I’ve enjoyed the couple year-end reviews I’ve seen where political pundits look back at their own predictions and figure out what they got wrong. I only wish that economists would do the same.
One of the standard opinions from many economists, especially those on the right, was that the US spending/debt load was unsustainable and would surely spark massive inflation. After the downgrade of US debt by Standard and Poor’s after the debt limit deal, debt was seen as toxic. America just had to deal with its debt problem or the bond market would deal with it for them.
This dog simply has not barked. In fact, US Treasuries showed a higher demand in 2011 than at any time in the past sixteen years.
The U.S. government received record demand for its bonds in 2011, pushing longer-maturity Treasuries to their best performance since 1995 in a sign that President Barack Obama may have little difficulty financing a fourth consecutive year of $1 trillion budget deficits.
The Treasury Department attracted $3.04 for each dollar of the $2.135 trillion in notes and bonds sold, the most since the government began releasing the data in 1992 during the George H. W. Bush administration. The U.S. drew an all-time high bid-to- cover ratio of 9.07 for $30 billion of four-week bills it auctioned on Dec. 20 even though they pay zero percent interest.
This is a classic example of a flight to safety, and it has as much to do with the poor performance of economies around the world as anything else. Investors, spooked by the troubles in Europe and elsewhere, are in real terms paying the United States to hold its money. We cannot satisfy all the demand clamoring for US debt.
(UPDATE: And as Paul Krugman points out, this is true for pretty much every country with its own currency these days.)
Maybe the markets are trying to tell us something. Perhaps they want the US to borrow more and use the money for a deficit-spending binge to strengthen the economy. I’d say the negative real borrowing rates are a tell in that direction. That money could purchase a complete remaking of US infrastructure, in ways beneficial to the country’s economy and productivity, without a red cent of borrowing costs.
And about those inflation hawks, the ones who claim that the US will turn into Zimbabwe if it keeps borrowing at this level? Another dog not barking.
U.S. inflation is slowing after a surge early in the year.
This is good news for Americans, as it means the money in their pockets goes further. It also is welcome at the Federal Reserve, which has been counting on an inflation slowdown. It gives the Fed some maneuvering room in 2012 if central-bank officials want to take steps to bolster economic growth.
The slowdown has been apparent for months in some commodities. The price of copper is down 21% from a year earlier. Cotton is down 45%. Natural-gas prices continue to fall, and crude oil has retreated from peaks hit in April, though not as sharply as other commodities.
Now, more broadly, the Commerce Department’s measure of consumer prices for November, released Friday, stood 2.5% above year-ago levels in November, down from year-over-year increases of 2.7% in October and 2.9% in September. A less volatile measure excluding food and energy, watched closely by the Fed, rose 1.7% from a year earlier.
Actually, that’s the opposite of good news. It means that the Fed is missing inflation targets. Lower numbers would mean that deflation is creeping back into the picture (the Labor Department’s consumer price index has grown at an 0.8% annual rate over the last quarter). It means that wages are likely stagnant. It means the economy is not running at peak. And most importantly, it means that there’s a ton of headroom for more borrowing to increase overall demand, an opportunity we are tragically wasting.




18 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
The problem is, economics and politics are faith-based endeavors. If they were grounded in logic and reason and decisions were made based on empirical evidence, everything would be fine. Because that isn’t the case, we can see how truly fucked everything is right now. It’s an ideological war and the idiots are winning.
the demand for debt is up because interest rates are down, money is virtually free
inflation is down because people aren’t spending their money, so long as banks hang on to the wealth they’ve stolen from the middle class, so long as they demand “austerity” policy inflation should remain low
i say “should remain low” because there will come a time when the wealthy will be forced into unloading their greenbacks, this will happen because their wealth will dwindle unless they do some hiring (wealth comes from labor not the other way around and when their wealth dwindles they will be forced to regain their wealth the only way possible, by using labor)
they are missing their targets because of austerity, if people aren’t spending money then the fed can’t meet those targets, they need to get back into a productive economic model which means MORE government projects and jobs, FEWER people looking for work and HIGHER wage pressure, once that happens they will happily meet their model
Don’t confuse the pronouncements about the economy by pundits and think-tank spokespeople with the actual field of economics.
U.S. bond yields kept falling all during the PTB hand wringing over U.S. deficits, so there was no need to wait until yearend to acknowledge that.
The inflation scare has been mostly in commodities, which is part & parcel of Bernanke’s bubblicious monetary policy. Bubbles burst.
Of course, the poor get hurt by higher commodities’ inflation.
And then the poor get hurt again when bubbles burst.
But everyone must sacrifice.
“I only wish that economists would do the same.”
Why would they do that? One thing the Republicans know is that the Republican voter willfully ignores truth and reality, and will readily believe the most ridiculous hogwash that NewMax can make up.
The Republican voter believes NewsMax and Rush Limbaugh, and for a dose of far-left extremism, they watch a little Fox ‘News’.
