I heard a lecture this semester by Roger Farmer who is the
Chair of the Economics department at the University of California, Los
Angeles. Dr. Farmer is different from
most economists in that he is attempting to address the 2007 recession from a
new perspective. In a previous post I
mentioned that there are the Keynesians, and the Hayekians. There is also Irving Fisher who explained the
1929 depression in terms of a debt-deflation cycle. Dr. Farmer explains Fisher by pointing us to
look at the end result of Fisher, which is wealth. It is wealth that is lost once a
debt-deflation cycle occurs. This is
equity on the balance sheet, and in financial terms, it is that residual value
in our own individual financial structures that allows us to borrow in order to
buy things. It is the basis for our own
personal leverage.
When the 2007 Great Recession hit lots of personal wealth
was wiped out. Some estimates put it as
high as 40%. This restrains consumption
from a Fisher perspective. However,
Farmer makes wealth a more central part of his economic argument. He bases much of his argument on Milton
Friedman, whom he described as a Keynesian.
Friedman stated that consumption is based on wealth and not income, which
is counter to a traditional Keynesian argument that wealth is based on
income. I know what you are thinking,
but I am just reporting what I heard.
Dr. Farmer presented several graphs that brought his
argument into focus. He traced
unemployment through the 1930’s and showed how growth in employment marched
hand in hand with the value of the stock market. He then used this information to build a
model of the relationship between the S&P and unemployment over fifty plus
years. He used the first have of the
years to establish a foundation of data for the model. He then used those years to predict
unemployment from the 1980’s to more recent years, and the model was incredibly
accurate. He demonstrated that wealth
and unemployment move together, and wealth can be used to predict the level of
unemployment.
What are the policy implications of this? Dr. Farmer proposed a solution that could be
received as a “big brother” type of method to stabilize the economy. He proposed that the Federal Reserve establish
an indexed fund of stocks. The term “index
fund” means to buy a set of stocks from the market that mirrors the overall
market. The idea is not to buy a set of
winners over loosers. The fact that the
Federal Reserve would buy an indexed set of stocks to stabilize asset values in
down cycles would also protect employment from moving to the downside in the
proportions that it has in the last five years.
My own personal recommendation is not to tax capital,
because taxing capital would retard its growth.
If you want employment to grow, wealth should grow.
Dr. Farmer has a little book that I recommend to anyone who
wants to understand the economy, but who has not the time or the patience to
suffer through a college course on the subject.
The book is How the Economy Works
and it is available on most bookseller web sites. Dr. Farmer’s own web site with his
mathematically based technical working papers is linked here as well.
The idea that wealth relates closely to unemployment is not
a new idea, but Dr. Farmer has been able to put together persuasive evidence
that the relationship is real.
No comments:
Post a Comment