header
Home  ::   Create Blog Entry  ::   Your Blog Entries  ::   View All Blogs

Monday, October 19, 2009

Ignorance Is Bliss

With all of the talk of economic "recovery" there is one underlying factor that keeps getting pushed under the rug by our leaders and ignored by us. The article below is the best one I have read so far outlining the impending issues our economy faces despite the talk of "recovery":

Ignorance Is Bliss
By Peter Schiff
Published 10/17/09

While all the talk at present is about economic corners turned and markets charging ahead, no one is paying much notice to an American economy deteriorating before our eyes. These myopic commentators seem to be simply moving past the now almost-universally held conclusion that before the crash of 2008, our economy was on an unsustainable course. If these imbalances had been corrected, then perhaps I too would be joining in the euphoria. But evidence abounds that we have not veered at all from that dangerous path.

Last week, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that consumer spending as a percentage of U.S. GDP has risen to 71%, a post-World War II record. This level is notably higher than other wealthy industrialized countries, and vastly higher than the levels sustained by China and other emerging economies. At the same time, our industrial output is contracting, our trade deficit is expanding once again (after contracting earlier in the year), and our savings rate is plummeting (after an early year surge).

The data confirms that government stimuli are worsening the structural imbalances underlying our economy. The recent ‘rebound’ in GDP is not resulting from increased economic output, but merely from the fact that we are borrowing more than ever. That is precisely how we got ourselves into this mess. An economy cannot grow indefinitely by borrowing more than it produces. Not only is such a course untenable, but the added debt ensures a deeper recession when the bills come due.

This soon-to-be-called depression will not end until the pendulum of consumer spending habits swings violently in the other direction. This will be a jarring change, but it is the splash of cold water that we need to return our economy to viability. I believe that consumer spending as a share of GDP will need to temporarily contract to roughly 50% of GDP, before eventually moving toward its historic mean of 65%. Such a move would indicate a restoration of our personal savings, a decline in borrowing and trade deficits, and an increased industrial output. That would be a real recovery.

In the meantime, the higher the spending percentage climbs, the more painful the ultimate decline becomes.

Consumers and governments must spend less so their savings can be made available to businesses for capital investments. Businesses, in turn, will produce more products and employ more people — increasing domestic prosperity. However, rather than allowing a painful cure to return our economy to health, the government prefers to numb the voting public with a toxic saline-drip of deficit spending and cheap money.

The primary factor that enables our government to peddle economic snake oil is the dollar’s unique role as the world’s reserve currency, and our creditors’ willingness to preserve its status. By buying up dollars and loaning them back to us through Treasury debt, productive countries give American politicians carte blanche to play Santa Claus.

Ironically, as foreign governments finance our spending spree, they are simultaneously scolding us for our low savings rate. At the recent G20 meeting in Pittsburgh, all agreed — including President Obama — that resolving the global economic imbalances was a top priority. By definition, this would require Americans to spend less and save more. However, with foreign central banks continuing to buy our debt, the President has shown no political will to encourage this change.

Normally, if politicians run up the government deficit, voters soon suffer the unpleasant consequences of higher inflation and rising interest rates. Yet, if foreign central banks keep supplying the funds, these consequences are indefinitely postponed. As a result, there is no need for American politicians to ever make the tough choices required to solve our problems.

Instead, the burden may fall squarely on the citizens of those governments doing all the lending. The conflict is that within the creditor states, a vocal minority actually benefits from this subsidy (owners of Chinese exporters, for example) while the overwhelming majority fails to make the connection. Thus, foreign politicians have the same incentives as ours to keep playing the game.

The bottom line is that foreign governments can lecture us all they want about the need for prudence but if they keep lending, we’ll keep spending. Any parent knows that if you give your child a curfew yet never impose any penalties when it’s violated, it will not be respected. My gut feeling is that foreign governments are tiring of our conduct and on the verge of finally imposing some discipline. That means the dollar’s days as the world’s reserve currency are numbered, and the days of American austerity are about to begin.

Share
Post Comment:

Comments

They can tout all of the numbers they want and point to a climbing Wall St. but it still doesn't fix the issue outlined here that is poised to bring it all down, and quickly. When the buyers of our debt stop buying, the inflation will be large and fast. Coupled with a growing number of unemployed leading to decreased revenues.......OUCH. I don't comprehend how our politicians could be so stupid.
I have tried to articulate many of these points, from time, myself. I failed to do so as well as this piece though. I have stated that on previous occassions that the debt mentality society that we live in is largely responsible to the collaps we saw last year. The Piper has to be paid eventually. And in our case, when he comes to get paid, we have no money to giove them, so the banks stop lending and we are f, I mean screwed. Such is why we saw record levels of foreclosures and bussines closings. All in all, I appreciated the many examples and facts stated in the article Smashey presented here.
Remember Lenin's words: "Don't think we can't topple you Capitalist pigs from within, using your own form of government and economic system?"
Well I believe that under a free trade treaty that the US could compete against lumber from Canada if the said treaty was not as complex as NAFTA.
Um thats the point erock. The same goes for American lumber vs- canadian lumber.
Who said we had to sign such treaties with them But here is what makes no sense Columbia can send products to us no tariffs and we send products to them and pay a tarriff and Columbia wants to change that but we hold up the treaty that is not good.
Right now RSobin we are one of the poorest countries in the world. People just haven't realized it yet.
A nation only benefits from free trade with nations that have an equal or higher standard of living. Otherwise, said nation's businesses will take advantage of cheap labor, and will move operations to the poorer nations whose workers have lower expectations. In other words, our whole economy becomes a charity operation, and we keep giving when it hurts.
Henece why I disagree with NAFTA but free trade doesn't mean u can not get government off of your companies back or slash taxes to help your companies with in your natin. But if we start to dictate internal policies so could others towards us. Thus I oppose fair trade.
The idea was to hurt the US to a degree.So others in the socialist and communist world can profit enough to keep their ideologies alive and say "see they work"
That is why I oppose NAFTA a free trade treaty should be simple in nature. Plus the US government should enact polices it help our companies.
NAFTA was designed to help Canada and Mexico by slurping a little off our profits in free trade. It worked too well. Between the environmentalist militia and international pressure NAFTA singlehandedly destroyed the lumber industry in the North West States. Well done!!
I am sorry but fair trade is interventionism into other nations affairs. We can sign a simple trade agreement NAFTA is 2 complex. Add to it further if we lowered the capital gains tax and inacted other policies yes we could compete on a global level. I believe in America and I believe that we can compete but not the way we are going now.
Yes imagine we know.
With out fair-trade and some obstructionism, America is never going to compeet with foreign companies or American companies who make everythign over seas and ship it back here.
American can produce just as much even under Free trade we need pro-producing and pro-economic growth policies. I reject fair trade for the same reasons I reject intervenionsims.
One can't complain that America doesn't produce enough and support virtually unlimited trade. You're either a fair-trader of obstructionist...or you're a free marketer. You can't be a free marketer AND a fair-trader or obstructionist.
thank sorry its just the tone of your writing sometimes I apologize.
No kidding erock. I was giving you more ammunition for this particular fight. It is an artificial bubble for the wealthy to make money on. Look it up.
Taliasin I think my point agrees with Smashey's estimate that the economy is NOT on course for an economic revival.
Erock, seriously, look into what entity bought the vast majority of our treasury notes last time out. No shit, all personal bullshit and debate aside.
The stock market hitting 10,000 means nothing the dollar is weak and sales are slugish.
and to conferm that? the USA had to buy over 90% of our own treasury notes last time out. To put that into simple terms ,It's like getting a loan from the bank of america, to pay off the US bank. Normally other countries buy our notes due to confidence and commerce. By the way each loan has a higher interest rate.