Both sides and practically all analyses of the crisis
so far take for granted that the economic growth from
the early 1950s until 2000-interrupted only by the
troubled 1970s-represented a normal performance. From
this perspective the crisis was an interruption, caused
by bad policy or bad people, and full recovery is to be
expected if the cause is corrected. The End of Normal
challenges this view. Placing the crisis in perspective,
Galbraith argues that the 1970s already ended the age of
easy growth. The 1980s and 1990s saw only uneven growth,
with rising inequality within and between countries. And
the 2000s saw the end even of that-despite frantic
efforts to keep growth going with tax cuts, war
spending, and financial deregulation. When the crisis
finally came, stimulus and automatic stabilization were
able to place a floor under economic collapse. But they
are not able to bring about a return to high growth and
full employment. Today, four factors impede a return to
normal. They are the rising costs of real resources, the
now-evident futility of military power, the
labour-saving consequences of the digital revolution,
and the breakdown of law and ethics in the financial
sector. The Great Crisis should be seen as a turning
point, a barometer of the rise of unstable economic
conditions, which should be regarded as the new normal.
Policies and institutions going forward should be
designed, above all, modestly, to cope with this fact,
maintaining conditions for a good life in difficult
times. |
|