Op-Ed Columnist - Depression Economics Returns - NYTimes.com

Welcome to TimesPeople

14/11/08 11:33

Share and Discover the Best of NYTimes.com

Get Started

11:22 AM

No, thanks

What’s this? HOME PAGE

MY TIMES

TODAY'S PAPER

VIDEO

MOST POPULAR

My Account Welcome, cristovao51 Log Out Help

TIMES TOPICS

Search All NYTimes.com

Opinion WORLD U.S. N.Y. / REGION BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY SCIENCE HEALTH SPORTS OPINION ARTS

STYLE

TRAVEL

JOBS REAL ESTATE

AUTOS EDITORIALS

COLUMNISTS

CONTRIBUTORS

LETTERS

OP-ED COLUMNIST

More Articles in Opinion »

Depression Economics Returns By PAUL KRUGMAN Published: November 14, 2008

The economic news, in case you haven’t noticed, keeps getting worse. Bad as it is, however, I don’t expect another Great Depression. In fact, we probably won’t see the unemployment rate match its post-Depression peak of 10.7 percent, reached in 1982 (although I wish I was sure about that).

COMMENTS (25) E-MAIL PRINT SAVE SHARE

We are already, however, well into the realm of what I call depression economics. By that I mean a state of affairs like that of the 1930s in which the usual tools of economic policy — above all, the Federal

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Paul Krugman

Go to Columnist Page »

THE PUBLIC EDITOR

Reserve’s ability to pump up the economy by cutting interest rates — have lost all traction. When depression economics prevails, the usual rules of economic policy no longer apply: virtue becomes vice, caution is risky and prudence is folly.

Blog: The Conscience of a

To see what I’m talking about, consider the implications of the latest piece of terrible economic news: Thursday’s report on new claims Related for unemployment insurance, which have now Times Topics: United States passed the half-million mark. Bad as this report Economy was, viewed in isolation it might not seem catastrophic. After all, it was in the same ballpark Readers' as numbers reached during the 2001 recession Comments and the 1990-1991 recession, both of which ended up being relatively mild by historical Share your thoughts. standards (although in each case it took a long Post a Comment » Read All Comments (25) » time before the job market recovered). Liberal

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/opinion/14krugman.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

MOST POPULAR E-MAILED

BLOGGED

SEARCHED

1. A Senior Fellow at the Institute of Nonexistence 2. A School Chief Takes On Tenure, Stirring a Fight 3. Thomas L. Friedman: How to Fix a Flat 4. Baby, You’re Home 5. The Return of the Interview Suit 6. U.N. Reports Pollution Threat in Asia 7. Law Firms Feel Strain of Layoffs and Cutbacks 8. For a Washington Job, Be Prepared to Tell All 9. Now in Sight: Far-Off Planets 10. Nicholas D. Kristof: Obama and Our Schools Go to Complete List »

nytimes.com/autos

Página 1 de 3

Op-Ed Columnist - Depression Economics Returns - NYTimes.com

But on both of these earlier occasions the standard policy response to a weak economy — a cut in the federal funds rate, the interest rate most directly affected by Fed policy — was still available. Today, it isn’t: the effective federal funds rate (as opposed to the official target, which for technical reasons has become meaningless) has averaged less than 0.3 percent in recent days. Basically, there’s nothing left to cut.

14/11/08 11:33

A green, mean fighting machine? Also in Autos: Think your ride is special? Prove it. G.M. suspends merger talks with Chrysler Vintage pickups

And with no possibility of further interest rate cuts, there’s nothing to stop the economy’s downward momentum. Rising unemployment will lead to further cuts in consumer spending, which Best Buy warned this week has

ADVERTISEMENTS

already suffered a “seismic” decline. Weak consumer spending will lead to cutbacks in business investment plans. And the weakening economy will lead to more job cuts, provoking a further cycle of contraction. To pull us out of this downward spiral, the federal government will have to provide economic stimulus in the form of higher spending and greater aid to those in distress — and the stimulus plan won’t come soon enough or be strong enough unless politicians and economic officials are able to transcend several conventional prejudices. One of these prejudices is the fear of red ink. In normal times, it’s good to worry about the budget deficit — and fiscal responsibility is a virtue we’ll need to relearn as soon as this crisis is past. When depression economics prevails, however, this virtue becomes a vice. F.D.R.’s premature attempt to balance the budget in 1937 almost destroyed the New Deal. Another prejudice is the belief that policy should move cautiously. In normal times, this makes sense: you shouldn’t make big changes in policy until it’s clear they’re needed. Under current conditions, however, caution is risky, because big changes for the worse are already happening, and any delay in acting raises the chance of a deeper economic disaster. The policy response should be as well-crafted as possible, but time is of the essence. Finally, in normal times modesty and prudence in policy goals are good things. Under current conditions, however, it’s much better to err on the side of doing too much than on the side of doing too little. The risk, if the stimulus plan turns out to be more than needed, is that the economy might overheat, leading to inflation — but the Federal Reserve can always head off that threat by raising interest rates. On the other hand, if the stimulus plan is too small there’s nothing the Fed can do to make up for the shortfall. So when depression economics prevails, prudence is folly. What does all this say about economic policy in the near future? The Obama administration will almost certainly take office in the face of an economy looking even worse than it does now. Indeed, Goldman Sachs predicts that the unemployment rate, currently at 6.5 percent, will reach 8.5 percent by the end of next year. All indications are that the new administration will offer a major stimulus package. My own back-of-the-envelope calculations say that the package http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/opinion/14krugman.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

Página 2 de 3

Op-Ed Columnist - Depression Economics Returns - NYTimes.com

14/11/08 11:33

package. My own back-of-the-envelope calculations say that the package should be huge, on the order of $600 billion. So the question becomes, will the Obama people dare to propose something on that scale? Let’s hope that the answer to that question is yes, that the new administration will indeed be that daring. For we’re now in a situation where it would be very dangerous to give in to conventional notions of prudence. A version of this article appeared in print on November 14, 2008, on page A33 of the New York edition.

More Articles in Opinion »

Past Coverage The Golden Years, Tarnished (November 13, 2008) MEMO FROM BANGKOK; This Time, Southeast Asia Is Not at Center of the Crisis (November 12, 2008) Applications Surge for Courses at CUNY’s 2-Year Colleges (November 11, 2008) FAIR GAME; Open the Door and Turn on the Lights (November 9, 2008) Related Searches Get E-Mail Alerts Get E-Mail Alerts Get E-Mail Alerts Get E-Mail Alerts

United States Economy Economic Conditions and Trends Layoffs and Job Reductions Recession and Depression

INSIDE NYTIMES.COM WORLD »

ART & DESIGN »

ESCAPES »

Settlers Who Long to Leave the West Bank

A Weekend in the Galleries

Boston, a Science Lover’s Kind of Town

Home

World

U.S.

N.Y. / Region

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Business

OPINION »

Technology Science Health Sports Automobiles Back to Top

Privacy Policy

Search

Corrections

RSS

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/opinion/14krugman.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

THEATER »

OPINION »

In Hard Times, Born to Pirouette

Errol Morris: Cartesian Blogging, Part 3

Opinion First Look

Arts Help

Style

Travel

Contact Us

Jobs

Real Estate

Work for Us

Site Map

Página 3 de 3