個人資料
正文

美國政客拿美國的未來賭博

(2024-05-04 00:39:09) 下一個

美國政客拿美國的未來賭博

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/opinion/us-federal-debt.html

大衛·布魯克斯 作者:大衛·布魯克斯 2024 年 4 月 25 日
意見專欄作家

過去幾十年來,在兩黨國民自信心高漲的情況下,聯邦政府借了很多錢,有時是為了應對國家緊急情況,有時是為了做人們認為值得做的事情。我們允許自己承擔所有這些債務,因為利率很低,而且許多人認為事情會保持這種狀態,因此承擔這麽多債務的成本不會太沉重。

不幸的是,這個假設被證明是錯誤的。利率上升了。據《華爾街日報》報道,美國今年預計將花費 8700 億美元,即國內生產總值 (GDP) 的 3.1%,用於支付聯邦債務利息。根據負責任的聯邦預算委員會的說法,政府在利息支付上的支出將超過整個國防預算。三年內,如果利率保持在高位,債務支付可能成為聯邦政府的第二大支出,僅次於社會保障。

當資金緊張時,就像現在一樣,政府借款與私人借款競爭,推高每個人的利率。 2019 年國會預算辦公室的一項研究發現,債務與 GDP 之比每增加 10%,比率導致利率增加十分之二到十分之三個百分點。這讓選民感到痛苦,就像他們現在一樣,因為獲得抵押貸款或其他類型的貸款的成本更高。

這讓政府會計師感到痛苦,因為借錢償還債務的行為本身就會推高利率,並使償還債務的成本變得更加昂貴。你必須擔心債務螺旋式的長期噩夢可能性,在這種情況下,你必須不斷借錢來償還債務,而借貸行為本身使償還債務變得更加難以承擔。

很快,你就會看到弗格森定律。曆史學家尼爾·弗格森闡明了這一原則:任何國家在債務利息支付上的支出超過軍費開支,就會陷入衰落。哈布斯堡王朝的西班牙、奧斯曼帝國、大英帝國和革命前的法國都曾發生過這種情況。它會發生在我們身上嗎?

你不必經曆這些噩夢般的場景,就能看到聯邦債務過多可能引起的所有問題。所有這些財政刺激措施都可能導致通貨膨脹,就像現在一樣。公共部門借貸可能會排擠私營部門借貸,從而減緩償還債務所需的經濟增長。

債務負擔還限製了未來的政府,它們必須過於擔心償還債務,而無力投資於可能促進增長、減少兒童貧困、教育兒童、為人們提供住房或應對緊急情況的項目。當今的高利率環境已經對住房建築行業造成了打擊,使住房變得更加難以負擔。

盡管經典凱恩斯主義理論告訴我們在經濟衰退時期借錢,但在增長良好的時期承諾削減債務,美國仍在繼續借入所有這些資金。

盡管烏雲正在世界各地聚集,但我們的債務仍在繼續加深。怨恨軸心——中國、俄羅斯和伊朗——正在前進,使世界變得更加危險,可能需要大幅增加軍費開支,並迫切需要加強我們的軍事製造基礎設施。

盡管嬰兒潮一代正在老齡化,但我們仍然繼續陷入債務困境,這使得社會保障和醫療保險等計劃的成本越來越高。聯邦政府已經在老年人身上花費了 6 美元,而在兒童身上每花費 1 美元,這並不是對未來的投資。

就我個人而言,我並不擔心我們在新冠疫情期間花掉了所有借來的錢。我們顯然需要這樣做,而且我們已經擺脫了疫情,經濟充滿活力。我擔心的是,削減赤字目前在兩黨議程上都不重要。唐納德·特朗普提議大幅減稅。拜登政府製定了雄心勃勃的第二任期議程,其中涉及從產業政策到學生債務減免,再到通過財政刺激實現增長等方方麵麵。

即使總統提議削減債務(正如拜登在某種程度上所做的那樣),兩極分化的國會也可能無法通過。正如預算專家瑪雅·麥吉尼亞斯(Maya MacGuineas)所指出的那樣,如今國會更喜歡贈品而不是預算選擇。讓兩黨多數人對大多數美國人削減支出或提高稅收要比讓他們用借來的錢花要困難得多。

最終責任在於選民。 20 世紀 90 年代,美國人看到高額政府債務導致利率上升。選民對政界施加巨大壓力

科學家們讓財政部門井然有序。羅斯·佩羅 (Ross Perot) 和喬治·H·W·布什 (George H.W. Bush) 總統的赤字削減計劃隨之而來。布什和比爾·克林頓。今天的選民還沒有建立這種聯係。當他們這樣做時,我懷疑政治格局將發生巨大變化。

也許我所描述的問題都不會變得更糟。也許利率會下降(盡管利率仍然居高不下)。也許經濟增長將超過利率上升,從而使債務更容易負擔。也許政府將能夠向經濟注入大規模刺激措施,而不會導致持續的通貨膨脹和高利率。

但這是一場巨大的賭博。這是一場賭博,賭未來通脹和利率下降的樂觀前景是否會成為現實。這是一場賭博,世界上不會發生任何意想不到的壞事。這是一場賭博,因為我們的領導階層如此擅長所做的事情,以至於我們可以繼續沿著懸崖邊緣行走而沒有任何跌倒的危險。

在某些時候,所有這些自信開始看起來像是傲慢或合理化:我們想把未來的錢花在自己身上。謹慎是一種無聊的美德,但謹慎的做法是讓美國走上更可持續的道路。正如互聯網上的模因藝術家可能會說的那樣(用稍微更豐富多彩的語言),你在債務上亂來,遲早你會發現的。

大衛·布魯克斯 (David Brooks) 自 2003 年起一直擔任《泰晤士報》專欄作家。他最近撰寫了《如何了解一個人:深入了解他人和被深入了解的藝術》一書。 @nytdavidbrooks

“我們為什麽要拿美國的未來做賭注?”

https://www.lotusmedical.ca/elra/c0a52597od16/?

這是《紐約時報》專欄作家大衛·布魯克斯提出的問題。更多來自誰:

美國今年預計將花費 8700 億美元,即國內生產總值的 3.1%,用於支付聯邦債務利息。根據負責任的聯邦預算委員會的說法,政府在利息支付上的支出將超過整個國防預算。如果利率保持在高位,三年內,債務支付可能成為聯邦政府的第二大支出,僅次於社會保障……

很快你就會看到弗格森定律。這是曆史學家尼爾·弗格森宣稱的原則:任何國家在債務利息支付上的支出超過軍費支出的國家都會衰落。西班牙哈布斯堡王朝、奧斯曼帝國、大英帝國和革命前的法國都曾發生過這種情況。它會發生在我們身上嗎?

是的——布魯克斯先生——這會發生在我們身上。

如果它沒有發生在我們身上,它就不是來自謹慎、忍耐或克製。

這將是通過機緣巧合。這將取決於運氣。甚至可能是神的旨意。

正如德國鐵血宰相俾斯麥曾經指出的那樣:

“上帝對傻瓜、酒鬼和美利堅合眾國有特殊的照顧。”

我們相信這位老普魯士人迷上了某種東西。正如我們之前爭論過的……

地球上最幸福的國家
上帝填滿了兩片海洋——一片大西洋和一片太平洋——以切斷美國與掠奪者的聯係。

他在南北陸地邊界上放置了兩個地緣政治最輕量級選手。

他賜予它大片肥沃的土地……廣闊的毛細管係統的內部水道……天然港口,可以從中運送物資……並接收物資。

還有哪個國家能享受到如此自然的、上帝賜予的財富呢?

我們徒勞地努力想出一個。將目光投向世界……

英國或日本可以享受針對入侵的海上保險。然而,這兩個國家都是缺乏必要資源的島國。他們高度依賴進口貿易。

德國位於北歐平原。這片平原毫無防禦能力,幾乎無限廣闊,從西邊的英吉利海峽一直延伸到東邊的俄羅斯烏拉爾山脈。

地理是一個極其廣泛的煎餅。地勢平坦,德國幾乎沒有天然防禦能力。

西南部是強大的法國。在東方,凶猛的俄羅斯熊咆哮著。

與此同時,法國永遠容易受到日耳曼人的入侵。看看1870年、1914年和1940年就知道了。

可憐的俄羅斯
接下來我們來到俄羅斯。與德國一樣,俄羅斯也位於開闊的北歐平原上。當然,這使她麵臨西方的入侵。

波拿巴先生和希特勒先生充分利用了這一弱點——前者在 1812 年,後者在 1941 年。

那麽向東呢?

俄羅斯幾乎一望無際的草原一直延伸到蒙古。蒙古最出名的是什麽?

成吉思汗和金帳汗國的掠奪騎兵威脅著歐亞大陸。

蒙古侵略者越過這片草海,圍攻並征服了俄羅斯。

因此,俄羅斯很容易受到來自東方和西方的入侵。曆史已經充分證明了這一事實。

難怪俄羅斯對領土侵犯如此偏執嗎?

難怪俄羅斯如此嫉妒其對烏克蘭的影響力以及前景

烏克蘭加入北大西洋公約組織會凍結俄羅斯的血液嗎?

與此同時:盡管俄羅斯幅員遼闊,但該國卻被內陸地區所包圍,冬季冰雪堵塞了其海岸。

那麽中國呢?

天國
中國相信自己是天國,是上帝獨一無二的眷顧者。然而我們還不能完全相信這是真的。

它的長城不是無緣無故修建的。

沿海地區有一係列堡壘環繞著這片土地——韓國、日本、台灣、菲律賓——都與上帝的選民結盟。

但讓我們把調查範圍擴大到赤道以下。巴西呢?

“巴西是未來的國家”,而且“永遠都是”。

它的大片區域形成了無法無天的叢林。耕地匱乏。主要城市都是孤立的點。

第二和第三審稿人名單仍然存在。

不……上帝已將美國置於地球的王座上。

上帝的幽默感
上帝給了美國一個巴爾的摩……一個底特律……一個克利夫蘭嗎?

京城裏是不是流氓、流氓、流氓、盜賊、騙子、騙子無數?

好吧,朋友們,也許他做到了。然而,即使是全能的上帝也必須允許犯錯。

也許這根本不是錯誤,而是故意的。

我們必須承認他可能有一種頑皮的、甚至是惡作劇的幽默感:這位上帝。

他喜歡拉鼻子和拉鎖鏈。

然而,他卻給美國帶來了如此巨大的自然奢侈……

在安靜的時刻,通常是在深夜的淩晨,我們常常感到驚訝。

為什麽我們如此幸運能夠居住在這個人間伊甸園、這個黃金國、這個極樂世界?

世界各地獄中無數的其他人更應該獲得這一崇高的榮譽。

然而我們就在這裏。但這裏卻不是這樣。但要繼續……

我們為什麽要拿美國的未來做賭注?
隻有美國人自己才能把這上帝設計的田園詩搞得一團糟。

看起來他們決心這麽做。上述布魯克斯繼續說道:

例如,當前的高利率環境已經對房地產行業產生了影響,使住房變得更加難以負擔。

美國繼續借入所有這些錢,盡管經典凱恩斯主義理論告訴我們,我們應該在經濟衰退時期借錢,但在經濟增長良好的時期,我們應該致力於削減債務......

即使嬰兒潮一代逐漸變老,我們仍繼續進一步陷入債務,使得社會保障和醫療保險等項目變得越來越昂貴。聯邦政府已經在老年人身上花費 6 美元,在兒童身上花費 1 美元,這不完全是對未來的投資……

讓兩黨多數人對大多數美國人削減開支或提高稅收要比讓他們用借來的錢花錢要困難得多。

他的結論是:

在某種程度上,所有這些自信開始看起來像是傲慢或合理化:我們想把未來的錢花在自己身上。謹慎是一種無聊的美德,但明智的做法是讓美國走上更可持續的道路。正如互聯網上的模因藝術家可能會說的那樣(用稍微更豐富多彩的語言),你在債務上胡鬧,遲早你會發現。

然而,偉大的國家,就像偉大的帝國一樣,都有著循環——從玫瑰色的黎明,到萬裏無雲的正午,到昏暗的日落。

美國是一種帝國——盡管沒有人敢說這個詞。

也許我們隻是目睹了一個衰落的帝國,一個暮色中的帝國。

“帝國有自己的邏輯,”我們自己的華盛頓和傑斐遜——比爾·邦納和艾迪生·威金——在《債務帝國》的結論中寫道:

“他們將以悲傷告終,這是已成定局。”

不幸的是……即使上帝的神聖旨意也不是永恒的……

烏克蘭加入北大西洋公約組織會凍結俄羅斯的血液嗎?

與此同時:盡管俄羅斯幅員遼闊,但該國卻被內陸地區所包圍,冬季冰雪堵塞了其海岸。

那麽中國呢?

天國
中國相信自己是天國,是上帝獨一無二的眷顧者。然而我們還不能完全相信這是真的。

它的長城不是無緣無故修建的。

沿海地區有一係列堡壘環繞著這片土地——韓國、日本、台灣、菲律賓——都與上帝的選民結盟。

但讓我們把調查範圍擴大到赤道以下。巴西呢?

“巴西是未來的國家”,而且“永遠都是”。

它的大片區域形成了無法無天的叢林。耕地匱乏。主要城市都是孤立的點。

第二和第三審稿人名單仍然存在。

不……上帝已將美國置於地球的王座上。

上帝的幽默感
上帝給了美國一個巴爾的摩……一個底特律……一個克利夫蘭嗎?

京城裏是不是流氓、流氓、流氓、盜賊、騙子、騙子無數?

好吧,朋友們,也許他做到了。然而,即使是全能的上帝也必須允許犯錯。

也許這根本不是錯誤,而是故意的。

我們必須承認他可能有一種頑皮的、甚至是惡作劇的幽默感:這位上帝。

他喜歡拉鼻子和拉鎖鏈。

然而,他卻給美國帶來了如此巨大的自然奢侈……

在安靜的時刻,通常是在深夜的淩晨,我們常常感到驚訝。

為什麽我們如此幸運能夠居住在這個人間伊甸園、這個黃金國、這個極樂世界?

世界各地獄中無數的其他人更應該獲得這一崇高的榮譽。

然而我們就在這裏。但這裏卻不是這樣。但要繼續……

我們為什麽要拿美國的未來做賭注?
隻有美國人自己才能把這上帝設計的田園詩搞得一團糟。

看起來他們決心這麽做。上述布魯克斯繼續說道:

例如,當前的高利率環境已經對房地產行業產生了影響,使住房變得更加難以負擔。

美國繼續借入所有這些錢,盡管經典凱恩斯主義理論告訴我們,我們應該在經濟衰退時期借錢,但在經濟增長良好的時期,我們應該致力於削減債務......

即使嬰兒潮一代逐漸變老,我們仍繼續進一步陷入債務,使得社會保障和醫療保險等項目變得越來越昂貴。聯邦政府已經在老年人身上花費 6 美元,在兒童身上花費 1 美元,這不完全是對未來的投資……

讓兩黨多數人對大多數美國人削減開支或提高稅收要比讓他們用借來的錢花錢要困難得多。

他的結論是:

在某種程度上,所有這些自信開始看起來像是傲慢或合理化:我們想把未來的錢花在自己身上。謹慎是一種無聊的美德,但明智的做法是讓美國走上更可持續的道路。正如互聯網上的模因藝術家可能會說的那樣(用稍微更豐富多彩的語言),你在債務上胡鬧,遲早你會發現。

然而,偉大的國家,就像偉大的帝國一樣,都有著循環——從玫瑰色的黎明,到萬裏無雲的正午,到昏暗的日落。

美國是一種帝國——盡管沒有人敢說這個詞。

也許我們隻是目睹了一個衰落的帝國,一個暮色中的帝國。

“帝國有自己的邏輯,”我們自己的華盛頓和傑斐遜——比爾·邦納和艾迪生·威金——在《債務帝國》的結論中寫道:

“他們將以悲傷告終,這是已成定局。”

不幸的是……即使上帝的神聖旨意也不是永恒的……

Why Are We Gambling With America's Future?

 

Opinion Columnist

Over the past few decades, in a surge of bipartisan national self-confidence, the federal government has borrowed a lot of money, sometimes in response to national emergencies and sometimes to do the things people thought were worth doing. We gave ourselves permission to incur all this debt because interest rates were low and many people assumed that things would stay that way, so the costs of carrying that much debt wouldn’t be too onerous.

Unfortunately, that assumption turned out to be incorrect. Interest rates have risen. According to The Wall Street Journal, America is expected to spend $870 billion, or 3.1 percent of gross domestic product, this year on interest payments on the federal debt. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the government will spend more on interest payments than on the entire defense budget. Within three years, if interest rates remain high, payments on the debt could become the federal government’s second-largest expenditure, behind Social Security.

When money is tight, as it is now, government borrowing competes with private borrowing, driving interest rates up for everybody. A 2019 Congressional Budget Office study found that every 10 percent increase in the debt-to-G.D.P. ratio results in an increase in interest rates of two-tenths to three-tenths of a percentage point. That makes voters miserable, as they are now, because it’s more expensive to, say, get a mortgage or some other kind of loan.

It makes government accountants miserable because the very act of borrowing money to pay off debt can drive interest rates higher and make the prospect of paying off debt even more expensive. You have to worry about the long-term nightmare possibility of a debt spiral, in which you have to borrow and borrow to service the debt while the act of borrowing itself makes paying off the debt more unaffordable.

Pretty soon, you’re staring at Ferguson’s Law. This is the principle enunciated by the historian Niall Ferguson that any nation that spends more on interest payments on the debt than on military spending will slip into decline. It happened to Hapsburg Spain, the Ottoman Empire, the British Empire and prerevolutionary France. Will it happen to us?

You don’t have to get to these nightmare scenarios to see all the problems that can be caused by excessive federal debt. All that fiscal stimulus can cause inflation, as it is doing now. Public sector borrowing can crowd out private sector borrowing, thus slowing the economic growth you need to pay off the debt.

The debt burden also constrains future administrations, which have to worry so much about paying off the debt they are less able to invest in programs that might increase growth, reduce child poverty, educate children, house people or respond to emergencies. Today’s high interest rate environment is already hammering, say, the housing construction industry and making housing even more unaffordable.

The United States continues to borrow all this money even though classical Keynesian theory tells us to borrow in times of recession but commit to debt reduction in times like these, when growth is good.

We continue to go deeper into debt even though the storm clouds are gathering around the world. The axis of resentment — China, Russia and Iran — is on the march, making the world a more dangerous place and possibly necessitating a surge in military spending and a rapid need to beef up our military manufacturing infrastructure.

We continue to go further into debt even though the baby boom generation is aging, making programs like Social Security and Medicare more and more costly. The federal government already spends $6 on senior citizens for every $1 on children, which is not exactly investing in the future.

Personally, I’m not bothered that we spent all that borrowed money during Covid. We clearly needed to, and we’ve emerged from the pandemic with a dynamic economy. My concern is that deficit reduction is not high on either party’s agenda right now. Donald Trump has proposed whopping tax cuts. The Biden administration has an ambitious second-term agenda that would involve everything from industrial policy to student debt forgiveness to growth through fiscal stimulus.

Even if a president proposed debt reduction (as Biden has to some degree), a polarized Congress probably couldn’t pass it. As the budget expert Maya MacGuineas has pointed out, these days Congress favors giveaways over budget choices. It is infinitely more difficult to get bipartisan majorities to cut spending or raise taxes on the bulk of Americans than it is to get it to spend with borrowed money.

Ultimately responsibility lies with the voters. In the 1990s, Americans saw how high government debt was raising their interest rates. Voters put tremendous pressure on politicians to get the fiscal house in order. Along came Ross Perot and deficit reduction plans under Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. Voters today have not yet made that connection. When they do, I suspect the political landscape will shift massively.

Maybe none of the problems I’m describing will get worse. Maybe interest rates will fall (though they have remained stubbornly high). Maybe economic growth will outpace interest rate increases, making the debt more affordable. Maybe the government will be able to pour massive stimulus into the economy without leading to continued inflation and high rates.

But this is a gigantic gamble. It’s a gamble that rosy scenarios about future inflation and interest rate declines will come to pass. It’s a gamble that nothing unexpectedly bad will happen in the world. It’s a gamble that our leadership class is so good at what it does that we can continue to walk along the cliff’s edge without any danger of falling over.

At some point all this self-confidence begins to look like hubris or a rationalization for: We want to spend the future’s money on ourselves. Prudence is a boring virtue, but the prudent course is to get the United States on a more sustainable course. As the meme artists on the internet might say (in slightly more colorful language), you mess around with debt, and sooner or later you’ll find out.

David Brooks has been a columnist with The Times since 2003. He is the author, most recently,  of “How to Know a Person: The Art of Seeing Others Deeply and Being Deeply Seen.” @nytdavidbrooks

“Why are we gambling with America's future?”

https://www.lotusmedical.ca/elra/c0a52597od16/?

This is the question New York Times columnist David Brooks. More from whom:

America is expected to spend $870 billion, or 3.1 percent of gross domestic product, on interest payments on the federal debt this year. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the government will spend more on interest payments than on the entire defense budget. If interest rates remain high, within three years, debt payments could become the federal government’s second-largest expense, after Social Security…

Soon you’re staring at Ferguson’s law. This is the principle proclaimed by historian Niall Ferguson: any country that spends more on interest payments on its debts than on military expenditure will decline. It happened to Habsburg Spain, the Ottoman Empire, the British Empire and pre-revolutionary France. Will it happen to us?

Yes – Mr. Brooks – it will happen to us.

If it does not happen to us, it will not come from prudence, forbearance or restraint.

It will be through serendipity. It will be through luck. Maybe even divine providence.

As the German Iron Chancellor Bismarck once noted:

“God has a special providence for fools, drunkards and the United States of America.”

We believe the old Prussian was hooked on something. As we have argued before…

The happiest nation on earth

God filled two oceans – one Atlantic and one Pacific – to cut off the United States from plunderers.

He placed two geopolitical bantamweights against the land borders north and south.

He blessed it with vast tracts of rich, fertile land… an extensive capillary system of internal waterways… natural harbors from which to ship supplies… and to take in supplies.

What other nation has enjoyed such natural, God-given wealth?

We struggle in vain to think of one. Cast your gaze around the world…

An England or a Japan can enjoy maritime insurance against invasion. Yet both countries are island states that lack essential resources. They are highly dependent on the import trade.

Germany inhabits the Northern European Plain. This plain is a defenseless and almost infinite expanse stretching from the English Channel in the west to Russia’s Ural Mountains in the east.

Geography is an enormously extensive pancake. Its flatness offers Germany little natural defense.

In the southwest lies formidable France. In the east the menacing Russian bear snarls.

France, meanwhile, is eternally vulnerable to the Germanic invasion. Just look at 1870, 1914 and 1940.

Poor Russia

Next we come to Russia. Like Germany, Russia is located on the open Northern European plain. This, of course, exposes her to Western invasion.

Messieurs Bonaparte and Hitler took full advantage of this vulnerability – the former in 1812, the latter in 1941.

And to the east?

The almost endless steppes of Russia stretch all the way to Mongolia. What is Mongolia best known for?

Genghis Khan and the Golden Horde of marauding horsemen who terrorized Eurasia.

Crossing these grassy seas, Mongol invaders besieged and conquered Russia.

Russia is therefore vulnerable to invasions from both the east and the west. History has demonstrated this fact to great effect.

Is it any wonder why Russia seems so paranoid about territorial transgression?

Is it any wonder why Russia is so jealous of its influence over Ukraine – and why the prospect of Ukrainian inclusion in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization freezes Russia’s blood?

Meanwhile: Despite Russia’s enormous size, the country is landlocked by winter ice that is choking its coasts.

What about China?

The kingdom of heaven

China believes that it is the Heavenly Kingdom, which is uniquely favored by God. Yet we are not half convinced that it is true.

It didn’t build its Great Wall for nothing.

And off the coast lies a chain of fortresses surrounding the land – South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines – all allied with God’s chosen nation.

But let’s extend our investigation below the equator. What about Brazil?

“Brazil is the country of the future,” says the old saw – and “always will be.”

Large areas of it form a lawless jungle. There is a lack of arable land. The main cities are isolated dots.

The list of second and third reviewers remains.

No… God has put America on the throne of the earth.

God’s sense of humor

Has God given the United States a Baltimore… a Detroit… a Cleveland?

Has He populated the capital with an endless array of scoundrels, scoundrels, scoundrels, chisellers, swindlers, and swindlers?

Well, friends, maybe He did. Yet even God Almighty must be allowed room for error.

Maybe it’s not a mistake at all, but intentional.

We must admit the possibility that He has a mischievous, even mischievous sense of humor: this God.

That He delights in pulling noses and pulling chains.

Nevertheless, he has showered America with such enormous natural extravagance…

In quiet moments, often in the wee hours of the night, we are often surprised.

Why are we so fortunate to be allowed to dwell in this earthly Eden, this El Dorado, this Elysium?

Countless others in the various hells of the world are infinitely more deserving of this high honor.

Yet here we are. And here they are not. But to continue…

Why are we gambling with America’s future?

Only the Americans themselves could make a mess of this idyll designed by God.

And it looks like they’re determined to do just that. The aforementioned Brooks continues:

For example, the current high interest rate environment is already having an impact on the housing sector and making housing even more unaffordable.

The United States continues to borrow all this money, even though classical Keynesian theory tells us that we should borrow in times of recession, but that we should commit to debt reduction in times like these, when growth is good…

We continue to sink ourselves further into debt even as the baby boomer generation ages, making programs like Social Security and Medicare increasingly expensive. The federal government already spends $6 on seniors for every $1 on children, which isn’t exactly an investment in the future…

It is infinitely more difficult to get a bipartisan majority to cut spending or raise taxes on the bulk of Americans than it is to get them to spend it with borrowed money.

He concludes:

At a certain point, all this self-confidence starts to look like hubris or a rationalization for: we want to spend the money of the future on ourselves. Prudence is a boring virtue, but the sensible course is to put the United States on a more sustainable course. As the meme artists on the internet might say (in slightly more colorful language), you’re messing around with debt, and sooner or later you’ll find out.

Great nations, like great empires, nevertheless move in cycles – from rosy dawn, to high and cloudless noon, to dim sunset.

The United States is a kind of empire – although no one dares to say that word.

Perhaps we are merely witnessing an empire in decline, an empire in twilight.

“Empires have their own logic,” our own Washington and Jefferson – Bill Bonner and Addison Wiggin – wrote in Empire of debtin conclusion:

ldquo;That they will end in sorrow is a foregone conclusion.’

Unfortunately… even God’s divine providence is not eternal…

[ 打印 ]
閱讀 ()評論 (0)
評論
目前還沒有任何評論
登錄後才可評論.