Debate on U.S. economy, “How to Solve the Unemployment Problem: Views from the Left, Right and Center,” brings together diverse views of necessary solutions
A debate was held at UCLA’s Jan Popper Theater about unemployment featuring economist Roger Farmer and LA Times writer, Tom Petruno.
By Nicole Mirea
Nov. 9, 2011 12:35 a.m.
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.
