I think the only clear parallel to where we are now economically is 1929. Most people think there was a stock market crash on a single day. The day before there was prosperity and the day after depression. It wsn't lke that, from memory it was teetering over a nine-month period. Australia at that point was already in trouble because there was a world commodity markey slump starting from 1927. The UK had been grinding backwards since 1924 due to Churchill going back on the gold standard at the wrong rate. After 32 or 33, Britain was actually more prosperous in the 30s than it was in the 20s.
I think economic events have a momentum of their own that will take a while to work out. What Obama's election represents is a chance to put in place a carefully considered set of effective policies to make the best of the situation. Once again, the parallel is probably FDR who followed up on the ineffectual economic policies of Hoover. He is generally seen in retrospect in terms of what his policies came to be but what initially elected he was essentially an economic pragmatist prepared to try whatever it took.
I'm not saying we're heading for a depression but with all hands off the tiller or another four years of President George III we would be. The capacity to deal with such problems is much greater now than it was in 1929 although due to economic globalisation the size of the problem could potentially become much greater.
I suppose there will be one benefit if in fact we do have a catastrophic world depression - it will slow the potential descent into environmental armageddon. I don't think it will happen like that but it seems likely that as the economic problems start to ease the ecological problems may become more urgent.
Back to the election, though.
RealClearPolitics is showing the voting result as 53% Obama to 46% McCain which happens to be the 7% swing they were predicting as a poll average just before the election. Compared to the polls, the divergence in most of the closer States in the last day or so was that those leaning to McCain went further in that direction and those leaning to Obama went further in his direction.
What I find fascinating though is how regional the results are. McCain's territory is the South and the MidWest. Apart from latino inroads in the central southwest, the battleground states are essentially related to the old North/South dividing line.
The electoral college results are very close to those of 1896. In those days it was perhaps more the case that the Republican Party was the progressive party of Abraham Lincoln and the Democrats were the Conservatives. Cleveland, the sitting President did not stand again after two terms. McKinlay defeated the Democrat candidate (Bryan) with an
electoral result that looks very similar to last Tuesday's. That was the start of a successful Republican era of 16 years until they tore themselves apart in the 1912 election.
Regards,
Murray
