Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Fiscal cliff to improve debt outlook but cause recession



@CNNMoney August 22, 2012: 12:08 PM ET
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- If the so-called fiscal cliff takes effect in 2013, the U.S. deficit outlook will improve, but scheduled tax increases and spending cuts would push the country into recession and unemployment up to 9%.
That's one of the main takeaways from an analysis Wednesday by the Congressional Budget Office, which released its updated budget and economic projections for 2012 through 2022.
The fiscal cliff is made up of an enormous amount of tax hikes and spending cuts set to take effect starting in 2013.
Among them, the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and the enactment of $1 trillion in automatic, across the board spending cuts that are being triggered because Congress has failed to come up with an alternativedebt-reduction plan.
If all the policies are allowed to go into effect, the CBO projects that the economy, as measured by GDP, will shrink by 0.5% between the fourth quarter of this year and the fourth quarter of next year. Unemployment, currently 8.3%, will rise to 9% in the second half of 2013.
The CBO's forecast for 2013 has worsened since May, when it first forecast the fiscal cliff would cause a recession.
The fiscal cliff would, however, improve the deficit picture greatly. The CBO forecasts the deficit will hit $1.1 trillion this year -- or 7.3% of GDP. But for 2013, it would fall to $641 billion, or 4% of GDP under the fiscal cliff. That would represent the biggest single year drop in the annual deficit as a percent of the economy since 1969.
Looking ahead to the rest of the decade, the CBO projects deficits wouldcontinue to fall dramatically through 2018 before starting to rise again as the costs of supporting an aging population start to take hold. Net result: the debt held by the public would fall to 58.5% of GDP by 2022, from a projected 73% this year.
By contrast, if lawmakers did not allow the fiscal cliff to take effect, the economy would continue to grow, albeit at a slow 1.7% pace. It would also create 2 million more jobs than if fiscal cliff policies were enacted, leaving the unemployment rate at 8%.
While that would result in a better economy in the short-term, over the next decade, the debt picture would worsen considerably and weigh on the economy in the later years.
In the absence of the fiscal cliff, the CBO forecasts the deficit in 2013 would again hit $1 trillion. And by the end of the decade, debt held by the public would rise to 90% of GDP, the highest it has been since shortly after World War II.
If lawmakers choose not to reduce deficits next year in order to preserve the economic recovery, they'll need to do so eventually, said CBO director Douglas Elmendorf.
"The key issue [for policymakers] is not whether to reduce budget deficits. The question is when and the question is how," Elmendorf noted.
At the moment, it's not at all clear how Congress will handle the fiscal cliff. Neither party wants all of the scheduled policies to take effect, but in the midst of a bruising campaign season, neither is willing to budge on their partisan views regarding how to replace the cliff.
To top of page


Friday, August 17, 2012

A Remarkable Quote From The 1970s That Perfectly Predicted Why The Euro Would Be A Disaster



Ramanan rounded up some pretty incredible Nicholas Kaldor quotes on Europe from the early 70′s.   It’s really remarkable commentary given the time it was written.   Given its pre-Euro timeframe, one could even argue that this is more prescient than the Wynne Godley comments in the early 90′s that predicted why the Euro would not work.   Kaldor passed away in 1986 but he likely would have had a similar view of the Euro that Godley had before it was implemented, but that’s just a guess.  Unfortunately, he wasn’t around to advise on the European Monetary Union.  More via Ramanan:
“… Some day the nations of Europe may be ready to merge their national identities and create a new European union – the United States of Europe. If and when they do, a European Government will take over all the functions which the Federal government now provides in the U.S., or in Canada or Australia. This will involve the creation  of a “full economic and monetary union”. But it is a dangerous error to believe that monetary and economic union can precede a political union or that it will act (in the words of the Werner report) “as a leaven for the evolvement of a political union which in the long run it will in any case be unable to do without”. For if the creation of a monetary union and Community control over national budgets generates pressures which lead to a breakdown of the whole system it will prevent the development of a political union, not promote it.
…The events of the last few years - necessitating a revaluation of the German mark and a devaluation of the French franc – have demonstrated that the Community is not viable with its present degree of economic integration. The system presupposes full currency convertibility and fixed exchange rates among the members, whilst leaving monetary and fiscal policy to the discretion of the individual member countries. Under this system, as events have shown, some countries will tend to acquire increasing (and unwanted surpluses) in their trade with other members, whist others face increasing deficits. This has two unwelcome effects. It transmits inflationary pressures emanating from some members to other members; and it causes the surplus countries to provide automatic finance on an increasing scale to the deficit countries.
… This is another way of saying that the objective of a full monetary and economic union is unattainable without a political union; and the latter pre-supposes fiscal integration, and not just fiscal harmonisation. It requires the creation of a Community Government and Parliament which takes over the responsibility for at least the major part of the expenditure now provided by national governments and finances it by taxes raised at uniform rates throughout the Community. With an integrated system of this kind, the prosperous areas automatically subside the poorer areas; and the areas whose exports are declining obtain automatic relief by paying in less, and receiving more, from the central Exchequer. The cumulative tendencies to progress and decline are thus held in check by a “built-in” fiscal stabiliser which makes the “surplus” areas provide automatic fiscal aid to the “deficit” areas.”


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/a-remarkable-quote-from-the-1970s-that-perfectly-predicted-why-the-euro-would-be-a-disaster-2012-8#ixzz23raKgT11

Proposition 32 offers a second chance




California's recent string of bankruptcies - San Bernardino among them - resulted from public-employee unions having a mafia-like stranglehold on democratically elected officials.Tony Soprano would be proud.
Back in the good times, when the public wasn't paying attention, public-employee unions bestowed election endorsements on candidates and flooded their coffers with campaign cash. These ever-organized unions also provided the people power needed to coat a city with candidates' yard signs.
Residents - oblivious to local politics and issues - based their votes on which candidates had the most yard signs. Residents blissfully went on with their lives as long as the cops responded to their calls and the city picked up their garbage.
And poof! Candidates deeply in hock to the public-employee unions kept winning elections. They repaid their political debts by giving unions as many taxpayer dollars as they wanted at negotiation time.
Public employees went onto to enjoy salaries and benefits doubling those of the taxpayers they were supposedly serving.
As cited in a recent San Bernardino Sun article, one in four San Bernardino city employees have six-figure salaries.
The process worked great until the Great Recession, when taxpayers hit a saturation point and refused to coughup the tax money needed to keep the machine turning. That's when taxpayers began paying attention to local issues.
Now, for the

Advertisement
ads not by this site

first time, elected officials are being forced to stand up to the public-employee unions whose greed triggered our current mess. Bankruptcy is the consequence. Many cities are expected to soon join San Bernardino, Stockton and Mammoth Lakes in the Golden State sick bay.Californians are only now paying attention because their financially ill cities are the laughingstock of the country. They are now at risk of losing police protection and garbage collection because of the incestuous public-employee, elected-official relationship.
(Ironically, I'm now reading almost as many articles about San Bernardino in the Wall Street Journal as I do in the Sun and the Redlands Daily Facts anymore.)
Both public and private unions have parasitic relationships with their employers. The difference is private unions know they die if their company dies. That's not a concern with public unions.
Their employers are the local government, which can stay alive indefinitely by constantly draining ever more money from taxpayers.
The financial disaster Californians are experiencing never would have happened if voters had paid attention to local issues and demanded that their dollars go toward fixing potholes and improving parks instead of lavishing even more benefits on public employees.
Fortunately, life is rife with second chances. For Californians, a chance to repent for decades of apathy comes in November when Proposition 32 will be on a statewide ballot.
If approved, that measure will block corporate and union contributions to state and local candidates; ban contributions by government contractors to the politicians who controlled and awarded the contracts in the first place; and, most significantly, prevent unions and corporations from automatically deducting wages for political purposes.
In other words, the same measure that the union bullies fought so hard in Wisconsin in June is coming to California in November. The public-employee unions are going to dig up every body and find every skeleton, real or imagined, to fight this proposition. Their fear-mongering might include such impossibilities as Mitt Romney wanting to take away your air conditioning.
Figures vary, but unions are expected to spend $30 million to defeat a ballot measure that has already turned around the fortunes of the Badger State.
And with good reason - If Prop. 32 wins, Tony Soprano would be angry.
John F. Berry
Redlands