creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
Patrick Buchanan
Pat Buchanan
25 May 2012
The Unraveling Myth of Watergate

It was, they said, the crime of the century. An attempted coup d'etat by Richard Nixon, stopped by two … Read More.

22 May 2012
What If Zimmerman Walks Free?

Three months ago, George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer in Sanford, Fla., shot and killed Trayvon Martin. Handcuffed,… Read More.

18 May 2012
Has the Bell Begun to Toll for the GOP?

Among the more controversial chapters in "Suicide of a Superpower," my book published last fall, … Read More.

Metrics of National Decline

Share Comment

"Bush Boom Continues" trilled the headline over the Lawrence Kudlow column, as George W. Bush closed out his seventh year in office.

"You can call it Goldilocks 2.0," purred Kudlow.

Yes, you could. But what a difference 12 months can make.

Final returns are now in on the eight years of George Bush. Charles McMillion of MBG Information Services has crunched the numbers. And, pace Kudlow, the only relevant comparison is to Herbert Hoover.

From January 2008, right after Kudlow's column ran, through January 2009, the U.S. economy lost 3.5 million jobs. The private sector loss of 3.65 million jobs was slightly offset by 148,000 jobs created by federal, state and local governments. Say what you will, the Bush years were boom times for Big Government.

And the private sector? Beginning and ending in recession, the Bush presidency added a net of 407,000 private sector jobs over eight years, less than 51,000 a year, the worst eight-year record since 1927-35, which includes the first six years of the Great Depression.

By January 2009, the average workweek had fallen to 33.3 hours, the lowest since record keeping began in 1964.

From Jan. 31, 2001, through Jan. 31, 2009, 4.4 million manufacturing jobs, 26 percent of all of the manufacturing jobs in the United States, disappeared.

Semiconductors and electronic component producers lost 42 percent of their jobs. Communications equipment producers lost 48 percent of their jobs. Textile and apparel producers lost, respectively, 63 percent and 61 percent of their jobs.

As a source of American jobs, manufacturing, for the first time in our history, fell below health care and education in 2001, below retail sales in 2002, below local government in 2006, below leisure and hospitality, i.e., restaurants and bars, in 2008.

Between this unprecedented loss in manufacturing capacity and jobs, and the $3.5 trillion in trade deficits in manufactured goods alone, run up by George W. Bush, the correlation is absolute.

Last week, final trade figures for 2008 came in. They make for riveting reading for Americans who yet believe that manufacturing is an indispensable element of national power.

With China exporting five times the dollar volume in goods to us as she imports from us, Beijing's trade surplus with the United States set yet another world record: $266 billion.

In those critical items the Commerce Department defines as advanced technology products (ATP), our trade deficit with China in 2008 reached an astonishing $72 billion.

Since Bush took office, our total trade deficit with China in ATP exceeds $300 billion.

Which of us, China or America, has the trade profile of a mature industrial and technological power?

Americans deplore our deepening dependence on foreign regimes for the vital necessity of oil. Are they unaware that the U.S. trade deficit in manufactured goods, $440 billion, is $89 billion greater than our all-time record trade deficit of $351 billion in crude oil?

Why is a dependence on Canada, Mexico, Venezuela or Saudi Arabia for oil a greater peril than a reliance on China and Asia for vital necessities upon which our prosperity and military depend?

A week ago, the Washington Times ("Volcker Blames Recession on Trade Imbalances") reported that ex-Fed Chair Paul Volcker told Congress the "massive trade-related imbalances in the United States economy were the source of the financial crisis."

Pressed by Sen. Chris Dodd, Volcker said, "Go back to the imbalances in the economy. The United States has been consuming more than it has been producing for many years."

What "imbalances" was Volcker referring to? Perhaps these.

Since 1982, the United States has run $5.7 trillion in trade deficits in manufactured goods, and $2.1 trillion in trade deficits in auto parts, trucks and automobiles. In the Bush years alone, the United States ran more than $1 trillion in trade deficits in auto parts, trucks and cars.

These statistics, these realities — factories closing in the United States, manufacturing jobs being outsourced in the millions to China and Asia, enormous, endless trade deficits in goods — testify to a painful truth: America is a receding and declining world power.

And in dealing with this systemic crisis, Obama's stimulus package is as irrelevant as were the Bush tax cuts.

How do we correct those "trade-related imbalances" of which Volcker spoke? We must export more and import less, save more and spend less, produce more and consume less. We need to emulate the ants and behave less like the grasshoppers of summer.

But how do you tell that to two generations of Americans who have been raised in an era of entitlement?

America needs an Industrial Policy.

But how do you tell that to Americans indoctrinated in the hoary myth that Reed Smoot and Willis Hawley caused the Great Depression and anything that sounds like America First risks a rerun of the 1930s?

Patrick Buchanan is the author of the new book "Churchill, Hitler and 'The Unnecessary War." To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.


Comments

2 Comments | Post Comment
Sir;.... Have you ever heard the expression that a capitalist will you sell you the rope he will be hanged with??? It was for profits that so much of our business was sold over seas... Who told the capitalist hoping to have high profits on imports that our  money would last for ever??? Sooner or later the wealth of the nation could be exported with production; but it would seem that some economist would have told capital and even the nation that it was driving down a dead end.... Henry No. 7 of England was a better economist than any economist we have in this country... He avoided war like the plague, and he absolutely refused to export capital, and instead exported finished products while building his own production and market... We have had high profits, and high profits have led to depression... What will it take to keep this thing going???Unless the government devalues the currency, as it does everytime it borrows and prints money, it will have no money... We could not even liquidate the wealth of the rich and live on that as we have for long... Every country needs its own production, and needs to be its own market.... What we have had is government of profit, government that serves the desire for the highest profit... It has serve capital well short term; but ruined the whole world as a market... This is not our government...The people have better sense... Even you have better sense...If you can see what is wrong, why couldn't the government see what was wrong??? We have the government of capital so we have stupid government... We need to govern everything that left ungoverned would govern us... You see what damage capital can do running mad... Isn't there a lesson here??? Thanks....Sweeney
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:27 AM
I completely agree with you, Mr. Buchanan; more specifically, with the Kudlow comments. Mr. Kudlow has been 'bullish' on the market this entire time. His 'spiel' is just the same old stuff that we hear from politicians, most conservative as I am, but that are out-dated. The man, on Jan 9 this year, said the market is back. He talked about everyone starting to invest again in this great capitalistic soicety of ours. He gave the same low taxes/increase consumer confidence 'spiel'. He has forgotten that the unnecessary consumer spending is one reason why our economy is collapsing. He is ignoring the fact that consumer no longer SAVE their money, but spend it at levels significantly above their annual income, resulting in more debt. That's the problem with our economy - DEBT on the govt and consumer level. We can argue about how these debts were created, but we have to bring them back to normal levels. Well, since 1/9/09 the dow has plummeted 1,000 points (and I think can go down further). But Mr. Kudlow, supposedly an expert, remains bullish. I can picture him boasting about and taking credit for when the market jumps from 6,500 to 7,500, saying 'I told you so.' Then again, what else do you expect from people like Mr. Kudlow. By the way, Mr. Buchanan, I continue to read your stuff in the american conservative too. Its a great publication.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Ali Mogharabi
Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:48 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Pat Buchanan
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Mark Levy
Mark LevyUpdated 26 May 2012
Oliver North
Oliver NorthUpdated 25 May 2012
Linda Chavez
Linda ChavezUpdated 25 May 2012

13 Dec 2011 David Cameron's Finest Hour

8 May 2012 Is This the End of ‘One Europe'?

3 Jun 2008 Munich, 1938