billy blog Wed 2010-09-08 19:04 EDT

Michal Kalecki -- The Political Aspects of Full Employment

...several readers have asked me whether I am familiar with the 1943 article by Polish economist Michal Kalecki -- The Political Aspects of Full Employment. The answer is that I am very familiar with the article and have written about it in my academic work in years past. So I thought I might write a blog about what I think of Kalecki's argument given that it is often raised by progressives as a case against effective fiscal intervention...[Job Guarantee concepts briefly summarized]...While orthodox economists typically attack the Job Guarantee policy for fiscal reasons, economists on the left also challenge its validity and effectiveness. In 1943, Michal Kalecki published the Political Aspects of Full Employment, in the Political Quarterly, which laid out the blueprint for socialist opposition to Keynesian-style employment policy. The criticisms would be equally applicable to a Job Guarantee policy...Kalecki's principle objection then seemed to be that ``the maintenance of full employment would cause social and political changes which would give a new impetus to the opposition of the business leaders.''...the major political blockages are no longer those that Kalecki foresaw. The opponents of fiscal activism are a different elite and work against the ``captains of industry'' just as much as they work against the broader working class. The growth of the financial sector and global derivatives trading and the substantial deregulation of labour markets and retrenchment of welfare states has altered things considerably since Kalecki wrote his brilliant article in 1943...

Billy Blog; full employment; Michal Kalecki; political aspects.

Thu 2010-08-26 09:03 EDT

Why Doesn't the United States Have a European-Style Welfare State? | The Weatherhead Center for International Affairs

Alesina, Alberto, Edward L. Glaeser, and Bruce Sacerdote

European countries are much more generous to the poor relative to the US level of generosity. Economic models suggest that redistribution is a function of the variance and skewness of the pre--tax income distribution, the volatility of income (perhaps because of trade shocks), the social costs of taxation and the expected income mobility of the median voter. None of these factors appear to explain the differences between the US and Europe. Instead, the differences appear to be the result of racial heterogeneity in the US and American political institutions. Racial animosity in the US makes redistribution to the poor, who are disproportionately black, unappealing to many voters. American political institutions limited the growth of a socialist party, and more generally limited the political power of the poor. [2001 Brookings Papers on Economic Activity; pdf downloaded]

European-Style Welfare State; internal affairs; United States; Weatherhead Center.

Willem Buiter's Maverecon Sat 2009-10-10 14:00 EDT

Expect little and you may yet be disappointed

Willem Buiter

...the most disappointing development this year was the performance of president Barack Obama and his administration - and my expectations were modest to begin with...On the fiscal side, Barack Obama is presiding over the biggest peace-time government deficits and public debt build-up ever. According to my back-of-the-envelope calculations there is about a 10 percent of GDP gap between the medium and longer-term spending plans of the Obama administration and the taxes the Congress is willing and able to impose. The reality that you cannot run a West-European welfare state (with decent quality health care, decent pre-school, primary and secondary school education for all), rebuild America's crumbling infrastructure, invest in the environment and fulfill your post-imperial global strategic ambitions while raising 33 percent of GDP in taxes, has not yet dawned on the Obama administration or on the American people at large...Clearly, the qualities one needs to get elected to high office in western democracies are not qualities that are likely to be helpful once you have achieved high office and are expected to govern and lead. To survive the selection process to become president you have to be able to stitch together a coalition of special interests that can provide sufficient financial and sweat equity resources to win this grueling race to the top. Once you get there, you should shed the unfortunate baggage you accumulated on your way up and govern in the interest of all the people. Few can do that. Apparently Obama is not one of them.

disappointment; expectations; Willem Buiter's Maverecon.