The Confidence & Spending Crisis: A Modest Proposal

The latest consumer confidence numbers are raising fears that the unwashed masses of the what this once American republic—convinced, perhaps, that Heath Ledger’s death portends bad signs for our economic health—might not spend their allegedly economically stimulating government checks quickly enough or in the right ways. They may, it is feared, decide to save for a rainy day or reduce their own leverage for fears that an economic downturn would reduce their earnings. Quite clearly this would undermine the government’s plans.

Here are the facts: lately, American spending has not grown as fast as our spending power. Indeed, the evidence indicates that it is being converted to saving power, which means that the benefits of the stimulus package to the consumer sector of the economy—which, somehow, means the people who take money from the consumer in exchange for stuff—may be delayed. But this is only because our great and bright have not thought this problem through. The solution was under our Christmas trees this winter, and we only need eyes to see it.

We’re talking, of course, about gift cards. Instead of sending redistribution rebate checks to the people, the government should consider sending gift cards with short expiration dates. Ninety days might do the trick. (Money unspent could be applied to, well, most likely a new round of discount cards but it’s better not to reveal that ahead of time.) It would also save precious time that might otherwise be wasted depositing checks in the bank, where they might be tempted to deposit them in a savings account rather than a checking account.

Perhaps we underestimate our government. It could be that this is exactly what government plans to do anyway. Reducing interest rates should have the marginal effect of reducing savings rates, and increasing inflation will be a multiplier on this effect. At this point, the dollar itself should probably be looked at as a gift card that ought to be spent immediately to avoid its expiration date.

New dip in US consumer confidence [BBC]

Comments

Posted by WD, Jan 29, 2008 11:58AM

Give me a break...these re-distribution checks (no need to cross it out) are going to the lower income bracket of Americans, and a higher level of payout is going to the lower income bracket of Americans with kids. These are not the people who think..."Hey, the economy is in trouble, I better invest as much and save as much as I can, to weather this downturn and provde for my dependents". These are the people who think..."Hells Yeah, $600 in rebate...gonna get me some new dubs for my accord".

Posted by , Jan 29, 2008 12:04PM

Don't put it past the gubmint to use gift cards.

Posted by Master of None, Jan 29, 2008 12:07PM

This is a fantastic idea. Make the 'gift cards' usable at any business but forbid depositing directly to banks. About $1 billion of the stimulus was already expected to be spent at US casinos, but if they distribute gift cards, that number could double or triple, as casinos are the first resort for easy money laundering schemes.

Point: people will do what they will, regardless of the government's intentions.

Posted by Bess-Fan, Jan 29, 2008 12:11PM

"At this point, the dollar itself should probably be looked at as a gift card that ought to be spent immediately to avoid its expiration date." Comedy gold. Brilliant and true. And sad.

Posted by 1-2, Jan 29, 2008 1:34PM

yes, it's a slow day over here.

If redistribution checks work why stop at $600 (or whatever the number is today). Why not toss out $1m to everyone. I mean if it shocks the economy back into stride like a defib on ER why don't we just use implants to avoid the heart attack in the first place? I propose $1m to everyone making less than $1m every year. That will keep this economy going!!

Clearly this is BS political positioning. If the democrats agree that lower taxes/more money in the consumers' hands is a good thing then why do the object to lower tax-rates across the board? IMHO this is one of the greatest political hypocracies of the...ummm....week. What i wrote above is the same argument against minimum wage: if it works so well at increasing wealth then why stop ~$7, why not $10, 20, or 30 bucks. The answer is because these transactions are not costless; rather they are very expensive. Beyond the fact that we must borrow short-term (not a bad idea given 2% interest rates on t-bills) there are the costs of actually administering the correct rebates (read: more IRS agents), the distortions to capital flow, uncertainty as to future action, and (ironically) perceived certainty that any time something goes wrong poppa-bear gov't will be there with a check in hand.

Don't want to save for retirement? Here's social security, which may bankrupt the nation.

Don't want to save for a rainy day?
Gift cards for all!

Don't want to acurately price the risk of risky assets?
Fed to the rescue!


Look, we don't need Dr. Ross here, we need some House, MD.

Foreman: "the patient's immune system has begun to kill the patient. It can't tell what is good and what is bad."

House: "well, let's kill the immune system."

Chase: "kill the immune system?! but then she won't be able to fight diseases."

House: "well, if she's dead because her immune system couldn't tell right from wrong she can't fight diseases very well, can she?"

btw=Dr. Ross is Clooney, the gentle, pediatrition most of our mother's would give us up for.

Posted by , Jan 29, 2008 3:10PM

1-2, if the govt gives back too much money, it'll start eating into the profits of the banking industry. I suspect credit cards, home equity and personal lines and loans would be the first things people paid down or off, while holding out for a govt bailout vis a vis their resetting ARMS. Bye-bye usurious credit card and credit line rates, bye-bye net interest margins, bye-bye consumer banking profits.

Posted by , Jan 29, 2008 4:32PM

Why exactly would a gift card deter an individual from saving and promote consumption instead?

If an individual were truly motivated to apply the $600 towards their savings or paying down debt, wouldn't he just utilize the less-fungible funds (the gift cards) for necessities purchases (at Target or whatever) and take their fungible funds (the cash they would have bought necessities with) and stick it in their bank account?

Posted by Anal_yst, Jan 29, 2008 4:48PM

@ 4:32

That assumes they had already earmarked those funds for purchases already.

Perhaps its just because we're in NYC, butt I have been out of the area and fail to see any recession (admittedly I have not been to south florida, orange county california, or las vegas, but all those places wrote their own death wish imho).

Is it such a bad thing if consumers pay off their debts, given our essentially negative savings rates?

Of course, I don't support this bailout bullsh!t to begin with, butt worst-case scenario, savings isn't necessarily terrible.

One last thought, if they go through with this stimulus plan, and everyone spends every last penny, aren't we just talking about a complicated series of transfer payments from the government->individuals->corporations (which pay individuals and the government), etc ad nauseum? What net tangible benefit are we actually expecting here?

Post Your Comment