Moody’s Analyst: Weak Growth, Fiscal Slips Could Lose UK ‘AAA’

The wonder is how Moody’s keeps it’s prized credibility and Sarah Carlson her prized job.

Moody’s Analyst: Weak Growth, Fiscal Slips Could Lose UK ‘AAA’

Jun 8 (MNI) — The UK could lose its prized ‘Aaa’ credit rating if growth remains weak and the coalition government fails to meet its fiscal consolidation targets, a senior analyst at ratings agency Moody’s has told Market News International.

Sarah Carlson, VP-Senior Analyst at Moody’s, told MNI that weak growth and fiscal slippage could see the country’s ‘debt metrics’ deteriorate to a point that would trigger a downgrade.

“Although the weaker economic growth prospects in 2011 and 2012 do not directly cast doubt on the UK’s sovereign rating level, we believe that slower growth combined with weaker-than-expected fiscal consolidation efforts could cause the UK’s debt metrics to deteriorate to a point that would be inconsistent with a Aaa rating,” she said.

Carlson also said that due to their sheer size the UK’s austerity plans have a degree of ‘implementation risk’.

“As is true of any large fiscal consolidation effort, the government’s austerity plans entail some implementation risk. Moreover, a multi-year austerity programme of this magnitude is a political challenge,” she said.

Carlson’s comments come in a week of frenzied debate as to whether UK Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne’s fiscal consolidation plans are working.

At present, the government aims to close Britain’s structural deficit will by the end of 2014-15, slashing departmental budgets by almost stg100 billion over four years.

But a weaker-than-expected Q1 GDP outturn and a slew of disappointing economic data since then, has led several economists to question the wisdom of such a rapid deficit-reduction plan while others have said there is no other choice.

On Sunday, a group of leading economists led by Prof. Tony Atkinson of Oxford and centre-left pressure group Compass wrote a letter to the Observer newspaper questioning the wisdom of the current plan.

Carlson said that the government’s creation of a cross-departmental committee to monitor progress in public spending cuts could be useful in reinforcing commitment to consolidation.

“The creation of the Public Expenditure Cabinet Committee (PEX) – a cross-government spending committee that will monitor the progress of individual departments against their budget plans – has the potential to be a promising institutional change that could further bolster confidence in the government’s ability to follow through with its ambitious austerity programme.”

On Monday, a group of centre-right economists wrote a letter to the Telegraph newspaper which argued against relaxing austerity measures.

In its Article IV Consultation Report on the UK released Monday, the IMF said that there had been unexpected weaknesses in UK economy over the past few months but labelled the troubles temporary and advised the government to keep to its current deficit-reduction plan.

Geithner- U.S. Will Urge China to Boost Interest Rates

Even more confused than the usual out of paradigm nonsense from Geithner highlighted below:

U.S. Will Urge China to Boost Interest Rates in Washington Talks

By Rebecca Christie and Ian Katz

May 9 (Bloomberg) — Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner will urge China to allow higher interest rates when he meets with Chinese leaders this week, as the U.S. extends its push for a stronger yuan.

Geithner will say China should relax controls on the financial system, give foreign banks and insurers more access and make it easier for investors to buy Chinese financial assets, said David Loevinger, the Treasury Department’s senior coordinator for China. Officials from both nations are meeting in Washington today and tomorrow as part of the annual Strategic and Economic Dialogue.

The US Treasury shamelessly fronting for the financial sector.

The U.S. is pushing for greater market access for financial firms as part of its broader effort to persuade China to ease the restrictions blamed for fueling global imbalances. U.S. officials argue that a yuan kept artificially cheap to help exporters also makes it harder for China to lift interest rates and curb an inflation rate that hit a 32-month high in March.

Budget Deficits

Chinese officials, for their part, blame record U.S. budget deficits for contributing to lopsided global flows of trade and investment. China held $1.15 trillion in Treasuries at the end of February, more than any other country. The U.S. trade deficit with China came to $18.8 billion in February.

Vice Finance Minister Zhu Guangyao said on May 6 that China is paying “close attention” to U.S. efforts to reduce its budget deficit, and his country will focus on improving the quality of itsexchange-rate mechanism.

Yes, China is chiming in on US fiscal policy and no one of political consequence believes they are wrong.

Geithner and Vice Premier Wang Qishan will meet alongside Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and State Councilor Dai Bingguo at this week’s meetings, which will draw about 30 top Chinese officials.

The Obama administration and U.S. lawmakers say China’s currency policy gives the nation’s exporters an unfair competitive advantage, costing U.S. jobs. Geithner is trying to convince Chinese officials that a stronger yuan has benefits for their economy.

‘Enhanced’ Ability

Geithner said last week that allowing the yuan to rise and making their financial system less dependent on government- controlled interest rates would give Chinese leaders an “enhanced” ability to damp inflation.

This just gets stupider and stupider with each out of paradigm iteration.

The Treasury argues that higher interest rates on deposits will also encourage consumer spending in China, another way to reduce imbalances.

Here he takes my position on monetary policy- depending on the institutional structure, higher rates add to aggregate demand via the income interest channels. But it’s totally confused in this context of fighting inflation, as higher demand adds to price pressures, and also adds to cost pressures via the cost of capital for businesses.

“We’re going to encourage China to move more quickly in lifting the ceiling on interest rates on bank deposits in order to put more money into Chinese consumers’ pockets,” Loevinger said at a briefing last week in Washington.

Investors are betting the yuan’s rise may be limited over the next 12 months. Twelve-month non-deliverable yuan forwards dropped 0.81 percent last week to 6.3520 per dollar on May 6, their biggest weekly loss of the year, on speculation that China won’t allow faster appreciation to reduce inflation.

Fundamentally, inflation and currency depreciation are pretty much the same thing. So ultimately inflation goes hand in hand with currency depreciation, as inflation removes the ability to ‘allow faster appreciation’.

17-Year High

The yuan closed little changed in Shanghai on May 6, ending a run of seven weekly gains that drove the currency to a 17-year high of 6.4892 on April 29, according to the China Foreign Exchange Trade System.

John Frisbie, president of the U.S.-China Business Council, said support for a stronger yuan among Chinese leaders has increased in the past year.

Yes, looks like inflation is bad enough in their view to throw their exporters under the bus via currency appreciation (for as long as it can last) in what looks like a desperation move.

“The strong hand has switched over to those who are saying that the exchange rate can help us fight inflation,” Frisbie said in a telephone interview. He said his group, whose members include companies such as Apple Inc. (AAPL), JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and Coca-Cola Co. (KO), wants China to resume opening its financial services sector to allow more foreign investment.

The American Chamber of Commerce in China said in a report last month that foreign banks play an “insignificant role” in China.

Foreign lenders’ market share in China has dropped since the government first opened the industry in December 2006. Banks such as New York-based Citigroup Inc. (C) and London-based HSBC Holdings Plc (HSBA) want to tap household and corporate savings that reached $10 trillion in January as China overtook Japan to become the world’s second-biggest economy.

Foxes into the hen house…

Foreign Exchange

The U.S. has delayed its semi-annual foreign-exchange report, which had been due on April 15, until after this week’s meetings. The previous report, due on Oct. 15, 2010, was released on Feb. 4 and declined to brand China a currency manipulator while saying the No. 2 U.S. trading partner has made “insufficient” progress on allowing the yuan to rise.

The yuan goes beyond the U.S. and China to become “a multilateral issue, in terms of the impact on Brazil, Korea, Thailand and India,” said Edwin Truman, a former Federal Reserve and Treasury official who is now a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

‘Causing Trouble’

The “slow” appreciation of the yuan “relative to the dollar in an environment where the dollar is going down against other currencies is causing trouble for other countries and currencies,” Truman said.

Diplomats at the Strategic and Economic Dialogue also will discuss events in the Middle East, including military operations in Libya and the ramifications of the region’s popular uprisings.

Officials are likely to discuss efforts to revive six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear program. Negotiations between the two Koreas, Russia, Japan, China and the U.S. stalled in December 2008 and tensions flared on the peninsula after North Korea’s Nov. 23 bombing of a South Korean island.

Yes, mistakenly believing we are dependent on China to fund our deficit spending has us kowtowing on human rights and nuclear weapons.

“We want to compare notes on where we stand with respect to North Korea, and we will be very clear on what our expectations are for moving forward,” Kurt Campbell, assistant secretary of state for East Asia, said on May 5.

What happened to Q1?

This is typical of recent announcements:

“With most of the news on 1Q growth now in, the GDP “bean count” looks even softer than it did a couple of weeks ago. The most recent disappointments have come on the export side—with trade now set to subtract significantly from growth in the quarter—and from inventories. Consequently, we are downgrading our real GDP growth estimate to 1¾% (annualized), from 2½% previously (and from 3½% not too long ago).”

So what went wrong?

Maybe, as I guessed at just prior to year end:

The effect of world austerity was underestimated, particularly in Europe and China?

The effects of income channel from QE2 (remember the Fed turning over $79 billion to the tsy that the economy would have earned if the Fed hadn’t bought/owned those securities?) were underestimated?

The effect of the year end tax adjustment was less than anticipated, as work for pay that was eliminated maybe had higher propensities to consume than the 2%, one year FICA reduction?

Rising gasoline prices slowed things down some?

Rising food price as we burn up our food supply for fuel wreak havoc world wide?

So how about Q2, which is starting about as high as Q1 did?

High food and gasoline prices continue.

Supply disruptions from the Japan.

The Fed owns more tsy secs and has thereby removed more interest income from the economy.

World austerity intensifies, now including the US.

China’s inflation fight intensifies.

And business top line growth starting to falter from modest levels?

And this time the fiscal safety nets are in jeopardy as govt’s believe they have ‘run out of money’ and need to tighten up, with Japan now the prime example, looking at tax hikes to ‘pay for’ earthquake damage.

MMT to Obama- Taxes Function to Regulate Aggregate Demand, Not to Raise Revenue per se

We, the undersigned economics and financial professionals,
seeking to foster world prosperity,
send the following urgent message to President Obama and the US Congress:

Taxes Function to Regulate Aggregate Demand (total spending),
Not to Raise Revenue per se

That means:

Federal spending is NOT inherently dependent on revenues from taxing or borrowing.

ANY constraints, including debt ceilings and budgeting rules, are necessarily self imposed by Congress.

The US can’t EVER have a funding crisis like Greece- there is no such thing for ANY issuer of its own currency.

The correct analogy is between Greece and the US states.
A US state can indeed become unable to fund itself, and look to the US Federal Reserve Bank for funding, much like Greece is getting assistance from the European Central Bank. But as issuers of their own currencies, the notion of a funding crisis for the US Federal Reserve Bank or the European Central Bank is entirely inapplicable.

Furthermore, federal borrowing is nothing more than a matter of the Federal Reserve debiting reserve accounts and crediting securities accounts. And paying off the Federal debt, as done continuously as US Treasury securities mature, is nothing more than a matter of the Federal Reserve debiting securities accounts and crediting reserve accounts.

THERE ARE NO GRANDCHILDREN INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS!!!

Nor is there any inherent financial risk posed by foreigners or anyone else buying or not buying US Treasury securities.

Additionally, the risk of federal overspending relative to taxation, as available labor and materials become fully employed,
is higher prices, and not insolvency or any kind of funding crisis.

Therefore, with our currently recognized and highly problematic shortage of aggregate demand,
as evidenced by unemployment and economic slack in general, you’ve all got it backwards.

Given the current depressed state of the US economy, an informed Congress would be in heated debate
over whether to increase federal spending, or decrease taxes.

And with the current risk of inflation largely from crude oil prices and food prices,
which are now closely linked, for all practical purposes price stability is also currently in your hands.

Signed:

Warren Mosler
President, Valance Co.

Roger Erickson, PhD; Chairman
Operations Institute

Joseph M. Firestone, Ph.D.
Managing Director, CEO
Knowledge Management Consortium International
A Division of Executive Information Systems, Inc.

Stephanie Kelton, Ph.d
University of Missouri, Kansas City

Thomas E. Nugent
Chief Investment Officer, Victoria Capital Management, Inc.

Chris Hanley
Owner/Broker Farchette & Hanley Real Estate, US Virgin Islands

Art Patten
President, Symmetry Capital Management, LLC

Andrea Terzi
Franklin College Switzerland

Bernard J. Weis
Norfolk Markets

***If you wish to sign on, return this email with how you would like your name and associations to appear, thanks, and please distribute this to other academics and financial professionals who may be interested in signing on***

Obama Urges Democrats Help Him ‘Finish the Job’

April 15 (Reuters) — President Barack Obama said Thursday a Republican debt-reduction plan would create “a nation of potholes” as he used the first events of his 2012 re-election bid to strike a sharp contrast with his opponents.

Seeking to reignite the energy of supporters that propelled his candidacy in 2008, Obama said “extraordinary progress” has been made during his two years in the White House but much work remains.

He called on supporters to help him finish the job.

The president, who offered a 12-year plan Wednesday to reduce the U.S. deficit by $4 trillion, skewered a proposal by Republican Representative Paul Ryan.

Ryan would trim about the same amount without raising taxes and by making cuts in spending, such as on medical and social programs for the poor and elderly. Republicans have attacked Obama’s plan for raising taxes on wealthy Americans.

“Under their vision, we can’t invest in roads and bridges and broadband and high-speed rail,” Obama said.

“We would be a nation of potholes.”

The Republican approach, he said, is that “we can’t afford to do big things anymore” and says to the underprivileged, “tough luck, they’re on their own.”

Obama, who reluctantly agreed to extend Bush-era tax cuts late last year even for the richest Americans, said if the wealthy were to “pay a little more in taxes,” it would help solve America’s fiscal challenge without forsaking its responsibility to its people.

“If we apply some practical common sense to this, we can solve our fiscal challenges and still have the America that we believe in. That’s what this budget debate is about and that’s what the presidential campaign is going to be about.”

Obama has tried to straddle a middle ground and sought compromise with his political adversaries since Republicans took command of the House of Representatives and picked up strength in the Senate in elections last November.

He said he recognized that some of his liberal supporters have been frustrated “because we’ve had to compromise with the Republicans a couple of times,” and that he felt the same way sometimes.

“We knew this wasn’t going to be easy.”

Stiglitz Calls for New Global Reserve Currency to Prevent Trade Imbalances

>   
>   (email exchange)
>   
>   Hi Warren,
>   
>   Do you have any thoughts on Stiglitz calling for a new reserve currency?
>   Is this something you see as a problem or is Stiglitz getting it wrong?
>   

Yes, my advice for Joe is to stop talking about these things entirely.
He’s in it all way over his head.

Stiglitz Calls for New Global Reserve Currency to Prevent Trade Imbalances

By John Detrixhe and Sara Eisen

April 10 (Bloomberg) — The world economy needs a new global reserve currency to help prevent trade imbalances that are reflected in the national debt of the U.S., said Nobel-prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz.

He doesn’t seem to grasp the notion that imports are real benefits and exports real costs, nor that the national debt is nothing more than dollar balances in Fed securities accounts that are ‘paid back’ by debiting the securities accounts and crediting reserve accounts, also at the Fed. No grandchildren writing checks involved.

A “global system” is needed to replace the dollar as a reserve currency and help avoid a weakening of U.S. credit quality, said Stiglitz, a professor at Columbia University in New York.

There is no such thing as weakening the ability of the US to make US dollar payments. All that’s involved is crediting reserve accounts at the fed.

The dollar fell to an almost 15-month low against the euro last week, and the U.S. trade deficitwidened more than forecast in January to the highest level in seven months.

“By taking off the burden of any single country, we don’t have to have trade deficits,” Stiglitz said in an interview in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire.

He just assumes there’s some problem with a nation running trade deficits, not realizing it’s a sign of success- improved real terms of trade- and not failure.

“Things would be much worse if it were not the case that Europe was having even more of a problem, but winning a negative beauty pageant is not the way to create a strong economy.”

The benchmark 10-year Treasury note yield was at 3.58 percent on April 8, below the average of 7 percent since 1980.

Deficits per se obviously don’t drive up interest rates.

“Reserves are IOU’s,” Stiglitz said. “When IOU’s get big enough, people start saying maybe you’re not a good credit risk. Or at least, they would change in their sentiment about credit risk.”

Doesn’t matter with a currency issuer like the US, Japan and UK.

Japan’s ‘debt’ is nearly 3x ours, has had multiple downgrades, and their 10 year rate just ‘skyrocketed’ to about 1.3%, for example.

The existing monetary system means “there’s a very good risk of an extended period of low growth, inflationary bias, instability,” Stiglitz said.

Agreed, because nations don’t realize that their taxes function to regulate their aggregate demand, and not to raise revenue per se. And seems Stiglitz doesn’t get it either.

It’s “a system that’s fundamentally unfair because it means that poor countries are lending to the U.S. at close to zero interest rates.”

It’s unfair for a lot of reasons, except that one.

The Wall of Shame (cont.)

Today is year and in Japan,
which means the last few days could be mainly quarter end and year end maneuvers,
with a high probability of ‘buy the rumor sell the news’ types of unwinds coming up.

This would include the anticipation of another 200,000 new private sector jobs to be reported tomorrow am.
And the euro strength we’ve seen in front of the announced ECB rate hike next week.

There have been lots of promotional reasons to rush to get stocks on your books for year and/quarter end reporting,
as well as a bit of gold, silver, foods, and other commodities.

But fundamentally I see what’s going on below- a world heck bent on removing aggregate demand.

More noises from Japan on how they will pay for the rebuild, which looks to be a very modest appropriation tempered by fears of being at a fiscal tipping point.

UK austerity ratchets up April 1.

China still fighting inflation with further reduced spending and lending.

The euro zone demanding and getting austerity in return for funding, with signs in some members of austerity no longer bringing down deficits as revenues fall off from economic weakness. And no fiscal safety net if it does all go bad as markets have shown extreme reluctance to fund countercyclical deficits.

And food and fuel from monopoly pricing both eating into consumer demand and driving large segments of the world population into desperation.

Talk of Q1 US GDP down to maybe only +2%, housing still bumping along the bottom, and Q2 threatened by supply shortages due to the earthquake in Japan.

And the US debt ceiling showdown now possibly happing late next week as the deficit terrorists seal their congressional victory with the promised down payment on net spending cuts that won’t end there.

In fact, their army of support is now all but universal.

Everyone in DC and the mainstream media and economics profession agrees on the problem.

The only discussion is where the cuts should be, and who should pay more.

March 31, 2011
President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
The Honorable John Boehner
Speaker of the House
1101 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
House Minority Leader
235 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
The Honorable Harry Reid
Senate Majority Leader
522 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
The Honorable Mitch McConnell
Senate Minority Leader
361-A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear President Obama, Speaker Boehner, Minority Leader Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid, and Minority Leader McConnell:


As you continue to work on our current budget situation, we are writing to let you know that we join with the 64 Senators who recently wrote that comprehensive deficit reduction measures are imperative, and to urge you to work together in support of a broad approach to solving the nation’s fiscal problems. As they said in their letter to President Obama:

“As you know, a bipartisan group of Senators has been working to craft a comprehensive deficit reduction package based upon the recommendations of the Fiscal Commission. While we may not agree with every aspect of the Commission’s recommendations, we believe that its work represents an important foundation to achieve meaningful progress on our debt. The Commission’s work also underscored the scope and breadth of our nation’s long-term fiscal challenges.

Beyond FY2011 funding decisions, we urge you to engage in a broader discussion about a comprehensive deficit reduction package. Specifically, we hope that the discussion will include discretionary spending cuts, entitlement changes and tax reform.

By approaching these negotiations comprehensively, with a strong signal of support from you, we believe that we can achieve consensus on these important fiscal issues. This would send a powerful message to Americans that Washington can work together to tackle this critical issue. Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

We agree with this letter and hope that you will work together to agree on a comprehensive, multi-year debt stabilization package.

Sincerely,
The Honorable Roger C. Altman
Former Assistant Secretary of the U.S.
Department of the Treasury; Founder
and Chairman, Evercore Partners

Barry Anderson
Former Acting Director, Congressional
Budget Office

Joseph Antos
Wilson H. Taylor Scholar in Health Care
and Retirement Policy, American
Enterprise Institute

The Honorable Martin Baily
Former Chairman, Council of Economic
Advisers

Robert Bixby
Executive Director, Concord Coalition

Charles Blahous
Research Fellow, Hoover Institute

Erskine Bowles
Former Co-Chair, National Commission
on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform

The Honorable Charles Bowsher
Former Comptroller General of the
United States

The Honorable John E. Chapoton
Former Assistant Secretary for Tax
Policy, U.S. Department of the Treasury

David Cote
Former Member, National Commission
on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform;
Chairman and CEO, Honeywell
International

Pete Davis
President, Davis Capital Investment
Ideas

John Endean
President, American Business
Conference

The Honorable Vic Fazio
Former Member of Congress

The Honorable Martin Feldstein
Former Chairman, Council of Economic
Advisers

The Honorable William Frenzel
Former Ranking Member, House
Budget Committee; Co-Chair,
Committee for a Responsible Federal
Budget

Ann Fudge
Former Member, National Commission
on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform;
Former CEO, Young & Rubicam Brands

William G. Gale
Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution William A. Galston
Senior Fellow and Ezra K. Zilkha Chair,
Brookings Institution

The Honorable Bill Gradison
Former Ranking Member, House
Budget Committee

The Honorable Judd Gregg
Former Chairman, Senate Budget
Committee

Ron Haskins
Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution

Kevin Hassett
Senior Fellow and Director of Economic
Policy Studies, American Enterprise
Institute

G. William Hoagland
Former Staff Director, Senate Budget
Committee

The Honorable Glenn Hubbard
Former Chairman, Council of Economic
Advisers; Dean, Columbia Business
School

David B. Kendall
Senior Fellow for Health and Fiscal
Policy, Third Way

The Honorable Bob Kerrey
Former Member of Congress

Donald F. Kettl
Dean, School of Public Policy,
University of Maryland

The Honorable Charles E.M. Kolb
President, Committee for Economic
Development

The Honorable Jim Kolbe
Former Member of Congress

Lawrence B. Lindsey
President and CEO, The Lindsey Group;
Former Director, National Economic
Council

Maya MacGuineas
President, Committee for a Responsible
Federal Budget

The Honorable N. Gregory Mankiw
Former Chairman, Council of Economic
Advisers

The Honorable Donald Marron
Director, Urban-Brookings Tax Policy
Center; Former Acting Director,
Congressional Budget Office

William Marshall
President, Progressive Policy Institute

The Honorable James T. McIntyre, Jr.
Former Director, Office of Management
and Budget

Olivia S. Mitchell
Economist

The Honorable William A. Niskanen
Chairman Emeritus and Distinguished
Senior Economist, Cato Institute; Former
Acting Chairman, Council of Economic
Advisers

The Honorable Jim Nussle
Former Director, Office of Management
and Budget; Former Chairman, House
Budget Committee; Co-Chair,
Committee for a Responsible Federal
Budget Michael E. O’Hanlon
Senior Fellow and Sydney Stein Jr.
Chair, Brookings Institution

The Honorable Paul O’Neill
Former Secretary of the U.S.
Department of the Treasury

Marne Obernauer, Jr.
Chairman, Beverage Distributors
Company

Rudolph G. Penner
Former Director, Congressional Budget
Office

The Honorable Timothy Penny
Former Member of Congress; Co-Chair,
Committee for a Responsible Federal
Budget

The Honorable Alice Rivlin
Former Director, Congressional Budget
Office; Former Director, Office of
Management and Budget; Former
Member, National Commission on
Fiscal Responsibility and Reform

The Honorable Charles Robb
Former Member of Congress

Diane Lim Rogers
Chief Economist, Concord Coalition

The Honorable Christina Romer
Former Chairwoman, Council of
Economic Advisers

The Honorable Robert E. Rubin
Former Secretary of the U.S.
Department of the Treasury

The Honorable Martin Sabo
Former Chairman, House Budget
Committee

Isabel V. Sawhill
Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution

Allen Schick
Distinguished University Professor,
University of Maryland

Sylvester J. Schieber
Former Chairman, Social Security
Advisory Board

Daniel N. Shaviro
Wayne Perry Professor of Taxation,
New York University School of Law

The Honorable George P. Shultz
Former Secretary of the U.S.
Department of the Treasury; Former
Secretary of the U.S. Department of
State; Former Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Labor

The Honorable Alan K. Simpson
Former Member of Congress; Co-Chair,
National Commission on Fiscal
Responsibility and Reform

C. Eugene Steuerle
Institute Fellow and Richard B. Fisher
Chair, Urban Institute

The Honorable Charlie Stenholm
Former Member of Congress; Co-Chair,
Committee for a Responsible Federal
Budget The Honorable Phillip Swagel
Former Assistant Secretary for
Economic Policy, U.S. Department of the
Treasury

The Honorable John Tanner
Former Member of Congress

John B. Taylor
Mary and Robert Raymond Professor of
Economics, Stanford University; George
P. Shultz Senior Fellow in Economics,
Hoover Institution
The Honorable Laura D. Tyson
Former Chairwoman, Council of
Economic Advisers; Former Director,
National Economic Council
The Honorable George Voinovich
Former Member of Congress

The Honorable Paul Volcker
Former Chairman, Federal Reserve
System

Carol Cox Wait
Former President, Committee for a
Responsible Federal Budget

The Honorable David M. Walker
Former Comptroller General of the
United States


The Honorable Murray L.
Weidenbaum
Former Chairman, Council of Economic
Advisers

The Honorable Joseph R. Wright, Jr.
Former Director, Office of Management
and Budget
Mark Zandi
Chief Economist, Moody’s Analytics

Harvard’s Mankiw- a disgrace to the economics profession

CAUTION: BE SEATED WHEN READING

COMMENTS BELOW:

It’s 2026, and the Debt Is Due

By N. Gregory Mankiw

March 26 (NYT)

The following is a presidential address to the nation — to be delivered in March 2026.

My fellow Americans, I come to you today with a heavy heart. We have a crisis on our hands. It is one of our own making. And it is one that leaves us with no good choices.

For many years, our nation’s government has lived beyond its means.

A rookie, first year student mistake. Our real means are everything we can produce at full employment domestically plus whatever the rest of the world wants to net send us. The currency is the means for achieving this. Dollars are purely nominal and not the real resources.

We have promised ourselves both low taxes and a generous social safety net. But we have not faced the hard reality of budget arithmetic.

The hard reality is that for a given size government, there is a ‘right level’ of taxes that corresponds with full domestic employment, with the size of any federal deficit a reflection of net world dollar savings desires.

The seeds of this crisis were planted long ago, by previous generations. Our parents and grandparents had noble aims. They saw poverty among the elderly and created Social Security.

Yes, they decided they would like our elderly to be able to enjoy at least a minimum level of consumption of goods and services that made us all proud to be Americans.

They saw sickness and created Medicare and Medicaid. They saw Americans struggle to afford health insurance and embracedhealth care reform with subsidies for middle-class families.

Yes, they elected to make sure everyone had at least a minimum level of actual health care services.

But this expansion in government did not come cheap. Government spending has taken up an increasing share of our national income.

The real cost of this ‘expansion’ (which was more of a reorganization than an expansion of actual real resources consumed by the elderly and consumed by actual healthcare needs) may have consumed an increasing share of real GDP, but with continued productivity this would have been at most a trivial amount at current rates of expansion.

Today, most of the large baby-boom generation is retired. They are no longer working and paying taxes, but they are eligible for the many government benefits we offer the elderly.

Yes, they are consuming real goods and services produced by others. The important consideration here is the % of the population working and overall productivity which he doesn’t even begin to address.

Our efforts to control health care costs have failed. We must now acknowledge that rising costs are driven largely by technological advances in saving lives. These advances are welcome, but they are expensive nonetheless.

Still no indication of what % of real GDP he envisions going to health care and real consumption by the elderly.

If we had chosen to tax ourselves to pay for this spending, our current problems could have been avoided. But no one likes paying taxes. Taxes not only take money out of our pockets, but they also distort incentives and reduce economic growth. So, instead, we borrowed increasing amounts to pay for these programs.

At least he gives real economic growth a passing mention. However, what he seems to continuously miss is that real output is THE issue. Right now, with potential employment perhaps 20% higher than it currently is, the lost real output, which compounds continuously, plus the real costs of unemployment- deterioration of human capital, broken families and communities, deterioration of real property, foregone investment, etc. etc. etc.- are far higher than the real resources consumed by the elderly and actual health care delivery. Nor does he understand what is meant by the term Federal borrowing- that it’s nothing more than the shift of dollar balances from reserve accounts at the Fed to securities accounts at the Fed. And that repayment is nothing more than shifting dollar balances from securities accounts at the Fed to reserve accounts at the Fed. No grandchildren involved!!!

Yet debt does not avoid hard choices. It only delays them. After last week’s events in the bond market, it is clear that further delay is no longer possible. The day of reckoning is here.

This morning, the Treasury Department released a detailed report about the nature of the problem. To put it most simply, the bond market no longer trusts us.

For years, the United States government borrowed on good terms. Investors both at home and abroad were confident that we would honor our debts. They were sure that when the time came, we would do the right thing and bring spending and taxes into line.

But over the last several years, as the ratio of our debt to gross domestic product reached ever-higher levels, investors started getting nervous. They demanded higher interest rates to compensate for the perceived risk.

This is all entirely inapplicable. It applies only to fixed exchange rate regimes, such as a gold standard, and not to non convertible currency/floating exchange rate regimes. This is nothing more than another rookie blunder.

Higher interest rates increased the cost of servicing our debt, adding to the upward pressure on spending. We found ourselves in a vicious circle of rising budget deficits and falling investor confidence.

With our non convertible dollar and a floating exchange rate, the Fed currently sets short term interest rates by voice vote, and the term structure of interest rates for the most part anticipates the Fed’s reaction function and future Fed votes. Nor is there any operational imperative for the US Government to offer longer term liabilities, such as 5 year, 7 year, 10 year, and 30 year US Treasury securities for sale, which serve to drive up long rates at levels higher than otherwise. That too is a practice left over from gold standard days that’s no longer applicable.

As economists often remind us, crises take longer to arrive than you think, but then they happen much faster than you could have imagined. Last week, when the Treasury tried to auction its most recent issue of government bonds, almost no one was buying. The private market will lend us no more. Our national credit card has been rejected.

As above, the US Government is under no operational imperative to issue Treasury securities. US Government spending is not, operationally, constrained by revenues. At the point of all US govt spending, all that happens is the Fed, which is controlled by Congress, credits a member bank reserve account on its own books. All US Government spending is simply a matter of data entry on the US Governments own books. Any restrictions on the US government’s ability to make timely payment of dollars are necessarily self imposed, and in no case external.

So where do we go from here?

WE DON’T GET ‘HERE’- THERE IS NO SUCH PLACE!!!

Yesterday, I returned from a meeting at the International Monetary Fund in its new headquarters in Beijing. I am pleased to report some good news. I have managed to secure from the I.M.F. a temporary line of credit to help us through this crisis.

This loan comes with some conditions. As your president, I have to be frank: I don’t like them, and neither will you. But, under the circumstances, accepting these conditions is our only choice.

Mankiw’s display of ignorance and absurdities continues to compound geometrically.

We have to cut Social Security immediately, especially for higher-income beneficiaries. Social Security will still keep the elderly out of poverty, but just barely.

We have to limit Medicare and Medicaid. These programs will still provide basic health care, but they will no longer cover many expensive treatments. Individuals will have to pay for these treatments on their own or, sadly, do without.

We have to cut health insurance subsidies to middle-income families. Health insurance will be less a right of citizenship and more a personal responsibility.

We have to eliminate inessential government functions, like subsidies for farming, ethanol production, public broadcasting, energy conservation and trade promotion.

The only reason we would ever be ‘forced’ to make those cuts would be real resource constraints- actual shortages of land, housing, food, drugs, labor, clothing, energy, etc. etc. And yes, that could indeed happen. Those are the real issues facing us. But Mankiw is so lost in his errant understanding of actual monetary operations he doesn’t even begin to get to where he should have started.

We will raise taxes on all but the poorest Americans. We will do this primarily by broadening the tax base, eliminating deductions for mortgage interest and state and local taxes. Employer-provided health insurance will hereafter be taxable compensation.

He fails to recognize that federal taxes function to regulate aggregate demand, and not to raise revenue per se, again showing a complete lack of understanding of current monetary arrangements.

We will increase the gasoline tax by $2 a gallon. This will not only increase revenue, but will also address various social ills, from global climate change to local traffic congestion.

Ok, finally, apart from the revenue error, he’s got the rest of it sort of right, except he left out the part about that tax being highly regressive.

As I have said, these changes are repellant to me. When you elected me, I promised to preserve the social safety net. I assured you that the budget deficit could be fixed by eliminating waste, fraud and abuse, and by increasing taxes on only the richest Americans. But now we have little choice in the matter.

Due entirely to ignorance of actual monetary operations.

If only we had faced up to this problem a generation ago. The choices then would not have been easy, but they would have been less draconian than the sudden, nonnegotiable demands we now face. Americans would have come to rely less on government and more on themselves, and so would be better prepared today.

What I wouldn’t give for a chance to go back and change the past. But what is done is done. Americans have faced hardship and adversity before, and we have triumphed. Working together, we can make the sacrifices it takes so our children and grandchildren will enjoy a more prosperous future.

N. Gregory Mankiw is a professor of economics at Harvard.

And no small part of the real problem we face as a nation!

Feel free to repost and distribute

The Ratings Agencies Should Downgrade the US Government

If I were running any of the ratings agencies I’d immediately downgrade the US Government’s financial obligations to no more than A based entirely on ‘willingness to pay.’

There are two considerations used by all ratings agencies when determining the credit worthiness of a government. They are ‘ability to pay’ and ‘willingness to pay.’

And while the ability of the US to make timely payment of $US is never in question, willingness to pay is not only in doubt, but, in fact, not paying as obligated by law is continuously and openly being discussed as a viable option by the same legislators tasked with making the final decisions.

IMF’s Lipsky Says Advanced-Nation Debt Risks Future Crisis as Yields Set to Rise

If any of you can forward this to John please do, thanks.
We went through all this from way back in his Salomon Bros. days- he should know better.

Comments below.

Lipsky Says Advanced-Nation Debt Risks Future Crisis as Yields Set to Rise

By Kevin Hamlin

March 20 (Bloomberg) — The mounting debt burden of the world’s most developed nations, set for a post-World War II record this year, is unsustainable and risks a future fiscal crisis, the International Monetary Fund’s John Lipsky said.

The average public debt ratio of advanced countries will exceed 100 percent of their gross domestic product this year for the first time since the war, Lipsky, the IMF’s first deputy managing director, said in a speech at a forum in Beijing today.

“The fiscal fallout of the recent crisis must be addressed before it begins to impede the recovery and create new risks,” said Lipsky. “The central challenge is to avert a potential future fiscal crisis, while at the same time creating jobs and supporting social cohesion.”

John, there is no potential future fiscal crisis for nations that issue their own non convertible/floating fx currencies.

Lipsky’s view clashes with Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, who told the same forum yesterday that further fiscal stimulus is needed to aid growth, and that European nations focused on austerity have a “fairly pessimistic” outlook. At stake is sustaining the developed world’s rebound without a deepening in the debt crisis that’s engulfed nations from Greece to Ireland.

Long-term bond yields could climb 100 to 150 basis points, driven by the 25 percentage point rise in sovereign debt ratios since the global financial crisis and projected increases in borrowing in coming years, according to Lipsky.

So? You know there is no solvency issue. So do you forecast increased aggregate demand, a too small output gap and too low unemployment because of that? What sense does that make???

A basis point is 0.01 percentage point. Yields on benchmark 10-year Treasury notes closed at 3.27 percent last week, with comparable-maturity German debt at 3.19 percent and Japanese bonds at 1.21 percent.

‘Unsustainably Low’

Bank of England Governor Mervyn King reiterated his view at a conference four days ago in Beijing that “long-term real interest rates are unsustainably low” in the aftermath of policy makers’ unprecedented monetary stimulus during the 2008 financial crisis.

And Professor Geoffrey Harcourt’s star pupil, of all people. Shame shame shame. What’s his problem- unemployment might get too low???

Total U.S. public debt was more than $14 trillion at the end of 2010, a 72 percent increase during five years, while Japan’s debt is about double the size of its $5 trillion economy. The European turmoil has forced policy makers to create rescue packages for Ireland and Greece.

This is slipped in now for the second time by Kevin Hamlin, the author of this article, in a way that suggests its associated with Lipsky, King, etc. though he obviously didn’t get any direct quotes from them, or he would have used them. In any case, its an inexcusable error to push the analogy that Ireland and Greece, users of the euro and not the issuer (the ECB is the issuer) are analogous to currency issuers like the US, Japan, and the UK.

While interest payments on debt have remained stable at about 2.75 percentage points of GDP over the last three years, “higher deficits and debts together with normalizing economic growth sooner or later will lead to higher interest rates,” Lipsky said. The IMF estimates fiscal deficits for developed nations will average about 7 percent of GDP this year.

The cost of repaying debt would increase by 1.5 percentage points of GDP by 2014 even if interest rates rise only about 100 basis points, Lipsky said.

And so what then? Create excess aggregate demand that would overly shrink the output gap? If so, I don’t see it in any IMF forecast?

IMF studies show that each 10-percentage-point increase in the debt ratio slows annual real economic growth by around 0.15 percentage point because of the adverse effect on investment and lower productivity growth, according to Lipsky, a former chief economist at JPMorgan Chase & Co.

He should know those studies are not applicable to what he’s talking about.

Welcome to the 7th US depression, Mr. bond market

Looks to me like the lack of noises out of Japan means there won’t be a sufficient fiscal response to restore demand.

If anything, the talk is about how to pay for the rebuilding, with a consumption tax at the top of the list.

That means they aren’t going to inflate.
More likely they are going to further deflate.
Yes, the yen will go down by what looks like a lot, maybe even helped by the MOF, but I doubt it will be enough to inflate.

In fact, all the evidence indicates that Japan doesn’t don’t know how to inflate, nor does anyone else.

Worse, what they all think inflates, more likely actually deflates.

0 rate policies mean deficits can be that much higher without causing ‘inflation’ due to income channels and supply side effects.
There is no such thing as a debt trap springing to life.
Debt monetization is a meaningless expression with non convertible currency and floating fx.
QE mainly serves to further remove precious income from an already income starved economy.

Only excess deficit spending can directly support prices, output, and employment from the demand side, as it directly adds to incomes, spending, and net savings of financial assets.

The international fear mongering surrounding deficits and debt issues is entirely a chicken little story that’s keeping us in this depression (unemployment over 10% the way it was measured when the term was defined) that’s now taking a turn for the worse.

The euro zone is methodically weakening it’s ‘engines of growth’- its own (weaker) members being subjected to austerity measures that are reducing their deficit spending that paid for their imports from Germany. And now China, Japan, the US and others will be cutting imports as well.

UK fiscal austerity measures are accelerating on schedule.

The US is also working to tighten fiscal policy, particularly now that both sides agree that deficit reduction is in order, beaming as they make progress towards agreeing on the cuts.

The US had 6 depressions while on the gold standard, which followed the only 6 periods of budget surpluses.
And now, even with a floating fx policy and non convertible currency that allows for immediate and unlimited fiscal adjustments,
we have allowed the deflationary forces unleashed by the Clinton budget surpluses to result in this 7th depression.

We were muddling through with modest real growth and a far too high output gap and may have continued to do so all else equal.

But all else isn’t equal.

Collective, self inflicted proactive austerity has been working against growth, including China’s ‘fight against inflation.’

And now Japan’s massive disaster will be deflationary shock that, in the absence of a proactive fiscal adjustment, is highly likely to further reduce world demand.

Hopefully, the Saudis capitulate and follow the price of crude lower, easing the burden somewhat on the world’s struggling populations.
If so, watch for a strong dollar as well.

And watch for a lot more global civil unrest as no answers emerge to the mass unemployment that will likely get even worse. Not to mention food prices that may come down some, but will remain very high at the consumer level as we continue to burn up our food supply for motor fuel.

And it’s all only likely to get worse until the world figures out how its monetary system actually works.