New Economic Perspectives Mon 2010-07-19 13:51 EDT

The Myths About Government Debt and Deficit as Told By Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff

Yeva Nersisyan

...with nearly 10% of the US labor force unemployed and another 7% underemployed, the public debate is now focused on the false issue of deficits and debt. A case in point is a recent book by Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff, ``This Time is Different'' that has become a bestseller...The media as well as academia have fawned all over this book...The crux of the book is that each time people think that ``this time is different'', that crises cannot occur anymore or that they happen to other people in other places. True. This is exactly what Hyman Minsky was arguing more than 40 years ago. Reinhart and Rogoff don't really explain why this perception leads to crises...The book is mostly on crises driven by government debt...[however] Aggregating data over different monetary regimes and different countries cannot yield any meaningful conclusions about sovereign debt and crises. It is only useful if the goal is to merely validate one's preconceived myth about government debt being similar to private debt...As far as I can tell Rogoff and Reinhart haven't identified a single case of government default on domestic-currency denominated debt with a floating exchange rate system...Professional economists are a major impediment on the way to using our economic system for the benefit of us all. And Reinhart and Rogoff are no exception.

Carmen Reinhart; Deficit; government debt; Kenneth Rogoff; myth; New Economic Perspectives; told.

PRAGMATIC CAPITALISM Mon 2010-07-19 13:35 EDT

PROPERTY FALLS, MORTGAGES STAY THE SAME

TPC

While property prices have fallen 30% over the last two years mortgage debt remains larlgely unchanged from peak levels. Housing Story asks if the de-leveraging is a myth? ...The current evidence points to continued weakness in housing prices going forward...

mortgages stay; PRAGMATIC CAPITALISM; property fall.

New Deal 2.0 Fri 2010-07-16 18:50 EDT

Despite Foreign Debts, U.S. Has the Upper Hand

Henry Liu

U.S. public debt as of July 8, 2010 was $ 13.192 trillion against a projected 2010 GDP of $14.743 trillion. As of April 2010, China held $900.2 billion of US Treasuries, surpassing Japan's holding of $795.5 billion. As of 2007, outstanding GSE (Government Sponsored Enterprises like Fanny Mae; Freddy Mac) debt securities (non-mortgage and those backed by mortgages) summed up to $7.37 trillion. Does this mean disaster for the US? ...the U.S., while vulnerable, is not critically over a barrel by massive foreign holdings of U.S. sovereign debt. The reason is because U.S. sovereign debts are all denominated in dollars, a fiat currency that the Federal Reserve can issue at will. The U.S. has no foreign debt in the strict sense of the term. It has domestic debt denominated in its own fiat currency held in large quantities by foreign governments. The U.S. is never in danger of defaulting on its sovereign debt because it can print all the dollars necessary to pay off foreign holders of its debt. There is also no incentive for the foreign holders of U.S. sovereign debt to push for repayment, as that will only cause the U.S. to print more dollars to cause the dollar to fall further in exchange rates... ...trade globalization through cross-border wage arbitrage also pushes down wages in the US and other advanced economies, causing insufficient consumer income to absorb rising global production. This is the main cause of the current financial crises which have made more severe by financial deregulation. But the root cause is global overcapacity due to low wages of workers who cannot afford to buy what they produce. The world economy is plagued with overcapacity as a result. It is not enough to merely focus on job creation. Jobs must pay wages high enough to eliminate overcapacity. Instead of a G20 coordination on fiscal austerity, there needs to be a G20 commitment to raise wages globally. [Henry C.K. Liu]

0; Foreign debt; new dealing 2; U.S.; upper hand.

naked capitalism Fri 2010-07-16 16:31 EDT

Debunking Michael Lewis' Subprime Short Hagiography

Lewis' tale is neat, plausible to a mass market audience fed a steady diet of subprime markets stupidity and greed, and incomplete in critical ways that render his account fundamentally misleading...The Big Short focuses on four clusters of subprime short sellers, all early to figure out this ``greatest trade ever'' and thus supposedly deserving of star treatment...The anchor is Steve Eisman...Lewis completely ignores the most vital player, the one who was on the other side of the subprime short bets...Who really was on the other side of the shorts' trades is the important question... ...these are the international equivalent of widows and orphans...Eisman is no noble outsider. He is a willing, knowing co-conspirator. Even worse, he and the other shorts Lewis lionizes didn't simply set off the global debt conflagration, they made the severity of the crisis vastly worse. So it wasn't just that these speculators were harmful, and Lewis gave them a free pass. He failed to clue in his readers that the actions of his chosen heroes drove the demand for the worst sort of mortgages and turned what would otherwise have been a ``contained'' problem into a systemic crisis. The subprime market would have died a much earlier, much less costly death absent the actions of the men Lewis celebrates. They didn't simply keep the market going well past its sell-by date, they were the moving force behind otherwise inexplicable, superheated demand for the very worst sort of mortgages...

Debunking Michael Lewis; naked capitalism; Subprime Short Hagiography.

Credit Writedowns Fri 2010-07-16 14:22 EDT

Paul McCulley does Modern Monetary Theory

PIMCO's Paul McCulley: ``the Financial Times' Martin Wolf...cited in a recent column the financial balances approach of the late Wynne Godley...Godley's analytical framework should be the workhorse of discussions of global rebalancing, in the context of a deficiency of global aggregate demand. So, it was wonderful to see Martin riding Godley's horse...'' Edward Harrison: McCulley makes my point that government deficits are not the cause of private sector surpluses but rather the reverse -- private sector debt distress is causing deleveraging and driving up net savings -- which causes greater government deficits.

credit writedowns; Modern Monetary Theory; Paul McCulley.

billy blog Fri 2010-07-02 18:17 EDT

A total lack of leadership

Bill Mitchell

Another G20 talkfest has ended in Toronto and the final communique suggests that the IMF is now back in charge...The line now being pushed is, as always, structural reform of product and labour markets -- which you read as deregulation and erosion of worker entitlements...They buy, without question the notion that ``(s)ound fiscal finances are essential to sustain recovery, provide flexibility to respond to new shocks, ensure the capacity to meet the challenges of aging populations, and avoid leaving future generations with a legacy of deficits and debt.'' But what constitutes ``sound fiscal finances'' is not spelt out. It is all fudged around what the bond markets will tolerate. But what the bond traders think is a reasonable outcome for their narrow vested interests is unlikely to be remotely what is in the best interests of the overall populace...A sovereign government is never revenue constrained because it is the monopoly issuer of the currency and so the bond markets are really superfluous to its fiscal operations. What the bond markets think should never be considered. They are after all the recipients of corporate welfare on a large scale and should stand in line as the handouts are being considered. They are mendicants. It is far more important that government get people back into jobs as quickly as possible and when they have achieved high employment levels then they might want to conclude the fiscal position is ``sound''...The G20 statement is full of erroneous claims that budget surpluses ``boost national savings'' when in fact they reduce national saving by squeezing the spending (and income generating capacity) of the private sector -- unless there are very strong net export offsets...The on-going deflationary impact on demand that persistently high unemployment imposes is usually underestimated by the conservatives...

Billy Blog; leadership; total lack.

Fri 2010-06-18 10:24 EDT

The Progressive Economics Forum >> Remembering Wynne Godley

Jim Stanford

Progressive economists everywhere should say a thank you this week to Wynne Godley, who passed away May 13...His final major volume (published by Palgrave in 2007) was a tour de force of heterodox macro theory, co-written with Canada's (and the PEF's) own Marc Lavoie: Monetary Economics: An Integrated Approach to Credit, Money, Income, Production and Wealth. Like Minsky, he can say ``I told you so'' to the whole neoclassical profession - although unlike Minsky, Godley could do this while he was still alive...His work exploring the implications of basic macro identities (such as the basic but oft-ignored fact that all sector deficits in the economy have to sum to zero in equilibrium, and hence not all sectors can be paying down debt simultaneously - someone must be increasing their debt to keep the money flowing) has influenced heterodox writers of all stripes...

Progressive Economics Forum; Remembering Wynne Godley.

Rajiv Sethi Tue 2010-06-15 14:25 EDT

Defenders and Demonizers of Credit Default Swaps

Rajiv Sethi

The recent difficulties faced by Greece (and some other eurozone states) in rolling over their national debt has let some to blame hedge fund involvement in the market for credit default swaps...Leaving aside the question of whether naked CDS trading has been good or bad for Greece, it is worth asking whether there exist mechanisms through which such contracts can ever have destabilizing effects. I believe that they can, for reasons that Salmon and Jones would do well to consider...such contracts allow pessimists to leverage (much more so than they could if they were to short bonds instead). The resulting increase in the cost of borrowing, which will rise in tandem with higher CDS spreads, can make the difference between solvency and insolvency. And recognition of this process can tempt those who are not otherwise pessimistic to bet on default, as long as they are confident that enough of their peers will also do so. This clearly creates an incentive for coordinated manipulation...

Credit Default Swap; defending; demonic; Rajiv Sethi.

The Money Game Wed 2010-06-09 18:11 EDT

How Deficit Hawks Will Keep Cutting Spending Until We're All On Food Stamps

Marshall Auerback

...Sovereign debt is not a problem as long as the nation's debt contracts is denominated in the nation's currency -- and the nation has control over its own currency (in contrast to the euro zone). The Greek problem is the equivalent of the California problem, where California does not print its own currency...Apparently, we do not yet have the guts to shift from the neo-classical orthodoxy. Chicago school economics is still too much our religion. It persists until we all go on food stamps. The country that detests ideology is too ideological to manage any kind of serious change prior to crisis. As a result, a new crisis is almost certain to come, which will force the change that our elites still refuse to contemplate.

deficit hawk; food stamps; Keep Cutting Spending; Money game.

naked capitalism Tue 2010-06-01 20:06 EDT

When Will Europe Have Its Wile E. Coyote Moment?

...The current program instead is ultimately about protecting Eurobanks from losses, and is destined to fail. John Mauldin, in his newsletters, has been featuring the work of Rob Parenteau, as featured first here on Naked Capitalism (and a source of much reader ire): that deleveraging the public sector and the private sector at the same time is impossible absent a big rise in exports. Pretty much every major economy is on a ``reduce government debt'' campaign. Many are also on a ``deleverage the private sector'' program too (which is warranted, given the amount of profligate lending that occurred). The problem, however, is that these states can't all increase exports, particularly to the degree sought...Rob Parenteau drew out the implications in an earlier post: ``...if households and businesses in the peripheral nations stubbornly defend their current net saving positions [continue to reduce debt levels], the attempt at fiscal retrenchment will be thwarted by a deflationary drop in nominal GDP. ''...This feels like 2007 all over again, with the authorities insistent that Things Will Be Fine, when a realistic assessment suggests the reverse.

Europe; naked capitalism; Wile E. Coyote Moment.

Tue 2010-06-01 17:29 EDT

billy blog >> Blog Archive >> In the spirt of debate ... my reply

Bill Mitchell

...Steve Keen and I agreed to foster a debate about where modern monetary theory sits with his work on debt-deflation. So yesterday his blog carried the following post, which included a 1000-odd word precis written by me describing what I see as the essential characteristics of modern monetary theory. The discussion is on-going on that site and I invite you to follow it if you are interested. Rather than comment on all the comments over on Steve's site, I decided to collate them here (in part) and help develop the understanding that way. That is what follows today... We distinguish the horizontal dimension (which entails all transactions between entities in the non-government sector) from the vertical dimension (which entails all transactions between the government and non-government sector)...A properly specified model will show you emphatically that the horizontal transactions between household, firms, banks and foreigners (which is the domain of circuit theory) have to net to zero even if asset portfolios are changing in composition. For every asset created there will be a corresponding liability created at the same time...you will make errors if there is not an explicit understanding that in an accounting (stock-flow) consistent sense all these transaction will net to zero. In adopting this understanding you might abstract from analysing the vertical transactions that introduced the high-powered money in the first place, but never deny its importance in setting the scene for the horizontal transactions to occur. I think the differences between Steve's models and modern monetary theory are two-fold. First, I do not think that Steve's model is stock-flow consistent across all sectors. By leaving out the government sector (even implicitly) essential insights are lost that would avoid conclusions that do not obey basic and accepted national accounting (and financial accounting) rules. This extends to how we define money. Second, I think Steve uses accounting in a different way to that which is broadly accepted. It might be that for mathematical nicety or otherwise this is the chosen strategy but you cannot then claim that your models are ground in the operational reality of the fiat monetary system we live in. I have no problem with abstract modelling. But modern monetary theory is firmly ground in the operational reality and is totally stock-flow consistent across all sectors. If we used the same definitions and rendered Steve's model stock-flow consistent in the same way as modern monetary theory then Steve's endogenous money circuits would come up with exactly the same results as the horizontal dimensions in modern monetary theory. His results might look a bit different in accounting terms but most of the message he wishes to portray about the dangers of Ponzi stages in the private debt accumulation process would still hold.

Billy Blog; blogs Archive; Debate; reply; spirt.

Tue 2010-06-01 16:23 EDT

billy blog >> Blog Archive >> In the spirit of debate ...

Bill Mitchell

Readers of my blog often ask me about how modern monetary theory sits with the views of the debt-deflationists (and specifically my academic colleague Steve Keen). Steve and I have collaborated in the last few days to foster some debate between us on a constructive level with the aim of demonstrating that the common enemy is mainstream macroeconomics and that progressive thinkers should target that school of thought rather than looking within...hopefully, this initiative will broaden the debate and bring more people up to speed on where the real enemy of full employment lies...The modern monetary system is characterised by a floating exchange rate (so monetary policy is freed from the need to defend foreign exchange reserves) and the monopoly provision of fiat currency. The monopolist is the national government. Most countries now operate monetary systems that have these characteristics...the monetary unit defined by the government has no intrinsic worth...The viability of the fiat currency is ensured by the fact that it is the only unit which is acceptable for payment of taxes and other financial demands of the government.The analogy that mainstream macroeconomics draws between private household budgets and the national government budget is thus false. Households, the users of the currency, must finance their spending prior to the fact. However, government, as the issuer of the currency, must spend first (credit private bank accounts) before it can subsequently tax (debit private accounts)... Taxation acts to withdraw spending power from the private sector but does not provide any extra financial capacity for public spending...As a matter of national accounting, the federal government deficit (surplus) equals the non-government surplus (deficit). In aggregate, there can be no net savings of financial assets of the non-government sector without cumulative government deficit spending...contrary to mainstream economic rhetoric, the systematic pursuit of government budget surpluses is necessarily manifested as systematic declines in private sector savings...Unemployment occurs when net government spending is too low. As a matter of accounting, for aggregate output to be sold, total spending must equal total income (whether actual income generated in production is fully spent or not each period). Involuntary unemployment is idle labour unable to find a buyer at the current money wage. In the absence of government spending, unemployment arises when the private sector, in aggregate, desires to spend less of the monetary unit of account than it earns. Nominal (or real) wage cuts per se do not clear the labour market, unless they somehow eliminate the private sector desire to net save and increase spending. Thus, unemployment occurs when net government spending is too low to accommodate the need to pay taxes and the desire to net save...Unlike the mainstream rhetoric, insolvency is never an issue with deficits. The only danger with fiscal policy is inflation which would arise if the government pushed nominal spending growth above the real capacity of the economy to absorb it...government debt functions as interest rate support via the maintenance of desired reserve levels in the commercial banking system and not as a source of funds to finance government spending...there is no intrinsic reason for...

Billy Blog; blogs Archive; Debate; Spirit.

New Economic Perspectives Mon 2010-05-24 10:52 EDT

The Coming European Debt Wars

Michael Hudson

Government debt in Greece is just the first in a series of European debt bombs that are set to explode. The mortgage debts in post-Soviet economies and Iceland are more explosive. Although these countries are not in the Eurozone, most of their debts are denominated in euros. Some 87% of Latvia's debts are in euros or other foreign currencies, and are owed mainly to Swedish banks, while Hungary and Romania owe euro-debts mainly to Austrian banks. So their government borrowing by non-euro members has been to support exchange rates to pay these private sector debts to foreign banks, not to finance a domestic budget deficit as in Greece...No one wants to accept the fact that debts that can't be paid, won't be. Someone must bear the cost as debts go into default or are written down, to be paid in sharply depreciated currencies...The question is, who will bear the loss?...There is growing recognition that the post-Soviet economies were structured from the start to benefit foreign interests, not local economies. For example, Latvian labor is taxed at over 50% (labor, employer, and social tax) -- so high as to make it noncompetitive, while property taxes are less than 1%, providing an incentive toward rampant speculation...Future relations between Old and New Europe will depend on the Eurozone's willingness to re-design the post-Soviet economies on more solvent lines -- with more productive credit and a less rentier-biased tax system that promotes employment rather than asset-price inflation that drives labor to emigrate...

Coming European Debt Wars; New Economic Perspectives.

The Money Game Sat 2010-05-22 21:47 EDT

The Root Cause Of Recurring Global Financial Crises

Henry Liu

Severe global financial crises have been recurring every decade: the 1987 crash, the 1997 Asian financial crisis and the 2007 Credit Crisis. This recurring pattern had been generated by wholesale financial deregulation around the world. But the root causes have been dollar hegemony and the Washington Consensus. -- The Case of Greece --Following misguided neo-liberal market fundamentalist advice, Greece abandoned its national currency, the drachma, in favor of the euro in 2002. This critically consequential move enabled the Greek government to benefit from the strength of the euro, albeit not derived exclusively from the strength of the Greek economy, but from the strength of the economies of the stronger Eurozone member states, to borrow at lower interest rates collateralized by Greek assets denominated in euros. With newly available credit, Greece then went on a debt-funded spending spree, including high-profile projects such as the 2004 Athens Olympics that left the Greek nation with high sovereign debts not denominated in its national currency...

Money game; Recurring Global Financial Crises; root cause.

Sat 2010-05-22 20:28 EDT

New Economic Perspectives: What If the Government Just Prints Money?

Scott Fullwiler

As Congress gets set in the near future to consider raising the debt ceiling yet again, my fellow blogger L. Randall Wray creatively suggests not raising the debt ceiling but instead having the Treasury continue spending as it always does: by simply crediting bank accounts...Wray's proposal is based upon modern monetary theory (MMT) that is the focus this blog and those by Bill Mitchell, Warren Mosler, and Winterspeak. Of course, given the lack of understanding of basic reserve accounting at the heart of MMT and Wray's proposal on the part of the public, the financial press, and the vast majority of economists, one can already anticipate the outpouring of criticism suggesting that such a proposal amounts to ``printing money'' and thereby destroying the value of the currency...The approach here recognizes the importance of understanding the balance sheet implications of both of these options that are central to MMT. While most economists typically assume a supply and demand relationship, as in the hypothesized loanable funds market, and then build models accordingly, such an approach can miss important relationships in the real world...Both the Treasury's bond sales and the Fed's operations affect only the relative quantities of securities, reserve balances, and currency held by the non-government sector; the total sum of these is set by the outstanding government debt. With or without bond sales, it is the non-government sector's decision to spend or save that matters in regard to the potential inflationary impact of a given government deficit. Indeed, to be more precise, a deficit accompanied by bond sales is actually the MORE potentially inflationary option, as the net financial assets created by the deficit will be increased still further when additional debt service is paid.

Government Just Prints Money; New Economic Perspectives.

Credit Writedowns Sat 2010-05-22 20:22 EDT

On debt monetization

...Scott Fullwiler has a post out today at the UMKC Economics Blog which answers whether `monetizing the deficit' is even more inflationary. I will present some of his ideas...There is no difference between the monetization scenario and the government bond sale scenario except in regards to the Fed Funds rate. So, in a situation in which the Fed Funds rate is essentially zero, the Federal Government does not have to issue any bonds at all. Moreover, there is no difference in terms of the inflationary impact as the two scenarios have identical impacts on base money...

credit writedowns; debt monetization.