Therefore it makes no difference what documented reality proves. if Rush Limbaugh didn’t say it, then it’s just far-left propaganda.
And the vultures are circling over the remains of one huge burst bubble:
Deutsche Bank Among Firms Giving U.S. Plans to Rent Seized Homes
“Demand for rentals is rising as more homeowners lose their properties to foreclosure and fewer buyers qualify for mortgages. About 6 million homes with a current market value of $750 billion will be repossessed by banks or sold at distressed prices by 2016, according to Oliver Chang, a San Francisco-based analyst at Morgan Stanley. FHFA’s plans for a foreclosure-to- rental program are significant because Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac service more than half of U.S. home mortgages, he said.
‘”In our opinion, this is the most important housing- related program under consideration,” Chang wrote in a Dec. 6 note to investors. “The hope is that a larger unified program is established that could move the needle a year or two down the road.”‘
LINK.
I disagree. Wall Street has contrived so many derivatives and products that wealth can be created by simply clicking money from place to place. Granted, this is not new wealth being generated, as it is when labor is involved. It is wealth that was loaned by the Fed and is being shifted from institution to institution, money being shaved off here and there, traveling overseas for a cut and coming back from another cut.
It is a transfer of wealth from the middle and lower classes to the upper class in that our tax dollars are being used by private companies to post gains at no profit to us.
This system has generated hundreds of billions of dollars in profits over the last 3 years. It’s not sustainable but it will continue to work in the short term. Therefore, no need for labor to sustain profit models for at least the next few years.
They want the USG to assume the risk of these home assets through Fannie and Freddie, thus absolving themselves of the trash inventory and bolstering their balance sheets?
On edit – and eliminating the need to write mortgages so the banksters can hold on to more money instead of loaning against property?
Is that what I’m seeing here or am I misinterpreting this?
The politicians are listening to the wrong school of economics then when it comes to policy making. The Chicago school, the Rubinites, supply siders, etc.
The Chicago and neolibrul schools were developed specifically allow rich to loot the poor.
I’ve read that the effect interest rate that the U.S. government now pays on money it borrows is actually negative. So, why not refi our national debt, i.e., borrow as much as possible to pay off our debt, i.e., go on a serious binge of quantitative easing?
You make a very good point here, Kris. We should be trying to outguess these malefactors. Where is the next area for them to use these profitmaking ploys? The looting of the poor is going to continue, because more folk now are poor – that’s where the motherlode is located. So, what will they be doing in the coming year to exploit that?
We’ve already seen that the stuff poured into local policing by Homeland Security got used up on manufactured riotous encounters – good for the makers of that stuff as now those entities need resupplying. Think the arms industry internationally being brought home to roost. Probably should supply at least the cities with a few of those tanks we no longer will be using in Iraq. So, that’s an area too, the national arms supply chain, which can be perhaps commodified into those slices and dices of interesting debt – and if we all remain peaceful can be bet against as well since that’s where the real money is.
Healthcare will probably continue to be the biggie as far as costing the roof so bringing in the income. Disaster relief would be another as disasters increase. But there they are really feeding on their own flesh – what else can the rest of us ordinary folk provide?
I’d like to think it would be the lowcost labor to build windfarms and solar energy arrays. Even on a privatized basis that would be far better than nothing. Hoover Dam here we come. I hear Bhutan has great little hydroelectric projects that don’t use dams, just the actual flow of the mountain rivers. We could do that. Gross National Happiness: you could commodify that.
Yes, instead of us all becoming wards of the state, we shall become wards of the corporation. They will own everything, looks like. What’s not to like.
that wealth is derived from a debt to be paid when it’s spent, and that bill will be paid by labor at some time in the future
Yes. Until that debt is paid, however, money is being drawn down from corporate entities by individuals in the form of compensations and bonuses. That money will never be returned against the loans. They are creating wealth simply by having wealth at the expense of the tax payer.
the debt will eventually be paid with (at the expense of) labor or the money will become worthless and repaid with air
when you say “at the expense of the tax payer” that taxpayer repays the debt with their blood, their sweat, their tears
.
thanks, Mr. Dayden, you write good articles. I would point out that as we are entering this deflationary period, aka a “liquidity trap”, the presumption that only more growth in demand can put us back on sound economic footing is misplaced.
The question at this point becomes one of growth of sustainability vs. demand for “products and services”. The finite characteristics of planet earth present both the economic solution for and the potential demise of our consumer-based lives. Growth in the number of ipods, oil wells, plastics factories, hitech diapers, agribusiness chemicals, etc. is extremely short term “growth.”
The huge amounts of money available to us right now at ZERO percent interest rates should be used to finance huge infrastructure projects to enhance the sustainability of our energy, transportation, housing, education and food industries, for starters.
Demand for more useless shit really just rewards the lazy bastards lounging in the corner offices of our mega corporations who make the useless shit, and their shareholders. Yes, it provides a few jobs until those jobs can be outsourced, useless shit can be made anywhere. But sustainability systems provide long term employment for millions and millions of Americans, those jobs can’t be outsourced.