Deck the Halls with Macro Follies

Each year, our attention turns to the holidays… and to holiday consumer spending! We’re told repeatedly that, because consumer spending is 70 percent of measured GDP, such spending is vital to economic growth and job creation. This must mean that savings, the opposite of consumption, is bad for growth. But is it? Can we really consume our way to prosperity, or do savings and investment actually drive economic growth?

Share or Bookmark:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Tumblr
  • Reddit
  • del.icio.us

Each year, our attention turns to the holidays… and to holiday consumer spending! We’re told repeatedly that, because consumer spending is 70 percent of measured GDP, such spending is vital to economic growth and job creation. This must mean that savings, the opposite of consumption, is bad for growth.

This view of macroeconomics was first popularly asserted by Thomas Malthus in 1820, nearly 200 years ago. Malthus believed recessions were caused by “underconsumption” because there was a “general glut” of goods unsold. To recover from a recession and grow, we needed to stop all the saving and spend more to buy up all the goods on store shelves. Savers are like the miserly Ebenezer Scrooge. If you want a happy holiday, you’ve got to clear those shelves and give people a reason to produce more and create jobs. Or so Malthus thought.

John Maynard Keynes resurrected this approach and built on it with his influential “General Theory”, which now underpins much of our government policy and public discussion of spending and economic growth. Keynesians believe aggregate spending drives the economy and savings is a “leak” out of the flow of spending. Indeed, this economic philosophy underpins many people’s widespread obsession with retail sales each holiday season. Keynesian Macro Santa’s sack is filled with spending.

But there is another view on recessions, recoveries and growth.

Classical and Austrian economists such as Adam Smith, Jean-Baptiste Say and Friedrich Hayek viewed savings as the vital lifeblood of economic growth and production as the means by which we live better and consume more in the long term. Our savings aren’t simply taken out of the economic system, but become the source of capital that entrepreneurs use to create new goods and increase productivity. These economists believe this increased productivity is the key to a wealthier world. Before we consume, we must effectively produce what others value — at prices that cover the costs. This fundamental idea, that our demand for goods is enabled and constituted by our supply of other goods came to be known as the “Law of Markets” and later “Say’s Law”.  For classical and Austrian economics, recessions happen when producers make mistakes. They create goods that can’t be sold at a profit. These malinvestments tend to cluster in a recession as a result of systematic problems, such as disruptions in the financial system and often government interventions in the economy.

Recovery and growth in the classical and Austrian view is driven by restructuring production so that entrepreneurs discover again the best — i.e. the most valuable and sustainable — ways to serve customers. That process is led by new entrepreneurs and driven by savers who make capital available to fund new investments and new ventures. Sustainable saving and investment means creating more value for others while using fewer resources. This process lies at the core of healthy economic growth, including better job opportunities and a rising standard of living. If there are problems in the financial system such that our savings aren’t effectively being invested but sitting idle in bank vaults, or people are hoarding cash under their mattress in distress, a classical approach seeks to get the root of that problem and resolve the monetary problems with monetary solutions such as increasing the money supply to meet demand and other approaches. Using up more real resources through additional consumption in such a case is applying the wrong medicine to the disease.

Consuming is our end goal, but producing value must be the means to that end. That is to say, Macro Santa’s sack is filled with saving.

So which approach do you think is right? We favor the Smith-Say-Hayek approach to economic growth. Share your thoughts!

CREDITS

Executive Produced and Directed by John Papola

Produced by Lisa Versaci and Debra Davis

Written by John Papola, Adam Albright-Hanna and Jason Rink

Edited by John Papola and Josh Meyers

Post Producer Josh Meyers

Music by Layng Martine III

Cinematography by Wilson Wagoner

Production Design by John Robinson

Graphic Design by Jorge Gonzalez

Animation by Matty Young

Compositing by Thom Lynch

Sound Design by Marty Lester

Special Thanks to Russ Roberts, Steven Kates, Larry White, Steve Horwitz, James Adams and Steve Fritzinger.

Share or Bookmark:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Tumblr
  • Reddit
  • del.icio.us
Comments Link
  • Kathryn Shelton

    This is brilliant! 

