Tag: federal debt

–Three misunderstood, economic truths

An alternative to popular faith

        Three economic truths: Federal deficit spending is necessary for economic growth; all money is debt; federal taxes do not pay for federal spending.
        For you and me, running a financial deficit is bad. Deficits can deplete our personal money supply, reducing our ability to pay bills. Similarly, when a corporation or a city, county or state runs a financial deficit, their ability to pay bills is reduced.
        However, despite what the media, the politicians and the economists tell you, when the U.S. government runs a deficit, that is good – in fact, necessary.
        By definition, a large economy has more money than does a small economy. So, a growing economy must have a growing supply of money. Federal deficit spending is the way the government adds growth money to the economy. Because the federal government has the unlimited power to create money, it never can run short of money to pay its bills.
        Every form of money is a form of debt. Bank savings accounts, checking accounts, money market accounts, CDs, travelers’ checks, corporate bonds and T-bills all are types of debt and money. Even the dollar bill is a debt of the federal government, which is why it has “federal reserve note” printed on it. “Bill” and “note” are words describing debt.
        As debt and money are identical, a growing economy must have a growing supply of debt. It can be personal debt, corporate debt, city, county and state debt, and it can be federal debt. All debts, except federal debt, are limited by the debtor’s ability of pay, and excessive debt can lead to bankruptcy. This makes federal debt the safest form of debt. It can grow endlessly, without causing bankruptcy.
        One counter-argument is that foreign countries (especially China) will refuse to lend us money. But, we don’t need to borrow from China or from anywhere else. We borrow by creating T-securities out of thin air, then selling them. This process is a relic of the gold standard days, when the government did not have the unlimited ability to create money. Today, the government does not need to create and sell T-securities. It merely can create money, also out of thin air. The processes are functionally identical. The end of federal borrowing would end concerns about federal debt. Rather than discuss “debt” we would discuss “money created.”
        A second counter argument is that printing money causes inflation. Examples are given of pre-war Germany, China and Brazil, which suffered hyper-inflation, a different process. Hyper-inflation occurs if a government prints money in response to inflation, when the proper response is to raise interest rates. Since WWII inflation has not been caused by excessive money printing, but rather by excessive oil prices. The largest, recent inflationary period came during the modest Carter deficits. The massive Reagan deficits saw inflation decline. Making money more valuable by raising interest rates, prevents and cures inflation.
        The media tell us the federal government spends “taxpayers’ money” or “our grandchildren’s money.” Neither is true. Other governments – city, county and state — do not have the unlimited ability to create money, so they spend taxpayers’ money. The federal government does not. There is no historical relationship between federal deficits and tax rates. The federal government literally destroys incoming tax money, and creates new money to pay its bills. There is no federal “bill-paying” account funded by taxes.
        Federal debt has increased 1400% in just the past 30 years, and the government never has had any difficulty paying its bills. Were taxes to fall to $0, this would not affect by even one penny, the government’s ability to pay its bills.
        In summary, much of what the media, the politicians and the economists tell you about our economy either is obsolete or always has been wrong. The lack of understanding that federal deficits are different from all other deficits has prevented universal health care and improvements in education, pension support, the ecology, the infrastructure, energy, the military and numerous other situations.
        The misguided fear of inflation or taxes, neither of which is exacerbated by federal deficit spending, has paralyzed our ability to solve the most pressing problems of today.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

–Understanding Federal Debt. Full Faith and Credit

An alternative to popular faith

Why do we have recessions and depressions? Are they inevitable and unavoidable? Why do we have inflations? Are they preventable and curable?

This short post will give you a basis for answering these vexing (especially to the politicians, the Fed and the media) questions.

1. By definition: A larger economy has more money than does a smaller economy. California has more money than does Los Angeles, which in turn, has more money than does Anaheim.

2. Therefore: To grow larger, an economy requires a growing supply of money.

3. All forms of money are debt. Although there are many definitions of money, every form of modern money – bank accounts, money market accounts, traveler’s checks – is a form of debt. Even currency is a debt of the government. That is why a dollar “bill” has “federal reserve note” printed on it. “Bill” and “note” are words signifying debt (as in “T-bill” and “T-note.”)

4. Therefore: To grow larger, an economy requires a growing supply of debt/money.

5. The safest form of debt/money is federal debt/money. There are many types of debt – personal debt, corporate debt, state and local government debt, federal debt – but after 1971, the end of the gold standard, only the federal government has had the unlimited ability to create money to service its debt. All other debtors go bankrupt when they are unable to service their debts. The end of the gold standard marked the biggest change in economics during the 20th century. Most key economic hypotheses became obsolete in 1971; economists who did not change in 1971 are themselves obsolete.

6. All debt requires collateral. The collateral for federal debt is “full faith and credit.” This may sound nebulous to some, but it actually involves certain, specific and valuable guarantees, among which are:
A. –The government will accept only U.S. currency in payment of debts to the government
B. –It unfailingly will pay all its dollar debts with U.S. dollars and will not default
C. –It will force all your domestic creditors to accept U.S. dollars, if you offer them, to satisfy your debt.
D. –It will not require domestic creditors to accept any other money
E. –It will take action to protect the value of the dollar.
F. –It will maintain a market for U.S. currency
G. –It will continue to use U.S. currency and will not change to another currency.
H. –All forms of U.S. currency will be reciprocal, that is five $1 bills always will equal one $5 bill and vice versa.

7. The value of debt (money) is based on supply and demand. An increase in supply makes the value go down. An increase in demand makes the value go up.

8. The demand for debt (money) is based on risk and reward. The risk of owning debt (money) is the danger of inflation. The reward for owning debt (money) interest rates. High reward with low risk makes demand go up which makes value go up.

9. Inflation compares the value of debt (money) with the overall value of goods and services. Fighting inflation requires increasing the reward for owning debt (money) and/or reducing the supply of debt (money). However, because a growing economy requires a growing supply of debt (money), reducing the supply leads to recessions and depressions, making supply-reduction a poor choice for fighting inflation.

10. For every borrower there is a lender. To the degree lowering interest rates helps borrowers, it equally hurts lenders, both of whom are part of the economy. The Fed lowers interest rates, believing this helps businesses that are borrowers, neglecting the fact that it equally hurts businesses that are lenders. That is why the 20 rate reductions preceding and during the recession, neither prevented nor cured the recession.

You now know how to begin to answer the questions in the first paragraph.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

–More “debt bomb” nonsense

An alternative to popular faith

Well, they just keep on doing it. The February 8, 2010 Forbes Magazine’s cover story is titled, “The Global Debt Bomb,” by Daniel Fisher.

It contains the usual scary words, for instance: “The world has issued so much debt in the past two years fighting the Great Recession that paying it all back is going to be hell –for Americans, along with everybody else. Taxes will have to rise around the globe, hobbling job growth and economic recovery.” Etc., etc., etc. You get the idea.

Never mind that this is exactly the same “sky is falling” commentary — even using the words “debt bomb” — we have been hearing from pundits since 1940 (See https://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/federal-debt-a-ticking-time-bomb/). Never mind that “government debt” is an exact synonym for “government money,” which needs to grow if an economy is to grow.

Never mind that “paying it back” is not, and since 1971 (the end of the gold standard) never will be, a problem for a sovereign nation with the unlimited ability to create money. Never mind that using this unlimited ability has not caused inflation, which in any event could be cured by raising interest rates. And never mind that taxpayers do not pay for federal debt and tax rates are not related to federal debt.

In short, never mind history, and just keep making the same old, wrong predictions, using the same old words, because let’s face it, fear-mongering sells magazines, and why make up new words when cribbing the old words is so much easier.

Pick up that issue of Forbes, read Fisher’s article, and wherever you see the word “debt” replace it with the word “money.” That will show you the reality. Also, if you know how to contact Fisher, you might ask him to supply historical proof that, as he says, “. . . the taxpayer will have the devil to pay.”

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
www.rodgermitchell.com

–Robin Hood Obama takes from rich and poor

An alternative to popular faith

        You have been led to believe recessions are an unavoidable part of the natural business cycle. Like bad weather, there is nothing we can do to prevent them, and when they come, we simply must deal with them.
        Wrong. Recessions neither are unavoidable nor natural. They always occur because of mistakes, both innocent and deliberate, by our political leadership.
        Today we experience a classic example. For the past two years, the economy has experienced a money shortage, also known as a recession. In belated response, the government properly has pumped stimulus money into the economy via deficit spending. This addition of money to a money-starved economy is beginning to help (though the stimulus has been too little and too late — but that’s another story.)
        Where did the government obtain the stimulus money? Not from taxpayers. The definition of “deficit spending” is money spent without taxes. The government created the money simply by crediting bank accounts and debiting its own balance sheets. Despite what the media say, tax payers and tax money, which never pay for federal spending, were not involved.
        Read this article — wording in green:

“1/15/10: WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama told banks Thursday they should pay a new tax to recoup the cost of bailing out foundering firms at the height of the financial crisis.”
        If stimulus spending helps the economy grow, what will new taxes do? Right. Help the economy shrink.

“‘We want our money back,’ he said.”
        He neglected to indicate who “our” is. Surely not the American public, who have paid, and will pay, nothing for the bank bailout funds. And why does the government want the money? It has no use for it. In fact, money sent to the government immediately is destroyed when federal balance sheets are credited. The government has the unlimited ability to pay bills by crediting bank accounts. Unlike you, me and every other U.S. entity, the government does not use income to pay its bills.

         “In a brief appearance with advisers at the White House, Obama branded the latest round of bank bonuses as ‘obscene.’ But he said his goal was to prevent such excesses in the future, not to punish banks for past behavior.”
        Typical populist rhetoric, fomenting class warfare. He’s a benevolent Robin Hood, taking from the rich and, oh yes, also taking from the poor by removing money from the economy. Taxing banks does punish them, but President Obama doesn’t want to punish banks. Sure. Believe that and I have some costume jewelry I want to sell you.

        “The tax, which would require congressional approval, would last at least 10 years and generate about $90 billion over the decade, according to administration estimates. ‘If these companies are in good enough shape to afford massive bonuses, they are surely in good enough shape to afford paying back every penny to taxpayers,’ Obama said.”
         That’s $90 billion to be ripped out of the economy and destroyed. Does anyone really believe they will see one penny of that $90 billion? Does anyone believe that will put even one nickle in their pockets? If so, contact me about that jewelry.

         “Advisers believe the administration can make an argument that banks should tap their bonus pools for the fee instead of passing the cost on to consumers.”
         Instead of paying bonuses and salaries to living people, who then will pass the money on by spending and saving, the government wants the money extracted from the economy, then sent to the government, where it will be destroyed. (If you don’t believe the government destroys all money sent to it, tell me where the government stores the tax money it receives.)
        By the way, did I mention that President Obama has other populist taxes in store for you? Think about the tax on what he calls “Cadillac” health plans.
         And this is why future recessions are certain. They neither are normal nor unavoidable. They are caused by politicians who either through ignorance or populist electioneering, actively cause recessions.
        If banks don’t want to pay this extra tax, and unions don’t want the “Cadillac health plan” tax, they will have to bribe Democratic legislators to vote “properly.” This is the old political trick of proposing something onerous, so the prospectively injured party pays up. Cynical, but effective, and no one ever said President Obama is not an effective politician.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com