Category Archives: interest rates

Updated Budget Projections from the Congressional Budget Office

Posted on by
Reply

 

The Congressional Budget Office has just released an update to its February 2013 Budget Projections.  The deficit for 2013 is now projected to be $642 billion, down from the previous $845 billion.  This is good news but its main effect will only be to delay by several months until fall serious negotiations about raising the debt limit again.  The long term outlook has changed very little.  New debt for 2014-2023 is now projected at $6.3 trillion.  The total debt this year will be 76% of GDP and in 2023 it is projected to be at 74% of GDP and rising.  Over the past 40 years total debt has averaged 39% of GDP.
Such a large debt level now and for the indefinite future obviously has very serious negative consequences.  As soon as interest rates return to more typical higher levels, interest payments will rise by hundreds of billions of dollars per year, crowding out much other spending.  We can be sure that a new crisis will occur sooner or later leaving national leaders at that time in a precarious position, unless the debt level shrinks significantly in the meantime.
This means that significant additional deficit reduction is still needed at the present time.  Realistically, it should come from reforming entitlement spending which is becoming an even bigger driver of our continuing debt explosion.  Any national leader who denies the seriousness and urgency of our current frightful fiscal condition should be considered irresponsible and held to account for this failing.
The presently high unemployment rate of 7.5% is no excuse for inaction.  The way to boost the economy, and thereby reduce unemployment, is to encourage more business investment with tax and regulatory reform.  Economic stimulation and deficit reduction are not in opposition to each other.  They can and should be addressed together at the same time.

The Long Run vs. the Short Run

Posted on by
Reply

In a New York Times column on May 3, 2013, “Not Enough Inflation”, Paul Krugman writes that since we are now in a liquidity trap, where business is sitting on hoards of cash, what we need is more inflation.  A higher rate of inflation would encourage more borrowing and spending and make it easier to pay down debt.  Inflation is low because of the economy’s persistent weakness which prevents workers from bargaining for wage increases and forces business to hold down price increases.  He goes on to say that what we also need right now is “more stimulus, monetary and fiscal, to reduce unemployment” and that “the response from people who consider themselves wise is always that we should focus on the long run, not on short-run fixes”.  I think that Mr. Krugman has overstated his case as he so often does.
On May 4 the NYT “Off the Charts” columnist Floyd Norris shows that “Business Investment Rebounds Even as Recovery Drags”.  He looks at data for our four most recent recessions which shows that while consumer spending is growing slowly in our current recovery, and government spending (federal, state and local) is way down, business investment has been quite strong.  This is especially significant because the Stanford economist, John Taylor, has pointed out the amazingly strong inverse correlation between business investment and the unemployment rate.  (See also his more recent blog on February 4, 2013.)  This is a strong indication that the unemployment rate will continue to drop and perhaps even more quickly in coming months.
In summary: business investment in growing robustly, consumer spending is growing steadily, and quantitative easing (monetary policy) is just about maxed out.  Government spending is down but this is primarily because state and local governments have to balance their budgets.  So there is really only one policy lever left to further stimulate the economy, i.e. federal spending.
However this is where the long run matters at least as much as the short run.  With the national (public) debt currently at 76% of GDP and growing, it is simply too risky to let it go much higher.  In fact it is only prudent to begin reducing it as soon as possible.  Absent an unforeseen national emergency this must be our first priority.

Whither the American Economy? II

Posted on by
Reply

In today’s Wall Street Journal the columnist Holman Jenkins, with “The Reinhart and Rogoff Distraction”, writes that “Washington has signally failed to enact confidence-building and growth-inducing reforms that would make its fiscal and monetary stimulus seem less reckless and more like part of a coherent therapy.  The real problem is the incentive of voters and their representatives to stonewall any serious adjustment to the status quo….Hardly has the time been riper for another reform spasm like the Carter-era deregulation efforts, Reagan’s tax overhaul, … The ill-timed Obama campaign to magnify the perversities of our health-care system epitomizes a failure of political leadership to do its part to make the global monetary Hail Mary come off.”
The Republican House can slam on the brakes to try to slow down excessive federal spending but there is not much else it can do by itself.  The Democratic Senate is showing that it can address important but less central issues like Gun Control and Immigration Reform.  But only the President can provide game changing leadership on our fundamental economic and fiscal problems.  His political base of liberals and minorities does not want either spending cuts or reduction in tax rates.  So he proposes spending increases, small adjustments to entitlements, and tax increases on the wealthy.  This amounts to a political posture in order to appear to be addressing important issues without really engaging on them.
What has Obama accomplished?  He has shown that a liberal can be elected President  but can’t govern effectively from the left.  What is the likely outcome?  A stagnant economy with a slowly dropping unemployment rate from now until 2016 when we’ll have our next chance to vote for a reform agenda.  Eventually our rapidly growing national debt will lead to a new fiscal crisis, much worse than the Great Recession which we’ve just been through.  However it probably won’t happen until sometime after 2016.  So Obama is temporarily off the hook, so to speak, but he’ll still catch much blame later on.
Oh well, what is life without challenges!

Are Low Interest Rates Hurting the Economy?

Posted on by
2

 

The former Chairwoman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Sheila Bair, has recently stated that “Low interest rates are hurting, not helping, the economy”.  According to Ms. Bair, historically low interest rates have helped the housing market recover but are hindering business lending, which holds the key to the overall recovery.  “Very low interest rates on your (the banks) balance sheet … is not good for business lending”, says Bair.  She would like the Fed to start increasing rates in a gradual and methodical manner so that the market can adjust.
Even the WSJ’s conventional economics columnist, David Wessel, admits that “big companies continue to build an enormous cash hoard as if they are preparing for catastrophe”.  He says that “Ben Bernanke sees the exit, he just doesn’t know how to get there”.
Current policies for fixing the economy are clearly not working and may be doing grave damage.  There are lots of policy measures which might help, and certainly won’t hurt, such as broad-based tax reform, loosening regulation of small business, aggressively pursuing new trade agreements, visa reform, targeted job training, etc..  Concentrating on implementing such measures is what our national leaders should be doing!