“A modest man,” Winston Churchill supposedly quipped about Clement Attlee, his
successor as prime minister, “but then he has so much to be modest about.” We
should say the same about economists, particularly their ability to forecast
anything in a useful and timely manner.
Those predicting an imminent American economic decline
have usually been no exception. This time, though, they may be on to something.
Prevailing arguments about when the era of U.S.
dominance would end, and which country would supplant it, have been wildly and
consistently wrong for half a century. In the 1950s, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev was taken seriously when he told Western
ambassadors “We will bury you.” Today, his country no longer exists. In the 1980s, Japan was supposedly going to be No. 1; now the
question is whether the precipitous decline in its working-age population will
generate a fiscal crisis.
The Germans -- or Europeans more broadly -- were
thought to be on the brink of elbowing aside the U.S. several times, including
in the run-up to the global financial crisis in 2008, when the euro seemed to
threaten the dollar’s role as the pre- eminent reserve currency. Remember when
Brazilian model Gisele Bundchen was quoted as saying she preferred to be paid in euros? Now the
euro-area economy looks very sick indeed, and Ms. Bundchen is apparently long
American icons (she married football player Tom Brady).
Three Questions
Becoming the world’s top economic dog isn’t easy.
That’s because any contender -- China or anyone else -- needs to answer three tough
questions.
First, do they have secure property rights for
individuals? Who would trust their rainy-day funds or their most innovative
ideas in a country where, when the going gets tough, the state gets your stuff?
China has a big current-account surplus and lots of foreign-exchange reserves.
They also have a 2,000-year tradition of putting the government before the
individual. Think about all the ways this went wrong for the Soviet Union.
Second, is the financial system viable in its current
form? Japan had a great economic-transformation story -- and an even greater
debt-fueled asset-price bubble when its banks went mad in the mid-1980s. How
confident are you that China, Brazil or other emerging markets aren’t headed down the same road?
Third, is debt -- both public and private -- on an
unsustainable path? Mismanaged debt has brought Europe to its current low point, both in the form of
direct public borrowing (see Greece) and in the equally painful form of private-sector
borrowing that goes bad, with nasty implications for the government’s balance
sheet (ask the Irish and Spanish about this).
Even so, the U.S. has serious economic, social and
political problems. Just look at the current budget debacle. Democrats and
Republicans are at each other’s throats, struggling theatrically, rather like
Holmes and Moriarty above Reichenbach Falls. If they get a fiscal deal done in
the next few weeks, do you really think it will result in a sensible tax
system, or bring long-term health-care spending under control? Are we going to
invest more in education? Will we really have a frank discussion about what
kind of social-insurance programs we want, and how to pay for them?
I’m also well aware that incentives to take excessive
risk remain at the heart of Wall Street. The Dodd-Frank financial reforms
contain some useful measures but do too little to significantly alter the
balance of power between global megabanks and the rest of us. The Federal Reserveseems to be edging in the right direction on
regulation but it is moving too slowly to make any difference for the next
cycle.
And the U.S. is now entering perhaps the most
dangerous phase of its long-standing tax revolt, in which Republicans insist on
holding down federal revenue while the population is aging, but they won’t
propose specific cuts in social programs, precisely because they know that
Medicare and Social Security remain immensely popular.
More Borrowing
As a result, the political logic of the moment leads
to continued increases in U.S. government borrowing, about half of which is
financed, for now, by international savings at low interest rates. Our post-crisis monetary policy is contriving to
keep those rates very low for a long time, presumably setting the table for a
further round of mismanaged risk taking in the financial sector (just as it did
after 2001).
So while no country will rise up to take America’s
place as the world’s leading economy, its global position is indeed threatened
-- by its own reluctance to have an honest conversation about the federal budget and by the unwillingness of its political
leadership to confront powerful interests on Wall Street.
Sooner or later, it will be America’s turn to fall out
of favor with investors and to see its own interest rates rise. It is hard to
know when that day will come, or precisely what pressures the country will
face.
Let me only venture one forecast: We will not be
ready.
No comments:
Post a Comment