Speaking at a recent sporting event, Congressman Edward Markey likened the early season batting woes of Red Sox slugger David Ortiz to those of the domestic economy.

Just as Ortiz seemed to finally emerge from his dreadful slump, so too would the economy, Markey told his audience. After all, the congressman said, "David Ortiz is the greatest clutch hitter in Red Sox history, just as the American people will come through in the clutch in helping restore the economy."

Clearly people are worried about the economy — so much so that President Obama has pulled out all the stops to convince the public that the nation will succeed in putting its economic house back in order, and sooner rather than later. But are such assurances realistic? Or has American already begun a slow, increasingly painful, and irreversible decline toward ultimate Third World status, as some believe?

Debate over the fate of nations is not new to human conversation. Long before the collapse of the Roman Empire, at least one critic warned that the only thing his countrymen seemed to care about were bread and circuses. It's a warning that resonates even today, for to loosely paraphrase the 19th century French writer Gustave Le Bon, we post-Great Depression Americans aren't ready to admit that anything can come between our longings and the realization of our longings. For us, the notion of impossibility simply doesn't exist.

Swiss economist Dr. Marc Farber, whose writings brought much of this to my attention, claims the profound slump in which America has fallen isn't cultural, social, or political, but economic. Though he wouldn't trade the American way of life for that of other nations, such as China or the former USSR, he nonetheless finds much that is wrong with the U.S. economy, the health of which, Farber contends, has been undergoing a steady decline since 1913, with the peak of what he labels "U.S. economic hegemony" occurring in the 1950s and 1960s.

One of a growing number of economists referred to as "Dr. Doom" by Wall Street insiders, Farber claims the driving force responsible for the great technological advances and subsequent material prosperity of the 20th century had all come about prior to 1913. His reference, of course, being the harnessing and utilization of electricity, invention of the railroad, automobile, airplane, telephone, radio, and — perhaps most important of all — establishment of the means to mass produce on a scale never before seen products people needed and wanted.

But then, according to Farber, in the immediate wake of the Industrial Age's epic birth, something not entirely expected happened. The purchasing power of the U.S. dollar began to slowly but steadily decline.

Indeed, today's dollar has retained just 4 percent of its 1913 value, a sobering fact that ought to quickly snap us all out of the bread-and-circus, entertainment-first-and-foremost funk that we've allowed ourselves to be drawn into over the years. And so now, faced with and struggling to endure the worst economic crises in 80 years, to whom or what have we turned to come to our and the nation's rescue? A young man not long out of Chicago named Barack Obama.

Despite the uncertainties and contentious debate regarding the course best suited to steer the nation out of the stormy seas of today's economic catastrophe, President Obama still appears the far better option than all other of the many contenders for the job of America's top chartmaker and problem fixer.

But it's also become apparent that the rosy predictions of today's White House concerning the recovery of the economy may be about as well-founded as a child's belief that the moon is made of cheese.

The approach used by the late Billy Mays may work just fine for OxiClean and other useful household products, but not when selling optimism concerning the reversal of fortunes of an economy that already has had a devastating impact on the lives of many millions of ordinary Americans.

Jim Munn is a regular contributor to the Times, and the longtime track and field coach at Gloucester High School.