Live data from Hacker News

No one knows how much the government can borrow

noahpinion.substack.com

241–250 of 326 posts

Re: No one knows how much the government can borrow

#241

Without a debt ceiling I presume it’s until no one will loan it any further money.

When you own the money printing press like the US does, you don't have to get other people to loan you money.

It's a quirk that we use "debt" in the form of T-bills instead of printing more dollars. The t-bills get used and exchanged like money anyway. They do let the US have some control over the interest rates used in the rest of the economy, so it's not a useless quirk, but it's important to understand that US debt is nothing at all like personal debt, and it's probably defective to use the same word.

Re: No one knows how much the government can borrow

#242
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another misconception that has to die is that governments can get away with printing money indefinitely. The concept itself is not new: Roman Empire also did the same, shortly before its fall. Soviet block countries did that before 1989. Venezuela and Zimbabwe also did it. See the common theme here?

The difference between the smaller countries and the USA is, the dollar is basically the world's currency now. The world can afford to let Venezuela fail, but if the USA fails, the whole world goes down with it, so IMO they'll happily "lend" the USA more money. With the Roman Empire, I'm guessing other problems caused it to fall; it didn't fall because of money printing, but it was printing money because it was falli…

> The world can afford to let Venezuela fail, but if the USA fails, the whole world goes down with it

Hypothetically if the riots at the Capitol had gotten really bad and America fell even close to Civil War a couple of weeks ago, I'm quite certain the rest of the Developed World would have quickly switched to using the Euro or the Yen or the Yuan or some combination of those and more.

I seriously doubt it would take more than a few days before the rest of the world moved on without the US.

Re: No one knows how much the government can borrow

#243

Directly related is "Modern Monetary Theory" or MMT. Here's a 24 minute explainer from NPR, Planet Money. https://www.npr.org/2021/01/20/958854717/modern-monetary-the... And a brief explainer from The Conversation https://theconversation.com/modern-monetary-theory-the-rise-... Also known by its detractors as "Magic Money Tree." One of those detractors is of course the Adam Smith Institute. https://www.adamsmith.org/r…

I've been deep diving on MMT lately (per Rohan Gray, Stephanie Kelton, and L. Randall Wray); while I'm not entirely convinced, one thing that's surprised me is that it's less prescriptive than is oft assumed from its elevator pitch, and is much more focused on accurately describing what states do already. The claim is not that we can starting printing money willy-nilly without consequences; it's that we do that already, and we can be smarter about it if we're honest about that fact.

A couple other interesting outgrowths from that premise:

- the Federal Jobs Guarantee concept, which in addition to any positive externalities of putting the under-employed to work, also pegs the value of the dollar to labor (@$15/hr, $1=4min), while also providing a negotiating BATNA for the working class with their private employers.

- Because money is printed into existence, rather than an empty ritual of collecting revenue before spending it, taxation exists only for money to exit the system, reducing inflation and creating demand for dollars; tax payments aren't used to pay for anything, and are effectively burned. Kelton also makes an interesting point: rather than taxes being a "necessary evil" policy to pay for some other good, they can actually be reconstrued as positive goods in and of themselves: to price externalities (pollution tax) or discourage behavior (sin tax), etc.

The strongest argument against MMT, regardless of its theoretical merits, is simply the practical one: that Congress already perpetrates vast quantities of graft and fiscal short-sightedness, and it's unwise to trust such a transparently corrupt and dysfunctional institution with additional leeway for limitless spending.

Re: No one knows how much the government can borrow

#244
post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is crazy inflation in things like house prices and assets like stocks. but these items are not required for somebody to live - so they are not used in the inflation calculation.

Stocks, no. But houses are generally considered essential. Or at least I home they will be. With the way that my community has accepted mass homelessness without any concern fir allowing new housing to be built, I fear that we may regress from the 20th century position of housing being a human right.

The cost of housing is the rent cost (which is the imputed rent cost of your own home, if you owned the house - not the interest cost of a mortgage).

Re: No one knows how much the government can borrow

#245
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MMT works so long as you've got the ability to conjure your own money. (Eg, not on the Euro, or a currency pegged to another currency.) The idea is that you create money to pay for things, and then pull back excess money through taxes. (As opposed to pulling in money through taxes, using it to pay for things, and whining that you don't have enough.) So it 'works' as long as you have your own independent national curr…

Another mind flip: the scarce resource isn't labor - but energy . Edit: A gallon of oil is equivalent to roughly 400 hours of human labor. Manual work is nothing compared to the energy contained in fossil fuels (or external energy sources in general). An argument could be made that the economy is in decline due to this, that the sources of fossil fuels are getting more expensive. Most of the cheap sources have been u…

Mark Blyth on MMT:

https://youtu.be/2ONGvkAoOI0?t=1550

- it only applies to the US

- depends on having a hegemonic currency (i.e. everyone else earns in your currency and has to convert it, so that you can run a deficit and others supply the capital to fill it)

- contingent on control of the house, senate, and presidency, for about 3 terms in a row, to do all the things you want to do (in the MMT program)

- though sure, we could spend more on stuff we care about; we're not at "capacity" yet.

- you've already got a bond market in the US... why do do we need to re-invent everything in the world when the bond market allows you to already do it?

- hardly any other country actually sets their own monetary policy because the dollar is so dominant. When the fed goes up or down, it's effect is global.

- since every country has to import, if you print a lot of money, you'll get inflation through exchange rates & the import channel

Haven't listened to this one yet: https://youtu.be/NfKiW0Gfn04

Re: No one knows how much the government can borrow

#247
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MMT works so long as you've got the ability to conjure your own money. (Eg, not on the Euro, or a currency pegged to another currency.) The idea is that you create money to pay for things, and then pull back excess money through taxes. (As opposed to pulling in money through taxes, using it to pay for things, and whining that you don't have enough.) So it 'works' as long as you have your own independent national curr…

Another mind flip: the scarce resource isn't labor - but energy . Edit: A gallon of oil is equivalent to roughly 400 hours of human labor. Manual work is nothing compared to the energy contained in fossil fuels (or external energy sources in general). An argument could be made that the economy is in decline due to this, that the sources of fossil fuels are getting more expensive. Most of the cheap sources have been u…

What do you mean by "economy is in decline" ? And, on what basis do you claim fossil fuel is getting more expensive ? The oil price hasn't gone up significantly over the past decades. The cost of electricity, adjusted for inflation, hasn't gone up.

Re: No one knows how much the government can borrow

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody in the industry is making predictions (with 0 dollars on the line) constantly, so cherry-picking different credentialed people to support a narrative is pointless. Especially in the field of macroeconomics where a few individuals are making decisions behind closed doors that can radically alter the economy. I do tend to put more weight on the predictions of people who statistically understand markets. By th…

I know who Dalio is. I've read his Principles . He's a smart cookie. I think he's wrong. The inflationists have been squawking about since QE started under Ben Bernanke way back in 2010: > We believe the Federal Reserve's large-scale asset purchase plan (so-called "quantitative easing") should be reconsidered and discontinued. We do not believe such a plan is necessary or advisable under current circumstances. The pl…

While Dalio has publicly anticipated cash and bonds being poor investments in 2020, I'm making a blanket statement regarding appeals to authority (similar to you). But when authorities are to be invoked, economists are generally just sideline-experts with no skin in the game, who are unable to translate their understanding of markets into alpha. This is in response to you stating in your first post that economists are the true experts (intuitive, but I think incorrect. It's like interviewing a sports commentator (who wasn't formerly a coach or player) instead of an actual coach).

While I don't know Dalio's full position or rationale, I have another comment on this post that explains when and why I personally expect inflation. I am curious though -- can you expand on what you believe Krugman's position to be here, and why it makes sense? He doesn't seem to worry about inflation from open market operations because it works until it doesn't. There has been inflation since 2008, but most of it went to wealthy people who hold the majority of their net worth in equities and real estate. These asset classes are severely under-represented in the CPI. Because these are mostly unrealized gains enjoyed by so few, there aren't that many more people competing to buy milk and eggs, which would actually affect CPI.

Many progressive economists don't seem to realize their policies contribute to massive wealth inequality just as much as America's poor attempt at graduated tax brackets. Granted, Krugman has his moments, and for all his faults his recommendations don't seem to be purely ideologically motivated.

Re: No one knows how much the government can borrow

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really an economic question, it's one of politics, intimidation, and a global empire. The "magic money tree" is backed by the full force of the United States. Heads of state who have suggested alternatives found themselves confronted with a sweeping range of responses, starting with bribes, then coercion, sanctions, and if those fail, hiding in a hole from US forces. There's nothing magic, nor mysterious abo…

Does MMT work if you're not the reserve currency? (Honest question; I don't know enough about the theory to say.) But it is really an economic question. What will be the results if you run your economy this way? What will be the results if you do so as the reserve currency, and what will be the results if you do so when you're not?

MMT has nothing to do with any kind reserve currency status. The primary mistake most people make with MMT (and one which is continually enforced by both sides of the political media), is that they think it is a policy choice, or a "kind of thing a government does".

If nothing else, please takeaway that MMT is a _framework for economic analysis_. You can apply it to any economy, you can use it to look at any policy decision, and you can work with this tool if you're a conservative or progressive. I find a lot of value in using it to understand China, Japan, emerging markets, economic history, etc.

With relation to the original topic, the answer through an MMT lens is very simple. Nominally, there's no limit.

A cornerstone idea of MMT is that a currency issuer can always purchase anything for sale in the currency that it has a monopoly over. Examples of these monetary sovereigns include the US, the UK, Japan, Australia, China. It does not include the EU, or most emerging markets (who effectively use another government's currency).

The implication of this is that a monetary sovereign government has no binding constraints on the amount of debt it can issue (it can of course issue debt to itself if no-one else is around to buy it, i.e. Treasury -> Central Bank).

Now that's not to say that government borrowing has no real limits. The most useful constraints to look at are real resource constraints (possible supply of goods and services), and external constraints (do you need to pay something in a currency you can't control?). If the government is purchasing more goods or services than the resource constraints are available to supply, you'll see an appreciation of prices (inflation).

Simply creating more dollars doesn't lead to inflation. Fiat currencies are just units of account (think score points), not some kind of commodity. Japan's money supply has quintupled since 1990 to 2020 (from memory), while the consumer price index has been roughly flat, and the USD/JPY exchange rate has been roughly rangebound (wide range, but not a monotonic increase like one would expect if using intuition )

Rushed for time, but happy to discuss/debate points of contention.

Re: No one knows how much the government can borrow

#250
post #11

As long as much of the world’s trade is settled in US dollars, there is a demand for them, and some demand for US treasuries. The merry-go-round of the Fed increasing the money supply and buying US government debt with the newly created money can keep going for a while, but it will lead to a steady decline in the value of the dollar vs other currencies and some official inflation over time, as the cost of imported go…

> but it will lead to a steady decline in the value of the dollar vs other currencies.

That would be true if the other currencies weren't printed like crazy also. Have a look at past year's increase in M2 circulating supply of the EUR or GBP. They're very similar to the one of the USD (percentage wise). That might be the reason why the dollar didn't collapse compared to them. The dollar (and the other currencies) collapsed though, when compared to assets that didn't increased in quantity at the same pace: real estate, stocks, gold and bitcoin. None of which is part of the CPI, hence the low reported inflation in the developed world economies.

Post reply on HN