Debt, risk and employment are in a death-spiral of malinvestment and debt-based consumption.
Economists
look at debt, risk and the job market as separate issues. No wonder they can't
make sense of our "jobless recovery": the three are intimately and
causally connected. An
entire book could be written about debt, risk and jobs, but let's see if we can't
shed some light on a complex dynamic in a few paragraphs.
Risk:
As I described in "Resistance, Revolution, Liberation: A Model for Positive
Change", risk cannot be eliminated, it can only be shifted to others or
temporarily masked.
Masking risk simply lets it pile up beneath the surface until it brings down the entire system. Transferring it to others is a neat "solution" but when it blows up then those who took the fall are not pleased.
Risk and gain are causally connected: no risk, no
gain. The ideal setup is to keep the gain but transfer the risk to others. This
was the financial meltdown in a nutshell: the bankers kept their gains and
transferred the losses/risk to the taxpayers via the bankers' toadies and
apparatchiks in Congress, the White House and the Federal Reserve.
Risk is like the dog that didn't bark. In the story Silver Blaze, Sherlock
Holmes calls the police inspector's attention to the fact that a dog did
something curious the night in question: it did not bark when it should have.
When scarce capital is misallocated to unproductive
uses such as duplicate tests that can be billed to Medicare, sprawling
McMansions in the middle of nowhere, etc., "the dog that didn't bark"
is this question: what productive uses for that scarce capital have been passed
over to squander the scarce capital on Medicare fraud, McMansions, Homeland
Security ("Papers, please! No papers? Take him away"), etc.
Once the capital has been squandered, it's gone, and
the opportunity to invest it in productive uses has been irrevocably lost.
Debt:
Debt has a funny cost called interest. If you have a corrupt, self-serving
central bank (a redundancy) that can lower interest rates by printing money to
buy government bonds, then this funny thing called interest can be lowered to,
say, 1%.
At 1% interest, the government can borrow $100 and
only pay 1% in annual interest. That is almost "free," isn't it? The
key word here is "almost." If you borrow enough, then that
silly 1% can become rather oppressive.
Let's say the Federal Reserve is willing to loan you
$100 billion at zero interest.
You have an incredible sum of cash to use for speculation, and it doesn't cost
anything! Wow, you must be an investment banker....
Now what happens when the interest rate goes from zero
to 1%? Yikes, you suddenly owe $1 billion a year in interest. That is some serious change. You can of
course pay the interest out of the borrowed $100 billion, unless you've spent
it building bridges to nowhere and supporting crony capitalism.
Yes, we're talking about Japan--and Greece, the U.S.,
China, and every other nation that piled up staggering debts to fund an
unproductive Status Quo. If
you play this "borrow at low rates" Keynesian game for 20 years, then
you end up with a debt that far exceeds your national output (GDP). That funny
cost is now so large all your tax receipts generated by your vast economy only
cover the interest and your Social Security tab. That's Japan today: all its
tax revenues only cover its gargantuan interest on its unimaginably vast debt
and Japan's social security outlays. The rest of its government expenses must
be borrowed and added to the already monumental debt.
Interest creates a death spiral when the borrowed
money was squandered on unproductive bridges to nowhere and consumption.
Jobs:
Jobs have an interesting feature called productivity. If you pay me $1 million
for a manicure (OK, you're an investment banker and can afford it), that money
funds consumption, interest and taxes (presuming I pay taxes, which I might not
if I hire the right Wall Street law firm). Once the money is spent on
consumption (housing, energy, entertainment, hookers for the Security Guys,
etc.), interest and taxes, then it's gone. It cannot be invested in productive
assets.
If I invest the $1 million in software and robotics
that produce equipment for the natural gas industry, then I will hire a
software person to manage the software and technicians to maintain the
machines, a few more to transport the raw materials and finished goods, a few
more to oversee the accounts, and so on. The $1 million funds a number of jobs
that will be permanent if the products being produced meet a real market demand
and can be sold at a profit.
The $1 million spent on consumption pays for some
labor, but it doesn't create any value. If we track where it went, it ended up
in the government coffers as taxes, in the five "too big to fail"
banks as interest, and in various agribusiness, food services and energy
corporations. A few bucks were distributed as tips and donations.
Now imagine if that $1 million was borrowed. If the $1 million was squandered on
consumption, interest and taxes, then it's gone in a short period of time--but the interest remains to be paid
forever. If you're an investment banker and the Fed loves you
(and of course it does), then you can roll that $1 million into a new $2
million loan. You use some of the $1 million in fresh debt to pay the interest,
and then you blow the rest on unproductive consumption.
The causal connection between debt, risk and jobs is
now visible. Debt is
intrinsically risky because the interest accrues until the debt is paid in
full. If the debt will never be paid--for instance, the $14 trillion in Federal
debt--then the interest is eternal, or at least until the system implodes and
all the debt is renounced.
If the money has been squandered on consumption
(marginalized college degrees, medical procedures with minimal or even negative
results, $300 million a piece F-35 fighter jets, etc.) then there are two
risks: the interest that piles up must be paid, meaning potentially productive
investments must be passed over to pay the interest, and productive uses that
could have been funded by the borrowed capital have been passed over.
Consumption funds temporary labor, but there is no
wealth created or sustainable employment created. When you borrow $100K for a marginal
MBA, the money paid some staffers at the Status Quo educrat edifice and some
overhead/profit, but when it's gone, the debt remains and the staffers need another
debt-serf to fund their pay next semester.
If the borrowed money were actually invested in a
marketable product (in our example, equipment for natural gas production), then
jobs and wealth are created by the increase in productivity and output created
by the enterprise.
What we have instead is a Central State and an economy
that has borrowed and squandered trillions of dollars on consumption and
malinvestment in unproductive "stranded" assets. The debt and risk pile up, while the
labor that results from consumption is temporary and does not create wealth or
permanent employment.
Figuratively speaking, we're stranded in a McMansion
in the middle of nowhere, a showy malinvestment that produces no wealth or
value, and we're wondering how we're going to pay the gargantuan mortgage and
student loans.
Debt and the risk generated by rising debt create a
death-spiral when the money is squandered on consumption, phantom assets,
speculation and malinvestments. Sadly, that systemic misallocation of capital
puts the job market in a death spiral, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment