Want to Save the Economy? Invest.

Can we call this the “Obama bounce”? Yesterday, the president did something rare for a head of state. In the midst of another weeklong cascading tumble in the financial markets, President Obama suggested on Tuesday that investments have been so beaten down that “buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you’ve got a long-term perspective on it.” On Wednesday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed up nearly 150 points (or 3.6% to 6875). The S&P 500 and NASDAQ posted similar gains. Were investors actually listening to the president’s investment advice?

Certainly, there are other reasons the markets are on the move today. You don’t have to be hanging onto Obama’s every word to realize that some very good companies are trading at steep discounts when

you consider their ability to weather the current economic conditions. There was also other news that may indicate that an economic turnaround is (far off but still) in sight. Challenger Gray & Christmas, for instance, said layoff announcements in February slowed from January’s pace. Granted, companies still issued 186,350 pink slips last month–that’s double the number from February of 2008–but this could be a sign that layoffs hit their peak in January.

Another positive sign–the Federal Reserve’s “beige book” anecdotal survey of the economy noted Wednesday that there has been some resurgence of consumer spending of late. Even so, the Fed doesn’t see an upturn coming until late 2009 or 2010. Government economists also pointed out two sectors that–thus far–have remained recession-proof: food and drugs. But all the news wasn’t entirely upbeat. In general, the Fed said that downward pressure on the economy continues to be a problem.

What’s interesting about Obama’s investing advice is that it differs from advice we’re hearing from other sources in the media and elsewhere–where the mantra is spend, spend, spend to jumpstart the economy. Is Obama promoting an alternative here? Invest, invest, invest? Could be. His pronouncement coincides this week with news that Americans have increased the amount of money they’re saving. The Commerce Department reported on Monday that personal savings rose to 5% of incomes. It makes sense. We keep hearing about how consumers aren’t spending–and how the economy is suffering for it. It’s something economists call the “paradox of thrift”. That is, the more people save during a recession, the more it hurts the overall economic well-being. The theory is that when people don’t spend, business revenues suffer, which then causes businesses to cut back by laying off workers or cutting salaries.

Saving money is clearly what’s best for anyone in this downturn. Having an emergency fund of a few months worth of wages makes good sense. Single-handedly saving the nation by purchasing an even bigger plasma TV isn’t our job, but maybe there’s another way we can help. Ed Fredericks, a professor of finance at Pepperdine University’s Graziadio School of Business and Management, is one of the few people who see a win-win in our new American propensity to save. He believes that “now and for the foreseeable future, an increase in savings is

good for the country. This will reduce the deficit through lower imports. As imports decline and savings increase, our capital markets should benefit as surplus savings will go into investments (stocks). This investment capital will go to businesses and entrepreneurs promoting economic activity … ”

Just as I was thinking about all these things this morning, I received an e-mail from a B.E. reader, part of which posed a rather provocative question: Should African Americans invest in stocks in order to prop up the market and make President Obama look good? I would ask the question differently. Is there a way to help the national economy while doing what’s best for myself and my family? Perhaps President Obama has already offered an answer.

What do you think?