NEVER MIND the B*LLOCKS Osbo peddles, deficits don't really matter

But the absence of one can

Worstall @ the Weekend What with another budget just coming up, to correct the one that chancellor of the exchequer George Osborne kidded everyone with before the election, it might be time to answer the question of whether deficits really matter?

For Osborne is most certainly going to continue shouting that they do and, equally certainly, everyone to the left of Genghis Khan is going to be shouting that they don't: even that they're beneficial. I was also asked this by an old friend just recently for the counter-claims were getting confusing. And given that he's been a banker these past 20 years and if they don't know ...

The truth is that there's two entirely different arguments going on here. There's an economic one and that's conducted to one set of rules. And in terms of actual real government and central bank stuff everyone really is using just the one set of rules, albeit with minor variations.

Then there's the political argument, which is being run on entirely different lines. Each borrowing whatever part of the economic story seems suitable for their purpose at the time. And equally ignoring the bits of the economic story that seem inconvenient to their preferred arguments at any one time.

In that strict economic sense: government spends more than it collects in taxes. Oh deary me, what tragedy. This is about as worrisome as my borrowing a tenner until payday. Because that's what is being done, some borrowing is being done from future state revenue to spend now. So Osborne tramping around the country shouting that we've got to close the deficit isn't quite what economists would worry about.

Indeed, there's another way of looking at it (and here everyone is working from a reasonably standard Keynesian of some form economic textbook, so pretty much everyone working in the field agrees), which is that, when we're in recession, a deficit is a very good idea indeed.

Borrow money, spend it into the economy, this boosts aggregate demand and reduces either the depth or the duration of the recession. Admittedly, there are some economic schools that don't agree, the Austrians, for example, (no, not yodellers in lederhosen, a school of economic thought) for they insist that the recession is necessary to purge the economy of the excess accumulated through the boom.

Only when all the previous malinvestment is liquidated can we get back to growth. Despite my often lederhosen ways, extending perhaps to an arpeggio or two rather than the full yodel, that seems a bit harsh to most. A deficit will reduce the pain of recession, that pain being done to real human beings, let's have a deficit.

But a deficit in itself being harmful? No, not really.

What does become important is the national debt: the accumulation of all past deficits minus whatever surpluses anyone has ever run (no, don't laugh, it's happened a few times since World War Two in the UK. Under Clement Atlee, Nigel Lawson and, amazingly, Gordon Brown).

Now, there's an argument about at which point the next thing happens. Professor Carmen Reinhart and one-time chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, Ken Rogoff, insisted that the trigger point was when the debt was 90 per cent of GDP. That turned out to be an Excel error in part. And they didn't differentiate between people borrowing in their own currency and borrowing in another.

But all will agree that at some point that debt will rise up and swallow the rest of the economy. At which point a little detail.

We differentiate between a primary surplus (or deficit), which is before interest and capital repayments on the national debt and a final surplus (or deficit). So, say that the debt is 50 per cent of GDP, interest rates are 4 per cent (just to make the maths easy) so we've got to find 2 per cent of GDP to pay the interest bill. This is below the combined inflation rate and growth rate (or what we call the nominal growth rate) of the economy and our bill isn't going to get any larger.

We might even borrow to pay that interest as with that nominal growth the debt to GDP ratio isn't going to grow. And it's not terribly difficult to run a primary surplus of 1 per cent or so of GDP so we can possibly even pay down that debt a bit.

Now run things again: debt is 300 per cent of GDP (not far off where Greece got to at one point) and interest rates are 10 per cent. We've now got to find 15 per cent of GDP just to pay that interest bill. That is, we've got to pull out in tax 15 per cent of everything that everyone does in the entire economy and send it off to those bondholders. That's 15 per cent of the economy that's got to be taxed and not spent on public services.

Simply not going to happen: the general thought is that you might manage a 2 or 3 per cent primary surplus for years, but no more than that (some countries managed a bit more in the run up to the Euro but some of them were, umm, lying, Hi! Greece! How are ya?).

People just won't put up with it.

Other stories you might like

  • AI tool finds hundreds of genes related to human motor neuron disease

    Breakthrough could lead to development of drugs to target illness

    A machine-learning algorithm has helped scientists find 690 human genes associated with a higher risk of developing motor neuron disease, according to research published in Cell this week.

    Neuronal cells in the central nervous system and brain break down and die in people with motor neuron disease, like amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) more commonly known as Lou Gehrig's disease, named after the baseball player who developed it. They lose control over their bodies, and as the disease progresses patients become completely paralyzed. There is currently no verified cure for ALS.

    Motor neuron disease typically affects people in old age and its causes are unknown. Johnathan Cooper-Knock, a clinical lecturer at the University of Sheffield in England and leader of Project MinE, an ambitious effort to perform whole genome sequencing of ALS, believes that understanding how genes affect cellular function could help scientists develop new drugs to treat the disease.

    Continue reading
  • Need to prioritize security bug patches? Don't forget to scan Twitter as well as use CVSS scores

    Exploit, vulnerability discussion online can offer useful signals

    Organizations looking to minimize exposure to exploitable software should scan Twitter for mentions of security bugs as well as use the Common Vulnerability Scoring System or CVSS, Kenna Security argues.

    Better still is prioritizing the repair of vulnerabilities for which exploit code is available, if that information is known.

    CVSS is a framework for rating the severity of software vulnerabilities (identified using CVE, or Common Vulnerability Enumeration, numbers), on a scale from 1 (least severe) to 10 (most severe). It's overseen by, a US-based, non-profit computer security organization.

    Continue reading
  • Sniff those Ukrainian emails a little more carefully, advises Uncle Sam in wake of Belarusian digital vandalism

    NotPetya started over there, don't forget

    US companies should be on the lookout for security nasties from Ukrainian partners following the digital graffiti and malware attack launched against Ukraine by Belarus, the CISA has warned.

    In a statement issued on Tuesday, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency said it "strongly urges leaders and network defenders to be on alert for malicious cyber activity," having issued a checklist [PDF] of recommended actions to take.

    "If working with Ukrainian organizations, take extra care to monitor, inspect, and isolate traffic from those organizations; closely review access controls for that traffic," added CISA, which also advised reviewing backups and disaster recovery drills.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022