Don’ts and Do’s for a Fragile Recovery

June 14, 2011 at 9:11 am

With the recent slowing of an already fragile U.S. economic recovery, an increasing number of experts are becoming convinced that the economy needs help.  Economists, columnists, and policymakers have joined a drumbeat stressing ideas that could strengthen the recovery, while warning against policies that risk pushing us back into recession.

What We Shouldn’t Do: Policymakers should adopt a balanced plan—one involving both spending cuts and revenues increases—to rein in medium- and long-term deficits.  But with over 20 million people un- and underemployed, now is not the time to institute large budget cuts or tax hikes.

Aggressive spending cuts this year or next wouldn’t just hurt those most exposed to the tough economy.  By taking money and services away from those who need them most, such cuts would hurt the macroeconomy as well.  Independent research has consistently found that the benefits from safety net programs like unemployment insurance and food assistance and entitlements like Social Security go disproportionately to people who spend the money fairly quickly to meet basic needs.  That, in turn, leads to more economic activity, amplifying the impact.

We should also avoid creating any additional economic “air pockets” in the short term.  That is, as federal stimulus fades and states continue to face budget constraints, we mustn’t allow policies that are boosting demand to fade too soon, as explained below.

Another bad idea right now would be to allow multinational corporations to bring their overseas profits back to the United States at a sharply reduced tax rate.  Instead of generating jobs, the evidence is that this type of tax holiday results in windfall profits for shareholders of a few large companies.

What We Should Do: Clearly, the politics of pivoting to job creation are very tough right now (though if the Mavericks can beat the Heat, anything’s possible!).  But the realities of the tough economy may have created an opening.  Thus, it makes sense to have a ready agenda of ideas that could help:

  • State Fiscal Relief: One of the 2009 Recovery Act’s most effective programs was fiscal relief to help states meet their balanced-budget requirements despite a historic revenue decline.  Over the past three years, states and towns have been aggressively cutting jobs — more than 530,000 since August 2008 — but these job losses would have been much, much worse without the state fiscal relief.  Since most states still face significant budget gaps, another round of fiscal relief would preserve important jobs and services in our communities, like teachers and police.
  • Unemployment Benefits and Payroll Tax Cut: Federal benefits for the long-term unemployed and the current payroll tax cut both expire at the end of this year.  Policymakers should extend both.  In fact, we’ve never failed to extend UI benefits with the unemployment rate as high as it is likely to be at the end of this year.  And while another round of the payroll tax cut would benefit the economy, the federal Treasury must continue to replace any losses to the Social Security Trust Fund, and the tax cut should eventually expire so it doesn’t become a drain on Social Security finances.

Beyond this, ideas have been floated to add to the current payroll tax cut for workers and extend it to employers as well, thus lowering the cost of hiring.  Increasing the payroll tax cut for workers could be particularly important if energy prices remain high, as it has been instrumental in offsetting the negative impact of higher oil prices.

  • Infrastructure: We have deep infrastructure needs and, given the low cost of borrowing and high unemployment among construction workers and builders, infrastructure investment makes a lot of sense right now.  Though it takes a while to get these programs up and running, virtually every economic forecast has unemployment highly elevated for a number of years to come.  So, unfortunately, we have the time to get some traction from an infrastructure program.
  • Manufacturing: President Obama visited an LED lighting factory yesterday that benefited from a smart tax credit (the Advanced Energy Manufacturing Tax Credit) that incentivizes the building of clean energy equipment here in the United States, leveraging about $2 of private capital for every $1 of the credit.  Many in Congress want to renew it, and the Administration has been supportive in the past.
  • Housing: The protracted weakness in the housing market continues to drive foreclosures and falling home prices, and to act as weight on the recovery.  While some “underwater” homeowners would be better off getting out from under a loan they’ll never be able to service, others, with some principal reduction or other modification, could “resurface” and hang onto their home.  An important part of the solution here is for market participants, including the government-sponsored entities (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), to do more mortgage modifications, particularly those that provide principal reduction.  Their reluctance to do so is one reason the current “correction” in the housing market is taking so long.

We will continue to stress more ideas like these in days to come.  But the key point is that all the economic signals are pointing to the need to:  a) pivot towards doing more to help the many working families still struggling with the tough job market; and b) pivot away from short-term spending cuts that will hurt those families more while threatening to further slow the fragile recovery.

