The Fiscal Cliff Is A
Diversion
| by Paul Craig Roberts
(December 17, 2012, Washington DC, Sri Lanka Guardian) The “fiscal cliff” is another hoax designed to shift the attention of policymakers, the media, and the attentive public, if any, from huge problems to small ones.
(December 17, 2012, Washington DC, Sri Lanka Guardian) The “fiscal cliff” is another hoax designed to shift the attention of policymakers, the media, and the attentive public, if any, from huge problems to small ones.
The
fiscal cliff is automatic spending cuts and tax increases in order to reduce
the deficit by an insignificant amount over ten years if Congress takes no
action itself to cut spending and to raise taxes. In other words, the “fiscal
cliff” is going to happen either way.
The
problem from the standpoint of conventional economics with the fiscal cliff is
that it amounts to a double-barrel dose of austerity delivered to a faltering
and recessionary economy. Ever since John Maynard Keynes, most economists have
understood that austerity is not the answer to recession or depression.
Regardless,
the fiscal cliff is about small numbers compared to the Derivatives Tsunami or
to bond market and dollar market bubbles.
The fiscal cliff requires that the federal government
cut spending by $1.3 trillion over ten years. The Guardian reports that means
the federal deficit has to be reduced about $109 billion per year or 3 percent
of the current budget. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/27/fiscal-cliff-explained-spending-cuts-tax-hikes More
simply, just divide $1.3 trillion by ten and it comes to $130 billion per year.
This can be done by simply taking a three month vacation each year from
Washington’s wars.
The Derivatives Tsunami and the bond and dollar
bubbles are of a different magnitude.
Last June 5 in “Collapse At Hand” http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/06/05/collapse-at-hand/ I pointed out that according to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s fourth quarter report for 2011, about 95% of the $230 trillion in US derivative exposure was held by four US financial institutions: JP Morgan Chase Bank, Bank of America, Citibank, and Goldman Sachs.
Prior
to financial deregulation, essentially the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act and
the non-regulation of derivatives–a joint achievement of the Clinton
administration and the Republican Party–Chase, Bank of America, and Citibank
were commercial banks that took depositors’ deposits and made loans to
businesses and consumers and purchased Treasury bonds with any extra reserves.
With
the repeal of Glass-Steagall these honest commercial banks became gambling
casinos, like the investment bank, Goldman Sachs, betting not only their own
money but also depositors money on uncovered bets on interest rates, currency
exchange rates, mortgages, and prices of commodities and equities.
These
bets soon exceeded many times not only US GDP but world GDP. Indeed, the
gambling bets of JP Morgan Chase Bank alone are equal to world Gross Domestic
Product.
According
to the first quarter 2012 report from the Comptroller of the Currency, total
derivative exposure of US banks has fallen insignificantly from the previous
quarter to $227 trillion. The exposure of the 4 US banks accounts for almost of
all of the exposure and is many multiples of their assets or of their risk capital.
The
Derivatives Tsunami is the result of the handful of fools and corrupt public
officials who deregulated the US financial system. Today merely four US banks
have derivative exposure equal to 3.3 times world Gross Domestic Product. When
I was a US Treasury official, such a possibility would have been considered
beyond science fiction.
Hopefully,
much of the derivative exposure somehow nets out so that the net exposure,
while still larger than many countries’ GDPs, is not in the hundreds of
trillions of dollars. Still, the situation is so worrying to the Federal
Reserve that after announcing a third round of quantitative easing, that is,
printing money to buy bonds–both US Treasuries and the banks’ bad assets–the
Fed has just announced that it is doubling its QE 3 purchases.
In
other words, the entire economic policy of the United States is dedicated to
saving four banks that are too large to fail. The banks are too large to fail
only because deregulation permitted financial concentration, as if the Anti-Trust
Act did not exist.
The
purpose of QE is to keep the prices of debt, which supports the banks’ bets,
high. The Federal Reserve claims that the purpose of its massive monetization
of debt is to help the economy with low interest rates and increased home
sales. But the Fed’s policy is hurting the economy by depriving savers,
especially the retired, of interest income, forcing them to draw down their
savings. Real interest rates paid on CDs, money market funds, and bonds are
lower than the rate of inflation.
Moreover,
the money that the Fed is creating in order to bail out the four banks is
making holders of dollars, both at home and abroad, nervous. If investors
desert the dollar and its exchange value falls, the price of the financial
instruments that the Fed’s purchases are supporting will also fall, and
interest rates will rise. The only way the Fed could support the dollar would
be to raise interest rates. In that event, bond holders would be wiped out, and
the interest charges on the government’s debt would explode.
With
such a catastrophe following the previous stock and real estate collapses, the
remains of people’s wealth would be wiped out. Investors have been deserting
equities for “safe” US Treasuries. This is why the Fed can keep bond prices so
high that the real interest rate is negative.
The
hyped threat of the fiscal cliff is immaterial compared to the threat of the
derivatives overhang and the threat to the US dollar and bond market of the
Federal Reserve’s commitment to save four US banks.
Once
again, the media and its master, the US government, hide the real issues behind
a fake one. The fiscal cliff has become the way for the Republicans to save the
country from bankruptcy by destroying the social safety net put in place during
the 1930s, supplemented by Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” in the mid-1960s.
Now
that there are no jobs, now that real family incomes have been stagnant or
declining for decades, and now that wealth and income have been concentrated in
few hands is the time, Republicans say, to destroy the social safety net so
that we don’t fall over the fiscal cliff.
In
human history, such a policy usually produces revolt and revolution, which is
what the US so desperately needs.
Perhaps
our stupid and corrupt policymakers are doing us a favor after all.
Paul
Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and
associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business
Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many
university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide
following.