It’s an intriguing question: why can’t central banks around the world, practically all of whom have bought up sovereign debt, just cancel it? Countries would get more headroom on their debts, inflation would rise but not necessarily at an unmanageable rate. It would have the effect of hitting the reset button.
And believe it or not, it has been a topic of discussion of late.
Gavyn Davies at the FT has been talking about this idea of central banks canceling debt.
The FT also discussed it in June.
The WSJ was on the topic this week as well, and apparently at least one member of the Bank of England was forced to deny that he favors such a radical solution.
So the bottom line is that this shocking move is being talked about by influential publications, Wall Street traders, and perhaps even officials, though they’re mum on something so radical.
Because very serious persons will continue to describe this step as radical (the screams of “monetizing the debt!” would accompany any action on this front), I wouldn’t bet the ranch on it. But why exactly would it hurt anyone? I suppose you could say that the expectation of what amounts to a bailout of sovereign debt would create a moral hazard. And I would argue that, in the line of countries who deserve a debt jubilee, industrial powers like the US and UK rank low on the list. Moreover, the US and UK don’t currently have a debt problem, and until they do it would be odd to see this step taken. It makes more sense for a country where debt has become an impediment to borrowing. Surely the conservative European Central Bank would recoil at such a solution, but there are others out there who might not.
But this gets into the elite perceptions of the national debt in the first place. It exists as not only an instrument of investment for those with large funds and seeking a yield, but as a forcing event to get governments to act “responsibly.” Canceling the debt would be about the most irresponsible thing you could do, in this telling, and so it’s unthinkable. But there’s no real reason for that.
Analysts at the major banks report that canceling sovereign is among the leading questions they get from investors these days. So there’s at least some groundswell of support for it. The rule of thumb, I suppose, is that there are no simple solutions, or free lunches. But that also acts as a narrowing constraint, oftentimes.
Image via EuroCrisisExplained.co.uk under Creative Commons License




15 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
This would just be the next phase of the bank bailout. First they created a bunch of crap, then sold it to the Central Banks to get it off their books so they could start “lending” again. Now, they want the Central Banks to eat their crap, so the Sovereigns can start borrowing again and banks can make more money. Meanwhile the Central Banks and the associated currencies will take the hit. Once again, socializing their losses so they can make more profits.
Why stop at sovereign debt?
amen to that!!! Time for steve keen’s modern debt jubilee.
As I understand MMT and “Sovereign Debt,” the Sovereign Debt is interest bearing money.
It is as fungible as money, readily exchanged and used to settle balances.
It is already money, consequently there is no “monetization” of Sovereign debt. Just removal of the interest payments (aka: extraction of moneys which could be used to pay for Government services, for the benefit of a minority — not a poor minority.)
Who used to own the Sovereign debt before the Governments?
Rothschilds et al.
I wouldn’t expect to see this gain traction until a breakup of the EU goes from “possible” to “probable”, and even then it will be reactive and not proactive.
The lifestyles of bankers are more important than the EU and 50 years of peace.
50 years of peace? Poor business opportunity. Financing War is very profitable. Bankers just love Sovereign Debt, the debtor is not going anywhere.
More Old Testament solutions to modern problems.
And who controlled the decision making that led to the Sovereigns buying the debt? I know. I know same answer. :)
We need to take matters into our own hands:
Occupy 2.0: The Debt Resistors Operations Manual
Good to see that FDL is finally advocating policy prescriptions that Ron Paul came up with. In all seriousness, good job Dan.
You’re saying this is a Republican idea?
I think Republicans like id’s but not ideas or ideals. :)
It’s either that or the default of the PIIGS and breakup of the EU. (We know who the real pigs are.)