RSS
Two economists and an economic strategist presented varying and often conflicting solutions to the unemployment crisis before a crowd of about 75 people Tuesday night at the Jan Popper Theater in Schoenberg Hall.
Economics department chairman Roger Farmer organized and participated in the debate, titled “How to Solve the Unemployment Problem: Views from the Left, Right and Center.”
Farmer was joined by Peter Schiff, CEO and chief global strategist at Euro Pacific Capital, and David Rosnick, an economist from the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C.
Before the debate, Farmer identified the unemployment crisis as the most important social problem of the modern period. This motivated him to hold the event, he said.
Throughout the debate, Rosnick and Schiff went back and forth with differing ideas about how to solve the country’s unemployment problem.
Rosnick said the stimulus package passed by Congress did not do enough.
Schiff said a stimulus package was the wrong decision altogether.
Farmer, often landing in the middle of the two, argued that government intervention needs to take place to put the economy back on the right track. He also said he wanted to see a “floor and a ceiling” on the stock market to reduce investment fears.
Schiff said he sees government as a roadblock to employers, and the economy should be left to restructure itself – a message greeted with a negative reaction from a number of audience members.
He also said the reason college tuition has increased is because the government gives out loans to students and families, also an unpopular stance with the crowd.
“If the government stopped giving out loans, students wouldn’t be able to afford college, and universities would be forced to bid down prices,” Schiff said.
Rosnick, on the other hand, said he sees government aid as instrumental for students. The government, he said, has to make a capital investment, because someone has to take the risk of financing students’ education.
Even though Schiff was booed during the debate, he elicited words of praise from students after the event.
“I enjoyed Peter Schiff’s explanation of college costs. … It’s not what’s commonly taught,” said Tyler Koteskey, a first-year political science student who came to the debate with his friend, Deepak Sahni.
Sahni, a fourth-year political science student and president of the Young Americans for Liberty at UCLA, said he respected Schiff’s theories because Schiff had accurately predicted both the dot-com bubble burst and the 2007 recession.
However, he said, it was important to have both sides represented.
Join the discussion
You Should Know: Any comments posted on dailybruin.com may be printed in the Daily Bruin. the Daily Bruin reserves the right to remove any comment deemed racially derogatory, inflammatory, or spammatory. Repeat offenders may have their IP address banned from posting future comments. Please be nice.
If this is the first time you've commented, your comment won't appear until you've verified your email address.
4 comments
Would be nice to see a video of the debate. The students can boo Schiff all they want; he was right about the financial crisis (Google Peter Schiff was Right) and he is right on his positions today. The suggestion from one professor that there should be a floor and a ceiling on the stock market is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in a while. Who determines what those levels should be – the Madoff-enabling SEC? Give me a break!!! The market already decides what the appropriate price for a stock is, and we would have a much more stable market if the government would stop artificially manipulating the market with low interest rates and various other schemes.
Peter Schiff was actually the only recipient of sustained applause, somehow… either a moment of intellectual honesty for the academics in the audience, or striking a chord with some students who have yet to be brainwashed. Schiff really ran away with this debate. The guy from CEPR was a petulant child, both in tone of voice and (lack of) content, and the professor seems to be afraid of his own shadow. The couple of times he was backed into taking a concrete stand, he took the wrong stand. Thankfully, Schiff shot him down unceremoniously every time. There was only one adult on that stage.
This article completely mischaracterizes the debate. Peter Schiff’s relation of government-guaranteed student loans subsidizing high tuition prices received the BIGGEST round of applause of the ENTIRE debate. I was sitting in the second row and I could see people nodding their heads to a lot of his points. Of course the audience didn’t agree with everything he said, but then you could see that they disagreed with plenty of the points offered by the other two panelists. From reading this article you would think that Schiff was practically run offstage, when in reality he was in control. Either the reporter was not paying close enough attention to the speakers’ points and the dynamic that was in the room, or she is projecting her own political biases into the report.
Peter Schiff was warning of the crisis back in 2006, the same time when all of the Keynesians were claiming that housing prices would keep going up forever.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw