Political-Economic
Correctness: Neither the ‘N’ or the ‘F’
Word Shall Be Spoken
The US economy is in the throes of a death spiral that will
ensure continuing slow growth, stagnant wages, and growing inequality. It is a
sad commentary that that there is virtually no mention by either of the two
major party candidates of the pernicious effects of what is now termed Neoliberalism, nor its pernicious appendage,
Financialization. In fact, the terms have been banished from
political campaign discourse despite the fact they are routinely evoked by those
analyzing the past 30 plus years of US capitalism. The consequences of
neoliberalism, alongside financialization, contribute to an economic death
spiral because they produce a vicious cycle that promises self-perpetuating economic
stagnation.
Neoliberalism refers
to the political-economic policy regime that emerged in the 1980s in response
to economic crisis conditions of the 1970s. In an effort to reestablish
corporate profitability, it elevated private corporate interests over all
others through regressive taxation, anti-labor legislation, the evisceration of
the social welfare system, “free trade” policies, and deregulation. The role of government is largely reduced to
creating favorable “free market” business climate conditions and reducing the obstacles
to the free flow of capital investment, domestically and globally. One of the
most significant consequences of the new policy regime was that corporations
responded to this neoliberal environment by structurally downsizing and
geographically relocating their operations to reduce costs and enhance
profits. This contributed to deindustrialization and the declining role of
manufacturing.
Financialization refers
to the growing role of the financial sector in determining the priorities, and accounting
for a larger share, of economic activity. This can be seen in the way corporate decision-making
is increasingly based almost exclusively on the anticipated reaction of
financial markets, and how an
increasing proportion of corporate profits are based not on production but financial
speculation.
Neoliberal corporate restructuring and financialization have
worked in tandem to undermine what has been described as the virtuous cycle of
capitalism. Historically, self-sustaining and dynamic capitalism has depended
upon a virtuous cycle that involves the following sequential process -- capital
investment in production, employment, labor income, discretionary spending by
labor on produced commodities, the generation of profit, and the net profit directed
toward more productive capital investment, which starts the cycle anew. The
two critical and necessary conditions in sustaining this cycle are corporations
reinvesting profits back into production of goods and services, and workers
directing their income toward consumer spending on those goods and services. Today this virtuous cycle is
short-circuited at just these two points as a result of two structurally symbiotic
features of the US economy stemming from neoliberal policies instituted in the
1980s – the outsourcing/offshoring of production and financialization.
How have we arrived at this unsatisfactory economic
state?
Let’s start on the production side.
1.
In response to the economic crisis of the 1970s
corporations restructured by outsourcing (aka subcontracting)
manufacturing to make their companies leaner and meaner, and sourced
manufacturing suppliers, or their own facilities, offshore. This contributed to
deindustrialization and the disappearance of well-paying blue-collar factory
jobs in the US, thus resulting in downward mobility and unemployment. This also
put domestic workers in competition with cheaper foreign labor.
2.
At the same time, one central aspect of financialization
was the transition from a philosophy of “managerial capitalism”, involving corporate
decision-making by professional managers aimed at improving and expanding
business operations, to a “financial capitalism” model that shifted corporate
strategy toward the single-minded goal of maximizing
“shareholder value”. Other stakeholder interests – those of workers,
communities, or the long-term viability of the enterprise – were subordinated
to maximizing the return to shareholders. In order to ensure that managers
would pursue shareholder value, their compensation packages included stock
options which served to align this desired behavior with monetary incentive.
3.
The “market”, and accordingly share price,
responded favorably when corporations were able to sell off various units and
divisions, downsize their labor force, offshore facilities or suppliers to low
wage/deregulated locations, and cut costs. Thus,
the financial sector both rewarded and reinforced corporate restructuring resulting
in progressive deindustrialization.
4.
As corporations, under neoliberalism and
corporate restructuring, were able to increase their profit share at the
expense of labor’s share, they had large sums of money in search of profitable
investment outlets. Since many of these corporations had outsourced manufacturing,
the profits would no longer be plowed back into new or upgraded factories or
production (which was now carried out by subcontractors, increasingly offshore)
but rather into something with potentially higher returns.
5.
At the same time, financial institutions, newly
deregulated under the neoliberal regime, developed and invented an assortment of
exotic financial instruments to attract the growing corporate windfall. This
fueled the further financialization of the economy and the upward concentration
of income and wealth (see below).
6. Theoretically
and historically, a rationale for allowing capitalists to retain the greatest
share of profits was based on the assumption that they would plow them back
into more investment and production in factories and new enterprises, and thus generate
expanding employment and worker income. But today in the US, rather than a
convergence, there is a divergence between profits and capital investment (see
Figure 1 below). The delinking of these represents a fundamental failure of US
capitalism. Profits are no longer retained
and re-invested in production; rather they are diverted
toward financial instruments, or used for stock
buy-backs to support or enhance share price.
This is how the capital
investment process necessary for a virtuous cycle has been short-circuited.
How has the consumption side of the equation been thwarted?
7. While
the financial sector both shapes and is the recipient of the flow of investment
dollars, the broader production side of the economy is neglected, employment
opportunities are curtailed, and income and wealth are further concentrated in
the hands of financial engineers and their corporate clients. For the average worker, who has experienced stagnation
in buying power, or worse downward mobility, as the economy is restructured and
globalized, debt becomes the means to sustain and support their standard of
living.
8. Consumer
demand is not only depressed as a result of neoliberal economic policies that
favor capital over labor producing stagnant wage growth, but an increasing
portion of one’s income stream is diverted to servicing or paying off the
various claims made by financial entities as part of car loans, mortgage,
credit card, and student debt (from which the financial sector benefits).
This diverts what little income they receive
back
to the financial sector through debt service rather than into the consumption
and spending that would stimulate business growth and employment. And given the offshoring of
production, much of the already limited simulative impact of consumer spending is
restricted domestically to the retail sector as the actual manufacturing of
commodities takes place abroad.
9.
Thus we have a toxic symbiotic relationship
between financialization and continuing de-industrializing disinvestment.
It is important to note that as a result of the restructuring
of our economy under the neoliberal regime, the financial sector is now in the most
powerful political-economic position as the recipient of the diversion of monetary
resources from both production and consumption. Economically, the dominance of the financial
sector has been identified by such establishment institutions as the Bank for International
Settlements as a serious drag on “real economic growth”. Politically, mainstream economists such as Simon
Johnson speak of a “financial oligarchy” determining policy in the United
States. Others describe the rise of
debt peonage under a neo-feudal financial regime.
It is the very power and influence of this sector that
ensures, under out current political system, that their interests will continue
to be protected by both political parties.
Two Recommended Sources
on Outsourcing/Offshoring and Financialization
William Milberg and Deborah Winkler, Outsourcing Economics: Global
Value Chains in Capitalist Development. Cambridge Univ Press
Michael Hudson, Killing The Host: How Financial Parasites
and Debt Destroy the Global Economy. Islet Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment