Skip to comments.
Beware the Broken Window Fallacy: Some Economists Still Think Disasters are Good for the Economy
Foundation for Economic Education ^
| 09/12/2017
| Jeff Jacoby
Posted on 09/12/2017 10:33:07 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
On Friday morning, with Hurricane Irma having wrecked the islands of Saint Martin and Barbuda, CNBC published a story cheerily laying out the silver lining embedded in the tropical disasters:
Hurricanes Harvey and Irma actually will lead to increased economic activity over the long run, New York Fed President William Dudley said in an interview.
Speaking just as Irma is about to start battering Florida as a Category 4 storm, Dudley said the initial impact in both human and economic costs will be harmful. But in the long run, economies tend to snap back from such major events.
"Those effects tend to be pretty transitory," Dudley said. . . . "The long-run effect . . . is it actually lifts economic activity because you have to rebuild all the things that have been damaged by the storms."
A few days earlier, Euronews had run a similar story: Hurricane Harvey pushes up petrol prices, but 'economic outlook positive.' Over at Yahoo Finance, a roundup of expert opinion quoted Goldman Sachss Jan Hatzius, who predicted a surge in the wake of the storms, reflecting a boost from rebuilding efforts and a catch-up in economic activity displaced during the hurricane. The Los Angeles Times, meanwhile, focused on one particular glint of silver lining in all the hurricane destruction the bonanza it would spell for car dealers:
Floodwaters in and around Houston severely damaged or destroyed hundreds of thousands of cars and trucks, most of which will be replaced. Those new and used vehicle sales will benefit automakers and the economy, providing a glint of silver lining amid terrible tragedy.
It never fails. A terrible disaster wreaks havoc and ruin, and is promptly followed or even, as in this case, preceded by experts insisting that the devastation will be great for the economy.
Could anything be more absurd?
Every dollar spent on cleanup and reconstruction is a dollar that could have been spent to enlarge the nations reservoir of material assets.The shattering losses caused by hurricanes, earthquakes, forest fires, and other calamities are grievous misfortunes that obviously leave society poorer. Vast sums of money may be spent afterward to repair and rebuild, but society will still be poorer from the damage caused by the storm or other disaster. Every dollar spent on cleanup and reconstruction is a dollar that could have been spent to enlarge the nations reservoir of material assets. Instead, it has to be spent replacing what was lost. That isnt a glint of silver lining. It is the tragedy of vanished wealth and opportunity, to say nothing of immense human suffering.
As a matter of theology or philosophy or psychology, there may be a certain validity to interpreting tragedy as a blessing in disguise. But as a matter of economics, it is madness. If your car is totaled in a crash, you dont celebrate your good fortune because the insurance company is going to send you a check to pay for a new car. Sure, the auto dealer will be glad to make a sale, but his gain will not outweigh your loss. Nor will the economy as a whole be better off: The money you have to spend to get another set of wheels is money that might otherwise have been devoted to enlarging societys stock of capital. All it can do now is restore capital that was wiped out.
Yet the fallacy that disaster is a boon never seems to go out of style. Even Nobel laureates indulge in it.
It seems almost in bad taste to talk about dollars and cents after an act of mass murder,wrote Paul Krugman in The New York Times, just after the 9/11 horror 16 years ago today, but the terrorist attacks could do some economic good. After all, he continued, Manhattan would need some new office buildings and rebuilding will generate at least some increase in business spending.
Ugh.
All the increased spending on earth will never bring back those who died. It will never undo the fear and trauma and sorrow of the survivors. And it can never restore the millions of man-hours required to repair and rebuild and recover.
No, hurricanes are not good for the economy. Neither are floods, earthquakes, or massacres. When windows are shattered, all of humanity is left materially worse off. There is no financial glint of silver lining. To claim otherwise is delusional. To make that claim in the midst of a catastrophe is callous beyond words.
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: brokenwindows; disasters; economy; fallacy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-74 next last
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Jeff Jacoby
Jeff Jacoby has been a columnist for The Boston Globe since 1994. He has degrees from George Washington University and from Boston University Law School. Before entering journalism, he (briefly) practiced law at the prominent firm of Baker & Hostetler, worked on several political campaigns in Massachusetts, and was an assistant to Dr. John Silber, the president of Boston University. In 1999, Jeff became the first recipient of the Breindel Prize, a major award for excellence in opinion journalism. In 2014, he was included in the Forward 50, a list of the most influential American Jews.
To: SeekAndFind
Frederic Bastiat’s broken window fallacy is less obvious under a debt-based monetary system and fiat currency.
Yes, its true that a storm destroying a car may be good for Toyota or Ford, but what about the owner who suffers the loss? Or, the insurance company who has to cover the owner’s loss? Or the government who bails out the insurance company?
The cost must end up somewhere. In our present system though, the cost is just swallowed into the pit of massive government debt in our printed currency. It allows people like Krugman to see it as just another debt-based, money-printed stimulus scheme.
2
posted on
09/12/2017 10:39:41 AM PDT
by
PGR88
To: SeekAndFind
Some Economists Still Think Disasters are Good for the EconomyHurricanes Harvey and Irma actually will lead to increased economic activity ... New York Fed President William Dudley said in an interview.
Increased economic activity.
3
posted on
09/12/2017 10:40:52 AM PDT
by
Navy Patriot
(America returns to the Rule of Law)
To: PGR88
Very good post. You could make the case that the “broken-window principle” is a fallacy at a small scale but may be legitimate at a larger scale when national monetary policy is changed to fix the “broken window.”
4
posted on
09/12/2017 10:45:14 AM PDT
by
Alberta's Child
("I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris." -- President Trump, 6/1/2017)
To: SeekAndFind
They must be Ferengi Econo-misseds.........
Ferengi Rules of acquisition:
War is good for business.
Peace is good for business.
Disasters are good for business.
5
posted on
09/12/2017 10:47:29 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(Road Rage lasts 5 minutes. Road Rash lasts 5 months!.....................)
To: Alberta's Child
The broken glass meme is nonsense. Although some economists say the Depression was not ended by WWII, it seems to me it was. Does broken glass work on a huge scale?
6
posted on
09/12/2017 10:49:52 AM PDT
by
sparklite2
(I'm less interested in the rights I have than the liberties I can take.)
To: PGR88
You get a short-term burst of retail economic activity when insurance companies are forced to empty their reserve funds to pay claims, which gets spent in the real economy.
The unseen back end of that transaction is a reduction in the amount of available investment capital.
To: SeekAndFind
Massive disasters do “help” the economy... the problem is - most of the disaster recovery spending is actually debt-based, which actually digs an ever-deeper hold that long-term cripples the economy.
Sure - there will be quite a few people with work to do - many new short-term jobs will be created... But ultimately, the hole gets deeper.
How many $billions with taxpayers be spending via taxes (or borrowed money from the Fed with interest) in disaster funding just on these two hurricanes? It is a staggering amount.
8
posted on
09/12/2017 10:50:33 AM PDT
by
TheBattman
(Gun control works - just ask Chicago...)
To: SeekAndFind
In theory, structures built prior to the building code changes will be rebuilt to a better standard and suffer less loss in the next storm.
9
posted on
09/12/2017 10:51:31 AM PDT
by
ealgeone
To: SeekAndFind
Some Economists Still Think Disasters are Good for the EconomyAlready covered in the Fifth Element.
"Life, which you so nobly serve, comes from destruction, disorder and chaos. Now take this empty glass. Here it is: peaceful, serene, boring. But if it is destroyed...
[Pushes the glass off the table. It shatter on the floor, and several small machines come out to clean it up]
Zorg: Look at all these little things! So busy now! Notice how each one is useful. A lovely ballet ensues, so full of form and color. Now, think about all those people that created them. Technicians, engineers, hundreds of people, who will be able to feed their children tonight, so those children can grow up big and strong and have little teeny children of their own, and so on and so forth. Thus, adding to the great chain of life. You see, father, by causing a little destruction, I am in fact encouraging life. In reality, you and I are in the same business."
10
posted on
09/12/2017 10:54:17 AM PDT
by
Teacher317
(We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men)
To: SeekAndFind
I disagree
I believe disasters to be a net positive in the long run.
Everything damaged will be replaced with new items even aging infrastructure that otherwise would have sat continuing to decay.
To: PGR88
Hi.
Only took 2 posts.
FR is pretty damn good.
5.56mm
12
posted on
09/12/2017 10:56:16 AM PDT
by
M Kehoe
To: PGR88
To: sparklite2
In order to win WW2 Roosevelt had to release US businesses from their socialist New Deal purgatory. So yes, WW2 was good for the economy, but in the same way that an enema is good for your stomach. The both removed a roadblock to increased activity.
To: SeekAndFind
If these economists were right, and there weren't enough natural disasters, we should have the Air Force carpet-bomb a few cities. Maybe that would finally convince them of the fallacy of their ideas.
To: SeekAndFind
It seems almost in bad taste to talk about dollars and cents after an act of mass murder
Yet there was some positive fallout from the Black Death.
“The most immediate consequence was a halt to the campaigns of the Hundred Years’ War. In the long term, the decrease in population caused a shortage of labour, with subsequent rise in wages, resisted by the landowners, which caused deep resentment among the lower classes. The Peasants’ Revolt of 1381 was largely a result of this resentment, and even though the rebellion was suppressed, in the long term serfdom was ended in England. The Black Death also affected artistic and cultural efforts, and may have helped advance the use of the vernacular.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death_in_England
16
posted on
09/12/2017 11:02:36 AM PDT
by
sparklite2
(I'm less interested in the rights I have than the liberties I can take.)
To: TexasFreeper2009
Well heck, then let’s replace all items everywhere. We will be rich!
To: sparklite2
Although some economists say the Depression was not ended by WWII, it seems to me it was. If the Depression was ended by WWII mobilization, production and consumption, then why didn't the USA plunge right back into Depression when 12 million soldiers returned home and war spending was reduced by 90%?
18
posted on
09/12/2017 11:05:44 AM PDT
by
PGR88
To: Alberta's Child
Not legitimate at any scale under honest accounting. The value lost is not accounted for, while the value “created” is. Done.
19
posted on
09/12/2017 11:08:01 AM PDT
by
jiggyboy
(Ten percent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
To: JoeFromSidney
*Milo Minderbinder Enterprises would contract the job out and everyone would get a share of the profits. Win win. Especially if the cities were Detroit, Newark, and well, you know what I mean.
* A reference to Catch-22
20
posted on
09/12/2017 11:08:10 AM PDT
by
sparklite2
(I'm less interested in the rights I have than the liberties I can take.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-74 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson