Time to Pay the Piper

[Our good friend Doug Behnfield – by far the savviest financial advisor we know — was hard at work Sunday, prepping an ultra-rare 1972 Citroen he’s restoring for a $10,000 paint job in Florida. He had just fixed the air conditioner in his wife’s Cayenne – a day’s work that would have cost him $1,200 if the Boulder Porsche dealership had done it. He had also just put the finishing touches on the essay below.  It explains why America is in for some very hard times as we work off debts that have been accumulating for decades.  Doug is no pessimist, however.  Far from it.  He says that although we face a deflationary depression that will exact big sacrifices from all of us, America will be better for it, able to return to the core strengths that made the country great. RA]

Genius survives the test of time. Beethoven, the Beatles. The Brothers Grimm, Hans Christian Anderson. T. Rowe Price, Bob Farrell. Stan Salvigsen and David Rosenberg.  The Pied Piper by the Brothers Grimm describes the consequences of stiffing the creditor — in this case the rat exterminator paid in florins — after a job well done. The Village of Hamelin loses all of her children (except for the crippled boy who can’t keep up) when the piper lures them to a cave that is sealed up by an avalanche. Grim indeed.

Today our Nation is facing the mother of all due bills now that we’ve had our heads extricated from the sand by the Tea Party. Congress and the President have settled on a fiscal restructuring plan that calls for $2.4 trillion in savings over the next decade, an increase in the debt ceiling and the creation of a congressional committee to recommend long-term fiscal reforms. The legislation acknowledges that we need not condemn all of our children to the suffocating fate of a national debt gone crazy. We must decide to pay the cumulative bill for post-WWII profligacy that started with unfunded entitlements and ended in an orgy of debt and structural deficits.

So, apparently, we are going to war. Shared sacrifice is demanded by the greatest and most powerful representative democracy in human history. A war to prevent our Nation from becoming a Banana Republic. Or Greece. Albert Einstein supposedly said that the most powerful force in the universe was the compound interest table. It must certainly be more powerful than the Third Reich, and we defeated them. The effort will require committing a substantial portion of the nation’s wealth if we are again going to avoid speaking German. We are now beginning the process of radically cutting spending and increasing revenues to eliminate our budget deficits.

Spending cuts, layoffs and revenue increases are occurring at the state and local level first, resulting in an enormous fiscal drag — and the Federal Government has not even gotten started yet. The war to reduce our nation’s collective debt will keep us in a depression for a long time. But the children will survive and, it is hoped, the able-bodied among us will not be boarding troop ships.

Moving to the Center

Since the most recent election, we’ve had total gridlock at the federal legislative level in budgeting matters and raising the debt ceiling. But that is to be expected. The framers of the Constitution intentionally built in a six-year election cycle and lifetime Supreme Court appointments so that political change did not occur too quickly. Get over it. We are still inside the first year of a secular political move to the center. And remember, there is no place for polarizing, fringe ideology when headed for war. One for all, and all for one!

The American people are in remarkable agreement when it comes to the need for spending cuts and revenue increases, but the leaders at the federal level are trapped by the length of the election cycle.

The terrified citizens flocked to plead with the town councilors to free them from the plague of rats. But the council had, for a long time, been sitting in the Mayor’s room, trying to think of a plan. Then, in walk Tom Coburn and the Gang of Six (preceded by the Simpson/Bowles Commission). We are going to pay up and avoid becoming a failed nation.  It seems, however that we are entering a recession at the same time, based on the most recent GDP report and all of the miserable economic data that had preceded it. Recessions are certainly not the ideal time for fiscal drag, but that is Mother Nature for you. Investors should be aware of the deflationary implications of a credit collapse: It is good for bonds, though not for anything else. And the deflation should be all the more powerful because global supply of goods and services has tremendous upward momentum. Think China and India, industrial technology and telecommunications technology. The money supply has a lot of capacity to keep up with and instead it will be shrinking like crazy.

Very Japanese

All very Japanese. Except for the fact that while Japan has labored through its credit collapse for the last 20 years, during the first 17, the global economy was expanding like mad. Even though Japan was the third largest economy, their depression did not rub off on the rest of the world. That is unlikely to be the case this time for many reasons. The United States is big enough to precipitate a global slowdown. And events in Europe, the Mideast and China seem to be contributing to deflationary forces as well. We must think beyond the debt ceiling debate. Resistance is futile. The fiscal drag is coming, albeit with the delay that Thomas Jefferson and the boys had in mind. S&P will not downgrade us, since one more stupid mistake like that will put them out of business.  Meanwhile, a  Deal, however incomplete, will not mean a stock market rally of any magnitude because paying the piper is not a growth strategy.

***

(If you’d like to have Rick’s Picks commentary delivered free each day to your e-mail box, click here.)

  • Chris T. August 3, 2011, 9:24 pm

    Dan:
    whether or not you are right, those “up there” certainly think so and see the danger.
    Just now, OBamba is announcing his violent extremism initiative, to help head of exactly that next step in discontent.

    With the ever present spying, one could even end up on their radar just for a post like yours.

    Certainly no different than Ron Paul bumper stickers leading to people being classified as extremists/potential terrorists, as became known in Mississippi not that long ago

  • dan August 3, 2011, 4:50 am

    Good incites and thoughts…We as a nation are in for a very rough next 5 years..hat with the politicians that are in office now I do not see any way out of our demise…and chaos will rule….as you can see from the comments made from the leaders..anyone that does not go along with THEIR ideas or laws is a terrorist…..someone that wants sound money,less spending,and adherence to the constitution is a terrorist…only force will reconcile our differences…with these type morons in power..the pen is NOT mightier then the sword

  • Cam Fitzgerald August 3, 2011, 3:52 am

    Thanks for your article today Doug. It was some of the most interesting commentary I have seen in awhile and your perspective resonates with me despite my own wonky ideas.

    I do agree that we are now headed for deflation and depression though. It will take a long time to work through the process but America surely has the strength to pull through the many difficulties and come out prosperous in the end.

    Your post was both worrisome yet encouraging in the perspective it offers. I remain optimistic over the long term but realize some tough choices and harsh medicine are ahead. We cannot escape what is coming without skinned knees and plenty of elbow scrapes.

    Thanks again for your timely effort.

  • Rick J August 3, 2011, 1:29 am

    Redwilldanaher;
    Disengagement in a mild form is what I have chosen. I retired at 49, but own some residential income real estate and play the market, strictly gold and oil stocks. It is addictive and for me profitable, though I worry about the endgame closure of markets when the elite figures it is time to collect the rest of the marbles and robo trade the market into nothingness.
    Remember Shakespeare`s King Lear: “Nothing? Nothing comes of nothing” or words to that effect and think about interest rates, which at next to nothing should beget all kinds of super ROI projects. Well??????? IMO, most valuable asset is a survival farm.

  • Rick J August 3, 2011, 1:03 am

    Apparently, all that needs to happen to balance the budget is to impose Canadian tax rates. Better still, impose Canadian tax law with regard to what is deductible and what is not, while not imposing income tax at $15,000 per annum income.
    Due to greed, this will never happen, just as noone will comment on this comment because paying for debt at the federal level is always some other nations` job until those nations decide that it is not, whereupon it will be too late for any rescue that does not involve destruction.

    • Jill August 3, 2011, 3:03 am

      As I mentioned far above, federal tax increases are not possible due to Grover Norquist’s pledge that so many Congress members have taken. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/07/grover-norquist-tax-pledge.html

      Also, the 2 Santa Claus theory in another article I cited above, says that you can cut taxes and also spend plenty of money, and everything will be fine. Lots of Americans believe this, and that is what Congress has been doing.

      I agree that we are going down the wrong road and unlikely to change. I can’t help but tryto figure out solutions to problems, and I see that you can’t help doing so either. It certainly will not hurt to try.

  • gary leibowitz August 2, 2011, 11:17 pm

    I think everyone missed the point on this historic agreement. It now provides political cover when the spending cuts need to be made. The states that get affected the most, with defense spending as an example, will now have a special task force with a mandate to cut. The entitlements will certainly be cut, along with other special pork programs. The one sided mandate is rather unfair, but I guess the tea-party and the republicans can rejoice on the “no new taxes” pledge. I guess that means oil subsidies and top wage earnings get a windfall.

    The skeptic that I am tried real hard to find this debt ceiling passage another meaningless decision, but I must say it really was a major breakthrough. It provided political cover for everyone.

