Sunday, March 30, 2014

Tyler Cowen — Austrian business cycle theory refuses to die


Even Tyler Cowan throws ABCT under the bus for Minsky.

Marginal Revolution
Austrian business cycle theory refuses to die
Tyler Cowen | Holbert C. Harris Chair of Economics at George Mason University

Lord Keynes — What is Wrong with Neoclassical Economics?

The list is a long one and includes practically every major theory:.......After all these have been thrown aside, there is not much left of mainstream economics.
Social Democracy For The 21St Century: A Post Keynesian Perspective
What is Wrong with Neoclassical Economics?
Lord Keynes

See also
Economics as ideology

Is INET nothing but a Trojan horse of the financial oligarchy?
Lars P. Syll | Professor, Malmo University

Paul R. Pillar — Forgetting the Lessons of Deterrence

“Tough-guy/gal-ism” is rampant again in Official Washington with many New Cold Warriors lusting for a military confrontation with Russia. But few of these hawks have a clear idea how deterrence worked during the real Cold War, writes ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar.
Consortiumnews
Paul R. Pillar

See also The Danger of False Narrative by Robert Parry

Amateurs in charge. Grownups missing.

Saturday, March 29, 2014

Henry Blodget — Sorry, But There's No 'Law Of Capitalism' That You Have To Pay Employees As Little As Possible


Sorry, Mr. Blodget, but it is a law of capitalism. It is the fatal flaw of capitalism along with the tendency of capital, both real and financial, to concentrate. It's called market efficiency. This is the way markets work left to themselves. This is what happens when economists ignore the effects of power, as Marx observed. 

Competition results in Pareto optimality, where no one can be made better off without making someone else worse off. Redistribution makes a few less well off in order to make everyone else better off, and that's why plutocratic oligarchy uses its power to prevent this from happening institutionally. 

Business Insider
Henry Blodget

Joe Weisenthal — Incredible Chart Shows Why Talking About The Rise Of The 'Wealthiest 1%' Is Totally Flawed



Business Insider
Incredible Chart Shows Why Talking About The Rise Of The 'Wealthiest 1%' Is Totally Flawed
Joe Weisenthal

Paul Craig Roberts — Pushing Toward The Final War

Does Obama realize that he is leading the US and its puppet states to war with Russia and China, or is Obama being manipulated into this disaster by his neoconservative speech writers and government officials? World War 1 (and World War 2) was the result of the ambitions and mistakes of a very small number of people. Only one head of state was actually involved–the President of France.
In The Genesis Of The World War, Harry Elmer Barnes shows that World War 1 was the product of 4 or 5 people. Three stand out: Raymond Poincare`, President of France, Sergei Sazonov, Russian Foreign Minister, and Alexander Izvolski, Russian Ambassador to France. Poincare` wanted Alsace-Lorraine from Germany, and the Russians wanted Istanbul and the Bosphorus Strait, which connects the Black Sea to the Mediterranean. They realized that their ambitions required a general European war and worked to produce the desired war.
A Franco-Russian Alliance was formed. This alliance became the vehicle for orchestrating the war. The British government, thanks to the incompetence, stupidity, or whatever of its Foreign Minister, Sir Edward Grey, was pulled into the Franco-Russian Alliance. The war was started by Russia’s mobilization. The German Kaiser, Wilhelm II, was blamed for the war despite the fact that he did everything possible to avoid it.
Barnes’ book was published in 1926. His reward for confronting the corrupt court historians with the truth was to be accused of being paid by Germany to write his history. Eighty-six years later historian Christopher Clark in his book, The Sleepwalkers, comes to essentially the same conclusion as Barnes.
In the history I was taught the war was blamed on Germany for challenging British naval supremacy by building too many battleships. The court historians who gave us this tale helped to set up World War 2.
We are again on the road to World War....
Institute for Political Economy
Pushing Toward The Final War 
Paul Craig Roberts, formerly Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy in the Reagan Administration

Zachary Keck — Russia's Military Begins Massive Nuclear War Drill

According to the Russian daily Nezavisimaya Gazeta, on Thursday Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces began a massive three-day exercise involving 10,000 soldiers and 1,000 pieces of equipment from more than 30 units. The major purpose of the drill, according to the report—which cites multiple senior Russian military officers—is to ensure Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces have sufficient readiness to conduct offensive operations involving the massive and simultaneous use of nuclear missiles.
Global Security Newswire previously carried a story on the nuclear exercise, also citing the Nezavisimaya Gazeta article. GSN described the exercise as “as practice for a large-scale nuclear offensive.” It added: “Exercise participants were set to position and prepare missile-firing units for launch, and to practice various administrative and support functions for the operation.
As Russia’s conventional military capabilities have deteriorated following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Moscow has become increasingly reliant on operationalizing its nuclear arsenal. This has been reflected in successive Russian security documents. For example, Russia’s 1997 national security concept stated that Russia would use its nuclear arsenal “in case of a threat to the existence of the Russian Federation,” whether that threat came in the form of nuclear weapons or from a conventionally superior military power.
This threshold was further lowered in Russia’s 2000 military doctrine, which was the first released during Vladimir Putin’s presidency. This document said that Russia would use nuclear weapons “in response to large-scale aggression utilizing conventional weapons in situations critical to the national security of the Russian Federation.” This held out the possibility that Russia would use nuclear weapons even if Russia proper hadn’t been attacked. The same doctrine further noted that Russia reserved the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of any kind of weapons of mass destruction against it.
Shortly before reassuming the Russian presidency for a third term, Putin reaffirmed the importance he placed on Russia’s nuclear forces in a number of articles and speeches. For example, in an op-ed article in Foreign Policy magazine, Putin wrote: “We will, under no circumstances, surrender our strategic deterrent capability. Indeed, we will strengthen it.”
The Diplomat
Russia's Military Begins Massive Nuclear War Drill
Zachary Keck

Sen. Sanders — ‘Will This Nation Become an Oligarchic Form of Society?’

Sanders says political power is no longer divided between the Republican and Democratic parties, but instead is held by a billionaire party in which candidates on both sides of the aisle depend on the “financial speech” of a few extremely wealthy donors. Those donors are capable of outspending the entire U.S. middle and lower classes. The exemplars of these superrich working to shape politics are the Koch brothers, currently the second-wealthiest family in this country. The Kochs to date have spent hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars on extreme right-wing Republican candidates and causes. Their efforts have paid off. Thanks to tax cuts and other measures passed by their politicians, their wealth in the last year alone increased by $12 billion to some $80 billion altogether.
With 95 percent of all income during the period between 2009 and 2012 going to the top 1 percent of earners, the problem Sanders describes is getting far worse. As it is currently being reported, the “Adelson Primary,” in which Las Vegas billionaire Sheldon Adelson gathers GOP favorites like former Florida governor and brother to former president George W. Bush, Jeb Bush and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to discuss plans for the 2016 presidential election, is becoming the new standard model for campaign planning.Sanders concludes his speech by asking, is “this nation ... going to become an oligarchic form of society?”
Going to become?

Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sen. Sanders: ‘Will This Nation Become an Oligarchic Form of Society?’
Bernie Sanders video and transcript

Nick Turse — Revealed: The U.S. military’s next shadow war

U.S. military ops -- including airstrikes, raids and proxy wars -- have surged by more than 200 percent in Africa
The numbers tell the story: 10 exercises, 55 operations, 481 security cooperation activities.
For years, the U.S. military has publicly insisted that its efforts in Africa are small scale. Its public affairs personnel and commanders have repeatedly claimed no more than a “light footprint” on that continent, including a remarkably modest presence when it comes to military personnel. They have, however, balked at specifying just what that light footprint actually consists of. During an interview, for instance, a U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) spokesman once expressed worry that tabulating the command’s deployments would offer a “skewed image” of U.S. efforts there.
It turns out that the numbers do just the opposite.
Last year, according AFRICOM commander General David Rodriguez, the U.S. military carried out a total of 546 “activities” on the continent — a catch-all term for everything the military does in Africa. In other words, it averages about one and a half missions a day. This represents a 217% increase in operations, programs, and exercises since the command was established in 2008.
Salon
Revealed: The U.S. military’s next shadow war
Nick Turse, Tomdispatch.Com

Ian Welsh — Ukraine’s Unelected Government Imposes IMF Austerity

Meanwhile the new PM in the Ukraine is imposing IMF austerity measures, like removing subsidies on Gas (50% increase) and cutting pensions (50%) cut. He says he’s on a Kamikazee mission. That’s because he’s not elected, so he can do thing that an elected leader could never do.
Which is to say: there is a coup, backed by a popular uprising in the capital, which puts in place an unelected government, which does things that elected governments repeatedly refused to do. The East and South of the country, which voted in the last elected government, is unhappy with this.
It’s really hard to conclude that Crimea didn’t do the right thing for most of their population by joining Russia. 50% increase in natural gas prices and 50% cut in pensions? Would you stand still for that? Oh, and the average pension in the Ukraine is—$160/month. $80 after it’s cut.
Ukraine’s Unelected Government Imposes IMF Austerity
Ian Welsh

Simultaneously, President Obama echoes the neocon excoriation of President Putin for acting like Hitler. Hypocritical isn't the word for it. More like conspiratorial.


Chris Arnade — The Pope, Obama and a Former Banker Walk Into a Slum—Does the 1% Still Win?

Barack Obama is not Pope Francis, and not just because the slums of Buenos Aires are so much worse than the South Side of Chicago. Pope Francis knows, in a visceral way, that the income equality we have in the US and Europe will get much worse if nothing changes. More importantly, he knows that these first-world problems are embryonic relative to those back home in Argentina.
The pope knows that the US is moving toward a Latin America-style economy, one wherein the Koch brothers get multiplied many times over – one wherein the wealthy don’t just want more money or opportunity, they want power. The problem with Francis’ Argentina writ large is a 1% that wants a political system run with the intent to guarantee that their wealth is never threatened. The problem with that is a wealthy class that wants the working class to be disposable, voiceless and immobilized.
This is the real issue President Obama faces: he needs to stare down, as Pope Francis has, the morally and intellectually corrupt philosophy that unregulated free markets help everyone.
It is a philosophy at the heart of the American conservative movement.When needed, conservatives drag out a gaggle of economists to argue their position. These economists, always a thoughtful lot when it comes to human behavior, know the wealthy will benefit far more. Yet the GOP’s sham philosophers argue that growth, even if unevenly distributed, will be a net benefit – because the winners will win more than the losers lose. We will then all share the winnings, goes this bankrupt economic philosophy, either by way of investments that boost jobs, or else from politically forced redistribution by way of taxes.
The sharing-the-winnings part never happens....

Steven Rosenfeld — How Deficit Hawks Are Pitting Millennials Against Seniors to Attack Social Security and Medicare


Pete Peterson and cronies at work. Disgusting.

AlterNet
How Deficit Hawks Are Pitting Millennials Against Seniors to Attack Social Security and Medicare
Steven Rosenfeld

Noah Smith — "Land of the brave" no more?


Noah Smith speculates on reasons for the decline in entrepreneurship in the US implying an increase in risk aversion. They are all correct in my view. 

What he leaves out is the tightening of bankruptcy law, the purpose of which is to offset consequences of failure in addition to providing recourse for creditors. Now it is skewed toward creditors thanks to creditors' lobbying efforts.

Another reason may be concentration of capital in dominant players, leaving only relatively minor niche markets available for modest startups. Before Walmart and the big box stores, and now Amazon and the Internet, it used to be less difficult to carve out a niche in retail, for instance.

Noahpinion
"Land of the brave" no more?
Noah Smith | Assistant Professor of Finance, Stony Brook University

Jonathan Larson — Money creation—the mind is repelled


Lots of quotes and links for reference.

real economics
Money creation—the mind is repelled
Jonathan Larson

Neil Wilson — Scottish Independence - a Modern Money analysis


Neil gets real. Forget about the money, look at the reality. Scotland has everything it need to be an independent nation and then some. The rest is just bookkeeping.

3spoken 

Look at this crap analysis of the euro from Citi's FX group

Read this Citi analysis of the euro.What a bunch of ueseless garbage. They fail to even mention the one and only reason the euro remains strong: AUSTERITY!! It's austerity, stupid! Austerity removes euro from the system. Makes euro harder to get. Creates a shortage.

