Best of the Week
Most Popular
1. The Trump Stock Market Trap May Be Triggered - Barry_M_Ferguson
2.Why are Central Banks Buying Gold and Dumping Dollars? - Richard_Mills
3.US China War - Thucydides Trap and gold - Richard_Mills
4.Gold Price Trend Forcast to End September 2019 - Nadeem_Walayat
5.Money Saving Kids Gardening Growing Giant Sunflowers Summer Fun - Anika_Walayat
6.US Dollar Breakdown Begins, Gold Price to Bolt Higher - Jim_Willie_CB
7.INTEL (INTC) Stock Investing to Profit From AI Machine Learning Boom - Nadeem_Walayat
8.Will Google AI Kill Us? Man vs Machine Intelligence - N_Walayat
9.US Prepares for Currency War with China - Richard_Mills
10.Gold Price Epochal Breakout Will Not Be Negated by a Correction - Clive Maund
Last 7 days
This Is Your Last Chance to Dump Netflix Stock - 19th July 19
Gold and US Stock Mid Term Election and Decade Cycles - 19th July 19
Precious Metals Big Picture, as Silver Gets on its Horse - 19th July 19
This Technology Everyone Laughed Off Is Quietly Changing the World - 19th July 19
Green Tech Stocks To Watch - 19th July 19
Double Top In Transportation and Metals Breakout Are Key Stock Market Topping Signals - 18th July 19
AI Machine Learning PC Custom Build Specs for £2,500 - Scan Computers 3SX - 18th July 19
The Best “Pick-and-Shovel” Play for the Online Grocery Boom - 18th July 19
Is the Stock Market Rally Floating on Thin Air? - 18th July 19
Biotech Stocks With Near Term Catalysts - 18th July 19
SPX Consolidating, GBP and CAD Could be in Focus - 18th July 19
UK House Building and Population Growth Analysis - 17th July 19
Financial Crisis Stocks Bear Market Is Scary Close - 17th July 19
Want to See What's Next for the US Economy? Try This. - 17th July 19
What to do if You Blow the Trading Account - 17th July 19
Bitcoin Is Far Too Risky for Most Investors - 17th July 19
Core Inflation Rises but Fed Is Going to Cut Rates. Will Gold Gain? - 17th July 19
Boost your Trading Results - FREE eBook - 17th July 19
This Needs To Happen Before Silver Really Takes Off - 17th July 19
NASDAQ Should Reach 8031 Before Topping - 17th July 19
US Housing Market Real Terms BUY / SELL Indicator - 16th July 19
Could Trump Really Win the 2020 US Presidential Election? - 16th July 19
Gold Stocks Forming Bullish Consolidation - 16th July 19
Will Fed Easing Turn Out Like 1995 or 2007? - 16th July 19
Red Rock Entertainment Investments: Around the world in a day with Supreme Jets - 16th July 19
Silver Has Already Gone from Weak to Strong Hands - 15th July 19
Top Equity Mutual Funds That Offer Best Returns - 15th July 19
Gold’s Breakout And The US Dollar - 15th July 19
Financial Markets, Iran, U.S. Global Hegemony - 15th July 19
U.S Bond Yields Point to a 40% Rise in SPX - 15th July 19
Corporate Earnings may Surprise the Stock Market – Watch Out! - 15th July 19
Stock Market Interest Rate Cut Prevails - 15th July 19
Dow Stock Market Trend Forecast Current State July 2019 Video - 15th July 19
Why Summer is the Best Time to be in the Entertainment Industry - 15th July 19
Mid-August Is A Critical Turning Point For US Stocks - 14th July 19
Fed’s Recessionary Indicators and Gold - 14th July 19
The Problem with Keynesian Economics - 14th July 19
Stocks Market Investors Worried About the Fed? Don't Be -- Here's Why - 13th July 19
Could Gold Launch Into A Parabolic Upside Rally? - 13th July 19
Stock Market SPX and Dow in BREAKOUT but this is the worrying part - 13th July 19
Key Stage 2 SATS Tests Results Grades and Scores GDS, EXS, WTS Explained - 13th July 19
INTEL Stock Investing in Qubits and AI Neural Network Processors - Video - 12th July 19
Gold Price Selloff Risk High - 12th July 19
State of the US Economy as Laffer Gets Laughable - 12th July 19
Dow Stock Market Trend Forecast Current State - 12th July 19
Stock Market Major Index Top In 3 to 5 Weeks? - 11th July 19
Platinum Price vs Gold Price - 11th July 19
What This Centi-Billionaire Fashion Magnate Can Teach You About Investing - 11th July 19
Stock Market Fundamentals are Weakening: 3000 on SPX Means Nothing - 11th July 19
This Tobacco Stock Is a Big Winner from E-Cigarette Bans - 11th July 19
Investing in Life Extending Pharma Stocks - 11th July 19
How to Pay for It All: An Option the Presidential Candidates Missed - 11th July 19
Mining Stocks Flash Powerful Signal for Gold and Silver Markets - 11th July 19
5 Surefire Ways to Get More Viewers for Your Video Series - 11th July 19

Market Oracle FREE Newsletter

Top AI Stocks Investing to Profit from the Machine Intelligence Mega-trend

The Government Will Default on Its Debts

Economics / Great Depression II Nov 02, 2009 - 08:01 AM GMT

By: Gary_North

Economics

Diamond Rated - Best Financial Markets Analysis ArticleThe governments of every major nation are going to default on their debts. There are two relevant questions: (1) How? (2) When?

Establishments around the world all deny this. They have gained power and wealth by means of the expansion of government. They have justified their success by insisting that the government-business alliance is the only way to establish economic growth and economic security for the masses. This claim rests on a more fundamental claim, namely, that an unhampered free market is destructive of economic stability and will inevitably lead to economic depression.


The Establishments are universally Keynesian. John Maynard Keynes' book, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, was published in 1936. It defended in theory what all Western governments had been doing in practice for at least five years, namely, running huge deficits. Keynes became as close to an academic high priest as any modern scholar ever has. He was the apostle of national government debt. His ideas today are more influential than they were at his death in 1946. We live in the age of Keynes.

I can think of only one major Establishment figure who has broken with the Establishment on the question of the great default: Peter G. Peterson, who was the chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations until 2007. He now runs the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, which focuses on the looming bankruptcy of the U.S. government. More than any other person of influence, he has warned of the bankruptcy of the Medicare/Social Security programs and their equivalents in the West.

Peterson a decade ago said that he had spoken with the major leaders of the West about the impossibility of funding these social programs. They all told him the same thing: "I will not be around at that time." In short, kick the can.

VOTE NOW, PAY LATER

Politicians lie. Voters believe. This is the great symbiotic relationship of democratic politics.

For older Americans, a single mental image above all others illustrates this perpetual relationship. It is their memory of the annual Sunday cartoon in the cartoon strip, "Peanuts," which was the most widely read cartoon strip – and therefore the most widely read anything – in the United States for at least three decades. The annual cartoon featured two children: the ever-mendacious Lucy, whose hand supported an upright football on the ground, who encouraged the ever-trusting Charlie Brown to run at the ball and kick it. He always believed her. At the last moment, she would pull the ball away, and Charlie would fly into the air, then land on his back. What changed each year was her argument on why she would not pull the ball away, and her final remark to Charlie, as he lay flat on his back. She thought he was stupidly naïve. He was. She always took advantage of him. Her philosophy was clear: "Never give a sucker an even break."

This scene is repeated every other November in the United States, when voters go to the polls. "This time, it will be different," cry the Congressional candidates. Then, for the next two years, they pull the ball away.

The only thing to top this exercise in mendacity in the United States is the testimony to each house of Congress delivered by the Chairman of the Federal Reserve System. Not even the President's annual State of the Union address tops this performance.

The voters never learn. Congress never learns.

The coin of the political realm is the promise. Not money, not power: the promise. Politics sometimes looks like prostitution, with money at the center. This is an illusion. The voters do not come to Congress demanding money. They demand faithfulness. Congress is to the voters what a philanderer is to a mistress. He may shower her with presents, but the presents have meaning to her only because of the promise. "I plan to divorce my wife. It's just a matter of working out the details." She likes the presents, but she believes the promise: "You can trust me. We'll grow old together." She thinks the presents are forever.

He borrows the money to buy her the presents. When interest rates rise, she will find out just how reliable his promises have been.

This is the heart of modern democracy. Politicians promise undying faithfulness. Voters believe them.

The first political campaign I can remember was the 1952 Presidential election. I recall only one event clearly. It was a singing group at the Democrats' national convention. They sang the following:

They promise you the sky.
They promise you the earth.
But what's a Republican promise worth?

Then came the chorus:

Don't let 'em take it,
Don't let 'em take it,
Don't let 'em take it away!

Eisenhower was elected. Both houses of Congress went Republican. This had not happened since 1928. It would not happen again until 2000. They didn't take it away. They added more.

The great advantage of political promises is that the politicians who make them will not be in office when the bills come due. The benefits are immediate: votes. The costs are deferred. The supply of promises increases.

These promises rest on assurances. "Treasury debt will continue to have a AAA rating." "Treasury debt is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States." "There is no alternative to the U.S. dollar as a world reserve currency." "We owe it to ourselves." "Deficits don't matter." "Inflation is under control."

With the exception of Austrian School economics, every major school of economic thought believes in at least four of these assurances. Keynesians believe all of them.

So, the supply of promises increases. So does the magnitude of these promises. For as long as investors buy the Treasury debt and the GSE debt (Fannie and Freddie), there will be no reversal of this process.

The advent of the day of reckoning is easy to describe: (1) the upward move of Treasury interest rates, or (2) the upward move of prices in response to the Federal Reserve System's expansion of its balance sheet – monetary base – to hold down rates.

Then will come the wail of the aging mistress: "But you promised!" Indeed, he did, but a younger mistress has come along, and she wants the presents that he had promised the first one. When lenders start tightening up, a philanderer has to pick and choose among his mistresses. Old ones lose.

But what of the faithful wife? When will she finally wise up and divorce the lying SOB?

I am writing this report for her.

WHY DEFAULT WILL COME

You know about the unfunded off-budget liabilities of the Social Security and Medicare programs. If you don't know the numbers, go here.

You know about the size of the on-budget Federal debt. If not, go here.

You presumably know about the size of the officially estimated deficits in the on-budget account: at least $900 billion a year until 2019. If not, go here.

Voters are oblivious. They do not care about anything beyond their next paycheck. Investors are oblivious. They do not care beyond the next quarterly report. Congress is oblivious. They do not care beyond the next election.

Am I saying that Congress has a longer-term perspective than investors? Yes. But why? Because investors believe two things: (1) the existing price of any asset reflects the best judgment of the smartest investors; (2) they will be smarter than all these other investors when it comes time to sell and buy gold.

The average American faces his day of reckoning on the first of every month. Congress faces its day of reckoning in November of even-numbered years. Investors do not believe that they, individually, will ever face a day of reckoning. They think they are smarter than the smartest guys in the room, or else they think Ben Bernanke is, and all those other FED economists are, who will see the crisis coming next time and will take steps to evade it.

Congress also thinks that the FED's economists will find ways to evade the day of reckoning.

Investors and politicians are united. They trust the ability of central banks to evade the costs of political promises. This has been true since 1694, when Parliament granted a monopoly over money to the Bank of England. Parliament wanted a lender of last resort. That was what the head of the Bank of England promised.

The political promises of every nation rest on faith in central banking. The politicians and the investors are united in a confession of faith. This confession of faith rests on an assumption: with fiat money, there can be a free lunch, indefinitely. Every school of economic opinion except the Austrian School also affirms this.

There is a problem with this confession. It is not true. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Fiat money is counterfeit money. It does not create wealth. It destroys wealth.

Congress has promised money. It has also promised wealth. Congress will default on at least one of these promises.

We are back to my original two questions: (1) How? (2) When?

Default has four major forms. We need to consider all of them.

1. OUTRIGHT DEFAULT

This scenario assumes that the central bank refuses to buy the government's debt. This has not happened since 1694.

At some point, the government will not be able to find buyers at low interest rates. Rates will rise. The economy will sink into a depression. Revenues will decline. Expenditures will rise. The government will not be able to pay all of its obligations. So, it will raise taxes. The depression will get worse. Revenues will again fall.

Investors will know that the government is likely to default. No credit-rating service will have the courage to downgrade the government's debt, but rates will rise as if they had. The government will reach the day of reckoning. It will default on all of its debts.

Every institution that has government debt in its portfolio will suffer a loss. Its share price will fall. The depression will get worse. Insurance companies will be hit hard. The largest banks, which swapped their toxic debt with the FED at face value in late 2008 will find that they own the most toxic debt of all.

Foreign central banks will refuse to buy any more American Treasury debt. Technically, their portfolios fall to the extent that they held Treasury debt. Then those governments must decide. Should those banks be allowed to inflate to overcome these losses?

The inverted pyramid of debt will topple. The great default will produce the great depression. Unemployment will rise. Depositors will finally go to their ATMs to draw out currency. The banks will default: no withdrawals of currency.

The division of labor will contract. Everyone will get much poorer.

Because a default on all Treasury debt would have such widespread consequences – immediate consequences – economists have argued that this will not be allowed to happen. The central bank will buy the debt. But if it does, at some point it must stop buying or else create hyperinflation. Hyperinflation has the same consequence as default and deflation: a contraction in the division of labor.

I know of only one economist who predicts an outright default: Jeffrey Rogers Hummel. On August 3, 2009, he published an article on the free market site, Library of Economics and Liberty: "Why Default on U.S. Treasuries is likely." His argument is simple: the only alternative is the Zimbabwe option: hyperinflation.

He goes through the numbers. He makes an impressive case. He does not discuss the level of interest rates that would bring on the crisis, but at some point, the Treasury will have to offer high rates unless the FED intervenes.

He says that the welfare state is going to die, all over the world. I think he is correct. I am not convinced that outright default is likely – not before much higher price inflation arrives.

The strategy of the FED is the same as the strategy of Congress: kick the can.

SELECTIVE DEFAULT

Hummel admits that selective default is a possibility. I think it is more than a possibility. I think it is likely. He writes:

The Zimbabwe option illustrates that other potential outcomes, however unlikely, are equally unprecedented and dramatic. We cannot utterly rule out, for instance, the possibility that the U.S. Congress might repudiate a major portion of promised benefits rather than its debt. If it simply abolished Medicare outright, the unfunded liability of Social Security would become tractable. Indeed, one of the current arguments for the adoption of nationalized health care is that it can reduce Medicare costs. But this argument is based on looking at other welfare States such as Great Britain, where government-provided health care was rationed from the outset rather than subsidized with Medicare. Rationing can indeed drive down health-care costs, but after more than forty years of subsidized health care in the United States, how likely is it that the public will put up with severe rationing or that the politicians will attempt to impose it? And don't kid yourself; the rationing will have to be quite severe to stave off a future fiscal crisis.

The rationing will have to be severe. The promises will not come true.

INFLATION

There are two forms: mass (up to 50% per annum) and hyper (the sky's the limit).

Mass inflation seems more likely over the next decade. If the world's central banks can coordinate the expansion of money, thereby funding the national welfare states, the public will not be able to escape. They will pay the inflation tax.

The ways around this are limited to investing in real goods: commodities, small farms, used goods stores, small-town real estate. Not many people will see this in time. Of those who do, few will take action. These escape hatches are for people who are hedging against default. The average voter has no financial reserves. Of the 20% who do have reserves, 80% will be stuck in conventional investments. They will believe the Establishment's Keynesian line. "The government can fix it if you just hang on."

Inflation means the erosion of money. It means a hidden default on the political promises. Why hidden? Because the politicians will blame speculators. They will not blame the Federal Reserve for having bankrolled their promises.

CONCLUSION

Ultimately, it is either the great depression or the Zimbabwe option. Ludwig von Mises called this the crack-up boom. It means the destruction of money and the collapse of the division of labor. It would mean devastation.

I think central banks will at some point refuse to fund governments any longer. They will bail out the largest banks instead. Foreign politicians may force hyperinflation on their central banks, as agents of the government. But as long as the Federal Reserve System maintains its selective independence, it will not adopt hyperinflation as a policy. That would not be in the interest of the largest banks. It would also not be in the interest of central bankers. Their retirement promises would die.

    Gary North [send him mail ] is the author of Mises on Money . Visit http://www.garynorth.com . He is also the author of a free 20-volume series, An Economic Commentary on the Bible .

    http://www.lewrockwell.com

    © 2009 Copyright Gary North / LewRockwell.com - All Rights Reserved
    Disclaimer: The above is a matter of opinion provided for general information purposes only and is not intended as investment advice. Information and analysis above are derived from sources and utilising methods believed to be reliable, but we cannot accept responsibility for any losses you may incur as a result of this analysis. Individuals should consult with their personal financial advisors.


© 2005-2019 http://www.MarketOracle.co.uk - The Market Oracle is a FREE Daily Financial Markets Analysis & Forecasting online publication.


Comments

Louie
08 Nov 09, 18:15
Good article, but...

I can´t quibble with anything written here with the exception of Mr. North ducking the most important question he puts forth, that being `when?`. Its a question, that if answered in as forthright and through a manner as was the question of `how?`, would easily have lengthened the article by at least a factor of three. Still, in this enviroment, `when?` is a question worth laboring through ten volumes of the Encylopedia Britannica in order to find it´s answer. Armagedon is all about timing. If it (that being timing) can be abated just one more month maybe the author can find the time to write on the subject of timetables for the arrival of the four horsemen. This really would be valubale information, especially to me as I´ve spent the last couple weeks waiting for a downleg in the gold price. I fear too many fellow investors have finally caught on to the gist of Mr. North´s (and others) arguments and are feverishly playing catch up and thereby punishing me for my overly opptomistic patience!!!


KRISHNA RAO
09 Nov 09, 11:34
PIE IN THE FACE

Sorry!! but I think it going to be a very big pie in the face for all the doom sayers. So US debt is high so what?

Did Japan default? NO!! so why expect US to default if they can carry as though everything is hunky dory. See as long as we have petro dollars, forget it, dollar will be the medium of exchange as its backed by the worlds most aggressive and expensive military. By the way China may deal in any currency they want but they have to buy oil in dollars!!! So whats the big issue? TARP? GoldmanSachs? Bonuses? Who cares? given a couple of years it will be long forgotten that there was even a hint of recession, especially as the DOW has broken the 10,000 an dis marching on further. DOW-company valuation-assets? all linked so it has to rise and cant drop. Commercial Mortgages- more printing- simple solution.


Post Comment

Only logged in users are allowed to post comments. Register/ Log in

6 Critical Money Making Rules