Larry Kudlow is the most dangerous conservative economic pundit. He is one of he prime architects of the “phrase tax cuts pay for themselves.” Obviously, he has never bothered to examine these tables from the Congressional Budget Office – especially table 3 which clearly prove tax cuts decrease revenue. Never let the facts get in the way of a fiscal agenda that has racked up nearly 5 trillion in debt in 17 of the last 25 years. (By the way Larry – it took 200 years to get to the first trillion. Way to over-achieve). Now he is arguing that the increased debt load from hurricane Katrina relief is “no big deal”.
First, here is a link to Larry’s editorial.
In this new spending environment, total U.S. debt held in public hands will rise a little more quickly to the $4 trillion mark. But that’s a small fraction of our nation’s wealth. The Federal Reserve recently indicated that total family net wealth — which includes the value of our nation’s businesses, bonds, stocks, and real estate — just hit an all-time high of $50 trillion. This illustrates the firepower of the free nation and economy that the radical Islamic fundamentalists desire to overthrow.
Here Larry makes a classic Republican argument that is wrong. He only uses the debt held by the public to calculate the national debt. Here’s the problem with using only that figure: there is a second category of debt called intra-governmental debt. According to the General Accounting Office:
Intragovernmental Debt Holdings represent federal debt issued by Treasury and held by certain federal government accounts, such as the Social Security and Medicare trust funds.
Intragovernmental debt holdings represent balances of Treasury securities held by federal government accounts, primarily federal trust funds, that typically have an obligation to invest their excess annual receipts over disbursements in federal securities. Most federal trust funds invest in special U.S. Treasury securities that are guaranteed for principal and interest by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. These securities are nonmarketable; however, they represent a priority call on future budgetary resources.
…debt held by the public and intragovernmental debt holdings are very different. Debt held by the public approximates the federal government’s competition with other sectors in the credit markets. Federal borrowing absorbs resources available for private investment and may put upward pressure on interest rates. In addition, interest on debt held by the public is paid in cash and represents a burden on current taxpayers. It reflects the amount the government pays to its outside creditors.
In contrast, intragovernmental debt holdings perform an accounting function but typically do not require cash payments from the current budget or represent a burden on the current economy. In addition, from the perspective of the budget as a whole, interest payments to federal government accounts by the Treasury are entirely offset by the income received by such accounts-in effect, one part of the government pays the interest and another part receives it. This intragovernmental debt and the interest on it represents a claim on future resources and hence a burden on future taxpayers and the future economy. However, these intragovernmental debt holdings do not fully reflect the government’s total future commitment to trust fund financed programs. They primarily represent the cumulative cash surpluses of those trust funds and also reflect future priority claims on the U.S. Treasury. They do not have the current economic effects of borrowing from the public and do not currently compete with the private sector for available funds in the credit markets. However, when trust funds redeem Treasury securities to obtain cash to fund expenditures, and Treasury borrows from the public to finance these redemptions, there is competition with the private sector and thus an effect on the economy.
Notice some key words from the GAO. Intra-governmental holdings are represented by special issue government securities. These are guaranteed by the “full faith and credit of the US government.” They are non-marketable (they can’t be sold) – but they have a priority claim. This simply means they jump to the front of the line when new revenues come into the federal treasury to get paid-off.
Here’s the somewhat over-simplified translation. Intra-governmental debt is essentially an IOU. Suppose the VA is running short of funds and Social Security has a surplus. SS sells its surplus to the Treasury for a special issue IOU. The cash from the transaction goes to the VA. The IOU has a priority claim on future government revenues. In other words, it is still a debt that must be paid. Because these holdings are debt instruments, they are entirely relevant to a discussion of national debt.
Now, according to the Bureau of Public Debt total public and intra-governmental debt holdings are 7.9 trillion. Notice how this figure is nearly twice the 4 trillion Larry quoted in the article? Isn’t that amazingly convenient he finds a lower figure to quote to make his master look good.
Larry continues:
In this new spending environment, total U.S. debt held in public hands will rise a little more quickly to the $4 trillion mark. But that’s a small fraction of our nation’s wealth. The Federal Reserve recently indicated that total family net wealth — which includes the value of our nation’s businesses, bonds, stocks, and real estate — just hit an all-time high of $50 trillion. This illustrates the firepower of the free nation and economy that the radical Islamic fundamentalists desire to overthrow.
Bankers often talk about debt-to-equity ratios when it comes to financing corporate deals. Well, our federal-debt-to-national-wealth ratio is a paltry 8 percent — a metric that would make any M&A specialist gleeful. Of all the commentary I’ve seen about the so-called fiscal crisis of hurricane-recovery spending, only Nick Danger of the RedState blog has had the sense to argue the issue like a banker. Global financing markets will underwrite new U.S. spending without a drop of perspiration.
Isn’t this wonderful? The national debt/equity ratio is a paltry 8%? Hell, let’s keep that wonderful federal credit card going! Borrow and squander our future!!!!!!
Here, once again, Larry is involved in the big smoke screen. The standard metric used to determine the size of the national debt is debt/GDP ratio, not the national debt/equity ratio. According to the CIA factbook, the US’ 2004 estimated GDP was 11.75 trillion. That makes the 8 trillion total debt (pre-Katrina spending) 68% of the total US GDP. This is the measurement every other economist uses. However, Larry decides to drive off the range and make the rules up as he goes along.
I just watch Sin City again and was again totally amazed by the movie. There is a scene in the movie when the politician is talking to Bruce Willis while Willis is in the hospital. The politician says something to this effect: “I deal in lies. And when you get people to believe the lie, you have them by the balls.” This is the central problem with right-wing talking head economic pundits. They make up all sorts of ways to justify their party’s policies.
Larry has of course conveniently overlooked the standard economic measure of national debt because it doesn’t look good for Bush’s policies. Larry has conveniently overlooked warnings from current Fed chief Greenspan, ex-fed chief Volcker and the International Monetary Fund about the US’ reckless spending habits, fiscal and international trade balance situation. Instead, Larry has decided it is better to go along with Bush instead of standing up and saying this is a situation that cannot continue without some serious economic pain. I would say I feel sorry for him. But I don’t. He is in a position to tell the truth – however damn ugly it really is – to help the country fix the problem instead of denying it exists. Funny how many religious people overlook the lying commandment.
In addition to him blowing smoke with his economic figures, he kind of plays fast and loose with the geo-political rhetoric, too.
I assume he is intelligent and well read enough to know how full of shit this statement is. I’ve recently read parts of Dying To Win by Robert Pape. In the book, Pape does a statistical analysis of suicide bombings. He pretty clearly refutes that this is an “Islamic fundamentalist” problem. The radical terror we face isn’t a consequence of a fanatic people trying to overthrow our system of economics, a fact I am sure Mr. Kudlow is completely familiar with. According to Mr. Pape’s well supported thesis, the primary cause of suicide bombings (including those on 9/11 and those happening almost daily in Iraq) is an occupation carried out by the military forces of a foreign democracy, particularly where the occupying forces do not share a strong cultural bond to the land they are occupying. A powerful thesis, that says every fiber of the military policy of our country (that is, having bases in Saudi Arabia and troops in Afghanistan and Iraq) is precisely what is causing suicide bombings against us. They don’t hate us because we are capitalists. They want Big Screen TVs too. They hate us because our soldiers are in their lands.
Way to call him Bonddad. That guy is a complete shill, is he not? Can’t really stand to watch him.
Which also explains why Europeans traded land through more or less amicable warfare (well, as close to “amicable” as you can get when you’re forcibly taking someone else’s land) for centuries. Europe’s culture is, after all, quite shockingly uniform. But when they tried to apply these same conflict resolution techniques outside of Europe, they ran afoul of cultural differences that “shouldn’t exist” at the scale they were looking at.
Thank you for an informative post.I find the entire premise of Rightwing Economics bogus,starting with Reagan’s trumpeting of Supply Side panaceas.Not a single one of the miracles from that elixir has proven true.Instead it continues to sap at our strengths day after day making it impossible for ordinary Americans to stay alive in the rat race.
Kudlow and rightwing shills like him can sit behind their well upholstered sinecures and lecture us paisans about the miracles yet to be visited upon us by the tax cuts Bush has implemented.They will never know the fear of an engineer at GM or Ford about to lose a job with no possibility of ever landing a job like that again.
These assholes must be made to seek a real job in our economy.I am sure they will all starve to death.
Where are you? GM or Ford?
I am not at either place.I am, fortunately retired but have a lot of friends at both places and at Visteon and Delphi.Each friday afternoon, pink slips are flying at all these places and grown men are crying.Kudlow and his brand of “economists” are yakking away about the benefits of outsourcing and tax cuts while real families of real people are hurting all over the Midwest.
My wife is out at Milford. I think she’s alright for now. I was at a machine builder until a couple of years ago. Now trying to figure out what to do next. I’m very concerned about the outsourcing both in the US and overseas. My old company went through a major bloodletting in 01, 02, 03 close to 60% let go. It was evil.
Those who have invested time in either the auto indutry directly or at places like Delphi and other parts related industries are going to see everything they have worked for come to an inglorious end.The pursuit of profits by the big shots leads to India or China with no let up. I used to travel in these countries before my retirement and can tell you that the pace of transformation of these countries is awesome even though the standard of living in these countries is still way below ours. That may well be a blessing for them.If they ever reach our levels the corporate powers will be blasting off to Mars in search of cheaper labor.
Laffing past the bathtub, Kudlow is.
I’m not sure who’s worse, Kudlow – or Cramer, who spends his whole show YELLING at the camera. I don’t watch either of them anymore. When the BJ scandal was hot and heavy, Cramer made the comment “Somebody get me out of this [Democratic] party.” That’s when I quit giving either of these guys one scintilla of attention. Even Lou Snobbs -er, Dobbs – is better than these turds.
Thanks again Bonddad for an excellent and informative piece. I always read your stuff even if I don’t comment.
Can I get you to move that quote mark to the other side of the word “phrase?”
Nails. Chalkboard. You understand.
Otherwise, a very fine analysis, and one I’ll be mailing to many of my “fiscal conservative” friends.