The Citi "analysts" end their article with this pathetic expression of conviction:

We are no less convinced than we were at the start of the year that EURUSD is going to head much lower over the coming years
We anticipated this move would already have begun at this stage yet we sit at almost the exact level where we closed 2013
We believe the “day of reckoning” is not far away and that as detailed above the building blocks are now falling in place. We may have already peaked with the marginal new high posted at 1.3967 this month but either way we are skeptical of any sustainable move over 1.40 materialising and still believe that we may see EURUSD much closer to 1.20 than 1.40 before this year is behind us.

The "day of reckoning."

"Building blocks."

OMG, what a joke.

Do yourself a favor and fade these guys and take their (and their clients') money. You're doing the world a favor, believe me. Consider it as euthanizing something sick.

Any currency analyst should understand that auserity keeps a currency strong. Look at what happened to Latvia or Estonia, when they imposed austerity to position to join the euro. Their economies collapsed, but their currencies soared.

These analysts at Citi (and on Wall Street in general) are clueless.

By the way...I teach this in my course and it's one of the reasons why I have been able to rack up 10 months without a loss and grow my account by 120% and a client's account by 40% in one month.

Ramanan — Nicholas Kaldor On Rational Expectations

This [revision of] rational expectations theory goes beyond the untestable basic axioms of the theory of value, such as the utility-maximising rational man whose existence can be confirmed only by individual introspection. The assumption of rational expectations which presupposes the correct understanding of the workings of the economy by all economic agents—the trade unionists, the ordinary employer, or even the ordinary housewife—to a degree which is beyond the grasp of professional economists is not science, nor even moral philosophy, but at best a branch of metaphysics.
The Case For Concerted Action

Merijn Knibbe — The UK – even a flexible labour market still is a LABOUR market

A wage is not just the atomistic market remuneration for your labour. It’s also a powerful social token of the respect you earn and a neon sign of your position in society. You’re paid for a position – not for your work. As far as I’m concerned this characteristic of wage setting is more important than the famous ‘stickiness’ of wages.
Real-World Economics Review Blog
The UK – even a flexible labour market still is a LABOUR market
Merijn Knibbe

This time is finally different. The world will truly go dark, if we don't find new reserves of fiat. :(

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)



OECD countries’ debt ‘to top’ post-war highs 
"The combined debt burden of the biggest developed economies will surpass this year record levels seen at the end of World War II, adding pressure on governments as they roll over post-crisis debts, the OECD said on March 28.
Gross public debt in OECD countries for which long-term data is available will top the World War II peak of 116 percent of GDP, reaching an estimated 117 percent this year, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development said. 
The OECD’s 34 members include mostly wealthy countries such as the United States and European countries. Some emerging economies such as Mexico and Turkey are members although bigger developing countries such as China and India are not. 
Not only are debt levels high, but a growing share comes due in the next three years with nearly 30 percent of long-term debt needing to be refinanced by the end of 2016, the Paris-based organisation said in its annual sovereign borrowing outlook. 
While such a high level of refinancing is not unprecedented, rolling over debt will be made all the more complicated by uncertainties created by the U.S. Federal Reserve’s unwinding its bond-buying programme, the OECD’s head of public debt management issue, Hans Blommestein, said. 
“If you have to go to the market because you have to refinance, that’s a challenge,” Bloomestein told Reuters. “It’s not impossible, but it’s not a piece of cake.” 
Taking redemptions into account, the combined borrowing need of OECD governments was seen easing slightly to $10.6 trillion this year from $10.8 trillion last year. 
Japan will be the biggest issuer this year with plans to borrow the equivalent of 64.7 percent of its national output. Its borrowing alone would make up 35 percent of the OECD total."
###

Never have so many, been so indebted ..... to themselves?

This is what happens when mass mania leads a people to try to peg the volatile growth of dynamic public initiative - aka, fiat - to any particular form of static asset.

May as well constrain an expanding universe to a theoretical economic black hole, from which no logic may escape?

How on earth do engineers, PhDs and so many educated people carry on conversations without even stooping to define the terms they're attempting to use? It's a Blommen catastrophe.

This news article fails logic 101 so badly that all involved should be thrown out of class for failing to master even the minimal pre-requisites. Just random data minus context .... yet again.

It's like showing up for work without even having learned how to dress yourself, let alone read, or write, or reason ..... or usefully interact with co-workers.

What does OECD REALLY stand for? Operationally Excised Cerebral Debris? Anyone interested in actually growing a group brain for your country, please contact me. rge (at) OperationsInstitute (dot) com



Friday, March 28, 2014

JW Mason — Liquidity Preference and Solidity Preference in the 19th Century


On the history of interest rates in the 19th century US. Turns out that the natural rate of interest is not natural.

The Slack Wire
Liquidity Preference and Solidity Preference in the 19th Century
JW Mason



Lars P. Syll — Economic models — chameleons and theoretical cherry picking


Lars takes up where Mark Buchanan left off.

For example, neoclassical economics is a just so story of neoliberal capitalism. It assume that neoliberal capitalism is defined by markets free of governmental "intrusion" (without asking where the money comes from) and perfect competition among agents that are essentially equal and act like atoms independently of historical, cultural and institutional context. This is also a model with no friction like transaction costs.

Needless to say, it is simple to derive equilibrium, just deserts, and other neoliberal dogmas from this simple model. However, the model doesn't even remotely represent the actual historical context or any context that is possible in a contemporary society.

Yet, all failures of the model to predict actual outcomes are explained as either owing to governmental intrusion introducing distortion or external shocks that could not be foreseen by the model. The first is used as a policy ploy to promote neoliberal doctrine, and the later to explain away failures of the model that cannot be attributed to government.

That's the basic agenda.

Of course, the reality is far more complex than the model assumes, and the context is historical and institutional rather than natural and atomistic.

Economic models — chameleons and theoretical cherry picking
Lars P. Syll | Professor, Malmo University


Mark Buchanan — Why high alcohol consumption is optimal for humans


Before you pop a cork, this post is about unrealistic assumptions.

An underlying point is that mathematical models are hypothetical-deductive systems that simply articulate what is assumed (postulated). A model cannot deliver on more than initially incorporated. If significant conditions are not included, then it's garbage in, garbage out.

A model is just a way of telling a story. It can be simple or complex but it is a narrative usually offered as an explanation. The formalism adds nothing but logical necessity deriving from formation and transformation rules. 

If the symbolism of the model is not shared topologically with what the model purports to represent, then the model is not realistic no matter how descriptive it looks or how interesting and convincing the story is.

The Physics of Finance

Bank Lobby Still Trying To Kill Credit Unions (blind pursuit of profits over nation and citizens)

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)



Starts out as a local issue raised by one lobby.

Runs amok when that lobby loses sight of all other inter-dependencies, and forgets that there must be tolerance limits on everything. Or else we don't have a culture. Only a mob. 

You want context? Consider the words of Marriner Eccles, 1932:
"The operation of our money world has failed to be our servant and instead is our tyrant and master." 
"We must correct the causes of the depression rather than deal with the effects of it!"
That was 82 years ago!!! Has the US electorate lost sight of Public Purpose? Have we lost sight of national goals?


Smart Companies? What About Smart Electorates? Smart Countries? Smart Governments?

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)




How Investing in Good Jobs Lowers Costs and Boosts Profits

The Good Jobs Strategy ... shows that even in low-cost settings, leaving employees behind with low wages and bad jobs is a choice, not a necessity. On April 4, we’ll discuss how smart companies are turning the Walmart business model on its head by investing in good jobs while earning strong investment returns. Sponsored by UFCW and the AFL-CIO.

These are merely politically correct ways of discussing loyalty in teamwork. 

For Pete's sake! Common sense is no longer allowed to be declared sensible until a photogenic university professor declares to be? And then only for "smart companies" with "strong investment returns."

Unfortunately, the good prof & the AFL-CIO don't define the terms of what constitutes a "strong investment returns." How long will it take until they realize that they don't really agree on the terms of that definition? Yet another generation of stalled labor-capital reforms? Is this the AFL-CIO's way of admitting defeat?

Something subtle is missing here, and it's not clearly apparent until you analyze what they're actually saying. This whole "Good Jobs" approach reminds me of Deficit Doves. They're trying to agree with their masters while also agreeing with the serfs ... at the same time? Doesn't that always turn into groveling?

Smart professors don't miss the point? 

Only clever ones trying to tout the uber-capitalist party line, masquerading as aggregate common sense? Usually in order to get tenure, and maybe a fellowship or endowed chair from an institute set up by some billionaire (non-labor) capitalist.

Can we just skip all the capitalist mumbo jumbo, and get straight to the point? 

Wouldn't a "Resilient Electorate Strategy" represent adaptive reality, and therefore common sense? Can't we just come right out and say that? Apparently not, because ~1% of people hoarding vast amounts of static assets feel that they have too much to lose personally, if they relieve constraints on and control over the rest of the electorate.

Bad move. Always suicidal. It's only a matter of time.

How did supposed capitalists forget that labor-capital is also one of the equal, arbitrary classifications of "capital?" Biasing a system to persistently make some forms of capital more equal in all contexts than other forms of capital is - by definition - constraining aggregate options, draining resiliency and reducing aggregate agility.

Yet that is obvious only if one stops to actually think.

Maybe we need to forget capitalism? And just go back to consistency across biology, anthropology, sociology, democracy and statistical process control? Let the capitalist mysticism go the way of the pythagorean mysticism?




Mark Karlin — The Major Reason There Will Be No War With Russia: They Are Rasputin Capitalists Now

All this talk of a new cold war is just a lot of political blather coming out of DC due to the re-emergence of the neocons.
The reality is that there will be no war with the Russian Federation because Russia is now a raffish capitalist nation. 
Wall Street not on board with President Obama and sanctions.

BuzzFlash
The Major Reason There Will Be No War With Russia: They Are Rasputin Capitalists Now
Mark Karlin, Editor Of Buzzflash At Truthout
(h/t Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism)

Glenn Greenwald — US takes a break from condemning tyranny to celebrate Obama’s visit to Saudi Arabia


Irony? I guess it is lost on the president.

The Intercept
US takes a break from condemning tyranny to celebrate Obama’s visit to Saudi Arabia
Glenn Greenwald

Diane Ravitch — Public Education: Who Are the Corporate Reformers?


This is a hugely important issue socially, politically and economically and it is not a single issue but rather a web of interconnected issues touching almost every sphere of life beginning with early childhood rearing. Education shapes a society more than anything else.

The great value of public education that is more or less standardized is that it provides the basis for a common culture, which is extremely significant in a pluralistic and multicultural society like the US. Without a "common core," and I don't mean the common core as it is used presently in education, the society can be expected to be become increasingly divergent and divisive, as well as layered.

However, achieving a common core socially is not the same as introducing a common core into the curriculum and teaching methodology as presently proposed. Cookie cutter approaches don't work at that well other than with cookies and other items that can be standardized. Human beings cannot be standardized and it would probably not be optimal even if they could be.

We need maximum diversity compatible with foundational unity. Entering the global age, that foundational unity must be the universality of humanity as a species that is ecologically interdependent with other species and the environment.

Reading, writing and 'rithmetic will not longer cut it. Nor will emphasis on STEM, especially at the expense of a liberal education.

The primary goal of education in a pluralistic multicultural democracy must be oriented to self-governance by the population itself with a view to common purpose. This is stated quite eloquently in the preamble to the US constitution:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The educational system that America has today is a holdover from the past and it may not be suitable for the new era that the country and world is embarking upon. We need to be asking what the opportunities and challenges are and how to meet them agilely in a time of when the pace of change is accelerating exponentially. New opportunities are bringing new levels of challenge that are orders of magnitude greater than previously experienced.

Is the educational system keeping pace? Would greater privatization increase the opportunities or exacerbate the challenges? Can the present system be reformed from within, or is an overhaul required? What questions do we need to be asking? I don't think we are asking the right questions yet. People seem to be too fixed on providing answers before the problem has been explored sufficiently.

Bill Moyers & Co.
Public Education: Who Are the Corporate Reformers?
Diane Ravitch

Department of Stupid: Congress to consider a bill comparing public and private lending


Via Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: 


The House will consider three bills in the coming weeks that would make the budget process more complicated, less transparent, and less credible. One of these is the Budget and Accounting Transparency Act (H.R. 1872), which would add an extra amount to the recorded budgetary cost of federal credit programs, beyond their actual cost to the government, to reflect what private lenders would charge if they issued the loans and loan guarantees.  By artificially inflating federal lending costs, this change would disadvantage direct loans and loan guarantees relative to other federal programs and expose them to a greater likelihood of cuts.
H.R. 1872 would change the accounting for credit programs such as Federal Housing Administration and veterans’ mortgage guarantees, student loans, small business loans, and rural electric loan guarantees by adding anextra amount to their recorded budgetary cost.  This extra amount would reflect what private lenders would charge if they, rather than the federal government, issued the loans or loan guarantees.  
The proposal is not based on a contention that current estimates of federal credit programs understate their cost to the government.  Therefore, the proposal would distort the budget by making federal credit programs appear more expensive than their actual cost to the government.  It would also undercut one of the key purposes of the budget, which is to provide a meaningful comparison of the cost to the federal Treasury of different programs.  
The bill also would make federal loan programs likelier targets for deficit reduction measures, since they would appear to cost more than unbiased projections show they actually would cost.  In the area of student loans, for example, this could result in higher costs for borrowers or less access to loans.  The size of the student loan program and how much of the cost students should bear are valid policy questions, but policymakers should not distort these issues by artificially inflating the program’s cost.

This idea is dumb enough even for those who don't understand monetary sovereignty...but for those of us that do, its just mind mindbogglingly stupid. CBPP does state that:


The concerns for the federal budget, however, are different from the concerns of private-sector investors.  The federal budget is a straight record of the cash flowing into and out of the Treasury; the deficit or surplus equals the difference between the money actually spent and the money actually collected.  That is what the existing credit rules ask the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to estimate.  If the estimates are unbiased and take all possible factors into account, including expected defaults and their likelihood, then the overestimates and underestimates should net to zero over the long term.  Adding a penalty because private investors are loss averse should have nothing to do with government budgeting and accounting. 

However, they don't go far enough, and say that the government's risk of default as a currency issuer is zero, and thus should never be compared to any private entity with inherent, nonzero credit risk. If a borrower of a federal loan defaults, this does not affect the federal government's credit/spending ability by one penny. There is therefore no reason to price this risk in any federal budget-scoring mechanism.

Thursday, March 27, 2014

Ian Welsh — The Age of the Obvious: Thomas Piketty’s Capital

But Piketty’s book is still important, because it proves the obvious beyond a reasonable doubt. In this it is similiar to the mountain of evidence of climate change. We can now say that climate change is happening and anyone who denies it is a fool. Likewise we can now say that allowing returns on unearned wealth to be higher than labor income, in a capitalist economy, leads to high inequality and doesn’t improve the economy. We should have known that already; we did know it already; now it has been proved to the point where we can say anyone who denies it is a fool.
Ian Welsh
The Age of the Obvious: Thomas Piketty’s Capital


Stephen S. Roach — The End of Chinese Central Planning

China, [Chinese Finance Minister Lou Jiwei] went on, is in fact moving away from its once single-minded emphasis on growth targeting. The government now stresses three macroeconomic goals – job creation, price stability, and GDP growth. And, as evidenced by the annual “work report” that the premier recently submitted to China’s National People’s Congress, the current emphasis is in that order, with GDP growth at the bottom of the list.
This gives China and its policymakers considerable room for maneuver in coping with the current growth slowdown. Unlike most Western observers, who are fixated on the slightest deviation from the official growth target, Chinese officials are actually far more open-minded. They care less about GDP growth per se and more about the labor content of the gains in output.
This is particularly relevant in light of the important threshold that has now been reached by the structural transformation of the Chinese economy – the long-awaited shift to a services-led growth dynamic. Services, which now account for the largest share of the economy, require close to 30% more jobs per unit of output than the manufacturing and construction sectors combined. In an increasingly services-led, labor-intensive economy, China’s economic managers can afford to be more relaxed about a GDP slowdown....
Zhou Xiaochuan, the head of the People’s Bank of China, was just as emphatic on this point. The PBOC, he argued, does not pursue a single target. Instead, it frames monetary policy in accordance with what he called a “multi-objective function” comprised of goals for price stability, employment, GDP growth, and the external balance-of-payments – the latter factor added to recognize the PBOC’s authority over currency policy....
 Project Syndicate
The End of Chinese Central Planning
Stephen S. Roach, former Chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia and the firm's chief economist, is a senior fellow at Yale University’s Jackson Institute of Global Affairs and a senior lecturer at Yale’s School of Management