Below is an article written by Kenneth Rogoff and published on FT
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/ed300802-63e5-11e2-84d8-00144feab49a.html#axzz2P6Z4NTpQ
America must face up to its responsibilities, writes Kenneth Rogoff
Many foreign observers look at the US budget shenanigans
with confusion and dismay, wondering how a country that seems to have
it all can manage its fiscal affairs so chaotically. The root problem is
not just a hugely elevated level of public debt, or a patently
unsustainable trajectory for old age entitlements. It is an electorate
deeply divided over the direction of government, with differences
compounded by changing demographics and sustained sluggish growth. It is
hard to escape the notion that today’s budget battles are but a
skirmish in a much longer-term war that won’t be settled soon.
America must shortly answer a series of fundamental questions. For
example, as its share of global gross domestic product shrinks from
about 20 per cent today to as little as 10 per cent in five decades,
should it try to continue to play the role of global policeman? The US
spends more than 4 per cent of GDP a year on defence, roughly twice the global average. The Obama administration’s fiscal plans anticipate a peace dividend after withdrawals from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Republican party has reasonably argued that it is unrealistic to
expect this quiet to last. At the very least, if military expenditures
continue to fall, it becomes more important to have the fiscal capacity
to ramp them up in response to new threats. It is also worth noting that
if the US were ever forced to surrender the mantle of world policeman
to, say, China, foreigners may no longer have quite the same desire for
its debt.
Another
huge area of disagreement surrounds the question of what services
should be provided by the federal government versus the states or the
private sector. There is a lot of “low-hanging fruit” here. Productivity
improvements in government services have been glacial compared with
many other sectors of the economy. A visit to a primary school classroom
in many US cities is the closest thing one can get to time travel. One
idea that economists have been enamoured with for years is school
vouchers but there is strong resistance from entrenched interests. How
long will these same interests forestall online classes and
computer-graded feedback, initially as a supplement for traditional
education structures but eventually as a significant substitute. The
fiscal implications are huge, as are the disagreements.
In contrast, infrastructure should be a place of common ground but
again there is paralysis. Aside from funding priorities, there is a wide
chasm between those who see union domination of infrastructure as key
to ensuring high-paying jobs versus those who want infrastructure built,
but at reasonable rates. There is the joke about the visiting Chinese
group that asks their New York tour guide how long it will take to
finish the Second Avenue subway. On being told two years, the Chinese
translator hesitates before conveying the response and asks: “Wait a
second, you mean two weeks, right?”
One of the US’s greatest assets is its ability to expand immigration
without running into land or resource constraints anytime soon. But US immigration policy
has long been dominated by emotion, not the cold-blooded, rational
economic calculus many other countries apply. There are rigid visa
restrictions aimed at keeping out terrorists, some of which remain
incredibly counterproductive. Immigration policy has large implications
for US debt and the sustainability of entitlements for the indigent
population, yet the link seldom receives serious attention.
And of course, healthcare is the mother of all fiscal challenges, as costs rise and the population ages.
The idea that one should just ignore all these problems and apply
crude Keynesian stimulus is a dangerous one. It matters a great deal how
the government taxes and spends, not just how much. The US debt level
is a constraint. A growing number of empirical studies, including my own
joint work with Carmen Reinhart,
suggest that the US has already reached a debt level that has been
associated with slower growth in advanced countries. The fact interest
rates are low today does not necessarily mean the US is an exception to
this rule – take one look at stagnant Japan’s rates. The dollar’s
reserve currency status buys America more room, but how much and for how
long? A high debt burden is a problem precisely because it reduces a
country’s capacity to deal with future shocks.
The US remains an incredible franchise with many remarkable
strengths. The world’s overwhelming presumption is that Americans will
find a path to budget sustainability. Nevertheless, it is hard for many
in the US to escape the nagging feeling that just maybe this time we
won’t. With more than $5tn of US Treasury debt, and memories of the huge
inflation of the 1970s and default on gold clauses in the 1930s,
foreigners would be right to worry a little.
The writer is professor of economics at Harvard University and the co-author of ‘This Time Is Different’
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου