Niall Ferguson: The Cure for Our Economy’s Stationary State
Adam Smith knew what ails us—and he prescribed the cure.
Jesse L. Jackson Jr. has been suffering from “a mood disorder.”
He
is not alone. The world economy may not be in a depression as bad as
that of the early 1930s. But it’s certainly got emotional problems.
A
year ago, according to Gallup, economic confidence in the United States
plunged, touching bottom in late August. It then rallied, only to start
sliding again with the arrival of summer. Sunshine doesn’t seem to work
like it used to.
The
answer is that much of the developed world, including the United
States, is stagnating. The founder of economics, Adam Smith, had a term
for this. He called it “the stationary state.” In his day it was China
that looked stationary: a once “opulent” country that had simply ceased
to grow. Smith blamed China’s unfavorable institutions—including its
bureaucracy—for the stasis. He also noticed how the stationary state
favored the super-rich and civil servants, leaving poor laborers to
slide toward subsistence wages.
Now
the boot is on the other foot. It is Westerners who are in the
stationary state, while China is growing faster than any other major
economy in the world. The World Bank expects the European economy to
contract this year and the U.S. to grow by just 2 percent. China will
grow as much as four times faster than that.
The
mood disorder is especially bad for investors. Only seven out of 47
national stock markets around the world have posted gains in the last 12
months.
The
currently voguish explanation for the slowdown is “deleveraging.” The
argument is that the excessive debts the West ran up in the past 10 or
20 years are now acting as a drag on growth. Households and banks are
desperately trying to reduce their debts, having gambled foolishly on
ever-rising property prices. To prevent this process from generating a
lethal debt deflation, governments and central banks have stepped in
with fiscal and monetary stimulus. That helps for a time, but it
ultimately transforms a crisis of excess private debt into a crisis of
excess public debt.
Yet
more is going on here than deleveraging. Consider this: the U.S.
economy has created 2.6 million jobs since June 2009. In the same
period, 3.1 million workers have signed up for disability benefits. Back
in 1992 there was one person on disability benefits for every 36 people
in employment. Now the ratio is 1 to 16. Unemployment is being
concealed—and rendered permanent—in ways all too familiar to Europeans.
The
stationary state is literally stationary. People claim to be disabled.
And they also stay put. Traditionally around 3 percent of the U.S.
population moves to a new state each year. That rate has halved since
the crisis began. You can’t blame all this on deleveraging.
Question:
if you want to open a lemonade stand in New York City, how long does it
take to jump through the necessary bureaucratic hoops?
The
answer is 65 days (including a wait of up to five weeks for your Food
Protection Certificate). That’s the kind of crazy red tape that
development economists like Hernando de Soto used to blame for Third
World poverty.
So
is there any way out of the stationary state? Smith made it clear that
he thought imperial China’s sclerotic “laws and institutions” were the
root of the problem. More free trade, more encouragement for small
business, less bureaucracy, and less crony capitalism: these were his
prescriptions. Well, we can live in hope that such policies get adopted
by the next occupant of the White House.
The
alternative is to escape stagnation through technological innovation.
One man who seems to have declared war on stasis is Elon Musk, the South
African–born engineer-entrepreneur who, in the space of just a few
weeks, has celebrated both the docking of his spaceship Dragon at the International Space Station and the launch of his electric car, the Tesla Model S.
I
met Musk for the first time earlier this summer and was captivated by
his energy and vision. Whenever the prevailing mood of economic gloom
gets me down, I remind myself that it was men like Musk who—for fully
two centuries after Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations—propelled the West onward and upward simply by doing things that their contemporaries considered impossible.
It
is time to shake off the “mood disorder” caused not just by excessive
debt but also by excessive bureaucracy. Only entrepreneurial optimism
can get us out of the stationary state—and moving again.
Niall Ferguson is a professor of history at Harvard University. He is also a senior research fellow at Jesus College, Oxford University, and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His Latest book, Civilization: The West and the Rest, has just been published by Penguin Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment