|
Request for
Comments A Fiscal Train Wreck
By Paul Krugman, NYT, 031103 With war looming, it's time to be prepared. So last week I
switched to a fixed-rate mortgage. It means higher monthly payments, but I'm
terrified about what will happen to interest rates once financial markets wake
up to the implications of skyrocketing budget deficits. From a fiscal point of view the impending war is a lose-lose proposition. If it goes badly, the resulting mess will be a disaster for the budget. If it goes well, administration officials have made it clear that they will
use any bump in the polls to ram through more big tax cuts, which will also be
a disaster for the budget. Either
way, the tide of red ink will keep on rising. Last week the Congressional Budget Office marked down its
estimates yet again. Just two
years ago, you may remember, the C.B.O. was projecting a 10-year surplus of
$5.6 trillion. Now it projects a 10-year deficit of $1.8 trillion. And that's way too optimistic. The Congressional Budget Office operates under
ground rules that force it to wear rose-colored lenses. If you take into account — as the
C.B.O. cannot — the effects of likely changes in the alternative minimum tax,
include realistic estimates of future spending and allow for the cost of war
and reconstruction, it's clear that the 10-year deficit will be at least $3
trillion. So what? Two
years ago the administration promised to run large surpluses. A year ago it
said the deficit was only temporary.
Now it says deficits don't matter.
But we're looking at a fiscal crisis that will drive interest rates
sky-high. A
leading economist
recently summed up one reason why: "When the government reduces saving by
running a budget deficit, the interest rate rises." Yes, that's from a textbook by the
chief administration economist, Gregory Mankiw. But what's really scary — what makes a
fixed-rate mortgage seem like such a good idea — is the looming threat to the
federal government's solvency. That may sound alarmist: right now the deficit, while huge
in absolute terms, is only 2 — make that 3, O.K., maybe 4 — percent of
G.D.P. But that misses the point.
"Think of the federal government as a gigantic insurance company
(with a sideline business in national defense and homeland security), which
does its accounting on a cash basis, only counting premiums and payouts as they
go in and out the door. An
insurance company with cash accounting is an accident waiting to
happen." So says the Treasury under secretary Peter Fisher; his point is that because of the future
liabilities of Social Security and Medicare, the true budget picture is much
worse than the conventional deficit numbers suggest. Of course, Mr. Fisher isn't allowed to draw the obvious
implication: that his boss's push for big permanent tax cuts is completely crazy. But the conclusion is inescapable. Without the Bush tax cuts, it would have been difficult to cope with the
fiscal implications of an aging population. With
those tax cuts,
the task is simply impossible. The accident — the fiscal train wreck — is
already under way.
How will the train wreck play itself out? Maybe a future administration will use
butterfly ballots to disenfranchise retirees, making it possible to slash
Social Security and Medicare. Or
maybe a repentant Rush Limbaugh will lead the drive to raise taxes on the
rich. But my prediction is that
politicians will eventually be tempted to resolve the crisis the way
irresponsible governments usually do: by printing money, both to pay current bills
and to inflate away debt. And as that temptation becomes obvious, interest rates will
soar. It won't happen right
away. With the economy stalling
and the stock market plunging, short-term rates are probably headed down, not
up, in the next few months, and mortgage rates may not have hit bottom
yet. But unless we slide into Japanese-style deflation, there are much
higher interest rates in our future. I think that the main thing keeping long-term interest rates
low right now is cognitive
dissonance. Even though the business community is
starting to get scared — the ultra-establishment
Committee for Economic Development now warns that "a fiscal crisis threatens our future standard of living" — investors still can't believe that the leaders of
the United States are acting like the rulers of a banana republic.
But I've done the math, and reached my own conclusions — and I've locked
in my rate.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/11/opinion/11KRUG.html Outgoing mail
scanned by NAV 2002 |
- RE: [Futurework] The US of Banana Republic Karen Watters Cole
- RE: [Futurework] The US of Banana Republic Cordell . Arthur
