I really appreciate this commentary by John Feehery. David M. Walker suggests one means by which we'll see everyone's slice of the pie get smaller.
I subscribe to the GOPUSA listserve. Not exactly sure how that happened, but it's any interesting source of news and commentary that I don't see elsewhere. Occasionally, it's even intelligent. The big topic over the last couple weeks has been the "T.E.A. Parties" going on around the country. Decried by many left-leaning sources as "astroturf", fake grass roots, I think these are very real local efforts and exactly the sort of consequence one expects from Capitalism Hitting the Fan. Let me explain, via personal narrative:
[rant]
I was offered a job recently that would more than double my household intake. In addition, the work is awesome, practically the definition thereof. In terms of my long term career goals, it's hard to imagine a better place to spend 3-5yrs. But I can't responsibly take it. It would involve moving to a higher-cost of living area with a much higher state income tax. Between the high taxes on income, food and transportation and the high rents, I would actually lose money my first year, break even the second and maybe be able to start saving in the third. Sure, rents are high, but mortgage rates are down to 4.75% or lower, so clearly it's the time to buy. Sure, if I could save the money required for a down payment on one of the overpriced houses in the region, but I can't realistically think of saving substantial amounts for another couple years, longer if kids end up in the mix. But now, despite forking over about 60% of my enlarged income to the government directly or through rental payments to cover property taxes (plus any landlord's income/corporate tax), there's a huge deficit that will hurt me and my kids for the rest of our lives in higher taxes, inflation and less private capital available. Worse than that, a huge chunk of that money is going to prop up housing prices and thus keep me from increasing my disposable income by buying one. Meanwhile, the Fed is taking steps to inflate away my meager current savings, just as the collapse of equity markets means my expectation of future expenses grows to include family members who have or will be retired soon. Even now, what's my biggest expense: taxes. And what do I get from them? A steadily declining sense of prosperity as roads crumble, schools fail and our unsustainable energy, food and water infrastructure start to show cracks.
[/rant]
All this from me, a pretty reasonable guy. I get a very strong "third century Rome" feel from these discussions. The infrastructure required to maintain the core of the empire has become more of a burden than the people (me included) are willing or able to bear. I have a lot of hope that the burden can be lessened by a steady reduction in consumption, and a slow but steady decentralization of things like energy and food production. But I'm still going to miss the chance to work on the really cool stuff.
Politicians who can address the feeling that we're living in a collapsing house of cards ought to do well in 2010.
1 comment:
3rd century Rome's problems were fundamentally not economic. The economic problems were themselves the symptoms of several related demographic problems and a major political one:
(1) The Roman population was in serious decline, both due to continuous civil wars and due to recurrent plague in Italy.
(2) Barbarian populations were exploding, at least locally, as tribes were pushed westward and bottlenecked on the Rhine and Danube frontiers.
(3) Politically, the decision to make up the Roman population shortfall by inviting barbarian tribes in as mercenaries and internal buffer states and treat them as foederati, and hence taxed in kind rather than coin, led to serious budget shortfalls, leading to less reliable recruitment, more need for mercenaries, etc etc etc repeat ad nauseum.
Point is, though... there was a demographic root to Rome's economic collapse that we aren't experiencing. Italy, France, even the UK, on the other hand are experiencing such a demographic crisis.
What we're seeing is the sort of decline you get when a nation loses the will to empire. The question is if we'll realise we can't be a hegemon any longer and we manage our decline to mere Great Power status like the UK, or if we'll try to hold on like a pit bull and bankrupt ourselves, gutting our society in the process, like France.
At least that's my contention du jour.
Post a Comment