some things
should be clear:
* Regulatory agencies should never be placed in competition for
the privilege of regulating particular financial institutions.
* Globally, the United States must lead a leveling-up of regulatory
standards, not as has happened all too often in the recent past,
trying to win a race to the bottom.
* No substantially interconnected institution or market on which
the system depends should be free from rigorous public scrutiny.
* Required levels of capital and liquidity must be set with a view
toward protecting the system, even in very difficult times.
* And there must be far more vigorous and serious efforts to discourage
improper risk taking through transparency and accountability for
errors.
An additional requirement for financial stability is that the government's
own finances be stable. When I left Washington eight years ago,
people were debating what to do when there was no more federal debt.
That is hardly our problem today. I hope that all of those who participate
in the debate over this year's budget, whether they agree or disagree
with President Obama's priorities, will share his commitment to
truthful and realistic budgeting and fiscal sustainability to ensure
that after recovery, the ratio of the nation's debt to its income
stabilizes.
If growth in the coming years is not to be driven by asset price
inflation-induced consumption, other engines of growth must be identified.
These forms of growth should be sustainable and shared by the majority
of American households.
Stronger exports are one sound foundation for sustainable expansion.
That is why along with strengthening financial regulation, the President
will be working on the global growth strategy at the G20. Priorities
will include spurring demand around the world and assuring the adequacy
of funding for emerging markets.
These are issues both for global recovery - at a time when 2009
is likely to be the first year of negative global growth since the
Second World War - and for a healthy, less debt-dependent US expansion.
But moving away from foreign debt-financed growth is only one component
of ensuring a healthy expansion. An additional component is addressing
our healthcare system. It is no accident that the period of the
most rapidly rising wages for middle income families was the 1990s
when healthcare cost inflation was relatively well controlled. Our
ability to produce competitively in the United States will be enhanced
if we contain healthcare costs. I have heard it said that GM's largest
supplier is not a parts company or a tire company, but Blue Cross
Blue Shield.
Containing healthcare costs help keep the economy sustainable and
so does improving quality and access. A study I helped sponsor while
at Harvard demonstrated that less than 1 in 4 Americans with hypertension
had it under control. This means huge costs for treating strokes
down the road as well as children who will never know their grandparents.
By investing in healthcare now, we can make our economy, as well
as our people, healthier. We will also increase confidence in the
ultimate stability of the nation's finances.
An equally important engine of recovery can be investment in reducing
our energy vulnerability and our contribution to climate change.
That is why the Recovery and Reinvestment Act provided for doubling
renewable energy and weatherizing 75 percent of federal buildings.
It is also why the President's budget points toward strong action
to implement a market-based cap-and-trade system, after the economy
recovers, beginning in 2012.
Let's be realistic. Sooner or later we will have to reduce our
dependence on foreign energy and contain our carbon emissions. As
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's doctoral thesis demonstrated
30 years ago, unresolved uncertainty can be a major inhibitor of
investment. If energy prices will trend higher, you invest one way;
if energy prices will be lower, you invest a different way. But
if you don't know what prices will do, often you do not invest at
all. That is why we must move forward as rapidly as possible to
reduce uncertainty and carefully create a new cap-and-trade regime.
There is another benefit as well. As many enlightened business
leaders have recognized, the confident expectation that pricing
policy will discourage carbon use in the future will spur a whole
range of green investments in the present, when our economy can
benefit from all the investment it can get. And in the long run,
we believe this will create millions of new jobs. And the evidence
is clear: we can choose to lead these industries, with all the commensurate
economic and political and environmental benefits, or we can choose
to lose out on these jobs and these opportunities.
Finally, while America's education system may not be directly implicated
in the current economic crisis, it is surely the case that improving
it is essential to the long-run growth of the economy and to ensuring
that this growth is shared, lifting up more families who get the
opportunities afforded by a better education and expanded access
to college.
I've spoken in the language of economists and economic policy -
budgets and prices, capitalization and interest rates. That is because
I believe there is no substitute for careful analysis in setting
economic policy. But as we debate these abstractions, we must always
keep in mind that our economic policies affect real lives - and
economic problems cause real pain.
The decisions we make will determine whether children will look
to their parents with pride when they come home from work - or fear
that their home will be lost. Whether families will experience the
prosperity this nation is capable of producing, or the disruption
and dislocation that too many have found instead.
President Obama inherited an economy in crisis. This is not a crisis
we sought - nor is it one we created. But it is one, under the President's
leadership, that we have answered. The Obama Administration is embarking
on what I believe is the boldest economic program to promote recovery
and expansion in two generations. No one can know just when its
positive effects will be fully felt. No one can predict when this
crisis will be resolved. But in resolution, I am confident there
is enormous opportunity for both Americans and for the United States
of America. We can and we will emerge more prosperous, stronger,
wiser, and better prepared for the future.
|