No End To Long-Term Unemployment – Business Insider

J BRADFORD DE LONG, professor of economics at University of California at Berkeley, argues for expansionary monetary and fiscal policy.

At its nadir in the winter of 1933, the Great Depression was a form of collective insanity. Workers were idle because firms would not hire them; firms would not hire them because they saw no market for their output; and there was no market for output because workers had no incomes to spend.

I have been arguing for four years that our business-cycle problems call for more aggressively expansionary monetary and fiscal policies, and that our biggest problems would quickly melt away were such policies to be adopted. That is still true. But, over the next two years, barring a sudden and unexpected interruption of current trends, it will become less true.

But private sector deleveraging means expansionary monetary policy is as effective as pushing on a string. And fiscal policy needs to focus on productive infrastructure investment, not just stimulus spending that runs up public liabilities without any assets to show for it on the other side of the balance sheet.

via No End To Long-Term Unemployment – Business Insider.

Three Converging Factors May Slash Economic Growth By 71% | Daniel Amerman | Safehaven.com

An excellent historical analysis of this issue can be found in the working paper, “Debt Overhangs: Past and Present”, which was published by the National Bureau of Economic Research in April, 2012. Authored by Carmen Reinhart, Vincent Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff, it examines 26 different “debt overhangs” that have occurred around the world since 1800, with “debt overhang” being defined as public debt exceeding 90% of GDP for at least five years…..What Reinhart, Reinhart and Rogoff found was that the average duration of a debt overhang was 23 years, and that the end result was a 24% reduction in the size of national economies, compared to what they would have been if they had grown at their average growth rates when not crippled by large government debts.

via Three Converging Factors May Slash Economic Growth By 71% | Daniel Amerman | Safehaven.com.

A lack of money isn't the problem: it's time to shrink – The Drum – ABC News

Alan Kohler: Debt was built up through 30 years of current account imbalances after currencies were finally unshackled from the gold standard in 1971, and the depression of the 70s came to an end in 1982.

Central banks, principally the Federal Reserve, complied in the process of debt build-up by holding down interest rates and allowing asset prices to rise, keeping balance sheets in the black.

The credit crisis of 2007-08 brought asset prices down rapidly and rendered banks suddenly insolvent, so they had to be recapitalised by governments. Now the governments of Europe, the US and Japan are insolvent, and the only question is when the central banks will monetise their debt – that is, print more money and buy their debts…..

via A lack of money isn’t the problem: it’s time to shrink – The Drum – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation).

Alan Simpson: No Solution to Debt Without Crisis – WSJ Online

Former Senator Alan Simpson, Co-Chair of President Obama’s Fiscal Commission, doesn’t believe the national debt can be solved without a financial or political crisis. He speaks with WSJ’s Alan Murray at the latest Wall Street Journal Viewpoints panel.

[gigya src=”http://s.wsj.net/media/swf/VideoPlayerMain.swf” bgcolor=”#FFFFFF” flashVars=”videoGUID={BDA341B1-2ADA-420C-ADA6-9586B4CF30C8}&playerid=1000&plyMediaEnabled=1&configURL=http://wsj.vo.llnwd.net/o28/players/&autoStart=false” base=”http://s.wsj.net/media/swf/” name=”flashPlayer” width=”512″ height=”363″ seamlesstabbing=”false” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” swLiveConnect=”true”]

US public debt growing at unsustainable rate

We often blame Fed monetary policy for the GFC, with interest rates at exceptionally low levels leading to “Greenspan’s bubble.” Treasury was just as culpable, however, with the massive 2004-2005 surge in public debt flooding the market with liquidity. The repeat in 2008-2011 was more justifiable: the spike in public debt was necessary to offset the sharp decline in private (non-financial) debt which would have caused a deflationary spiral. The effect was to smooth out the fall in total domestic debt (public and private) and create a relatively “soft” landing for the economy.

Government, Domestic and Private (Non-Financial) Debt Growth

Quick Glossary

  • Domestic debt is all local debt, both government and private sector
  • Non-financial excludes the financial sector from debt calculations as it largely acts as a conduit for other sectors.
  • Government debt includes federal, state and local government borrowing
  • Private debt is all Domestic debt other than Government. It includes both Corporate and Household debt.
  • Household debt is all debt owed by private households, as opposed to the corporate sector.
  • GDP is the market value of all final (excludes intermediate) goods and services produced within a country in a given year/quarter.
  • Nominal means before adjustment for inflation.

Government and Domestic Debt Growth compared to GDP

Public debt growth is slowing but needs to fall further in order to keep the economy on a sustainable path. A rough rule of thumb is that public debt should grow no faster than GDP — so that it does not outgrow the nation’s ability to repay. With public debt growing at 8.6% and GDP at a nominal rate of 4.1%, Treasury’s ability to repay — and its credit rating — is deteriorating. Reduction of public debt growth to a rate of no higher than 4.1% is necessary. Increases in tax collections as a percentage of GDP would alter this basic equation, but are highly unpopular and act as a disincentive to further GDP growth.

It should be evident from the above chart that GDP contracts when the rate of domestic debt growth slows. If domestic debt ever had to contract (below zero growth), you can imagine the impact that it would have on GDP. That is a debt-deflation spiral and should be avoided at all costs. So, although we would all like to see a sharp reduction in debt levels, there are limitations on how quickly this can be achieved — without smashing the economy into a brick wall.

We can also see that GDP growth for the past decade has been largely debt-fueled. Only recently has GDP growth surged above the growth rate of domestic debt, reflecting an increase in productivity. That is what we (not just the US) have to strive for: to widen the positive gap between GDP and domestic debt growth, while bringing public debt growth below the nominal rate of growth in GDP.

Reducing the rate of growth in public debt will not be easy, however, with private debt growing at a miserly 0.8% compared to domestic debt at 3.0%. The difference is made up by government debt, growing at a whopping 8.6%. Private capital expenditure, however, has in many cases been brought-forward to take advantage of accelerated tax write-offs and is likely to slow in the months ahead. Even worse is household debt which is contracting at an annual rate of 0.9%. So the medium-term outlook for private debt may be near-zero growth. And further slowing of public debt growth would court another recession.

Domestic, Household and Private (Non-Financial) Debt Growth

What’s Going on With Debt in U.S.? – Real Time Economics – WSJ

The chart shows clearly the build up of debt heading into the bust, and the subsequent deleveraging. Overall public and private debt, by this measure, peaked at 302% of GDP in the first quarter of 2009. Since then, it has fallen to 279% as the economy has grown and some private players have lightened their debt loads.

US Debt by Sector as Percentage of GDP

via What’s Going on With Debt in U.S.? – Real Time Economics – WSJ.

Comment: ~ The Financial sector can be ignored as this merely acts as a conduit for, and mirrors, the other sectors. My concern is that Government debt is growing at a faster rate than the fall in Household and Nonfinancial Corporations debt. That is unsustainable and is likely to reverse after the November elections. At which point the economy will contract.

The path to recovery: how to bring the debt binge under control

The debt binge since 1975, fueled by an easy-money policy from the Fed, has landed the US economy in serious difficulties. Wall Street no doubt lobbied hard for debt expansion, because of the boost to interest margins, with little thought as to their own vulnerability. There can be no justification for debt to expand at a faster rate than GDP — a rising Debt to GDP ratio — as this feeds through into the money supply, causing asset (real estate and stocks) and/or consumer prices to balloon. What we see here is clear evidence of financial mismanagement of the US economy over several decades: the graph of debt to GDP should be a flat line.

US Domestic and Private Non-Financial Debt as Percentage of GDP

The difference between domestic and private (non-financial) debt is public debt, comprising federal, state and municipal borrowings. When we look at aggregate debt below, domestic (non-financial) debt is still rising, albeit at a slower pace than the 8.2 percent average of the previous 5 years (2004 to 2008). Public debt is ballooning in an attempt to mitigate the deflationary effect of a private debt contraction. Clearly this is an unsustainable path.

US Domestic and Private Non-Financial Debt

The economy has grown addicted to debt and any attempt to go “cold turkey” — cutting off further debt expansion — will cause pain. But there are steps that can be taken to alleviate this.

Public Debt and Infrastructure Investment

If private debt contracts, you need to expand public debt — by running a deficit — in order to counteract the deflationary effect of the contraction. The present path expands public debt rapidly in an attempt to not only offset the shrinkage in private debt levels but also to continue the expansion of overall (domestic non-financial) debt levels. This is short-sighted. You can’t borrow your way out of trouble. And encouraging the private sector to take on more debt would be asking for a repeat of the GFC. The private sector needs to deleverage but how can this be done without causing a total economic collapse? The answer lies in government spending.

Treasury cannot afford to borrow more money if this is used to meet normal government expenditure. Public debt as a percentage of GDP would sky-rocket, further destabilizing the economy. If the proceeds are invested in infrastructure projects, however, that earn a market-related return on investment — whether they be high-speed rail, toll roads or bridges, automated port facilities, airport upgrades, national broadband networks or oil pipelines — there are at least four benefits. First is the boost to employment during the construction phase, not only on the project itself but in related industries that supply equipment and materials. Second is the saving in unemployment benefits as employment is lifted. Third, the fiscal balance sheet is strengthened by addition of saleable, income-producing assets, reducing the net public debt. Lastly, and most importantly, GDP is boosted by revenues from the completed project — lowering the public debt to GDP ratio.

Public debt would still rise, and bond market funding in the current climate may not be reliable. But this is the one time that Treasury purchases (QE) by the Fed would not cause inflation. Simply because the inflationary effect of asset purchases are offset by the deflationary effect of private debt contraction. Overall (domestic non-financial) debt levels do not rise, so there is no upward pressure on prices.

Infrastructure investment should not be seen as the silver bullet, that will solve all our problems. Over-investment in infrastructure can produce diminishing marginal returns — as in bridges to nowhere — and government projects are prone to political interference, cost overruns, and mismanagement. But these negatives can be minimized through partnership with the private sector.

Projects should also not be viewed as a short-term, band-aid solution. The private sector has to increase hiring and make substantial capital investment in order to support them. All the good work would be undone if the spigot is shut off prematurely. What is needed is a 10 to 20 year program to revamp the national infrastructure, restore competitiveness and lay the foundation for future growth.

There are no quick fixes. But what the public needs is a clear path to recovery, rather than the current climate of indecision.

Private sector debt growth warns of anemic recovery

The cause of current anemic GDP growth is evident from the recently-released Z1 Flow of Funds report. GDP recovery from 2008/2009 is accompanied by only a modest rise in Domestic (Non-Financial) Debt — which is now constraining further growth.

Domestic (Non-Financial) Debt Growth Compared To GDP

Domestic (Non-Financial) Debt is made up of Government Debt and Private (Non-Financial) Debt — which can be further broken down into Household and Corporate debt. The Financial sector is excluded as it mainly acts as a conduit, channeling debt to other sectors of the economy. We can see below that Private (Non-Financial) Debt contraction was far greater than overall Domestic (Non-Financial) Debt. What saved the economy was a sharp spike in Government Debt in 2009, offsetting the fall. The massive fiscal deficit may have left a public debt hangover, but failure to offset the contraction in private borrowing would have had more serious consequences: a GDP collapse similar to the 1930s.

Index

Resumption of corporate borrowing has dragged Private (Non-Financial) Debt growth into positive territory but growth remains anemic and households continue to de-leverage. Cessation of government borrowing would cause a fall in overall Domestic (Non-Financial) Debt growth to near zero and a sharp fall in GDP. The economy needs to be gradually weaned off stimulus spending in order to minimize disruption to growth. And not before Private sector borrowing recovers. We need a clear deficit-reduction plan, over 5 to 10 years, in order to restore corporate sector confidence and encourage new capital investment.

The only alternative is further quantitative easing (QE3), where continuous deficits are funded by borrowing from the Fed. But that poses a whole new set of problems — and could lead us back to square #1.

Europe stumbles onwards

Markets have been fed a steady diet of press releases out of Europe for the past few weeks but very little substance. This is a dangerous strategy as hopes are raised and reaction to any form of disappointment will be strong. No matter how it is dressed up, we are likely to witness a substantial default of Southern European borrowers, requiring recapitalization of French and Northern European banks. With public debt close to danger levels in many of these countries, there are no ready funds available for a bailout. Quantitative easing by the ECB has been touted as a possible solution, but aversion to this is so strong — particularly in Germany — that it would be political suicide for Angela Merkel to support this. So Europe stumbles onwards, searching for a disguised form of QE solution that is palatable to German voters.

Germany’s DAX is testing support at 5600. Breach would test 5000, while respect would signal a primary advance to 7200*. 13-week Twiggs Money Flow is relatively weak and reversal below zero would warn of renewed selling pressure.

DAX Index

* Target calculation: 6400 + ( 6400 – 5600 ) = 7200 OR 5700 + ( 5700 – 5000 ) = 6400

France’s CAC-40 index is testing medium-term support at 3000. Failure would test 2700, while respect (signaled by breakout above 3350) would signal a further advance. 13-week Twiggs Money Flow remains weak and reversal below zero would also warn of renewed selling pressure.

CAC-40 Index

* Target calculation: 2700 – ( 3300 – 2700 ) = 2100

Italy’s FTSE MIB index is similarly testing support at 15000. Again, 13-week Twiggs Money Flow is weak and reversal below zero would warn of renewed selling pressure.

FTSE Italian MIB Index

* Target calculation: 13 – ( 17 – 13 ) = 9

The FTSE 100 index is testing support at 5350. Failure would test primary support at 4800, while respect (signaled by breakout above 5700) would confirm a primary advance to 6100*. Rising 13-week Twiggs Money Flow favors an advance.

FTSE 100 Index

* Target calculation: 5400 + ( 5400 – 4800 ) = 6000

Stimulus spending, austerity and public debt: James Galbraith

Prof. James Galbraith on fiscal stimulus and public debt:

[gigya src=”http://d.yimg.com/nl/techticker/site/player.swf” width=”576″ height=”324″ quality=”high” wmode=”transparent” allowFullScreen=”true” flashVars=”vid=27057059&browseCarouselUI=hide&”]

Agree:

  • Fiscal stimulus should not be a short-term program that will run out. The term should be 10 to 20 years so that business can make long-term plans.
  • Stimulus spending should focus on investment that creates assets — to be offset against the accompanying liabilities.

Disagree:

  • Austerity cuts are foolhardy. ~ Austerity cuts should free up money for investment in infrastructure projects.

Strongly disagree:

  • “There is no long-term debt problem here. We’re clearly in a sustainable situation otherwise the markets would not give the US government the (low) rates they are.” ~ Keep telling yourself that!