  • Karel Jára

    Great, great, awesome!!! :)

    Just some typos in the text…
    In the lead paragraph, the last sentence, there is “…does savings and investment come drive economic growth?” Shouldn’t there be “do” and isn’t “come” to be left out?
    Then in the text: “recessions where caused” –> “recessions were caused”; “That process is lead by” –> “That process is led by”; “in such a case is a applying the wrong medicine” –> “in such a case is applying wrong medicine”

  • Mixer

    Thanks guys.  I needed that :)

  • theonlykeynesianintheroom

    liquidity trap much?

  • Guest

    Great Job!

    Is santa supposed to look like Ben Bernake?

  • Youmustbefuckingkiddingme

    Not nearly as classy as your previous videos, and I get that you support Hayek (as I do as well), but at least previously you gave the other side space to present their case without being overly dismissive.

    That being said, the other videos are perhaps the gold standard as an introduction to economic thought. Waiting for Henry George to make an appearance in the videos.

    • Nate

       I was thinking this as well. Not that George would disagree much with the Austrians.

      • Craigs

        Just today I was reading in Larry White’s new book “The Clash of Economic Ideas” the story of how Henry George was the original inspiration for the Fabian socialists.

  • notanotherskippy

    Brilliant as always. Keep ‘em coming.

  • Cowboy Prof

    I thought Santa had a Krugman-esque look.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ned-Netterville/1293196142 Ned Netterville

    How much did you have to pay Paul Krugman to play Santa?

  • Aaron

    Awesome video! You’re a pioneer, because you’re the only one making pro free-market videos with such high production values. If only we could tax people to produce more of these… oh wait…

    This may not help with high production values, but what about having Econ Stories video contests, to help generate dozens or hundreds of 30-to-60 second viral videos addressing various topics and then flood youtube with them?
     

  • David Coplin

    John,

    “Keynesians believe aggregate spending drives the economy and savings is a ‘leak’ out of the flow of spending”It is not that they see savings as a leak; it is that they recognize that savings represent only a small fraction ofthe funding used for investment.  The majority of that funding comes from the banking system which is creating moneyout of nothing (so to speak :-) .

    “Our savings aren’t simply taken out of the economic system, but become the source of capital that entrepreneurs use to create new goods and increase productivity”While there is nothing wrong with using savings to make capital investments, it is a grave mistake to limit capitalinvestment to such savings.  In a word it is very bad economics to limit your capital investment to savings alone.There are two reasons for this: first the only group in society who has the ability to save enough to make suchinvestments are the wealthy; and second if you limit capital formation to the wealthy you limit the potential growththat your economy could attain.  Since the Austrian School of thought has chosen to champion the cause of thewealthy I can understand why that school of thought reinforces the economic rules that allow that particular groupto remain in power.  But it is bad economics because it restricts the potential of anyone’s economy.

    “Recovery and growth in the classical and Austrian view is driven by restructuring production so that entrepreneurs discover again the best — i.e. the most valuable and sustainable — ways to serve customers.  That process is led by new entrepreneurs and driven by savers who make capital available to fund new investments and new ventures”You were doing well until you limited the process by requiring that it be driven by savers who are primarily goingto be the wealthy.  Take that out of your equation and you will be well on the way to actually understandingsomething useful about economics.

  • Tim S.

    David Coplin,

    Your contention that only the wealthy are able to save enough to contribute to capital investment ignores the “long tail” of smaller investors, who in aggregate contribue the lion’s share of capital. Anyone with actual experience in the market knows that, for better or worse, institutional investors like major brokers and mutual fund families drive the process. These institutional investors get their capital from yes, a few big fish, but to a larger extent from many many smaller fish. Anyone with a pension or 401k contributes to the process, as do smaller “day traders” and countless other individuals who tinker with small blocks of shares. Entrepreneurs know that while they can get millions of dollars from venture capitalists and angel investors to start and grow their companies, they can get billions (potentially) when they take their companies public.

  • nometa

    I think both theory and history shows the Austrian School to be right.

    That video is so good, so amusing… I love it!!! Please, keep up the fantastic work!!!

  • Alex Mc

    haha the only one who can create from thin air is Ben (Santa) Bernanke