|
Never before in recent history have monetary and fiscal policies been as "stimulative" as
today, and yet, the American economy remains weak and vulnerable. The Federal
budget deficit for the 2003 fiscal year was posted at $555 billion, some six
percent of GNP; it may continue to rise in coming years when new tax reductions
add their weight. The Federal Reserve System has opened its flood gates and
reduced all interest rates to their lowest levels since the 1950s. Its basic
rate now stands at just one percent permitting the stock of money in all its
forms to soar at frightening rates. Government and Federal Reserve officials
are convinced that this combination of stimuli is bound to facilitate an annual
growth rate of 3.75 to 4.75 percent, just like that of the late 1990s.
The fact that this opinion is widely held by many officials and economists
is no evidence that it is accurate; indeed, in our age of inflation and economic
manipulation, an official pronouncement is more likely to be political than
sensible. With the gates wide open, the rush of liquidity is bound to inflict
serious harm not only on the American economy but also on global conditions.
The Federal Reserves utter disregard of the market rate of interest, which
guides the efficient employment of all factors of production according to consumer
choices, is bound to do great harm to the economic structure. It causes severe
maladjustments and imbalances which market forces sooner or later are bound
to correct.
Record-low interest rates encourage present consumption and generate massive
debt. In just five years, total financial as well as non-financial American
debt has surged by 51 percent or $10.9 trillion to more than $32 trillion,
three times the annual Gross National Product. The Federal government itself
is chafing under $6.8 trillion debt and adding $1.6 billion a day every day.
At present interest rates, this debt alone commands charges of $300 billion
a year, or more than $1,000 per man, woman, and child. It may be no concern
for officials and politicians who, like Franklin D. Roosevelt, reassure us
that internal debt merely is a debt by the nation to the nation and interest
payments just are payments to ourselves. But it frightens this observer. It
may soon distress millions of households which, tempted by low mortgage rates,
converted their housing equities into consumer goods and new debt. During the
last quarter alone American households added $397.6 billion in mortgage debt
and another $40 billion in credit card debt. The annualized rate amounts to
more than $1.5 trillion or approximately fifteen percent of GNP. If it is true
that the living standard of Americans has been stagnant for years, we must
draw the startling conclusion that this boost in debt was needed to maintain
it. If the rate of new indebtedness should ever decline, or the people should
choose to repay some debt, living standards would surely plummet.
Facing the mountain of debt, even President Roosevelt would be frightened
today as nearly one-half of the U.S. Treasury debt is held by foreigners. The
Bank of Japan alone owns $440 billion of Treasury securities, the Bank of China
some $122 billion and more every day. Other Asian governments hold $166 billion.
They have become major creditors because U.S. trade deficits, which are a direct
consequence of the super stimulation, now exceed $500 billion a year. Yet,
U.S. dollars do not readily plunge in foreign exchange markets, as other currencies
would, because they are special, they are the primary reserve currency of the
world. Central and commercial banks and millions of individuals all over the
world hold and use them; some central banks eagerly purchase them in order
to assist their own export industries. In Keynesian fashion, they promote employment
by weakening their own currencies.
"A small debt makes a man your debtor, a large debt makes him your enemy." If
this old saw holds true also for governments, the U.S. government must have
countless enemies and be making more every day. Foreigners are financing the
American purchase of goods and services, half a trillion dollars worth every
year, which visibly sustain American standards of living. Foreigners are investing
in U.S. Treasury obligations and dollar assets, trusting in the continuing
integrity of the U.S. dollar. But with the stock of dollars rising incessantly
and American debt soaring at disturbing rates, their trust is wearing thinner
every day. By now, they may be considering the following scenarios.
No central bank on earth, not even the Federal Reserve System, can continually
inflate its currency and defy market rates of interest without harming both
its currency and the economy. Inflation tends to accelerate and ultimately
destroy the currency and cripple the economy. And no government whatsoever
can suffer budget deficits of half a trillion dollars annually without impairing
its standing with its creditors. Piling debt on debt undermines their trust
and raises the crucial question of debt resolution.
Important foreign creditors nevertheless may choose to stay the course in
the hope that their debtor will bring his house into order. They may continue
to peg their currencies to the U.S. dollar, as the government of China has
been doing with persistence, and to enjoy the influx of dollars. It not only
has given employment to millions of Chinese workers producing goods and services
for the American market but also attracted much American capital and technology
enabling them to leap from 19th century economic conditions to contemporary
high-tech capability and productivity. They obviously will not make haste to
increase the value of their currencies, which would depress their sales and
curb the flow of American capital. They may even be prepared to bear the costs
of a sudden devaluation of their large dollar holdings, if the U.S. dollar
should finally fall under the growing weight of foreign indebtedness.
Other foreign creditors who are dismayed by the soaring trade and budget deficits
of their giant debtor may quietly reduce their holdings of U.S. Treasury obligations.
The recent fall of the U.S. dollar from some 120 yen to just 108 may signal
a change in Japanese attitude and policy. At the same time the American dollar
fell more than ten percent toward the euro. The European Central Bank may not
have reduced its dollar holdings, but many European investors and traders undoubtedly
did. They may be frightened by the soaring American deficits or merely seek
higher interest returns in European capital markets. Growing foreign reluctance
to continue to cover American trade deficits and help finance U.S. Treasury
deficits is bound to affect American financial markets and economic activity.
All interest rates must rise although the Federal Reserve may want to offset
foreign reluctance with its own willingness to support Treasury obligations.
But such Fed reaction may alarm many foreign creditors who may react by liquidating
more U.S. Treasury obligations; it surely would trigger a financial crash and
launch a world-wide recession. Fear is the driving force of all crashes.
Both U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve officials seem to underrate the growing
international dangers to both the dollar and the economy. But even if they
were cognizzant of the true situation, their choices of action would be rather
limited. A few academic advisers favor instant removal of the prime causes
of the predicament; they would halt the Federal Reserve credit expansion
forthwith and balance the Federal government budget with due haste. They would
allow interest to find its market rate and capital and labor markets to readjust
freely to the preference and choices of the people. In short, they would stabilize
the U.S. dollar and release economic life from its most harmful constraints.
But they are fully aware that such a solution would be rejected summarily not
only by the policy makers but also by the American people. Under the sway of
the policy makers and their spokesmen, most people are unaware of the cause-and-effect
relationships of monetary policies and their portentous effects. And even if
they were more knowledgeable in monetary matters, they probably would reject
a sudden, resolute stabilization of the dollar which would painfully reveal
the full extent of the damage inflicted by the fiscal and monetary stimuli.
After many years of maladjustment the withdrawal would usher in a painful recession
which probably would be long and severe due to numerous institutional barriers
impeding or even thwarting the necessary readjustment. Few Americans are likely
to place their trust in these advisers and opt for such a scenario.
The pessimists in our midst envision a truly calamitous chain of events.
They are convinced that present policies will continue year after year until
inflation will accelerate and finally destroy the dollar, as it has so many
other currencies in the past. Federal spending is scheduled to head ever higher
not only to meet existing military commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan but
also to expand Medicare, the Federal healthcare program for the elderly. Both
political parties are eager to include prescription drugs, which are estimated
to cost $400 billion over the next decade. The real bill, of course, would
be much higher. Pessimists brace for ever greater instability and prepare for
another Great Depression with declining world trade and commerce and falling
standards of living around the globe. These augurs now portend political consequences
that may follow the economic upheaval.
This economist cannot envision the total destruction of the American dollar,
the primary world currency. Surely, it will continue to depreciate at
various rates and the American economy will remain sluggish and unstable.
The dollar may even have to share its eminent position as the world reserve
currency with the euro which itself suffers from massive deficit spending
by the three largest member countries: Germany, France, and Italy. The dollar
may even face a crisis similar to that in 1979 when the rate of inflation
soared to 13.5 percent, the prime rate to 15.75 percent, and the mortgage
rate to 14 percent or more in some parts of the country. Financial life ground
to a halt in two dozen states which had usury laws prohibiting credit transactions
at such rates. The Federal Reserve, under new management, finally broke the
inflation fever by raising its basic rate to 12 percent. The subsequent readjustment
was long and severe, especially in the housing market. A similar turning
point may be reached in coming years when the Federal Reserve, under new
management and in a crisis, will raise its rate to market levels and allow
the American economy to readjust. And once again the Fed may succeed in stabilizing
a smaller dollar. We cannot foresee the number of rescues needed in coming
years, but we believe that, in the end, the fiat dollar will need the support
by a commodity dollar which served this country rather well throughout its
history.
A few pessimists who are ardent friends of the enterprise order justify their
gloomy outlook with references to the surge of protectionism in the
United States. Scarcely a day passes without some well-known politician or
newsman denouncing America's foreign trade partners for amassing unwarranted
trade surpluses. China which prides itself in its trade with the U.S. is the
favorite target of disapproval and censure. Protectionists would impose a steep
surcharge on all imports from China and other countries with large surpluses.
They may even call for legislation that would take the U.S. out of the World
Trade Organization.
The United States government sought to protect "infant industries" from the
beginning of national history. Its chief instrument was the protective tariff.
Even after American industries had grown to a position equal to all others,
they were said to need protection from cheap foreign labor. Protectionists
still raise their voices whenever the rate of unemployment rises for any reason.
They are loudest in industries with militant union labor suffering high rates
of unemployment.
An American slide into protectionism unfortunately would have grave consequences
not only in the United States but also throughout the world. It would not alleviate
the very causes of the present imbalance: the Federal Reserve stimuli and Treasury
deficits. In fact, it would aggravate the situation as new import restrictions
would cause goods prices to rise, consumption to be curtailed, and levels of
living to fall. It would slash various sources of government revenue, which
in turn would boost budget deficits and make matters worse. Moreover, the government
of China and other countries hurt by American tariffs undoubtedly would retaliate
with similar restrictions on American goods. In American footsteps, they would
not hesitate to hurt their American trade partners and, in interventionist
fashion, impose even more restrictions on their own people.
A more optimistic scenario would be a gradual abandonment of the monetary
policies and an orderly readjustment to unhampered market conditions. The
Federal government would balance its budget in the next few years by holding
the line on both transfer spending and military outlays. The Federal Reserve
System would allow the market rate of interest to resume its basic function,
the efficient allocation of economic resources in the course of time. A painful
readjustment process would commence immediately; interest rates would rise,
calling a halt to misguided spending patterns and encouraging saving and
capital formation. Boom industries soon would suffer withdrawal symptoms
while others would revive from several years of stagnation. At the same time
China and other creditor countries hopefully would allow their currencies
to rise and the U.S. dollar to decline gradually, which would trim America's
trade deficits, raise goods prices, and depreciate all dollar debt at home
and abroad. With the Federal budget in balance and interest rates at market
levels, the dollar would continue to function smoothly as the primary world
currency.
Such a scenario would tell the truth about the international state of affairs.
In world money markets a dollar depreciation of 30 percent would reduce the
financial as well as non-financial American debt of $32 trillion by that percentage,
which would approximate one year's GNP. It would diminish the three-trillion-dollar
international debt burden of the U.S. government by one trillion dollars. Goods
prices would rise at lesser rates, which undoubtedly would bring relief to
all debtors while it would diminish the wealth of creditors. There are many
ways of cheating a creditor. The United States government would use an old
political ruse, the depreciation of its currency.
It is unlikely that present policymakers will soon see the urgent need for
basic changes; they like the present system. In contrast, the political
opposition, ever eager to take the place of the present team, may recognize
the need some day and advocate the return to solvency and integrity. When the
electorate finally recognizes the urgent necessity and elects and empowers
the opposition to correct the course, the dollar may stabilize. It will need
much courage and leadership to endure the pains of readjustment and hold the
course.
Our favorite scenario builds on a gradualist adjustment which, in democratic
societies, is the only realistic outline of changes. When the electorate finally
realizes that the U.S. dollar moves from crisis to crisis at ever shrinking
value and purchasing power it may want to retrieve the old anchor of all currencies,
the gold standard. The world abandoned it in 1971 when President Nixon defaulted
in international gold payment obligations and made the fiat dollar the only
available medium of exchange. Since then the world has moved from crisis to
crisis, suffering from ever increasing maladjustments.
The East Asian crisis of 1997 may have special significance because it may
point to important changes to come. Five currencies which were pegged to a
basket of currencies suddenly collapsed after years of current-account deficits.
In time, the Malaysian ringgity was devalued by 25 percent, the Indonesian
rupiah 33 percent, the Philippine peso 23 percent, the Singapore dollar 9 percent,
and the South Korean won 35 percent. Asian bankers and politicians readily
laid the blame for the crisis on foreign capital, especially the U.S. dollar,
on its massive influx and ready flightiness. The crisis demonstrated anew the
vulnerability of the present monetary system and the need for a more stable
and just monetary order.
Many Asians are convinced that they experienced the currency crisis as a result
of the international U.S. dollar policy. The dollar system exports massive
inflation, instability, and unsustainable debt around the world, and the oil-producing
countries of Asia exchange strategically important and diminishing assets for
paper dollars. It is hardly surprising that the subject of their increasing
concern is the role of gold in international trade and financial exchanges.
In Muslim countries such as Malaysia, Indonesia, and the states of West Asia
and North Africa monetary stability is an important issue, but equally important
is the issue of justice. An international system based on gold is believed
to address both these issues. In 2001 the United Arab Emirates apparently made
a beginning toward what they believe to be a more equitable world order; they
issued gold dinar coins. A public statement by the Islamic Mint even
made a fervent religious point in favor of a new gold standard: "The reintroduction
of gold money can be expected to be a significant milestone in the changing
tides of the world economic and social situation . . . there is no doubt that
this work puts behind it a century of suffering and defeat for Muslims and
opens the coming age to a powerful and revived Islam."
We may challenge such prognoses of a powerful and revived Islam; power and
revival require more than a gold dinar. But there cannot be any doubt that
a gold dollar would restore justice in international relations and reassert
American power and leadership. It would clear away much conflict and strife
and pave the way toward a more equable and peaceful world order.
|