Print Friendly

More About Jared Bernstein

Jared Bernstein

Jared Bernstein joined the Center in May 2011 as a Senior Fellow. From 2009 to 2011, Bernstein was the Chief Economist and Economic Adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, executive director of the White House Task Force on the Middle Class, and a member of President Obama’s economic team. Bernstein’s areas of expertise include federal and state economic and fiscal policies, income inequality and mobility, trends in employment and earnings, international comparisons, and the analysis of financial and housing markets. He is the author and coauthor of numerous books for both popular and academic audiences, including “Crunch: Why Do I Feel So Squeezed?” and nine editions of "The State of Working America." Bernstein has published extensively in various venues, including The New York Times, Washington Post, Financial Times, and Research in Economics and Statistics. He is an on-air commentator for the cable stations CNBC and MSNBC and hosts

Full bio | Blog Archive | Research archive at

4 Comments Add Yours ↓

Comments are listed in reverse chronological order.

  1. Bob Stern #

    Good thoughts except that the stimulus impact for that the payroll tax cut for employers rests on a very shaky CBO assumption that those businesses will pass on the tax break in the form of lower goods prices, hence spur demand.

    But all the ideas are temporary measures ; the larger question is how you get the large corporations and the top 1% who are the only ones who have the $trillions needed to get 15 million jobs back to invest here vs overseas and in job creating enterprises versus derivatives? Anyone ever thought about a 2 tier tax rate for them; a lower rate if you invest here and a higher one if you don’t?

  2. Jon #

    Hmm.. Everything was right on point up until the partisan comment about not allowing corporations to repartriate profits. That is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. If you are trying everthing in your power to create jobs or generate growth and revenues, then why not bring money back into the country which can be taxed and whether that money is used for stock buybacks, dividends, jobs, it will all benefit the economy in some way. Stock buybacks increase stock prices bolstering pension funds, same thing with dividends. Even if jobs were created on the margin from repatriated profits, there is nothing but upside to bringing USDs HOME. The fact that you throw this ball out there with everything else just shows what a partisan you really are. If you were really concerned about getting people back to work and not so concerned with your political agenda and title, then you would be open to whatever option there is that would and could generate growth or revenues regardless of your political beliefs. Very Sad we get nowhere because people like you. Oh yea, how’s that 1st stimlus working out? You know, the one you are now advising we do again? Now we can’t have profits brought back home but we can for sure flush another trillion down the toilet. That was a sure bang for our buck. If you had an ounce of credibility then I would feel bad for you, but you don’t, and you’re not fooling anyone but yourself

  3. 3

    Mr. Bernstein: Certainly you have heard of Milton Friedman. Certainly you have head of Hayek. Certainly you know that Obama’s “team” have all now retreated to the protection of academia, ot “think tanks” for the simple act of endorsing failed policy.

    Certainly you also know that there is no evidence that the WPA or any of the rest of FDR’s programs provided anything but a wash, or worse.

    How then can you in good conscience speak of infrastructure – a bullet train? Why cannot you see what JFK and Reagan saw before you – the problem IS government.

    Bob Craven

  4. Kevin Pua #

    Mr. Bernstein, since you are one of the few economists out there who actually knows what the thinking is behind many of the Obama administration’s policies, I was wondering if you could explain why the administration’s mortgage modification efforts have been so anemic to put it mildly? Why was a HOLC-style program not adopted? And a little off topic, but why wasn’t a direct-hire jobs program like the WPA not proposed? Thanks.


  1. Fight poverty, protect the safety net 08 08 12

Your Comment

Comment Policy:

Thank you for joining the conversation about important policy issues. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters and are subject to approval and moderation. We reserve the right to remove comments that:

  • are injurious, defamatory, profane, off-topic or inappropriate;
  • contain personal attacks or racist, sexist, homophobic, or other slurs;
  • solicit and/or advertise for personal blogs and websites or to sell products or services;
  • may infringe the copyright or intellectual property rights of others or other applicable laws or regulations; or
  • are otherwise inconsistent with the goals of this blog.

Posted comments do not necessarily represent the views of the CBPP and do not constitute official endorsement by CBPP. Please note that comments will be approved during the Center's business hours. If you have questions, please contact

 characters available