Bidenomics: A Roadmap to National Contraction

Industrial Policy and the Future of American Capitalism

Industrial Policy and the Future of American Capitalism

Changing the Nation’s Future

Every president promises to change the nation’s future. George W. Bush promised a stronger military. After 9/11, he initiated a war on terror that continues to shape our foreign and domestic policy. Barack Obama also was true to his word. Frustrated with Congress’s inaction in expanding his social-welfare agenda, he turned to executive orders to promote that end.

A Bigger Remake of America

After three years in office, though, it’s clear that Joe Biden envisions a much bigger remake of America than did his predecessors. His campaign promise to bring the country together, speaking of himself as “a bridge, not as anything else,” seemed to presage a modest agenda. Yet, once in office, he began to restructure the economy in profound ways.

Transforming the American Economy

The massive federal spending supposedly justified by Covid-19 served as cover for the Biden administration to transform the American economy into something more like China’s state-managed one. Left-leaning Keynesian economists had long desired to do just that, and the Biden administration put it into practice: the American Rescue Plan, the Investment and Jobs Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, and the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act pushed trillions of federal dollars into the consumer economy. Predictably, inflation in consumer prices reached the worst levels since the Carter presidency.

The Ventriloquist Behind Biden’s Economic Policy

Biden’s economic ventriloquist seems to have been Brian Deese, director of the National Economic Council from 2021 to 2023. Last October, Deese announced the first-ever peacetime use of industrial policy by the U.S. government, which he baptized as a “modern American industrial strategy.”

Understanding Industrial Policy

To appreciate the hazards of this policy, one needs to understand industrial policy as it operates in Europe, where various nations explicitly work to protect their oldest and biggest companies. These firms are seen as bedrock institutions that define the economies in which they exist. They have enjoyed decades of protection from competition and have never been allowed to fail.

The American Perspective on Business Failures

Americans, on the other hand, are used to seeing established, successful firms misread markets, misjudge new technologies, or over-leverage themselves, with sometimes fatal results. Recent examples of American bankruptcies include those of Silicon Valley Bank, WeWork, Mallinckrodt, Yellow Freight, and Bed, Bath and Beyond. From an American policy perspective, business failures are an indicator of a healthy, dynamic economy.

The Cost of Europe’s Protectionist Policies

The cost of Europe’s protectionist policies is best illustrated by the continent’s comparatively slow growth. Since 2000, EU member states have expanded their GDP at roughly 1 percent annually, while the U.S. has enjoyed overall economic expansion of slightly above 3 percent. Estimates by the European Centre for Political Economy suggest that, if this trend continues, the prosperity gap between the average European and American in 2035 will be as big as between the average European and Indian today.

The Long-Term Threats of Industrial Policy

Biden’s version of industrial policy presents three long-term threats to American capitalism. First, allowing unelected governmental elites to favor certain firms with subsidies for what they deem needed innovations does not work. Historically, American innovation has typically occurred in the market, whether from existing firms or the imaginations of entrepreneurs.

The Consequences of Government Intervention

During the Obama presidency, for example, government experts thought that Solyndra and a host of green-energy companies would be winners. These firms’ collective bankruptcies wasted over $1 billion of federal money. Today, far more resources are squandered as Washington seeks to limit the production of fossil fuels, despite the government’s own cost-benefit analysis showing that these steps will slow economic growth.

The Government’s Management of Innovation

The second threat of industrial policy relates to the federal government’s efforts to manage innovation. The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 established targeted grant funding, and the federal government decides the focus of these grants. Under this arrangement, the nation’s corporate innovation apparatus, university laboratories, and entrepreneurial ecosystems are induced to conform to government views of what’s required.

The Danger of a Government-Centric Approach

The principal danger of this government-centric approach is that it pushes aside more organic methods of innovation. When government agencies use subsidies to assert dominance over the innovation process, entrepreneurs will tend to pursue the opportunities that government planners see as important. The federal government is disturbing the nation’s ecosystem of innovation and entrepreneurship. The end result will be fewer startups.

The Rise of Cronyism

Therein lies the third and biggest worry related to industrial policy: cronyism. Business owners have sought privileged relationships with the government since Robert Fulton and Robert Livingston obtained a patent giving them a monopoly to operate a steamboat on the Hudson. But the United States has generally been able to rely on courts committed to principles of private property and free markets to provide some balance of interest. Historically, government-business ties commonly were initiated by companies seeking protection and subsidy for massive projects like canals and waterways that were cloaked in public benefit.

The High Cost of Biden’s Industrial Policy

In describing the new industrial policy, Deese promised enhanced worker productivity, a higher standard of living, reduced carbon emissions, and—of course—greater “inclusion.” As an added benefit, he said, the new industrial strategy would focus on localities. Even assuming that an industrial policy could deliver on any of these promises, the fulfillment would come at a serious cost: slowing American economic growth for decades to come.

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Read More of this Story at – 2024-01-15 21:31:06

Read More US Economic News

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.