Sell! … No, buy! … No, sell!

Some readers may have taken note of Standard & Poor’s Friday downgrade of the long-term debt ratings of France, Italy and Spain as well as assorted minor European countries such as Austria, Cyprus, Malta, Slovenia and the Slovak Republic. To some, that development may seem distant and irrelevant to Virginia as legislators struggle to assemble their own two-year budget. Yes, it is distant, but it is hardly irrelevant. It means that Boomergeddon is closer than even I had imagined.

In my book (buy it here!!) I published what I called the “Milestones to Mayhem,” which listed sign posts on the United States journey to fiscal perdition. I felt quite certain we would pass them all, although the dates I attached to them were conjectural.

2011: Slower-than-expected economic growth. Check.

2013: Failure to cut discretionary spending. Two years out, and we haven’t cut anything. Check.

And so it goes:  a U.S. currency crisis by 2017; the Social Security Disability Insurance crisis in 2018, which Washington has utterly failed to address; the next recession in 2018; and spreading fears of sovereign default in 2019.

In the short run, I noted, Europe’s sovereign debt crisis helps the United States because scaredy cat investors park their money in U.S. Treasuries, which seem safe by comparison. But that’s hardly a vote of confidence, I stressed. “It means that investors regard them as less unsafe than Greek, Spanish and Italian government bonds. In the long run, a default by Greece would cast a shadow across all sovereign debt, including our own.”

Then I explained the practical consequences of debt downgrades:

Declining confidence in sovereign debt will feed upon itself. As nations’ credit ratings are downgraded, investors will command higher risk premiums. According to one 1996 analysis, the loss of an AAA rating jacks up interest rates by 60 basis points (or 0.6%). Further declines to a Baa1 rating are worth another 60 basis points. Further deterioration  leads to commensurately higher risk premiums: 2.5% for a Ba1 rating, 4.5% for a B1 rating, and 7.5% for a Caa rating. In a vicious cycle, higher interest rates force governments to spend more money on interest payments, which inflates deficits and scares investors even more. It is a very quick slide down the B-level ratings to the very bottom.

Once the dominoes start toppling, the contagion of fear will spread rapidly. Investors, I suggested, next would start shying away from the debt of U.S. states and even start demanding risk premiums from the federal government itself. With a national debt now exceeding $15 trillion, every one percentage point increase in average interest rates paid will jack up the U.S. deficit by $150 billion.

Here’s the takeaway: In my Milestones to Mayhem, I speculated that Europe would muddle through another business cycle before fears of sovereign default became rampant. I was too optimistic. Those fears are spreading already. Boomergeddon is running ahead of schedule.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

11 responses to “Do Panic!!”

  1. I did not comment on “Don’t Panic” …to let others weigh in and not to always be the first to comment.

    So I behaved and earned my opportunity to comment now.

    What’s the big problem with the “sky is falling now – all of it now” mindset?

    for one thing it fails to discriminate between the issues and treats the all as the same problem.

    I cite, for instance, the lumping of Medicare Part A in the disaster scenario while ignoring Medicare Part B and MedicAid.

    First – let’s deal with those pesky facts. Medicare Part A is funded from FICA where as Part B and MedicAid are subsidized from General Revenues.

    If 2017 is the date when Part A “implodes”, what the date for Part B and MedicAid?

    Further.. what exactly happens on 2017 that affects Part A but not Part B?

    Finally – if we are already 15 Trillion in debt and adding to it at 1.5T a year, what part of that deficit and debt is attributable to Part A and Part B?

    What budgetary triage should we be doing right now to Part A and Part B?

    Here’s the truth which is totally missing from many narratives including this one.

    Part A is funded by FICA and by law in 2017 – Part A cannot pay out more than FICA generates so basically Part A has a fiscal equivalent of a balanced budget process. It cannot spend more than FICA brings in.

    so we have some time to deal with that issue and if we don’t – there is no default or budget explosion..

    Contrast that with Part B (and MedicAid, as well as DOD and Homeland Security).

    Other way of looking for this is to ask how much of the current 1.5 trillion deficit and 15 trillion debt is Medicare Part A responsible for?

    ZERO!

    how much of the future deficit and debt will Medicare Part A be responsible for if we don’t change the law and keep it the way it is now? ZERO!

    So why is Medicare Part A “fingered” as a part of the supposed “default” that will occur if we don’t change our ways?

    I have two explanations – both ugly.

    1. – People simple do not know the facts and do not choose to know the facts

    2. – Conservative think tanks loved by gloom and doom forecasters DO KNOW the facts but misrepresent them on purpose to stay true to their agenda of fingering entitlements – any/all as the reason why we are in deficit and debt. and apparently the right-wing echo chamber is only too happy to spread the misinformation which actually becomes disinformation if they know the facts but choose to misrepresent them.

    So my ending question here is – why are we talking about Medicare Part A in the sovereign debt discussion when, by law, it cannot incur a debt?

  2. Larry, I don’t know anyone in the “right wing echo chamber” who is talking about Medicare Part A. Bashing conservative think tanks totally misses the mark.

    Why do I mention Medicare Part A? Because nobody’s doing anything about it!. The trust fund will run out of money in only five years and it’s not even on the radar screen! What happens when the trust fund runs out? Where will the money come from to maintain health care benefits? Do we raise FICA taxes? Does the Treasury borrow more money and hand it over to Medicare?

    How does this figure into the longer-range picture of the looming U.S. default? C’mon, Larry, you’re smarter than that!

    Either we raise FICA taxes, which will such money out of peoples’ pockets — sort of a reverse payroll tax cut.

    Or we borrow the money instead, running up deficits and accelerating the growth of the national debt.

    Oh, two more possibilities… We make Medicare patients make up the difference, or we simply cut access to services. Like that would ever happen!

  3. Jim – ” The trust fund will run out of money in only five years and it’s not even on the radar screen! ”

    Jim – this is patently false. As long as FICA is collected it will fund Medicare Part A – albeit at a REDUCED level but NOT “out of money”.

    you make the same mistake that the right wing echo chamber makes in that they think there is a trust fund that funds Medicare Part A rather than FICA taxes – taxes that are collected every year and directly used to pay Medicare Part A benefits – ever year – and will continue – every year -as long as FICA is collected as a tax.

    you are confusing Part A with Part B. Part B is an appropriated entitlement that comes from income taxes/general revenues NOT from FICA.

    every year – Congress has to fund it at increasing levels because unlike FICA – Part B has defined benefits that by law must be paid.

    Part A has no such requirement. It is limited by law to not pay any more benefits that what FICA can provide.

    I said it before and I’ll say it again. There is ignorance in play here. Even the people who write articles – have not themselves ascertained the facts but instead adopt what the right wing echo chamber is saying.. which are not the facts.

    Why is this important beyond the obvious problem that lies are being promoted?

    It’s important because we cannot agree on what needs to be done and when – when we don’t even know what the actual problem is.

    and that pretty much defines the current dialogue with entitlements.

    We have people who – don’t know…that they don’t know.

    they are ignorant of the facts.. and don’t realize it.

  4. Repeat after me – “FICA funds Medicare Part A”

    every day of every year, FICA taxes are collected and every day of every year, people receive payments from Medicare Part A for their hospital expenses.

    it will never run out of money.

    if absolute nothing is done including not raising FICA taxes, it will still pay benefits – but at reduced levels.

    What is Virginia doing? It is RAISING TAXES on employees so that their future benefits are fully funded.

    Why is this not a legitimate option also for FICA taxes that pay Medicare Part A benefits?

    If Virginia does this to reduce/eliminate future shortfalls in benefits -why is this not an equally legitimate solution to Medicare Part A?

  5. If there is going to be universal health care, why do we need Medicare? Why not use the Medicare money to support Medicaid and expand the eligibility to a wider number of users? You know all those people who are going broke in the current economy, like old geezers forced into early retirement with no benefits? Oh wait! Obama handlers already thought of that. Have to change the name though, too welfarish. How about an exchange pool?

  6. Darrell.. you bring up honest questions but as I’ve said unless and until we really understand the current entitlement system – we have no hope of agreeing on future changes especially when it’s being demagogued.

    It’s very important IMHO that we do understand the difference between how Social Security and Medicare Part A “work” and how Medicare Part B and Medicaid “work”.

    I consider this to be indicative of how serious someone is in truly understanding the issues as opposed to repeating what the “herd” is parroting, often cheered on by the RWEC (right wing echo chamber).

    One of the really big differences between Medicare Parts A & B is that if Congress does absolutely nothing – Part A benefits will automatically reduce to not exceed it’s FICA funding whereas Part B costs will automatically increase and add to the deficit/debt because it has defined benefits that if the costs go up – we have to pay them. This is why it is called “mandatory spending”.

    so.. if Congress does nothing – Part A essentially self-balances and Part B continues to run amok.

    Look at your paycheck stub. There are usually TWO boxes for FICA. What is for SS and the other says Medicare but it’s Part A only.

    Part B is not paid for from you FICA deductions. In fact, Part B is a totally voluntary program that you have to sign up for and pay premiums for.

    The problem with Part B is that the premiums charged cover only about 1/4 the actual costs – and Congress is bound by law to pay the other 3/4 no matter how high those costs go.

    So.. if you want to actually do something about entitlements as part of any response to cutting the deficit and debt:

    1. – you don’t really have to do anything at all about Part A as long as we recognize that benefits will reduce.

    2. – you DO have to do something about Part B – raise the premiums, reduce the benefits, increase deductible and co-pays, etc.

    3. – MedicAid is the same – except most don’t pay premiums (but they do pay co-pays and deductibles depending on income).

    MedicAid – which is also a totally voluntary program for the States – they can refuse to participate if they think it’s too costly OR they can reduce eligibility and/or benefits (with restrictions).

    When you back up to look at the bigger picture that Jim speaks of with Boomergeddon – you essentially lose the understanding of the specific programs like Part A, Part B and MedicAid .. and as a consequence.. what to actually do about them.

    More than that – you lose perspective on what part all these entitlements play with regard to the total budget.

    Medicare Part A = zero impact on non-FICA budget and deficit
    Medicare Part B = about 210 billion in subsidies from General Fund
    MedicAid = about 350 billion in subsidies from General Fund.

    Note – that our current spending exceeds our revenues by 1.5 trillion dollars and Part B/MedicAid comprise 560 billion of that total (assuming you would zero fund both).

    So you can zero fund Part B and MedicAid and STILL have an annual deficit of about a trillion dollars.

    the right wing echo chamber says that to balance the budget we should cut entitlements but not DOD and that the trillion dollars shortfall will be made up by supply-side tax policies.

    you tell me. Does this really make sense ?

  7. It does if you are changing the social contract. States will be required to open the exchange program. You will pay for that exchange. Soon enough everyone will be in the exchange program as employment separates from benefits. From that point on you are nothing more than a 1099 contractor or temp instead of an employee. That’s why I’ve said repeatedly that the American worker is getting the shaft on this deal. They lose benefits but aren’t compensated for a loss that is now a standard procedure.

  8. Larry, My apologies. You caught me. I said the Medicare Part A trust fund will run out in 2017. I was mixing it up with the Social Security Disability Insurance trust fund.

    According to 2011 Social Security and Medicare Trustees’ annual report, the Disability Insurance Fund will run out in 2018. The Medicare Part A trust fund (for hospital payments) isn’t scheduled to run out in 2014.

    When those trust funds run out, benefits will be cut back…. Unless Congress decides to “do something” about it. Which means borrowing the money or raising taxes.

    Just so you know, the Social Security and Medicare Trustees are not part of the “right wing echo chamber.” Obama’s Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, is the managing trustee.

  9. Jim – I appreciate the clarification but I still object to the term ” run out”.

    These funds do not “run out”. They continue to be funded indefinitely just as Va pension funds with no changes will be funded indefinitely.

    in both cases funds continue to be devoted to those entitlements which as a consequence will not “run out”.

    that nomenclature is misleading and misrepresents the actual circumstances.

    If you skip down in the report you referenced to the section entitled:
    ” ESTIMATED OPERATIONS OF TRUST FUNDS”

    you’ll see that all of the FICA-funded entitlements from 2011 through 2020 not onl continue to receive revenues from FICA but those revenues actually increase – not “run out”.

    and no we do not “HAVE” to increase taxes to keep the benefits level funded. If we do nothing, taxes will not increase and benefits will reduce automatically, whereas for Medicare Part B which is an appropriated entitlement, if Congress does nothing – the tax subsidies will continue to increase.

    in that case – we don’t HAVE to increase taxes – they will automatically increase … unless Congress says no.

    For Medicare Part A .. doing nothing results in automatic benefit reduction.

    For Medicare Part B..doing nothing results in automatic higher subsidies and deficits.

    which entitlement directly affects the US budget? Which entitlement needs to be dealt with first?

    Virginia increased payroll taxes on employees to insure their benefits do not reduce.

    Why is that not a just a legitimate option for FICA payroll taxes and Medicare Part A?

    are you saying that it’s okay for Va to increase payroll taxes to preserve benefits but the same exact approach for Medicare is wrong?

    All I’m asking for here is an accurate narrative about the issue..

    and thank you again for looking closer.. I was not trying to “catch you” – only ask you to look closer… and you did. now just one more little baby step.

    😉

  10. Larry, you’re picking at nits. The trust fund will “run out,” as in there will be no more money left in the till. At that point the feds will be able to pay out no more than FICA generates in tax revenues, which will necessitate a cut in benefits. That will precipitate a political crisis! Congress will either (a) raise taxes, (b) continue funding the program by borrowing the money, or (c) stick with the lower benefits. Those are the only options!

  11. Jim – my esteemed friend – what will we do to Medicare Part B?

    do you think we will continue to raise taxes to fund it or do you think we’ll be making changes to keep it from running amok?

    If we are going to make changes in benefits to Medicare Part B – why not Medicare Part A?

    Why is Part A going to precipitate a political crisis and not Part B?

    Don’t you think BOTH Part A and Part B are going to require changes .. hikes in taxes/premiums, reductions in benefits, higher deductibles and co-pays ?

    If we are going to increase premiums on Part B and reduce benefits then why doesn’t that same approach work for Part A?

Leave a Reply