America’s Triple A Rating at Risk
Posted by WARREN MOSLER on May 13th, 2009
He’s public enemy #1 and senior spokesman for all the deficit terrorists.
He’s also an intellectually dishonest, paid propagandist.
I’ve got the recording posted on my website from the Mike Norman show where he agrees government solvency is not a risk.
If anyone has his email address feel free to email this to him.
The ratings agencies, however, don’t understand the monetary system, and it is indeed possible they will downgrade the US much like they have downgraded Japan.
While this did no harm to Japan and won’t hurt the US, it could be damaging for eurozone nations who are institutionally dependent on funding. However, even in Europe, the ECB has already stretched the limits of the Treaty and would likely go further as needed (though that is not a certainty.)
America’s Triple A Rating is at Risk
by David Walker
May 12 (FT) — Long before the current financial crisis, nearly two years ago, a little-noticed cloud darkened the horizon for the US government. It was ignored. But now that shadow, in the form of a warning from a top credit rating agency that the nation risked losing its triple A rating if it did not start putting its finances in order, is coming back to haunt us.
That warning from Moodys focused on the exploding healthcare and Social Security costs that threaten to engulf the federal government in debt over coming decades. The facts show we are in even worse shape now, and there are signs that confidence in America’s ability to control its finances is eroding.
Prices have risen on credit default insurance on US government bonds, meaning it costs investors more to protect their investment in Treasury bonds against default than before the crisis hit. It even, briefly, cost more to buy protection on US government debt than on debt issued by McDonald’s. Another warning sign has come from across the Pacific, where the Chinese premier and the head of the People’s Bank of China have expressed concern about America’s longer-term credit worthiness and the value of the dollar.
The US, despite the downturn, has the resources, expertise and resilience to restore its economy and meet its obligations. Moreover, many of the trillions of dollars recently funneled into the financial system will hopefully rescue it and stimulate our economy.
The US government has had a triple A credit rating since 1917, but it is unclear how long this will continue to be the case. In my view, either one of two developments could be enough to cause us to lose our top rating.
First, while comprehensive healthcare reform is needed, it must not further harm our nation’s financial condition. Doing so would send a signal that fiscal prudence is being ignored in the drive to meet societal wants, further mortgaging the country’s future.
Second, failure by the federal government to create a process that would enable tough spending, tax and budget control choices to be made after we turn the corner on the economy would send a signal that our political system is not up to the task of addressing the large, known and growing structural imbalances confronting us.
For too long, the US has delayed making the tough but necessary choices needed to reverse its deteriorating financial condition. One could even argue that our government does not deserve a triple A credit rating based on our current financial condition, structural fiscal imbalances and political stalemate. The credit rating agencies have been wildly wrong before, not least with mortgage-backed securities.
How can one justify bestowing a triple A rating on an entity with an accumulated negative net worth of more than $11,000bn (€8,000bn, £7,000bn) and additional off-balance sheet obligations of $45,000bn? An entity that is set to run a $1,800bn-plus deficit for the current year and trillion dollar-plus deficits for years to come?
He knows as per the recording on my website that the US government spending in USD is not constrained by revenues, and that any default would be due to a political decision not to pay, and not financial circumstances per se.
James Galbraith and I recently testified at the gao/fasb hearings on sustainability immediately following Walker.
Our presentation is on my website.
The panel agreed with us and reportedly has changed their report, including the elimination of the concern over intergenerational transfers.
I have fought on the front lines of the war for fiscal responsibility for almost six years. We should have been more wary of tax cuts in 2001 without matching spending cuts that would have prevented the budget going deeply into deficit. That mistake was compounded in 2003, when President George W. Bush proposed expanding Medicare to include a prescription drug benefit. We must learn from past mistakes.
Fiscal irresponsibility comes in two primary forms – acts of commission and of omission. Both are in danger of undermining our future.
First, Washington is about to embark on another major healthcare reform debate, this time over the need for comprehensive healthcare reform. The debate is driven, in large part, by the recognition that healthcare costs are the single largest contributor to our nation’s fiscal imbalance. It also recognises that the US is the only large industrialised nation without some level of guaranteed health coverage.
There is no question that this nation needs to pursue comprehensive healthcare reform that should address the important dimensions of coverage, cost, quality and personal responsibility. But while comprehensive reform is called for and some basic level of universal coverage is appropriate, it is critically important that we not shoot ourselves again. Comprehensive healthcare reform should significantly reduce the huge unfunded healthcare promises we already have (over $36,000bn for Medicare alone as of last September), as well as the large and growing structural deficits that threaten our future.
One way out of these problems is for the president and Congress to create a “fiscal future commission” where everything is on the table, including budget controls, entitlement programme reforms and tax increases. This commission should venture beyond Washington’s Beltway to engage the American people, using digital technologies in an unparalleled manner. If it can achieve a predetermined super-majority vote on a package of recommendations, they should be guaranteed a vote in Congress.
Recent research conducted for the Peterson Foundation shows that 90 per cent of Americans want the federal government to put its own financial house in order. It also shows that the public supports the creation of a fiscal commission by a two-to-one margin. Yet Washington still sleeps, and it is clear that we cannot count on politicians to make tough transformational changes on multiple fronts using the regular legislative process. We have to act before we face a much larger economic crisis. Let’s not wait until a credit rating downgrade. The time for Washington to wake up is now.
David Walker is chief executive of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation and former comptroller general of the US
[top]




















May 13th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
“The ratings agencies, however, don’t understand the monetary system, and it is indeed possible they will downgrade the US much like they have downgraded Japan.”
Some renaissance man kept telling everyone the world is round, not flat, he died burning at the stake. If everyone else believes one thing, true or not, and your theories are not accepted until a few hundred years after your death, and then have those ideas attributed to someone else, what have you achieved?
“I’ve got the recording posted on my website from the Mike Norman show where he agrees government solvency is not a risk.”
Mike Norman, the guy who laughed at peter schiff in 2007 about the coming housing collapse, like we are supposed to respect anything associated with Mike (rolls eyes) Perhaps Walker is a snake oil salesman like all the rest, or maybe he changed his mind about the solvency issue, I think people should have a chance to change their mind. I am still waiting for Mike or anyone here to admit Mike was wrong to laugh and ridicule Schiff and to apologize. It’s ok to change your mind Mike, I forgive your rude crass shallow sillyness, can the rest of you do that for Walker?
I have lots of green pieces of paper, right now they can buy a good eliot spitzer hooker for 5K of them, I personally don’t want that to increase to 10K or 20K of them and wish for my green pieces of paper to keep thier purchasing power relative to spitzer hookers.
Reply
May 13th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
“The panel agreed with us and reportedly has changed their report, including the elimination of the concern over intergenerational transfers.”
Who were the members of the panel Warren? Who was the majority and minority chairs? You say reportedly changed the report? Who said that? You don’t know for sure wether it was changed or not? That seems rather vague for me, for a man vying to be president, you need crystal clear FACTS and vivid transparency to get my vote.
Reply
Warren Mosler Reply:
May 13th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
Obama won’t even tell you who he’s lending eleventy seven trillion zillion dollars to. i only have to do better than that
Reply
Anderson Cooper Reply:
May 14th, 2009 at 12:31 am
LOL! You are a comedian Mr. Mosler! You will make a fine politician. Job Security through obscurity. What was it the bible says, sometimes you have hope and faith and take that leap. Trust in Obama, absolute power will not corrupt him absolutely ;)
Reply
May 14th, 2009 at 1:21 am
Yes, the US government can never default, they can always print as much money as needed. Isn’t there a risk though, that they will default (for a lack of better word) through inflation? In all seriousness, Zimbabwe probably didn’t default, but would anybody rate them AAA?
Reply
May 17th, 2009 at 10:56 am
The idea that the government defaults by way of inflation makes intuitive sense. Shortly before he died, Supply-Side icon Jude Wanniski wrote an open editorial memo on his website to Ron Paul, “Ron Paul’s Great Questionâ€. Wanniski commented on the question Ron Paul asked of Alan Greenspan in Congressional testimony before the House Financial Affairs Committee, not long before Greenspan departed from the Fed.
Ron Paul’s question, Greenspan’s response and Wanniski’s take on the exchange addresses your question about whether the government defaults by way of inflation. Here is the link:
http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_05/wanniski072705.html
If inflation is analogous to default, it should show up in the relationship between U.S. government CDS spreads and the spread between nominal U.S. treasuries and TIPS. However, the data appears to be inconclusive.
From Jan 2 to March 6, the 5yr TIPS spread widened +63bp from negative -25bp to +37bp after hitting a high water market of +93bp on Feb 9. During that time U.S. government 5yr CDS widened from +37bp from 65bp to 102bp. However since then, the 5yr TIPS spread has continued to widen another +59bp to 96bp, while 5yr U.S. government CDS has narrowed -65bp to 37bp as of May 15, after getting as tight as 28bp on May 7.
This implies relative value profit opportunities from an apparent ignorance gap that exists between nominal treasuries, TIPS and CDS.
Reply
May 17th, 2009 at 11:01 am
For the purposes of the AAA rating inflation does not constitute default.
That’s an academic question and not a ‘legal’ question.
Reply
Curious Reply:
May 17th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
If that is the case, then every country in the world that has its own fiat currency should be rated AAA, shouldn’t it? Is it? (Warren you have access to that information on Bloomberg, no?)
Reply
jcmccutcheon Reply:
May 18th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Yes, but some many countries who have their own currencies make contracts to repay loans in currencies they cannot issue.
Reply
Jim Baird Reply:
May 18th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
The problem is that the rating agencies give countries’ sovereign debt ratings without distinguishing between debt in their own currencies and true external debt. So, you have absurdities like Japan – which continues to be able to “raise” all the yen it wants at 0% interest because of the ZIRP – gets rated lower than Botswana. It doesn’t really affect anything, but it is a useful political tool for deficit terrorists.
Here’s an old paper by Warren on the Japanese downgrade:
http://www.epicoalition.org/docs/flawed_logic.htm