Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Sat 05/24/2025 View Fri 05/23/2025 View Thu 05/22/2025 View Wed 05/21/2025 View Tue 05/20/2025 View Mon 05/19/2025 View Sun 05/18/2025
2010-01-12 Economy
Bankruptcy could be good for America
In Winnie-the-Pooh, there is a significant moment when the bear is asked whether he wants honey or condensed milk with his bread. He replies "both". You can get away with this sort of thing if you are a much loved character in children's literature. But it is more problematic when great nations start behaving in a childish fashion. When Americans are asked what they want -- lower taxes, more lavish social spending or the world's best-funded military machine -- their collective answer tends to be "all of the above".

The result is that the US is piling up debt. A budget deficit of about 12 per cent of gross domestic product is understandable as a short-term reaction to a huge financial crisis. What should worry Americans is that, with entitlement spending set to surge, there is no credible plan to bring the budget deficit under control over the medium term.

The US has formidable strengths that will allow its government to be profligate for far longer than other nations could get away with. But if the US keeps running huge deficits, sooner or later the country will start flirting with bankruptcy. Oddly, it might be best if the crisis came sooner rather than later. For a surprising number of countries, running out of money has been the prelude to national renewal.

Continued from Page 4



The two biggest and most beneficial geopolitical stories of the past 30 years -- the spread of democracy and of globalisation -- were driven by a succession of states finding their coffers empty.

The background to Deng Xiaoping's liberalisation of the Chinese economy in 1978 was a fiscal and foreign exchange crisis. Finding itself desperately short of cash, the Chinese government was much more willing to embrace heterodox economic ideas that promised to deliver faster growth and higher revenues. The rest is history.

It was the same story when India embraced economic reform in 1991. The Indian government found itself with foreign reserves that were worth just two weeks' worth of imports. The Indians had to send gold to London to secure an emergency loan from the International Monetary Fund. But Manmohan Singh -- then finance minister, now prime minister -- urged his colleagues to "turn this crisis into an opportunity to build a new India". They succeeded triumphantly.

Or take Latin America in 1982. When Mexico defaulted on its debts in that year, it triggered an economic crisis across the whole continent. But the long-term consequences of that crisis were beneficial. As Michael Reid, author of a recent history, has pointed out, "dictatorships buckled under the opprobrium of economic failure". The Argentine junta fell in 1983; Brazil moved to democracy in 1985.

Disastrous problems with government finances also played a huge role in provoking the reforms that eventually did for the Soviet Union. When Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in Moscow, he was faced with a national debt that almost doubled in his first three years in office. It was those financial pressures that helped to persuade him that economic reform -- perestroika -- was unavoidable.

By 1989, the whole of the Soviet bloc was struggling under the weight of rapidly increasing foreign debts. Why did the East German government not shoot demonstrators in the streets in October 1989? In large part, it was because it could not afford to. East Germany was on the verge of bankruptcy and desperately negotiating with West Germany for a loan.

These salutary brushes with national bankruptcy do not only happen to under-developed Asian nations, flaky Latin American dictatorships and crumbling communist regimes. The British still shudder at the memory of the UK government having to go "cap in hand" to the IMF in 1976. It was humiliating -- but it served a useful purpose. Britain's brush with bankruptcy helped to convince the voters that things really needed to change, and prepared the ground for Thatcherism. France had a similar experience in the early 1980s -- when capital flight from the country and collapsing tax revenues forced the government of François Mitterrand to abandon its hard-left policies.

Sometimes, if a government is truly rotten -- East Germany in 1989 or France in 1789 -- it is a good thing if a fiscal crisis leads to political collapse. But for most normal countries, it is much better to get close to the edge of national bankruptcy than actually to go over the Niagara Falls of sovereign default. As Britain discovered in the 1970s and India found in 1991, looking over the edge can create the atmosphere of crisis that allows governments to win the arguments for economic reform. An actual sovereign default, however, can destroy confidence and trust among citizens and investors for years.

Perhaps the most memorable thing said so far by an official in Barack Obama's administration was the remark by Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, that "you never want a serious crisis to go to waste". Mr Emanuel was widely condemned for flippancy and cynicism. But an examination of world history over the last 30 years suggests he was definitely on to something. Those much discussed emerging powers, the Brics (Brazil, Russia, India and China) all needed a fiscal crisis to set them on the road to economic reform and national resurgence. America may one day be lucky enough to experience its very own national fiscal crisis. Let us hope it is not wasted.
Posted by Steve White 2010-01-12 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11136 views ]  Top

#1 The problem with the list of items "bankrupting" the United States is the only one of them, defense spending, is constitutionally permitted.

Some financial blogs I have read suggest that the US can't afford all this spending and, amazingly enough, they thus advocate disarmament of the US as a solution to US financial problems.

Disarmament is not an option in a free republic.

Social Security is an option.
PBS is an option.
National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities is an option.
The US Department of Education is an option.

And on it goes.

So bankruptcy may be good for the nation, but let us first try eliminating ( not cutting ) whole programs, before we declare bankruptcy, and thus open the gates to the barbarians.

National defense is never a choice, so nor should be survival of the US.
Posted by badanov 2010-01-12 01:23|| http://www.freefirezone.org  2010-01-12 01:23|| Front Page Top

#2 Disarmament is not an option in a free republic.

Given the behavior of our courts & elected "leaders" I'd say that the US is no longer a free repulic so if that's the only bar to disarmament ....
Posted by AzCat 2010-01-12 01:33||   2010-01-12 01:33|| Front Page Top

#3 How does defense budget compares, size-wise, to social (vote buying) budget?
Posted by g(r)omgoru 2010-01-12 02:19||   2010-01-12 02:19|| Front Page Top

#4 non-defense discretionary spending is about half the non-entitlement budget.

problem is that entitlements make up about 2/3 of the total budget.
Posted by  abu do you love  2010-01-12 03:57||   2010-01-12 03:57|| Front Page Top

#5 Where do you put the interest on the debt?
Posted by Bobby 2010-01-12 06:01||   2010-01-12 06:01|| Front Page Top

#6 If you check your 1040s that just arrived in the back is the break out of Federal Income and Outlays for 2008.

Social Security, Medicare and other retirement 37% - 1
National Defense, veterans, and foreign affairs 24% - 2
Social Programs 20% - 3
Physical, human and community development 8% - 4
Net interest on the debt 8%
Law enforcement and general government 2%

1-These programs provide income support for the retired and disabled and medical care for the elderly.*
2-About 20% of outlays were to equip, modernize, and pay our armed forces and to fund the Global War on Terrorism and other national defense acitivities; about 3% were for veterans benefits and services; and about 1% were for international activities including military and economic assistance to foreign countries and maintenance of US embassies abroad.
3-About 14% of total outlays were for Medicaid, food stamps, temporary assistance for needy families, supplemental security income, and related programs; and the remaining outlays were for health research and public health programs, unemployment compensation, assistance housing and social services.
4-These outlays were for agriculture; natural resources; environment; transportation; for elementary and secondary education and direct assistance to college students; job training; deposit insurance, commerce and housing credit, and community development; and space, energy and general science programs.

* military retirement is carried in the national defense budget.
Posted by Procopius2k 2010-01-12 08:50||   2010-01-12 08:50|| Front Page Top

08:05 Grom the Affective
08:02 Procopius2k
08:01 Procopius2k
07:59 Procopius2k
07:41 Procopius2k
07:37 Procopius2k
07:37 Super Hose
07:36 Besoeker
07:35 Besoeker
07:33 Super Hose
07:33 Besoeker
07:32 Super Hose
07:29 Super Hose
07:28 Super Hose
07:26 Besoeker
07:23 badanov
07:09 Besoeker
07:01 Besoeker
06:45 Besoeker
06:43 Richard+Aubrey+
06:38 NN2N1
06:28 Grom the Affective
06:25 Grom the Affective
06:23 Besoeker









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com