SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
Need to create a login? Want to change your email address or password? Forgot your password?
1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
2. Select Email/Password Information.
3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.
Subscribers can find additional help here. Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
The course to audit this semester at Berkeley would be Brad DeLong’s Econ 115. He’s been drilling down on the Great Depression and doing his best to extract lessons that are useful for our current circumstances. In particular, DeLong’s October 1 lecture “The Industrial Financial Business Cycle and the Great Depression” (which can be downloaded here) is worth a gander. It includes a review of the attitudes that leading economists of the Depression Era (including von Hayek and Schumpeter) developed in real time, and how this affected the situation.
At its nadir, the Depression was collective insanity. Workers were idle because firms would not hire them to work their machines; firms would
not hire workers to work machines because they saw no market for goods; and there was no market for goods because workers had no incomes to
spend. Orwell’s account of the Depression in Britain, The Road to Wigan Pier, speaks of “several hundred men risk[ing] their lives and several hundred women scrabbl[ing] in the mud for hours… searching eagerly for tiny chips of coal in slagheaps so they could heat their homes.” For them, this arduously-
gained “free” coal was “more important almost than food.” All around them the machinery they had previously used to mine in five minutes more than they could gather in a day stood idle.
DeLong highlights the historical lessons that were unlearned by leading economists of the day. He takes us on an excursion, courtesy E.M. Forster, of Britain’s financial crisis of 1825—peaked, as DeLong highlights, by a series of episodes that parallel America’s rollercoaster ride in the last decade—in which the Bank of England intervened aggressively to avert a catastrophe. DeLong summarizes:
Since 1825, the first rule in a financial crisis has been for the government to rescue the banking system—to try to prevent or moderate or offset the
collapse of risk tolerance. And it was this rule that was broken in the Great Depression. And that is why the Great Depression was so great.
The core of the lecture describes the analyses of leading lights of the Austrian school and applied by President Hoover. The view that prevailed was that of “liquidationists,” like von Hayek, who asserted that the Depression was unavoidable: there was only the choice between Depression now or still harsher Depression later. “Curiously, the Great Depression was pretty much the only time that the ‘liquidationist’ view carried the day.”
DeLong’s piece helps us understand the remarkable consensus that existed among economists in favor of a bailout in the last quarter of the Bush presidency, and it gives us a strong feel for the risks of the “do nothing” attitude of bailout critics on the right. These are high-stakes decisions on which the lives and fortunes of hundreds of millions hang. In the time of tea-bag histrionics, it’s a pleasure to read a calm, literate rehearsal of the major issues and the options available.
More from Scott Horton:
No Comment — March 28, 2014, 12:32 pm
On CIA secrecy, torture, and war-making powers
No Comment — November 4, 2013, 5:17 pm
An expert panel concludes that the Pentagon and the CIA ordered physicians to violate the Hippocratic Oath
No Comment — August 12, 2013, 7:55 am
How will the Obama Administration handle Edward Snowden’s case in the long term?
Many comedians consider stand-up the purest form of comedy; Doug Stanhope considers it the freest. “Once you do stand-up, it spoils you for everything else,” he says. “You’re the director, performer, and producer.” Unlike most of his peers, however, Stanhope has designed his career around exploring that freedom, which means choosing a life on the road. Perhaps this is why, although he is extremely ambitious, prolific, and one of the best stand-ups performing, so many Americans haven’t heard of him. Many comedians approach the road as a means to an end: a way to develop their skills, start booking bigger venues, and, if they’re lucky, get themselves airlifted to Hollywood. But life isn’t happening on a sit-com set or a sketch show — at least not the life that has interested Stanhope. He isn’t waiting to be invited to the party; indeed, he’s been hosting his own party for years.
Because of the present comedy boom, civilians are starting to hear about Doug Stanhope from other comedians like Ricky Gervais, Sarah Silverman, and Louis CK. But Stanhope has been building a devoted fan base for the past two decades, largely by word of mouth. On tour, he prefers the unencumbered arrival and the quick exit: cheap motels where you can pull the van up to the door of the room and park. He’s especially pleased if there’s an on-site bar, which increases the odds of hearing a good story from the sort of person who tends to drink away the afternoon in the depressed cities where he performs. Stanhope’s America isn’t the one still yammering on about its potential or struggling with losing hope. For the most part, hope is gone. On Word of Mouth, his 2002 album, he says, “America may be the best country, but that’s like being the prettiest Denny’s waitress. Just because you’re the best doesn’t make you good.”
Ratio of husbands who say they fell in love with their spouse at first sight to wives who say this:
Mathematicians announced the discovery of the perfect method of cutting a cake.
Indian prime-ministerial contender Narendra Modi, who advertises his bachelorhood as a mark of his incorruptibility, confessed to having a wife.
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
Science’s crisis of faith