Not in a Depression - Yet

One of the reasons we are only in a recession and not in a depression is the existence of safety net programs put in place eighty years ago under FDR, supplemented by programs put in place nearly fifty years ago under LBJ. As a consequence, even though the percentage of the population with jobs is lower than at any time since the great depression, we don't have masses of people living in Hooverville's, rummaging through garbage dumps for sustenance.

Because of those programs, which Republicans opposed from the very beginning, not only have individuals and families been able to survive, businesses that would otherwise have had to close their doors have been able to stay open.

The scale of our programs is significant. Twenty percent of all personal income in 2010 came from government transfer programs. Just imagine the impact if those programs didn't exist.

Before the year is over, you may not have to imagine it. Some programs, such as extended unemployment insurance, are due to expire later this year. Some stimulus programs are also due to expire. Among measures proposed to reduce government spending are proposals to raise retirement age, raise the age of eligibility for Medicare and increase the costs paid by individuals.

As of now, it appears that neither party is pushing for measures to stimulate the economy, create jobs, thus increasing GDP and revenue, reducing the deficit by growing our way out of it.

So whatever results from the current budget negotiations, it looks like government spending will be reduced.

This will kill jobs.

In the long run, though, there are issues beyond aggregate demand that need attention. How do we address the jobs deficit in face of outsourcing offshore, computerization, or a combination of both. Where will our future jobs come from?

University of Texas economist James K. Galbraith has some thoughts on the subject in a recent essay published here by the New America Foundation.