    The republican response, along with the Murdoch machine comments, were bordering on gloating. The market’s reaction these last 2 days wasn’t because they thought the deal was bad for cutting debt. To the contrary, they wanted business as usual. How else can businesses profit if the government isn’t handing more money out.

    I think all those that saw government’s intrusion as a waste of money will see the ramifications of a more tightly controlled spending. Insiders have already sold these last few months like never before. In fact their ratio of selling is the highest it’s been since the data was recorded in 74.

    Let’s see if QE3 comes around soon. I suspect not. It will certainly come too late. We are now in the second round of the double dip. With no political will to spend our way out of this recession, it will go deep and long.

    Place your bets on massive deflation and a very prolonged depression. I do believe we are actually in its midst.

  • Bc August 2, 2011, 9:54 pm

    I agree. Hard times indeed.
    There are only two paths forward. Debt deflation described above and true hyperinflation Zimbabwe style. Ones and two’s of trillions will do nothing deficit/printing wise. Fourty to fifty $trillion deficits printed would dilute the total debt merely in half. That is why a debt deflation is unavoidable. Lots of things people cannot imagine happening are about to start happening. Prepare to be amazed.

  • redwilldanaher August 2, 2011, 9:29 pm

    Hi Jill,

    I often read your comments and can’t help but to sort of shake my head in frustration and reach for my trusty glass of aged, distilled spirit.

    It appears to me that you have tried to let go of your ideological leanings but have only succeeded to a mild degree. I’m never one to claim to know something to be a certainty so of course this is only my opinion. However, I have to inform you, quite bluntly, that your mindset and discourse method are playing right into “their” hands. Listen, I’m an Austrian school guy, I’ve read Mises, Hayek and others like Bastiat, Locke, Smith, Federalists, Madison and Jefferson et al., but I long ago realized, and this is just ME, that it’s near impossible to make progress with someone that is a willing slave to an ideology or political agenda. It’s my opinion that you are the one clutching and maintaining the chains that bind you.

    What do I mean with “playing right into their hands?”

    Here’s exactly what I mean, Hegel:

    This is from http://www.amerikanexpose.com:

    “Why is it important for you to understand the subject of the Hegelian Dialectic? Because it is the process by which all change is being accomplished in society today. More importantly, it is the tool that the globalists are utilizing to manipulate the minds of the average American to accept that change, where ordinarily they would refuse it.

    The Hegelian Dialectic is, in short, the critical process by which the ruling elite create a problem, anticipating in advance the reaction that the population will have to the given crisis, and thus conditioning the people that a change is needed. When the population is properly conditioned, the desired agenda of the ruling elite is presented as the solution. The solution isn’t intended to solve the problem, but rather to serve as the basis for a new problem or exacerbate the existing one.

    When the newly inflamed difficulty reaches the boiling point of a crisis, it becomes the foundation upon which arguments may again be made for change. Hence, the process is repeated, over and over, moving society toward whatever end the planners have in mind.

    It’s also important to understand that as this process is being driven, arguments are created both for and against certain measures of change. All arguments are controlled. The presented solutions — each with varying levels of unadornment — are “debated” publicly by the manipulators or their minions. This is done until a perceived compromise has been reached on the best measure to take in route to solving the crisis. Then, the outcome of the “debate” — which purportedly weighs the concerns of the public with the mandate to do something — is enacted as public policy.

    Such is a summary of the Hegelian Dialectic. Though few in American society have ever heard of it, still fewer have not been profoundly impacted by its use in the effective neutralization of opposition in the formation of public policy.”

    Now, here’s a few layman’s observations. Most people claim to hate politics but are fascinated by them and get caught up in them. Most people claim to hate office politics and relationship politics and family politics as well. They see politics being played all the time, nearly everywhere (teams, kids teams, school cliques) YET the find it impossible to believe that all that we courtesy of our viewing boxes is mere political theater. Puppet clowns following a script that was completed long ago. It’s a perfect set up (see the Hegelian info above). There’s a hero fighting for your side and he/she will win or lose but only “on paper” of course, because in reality, unless you’ve been clinically dead for the last 50 years, and as many here and everywhere have noted, the ONE CONSTANT is that the Oligarchy wins at the expense of nearly everyone else losing and losing big! I can’t see how this constant can even be debated but I wouldn’t be surprised if some political slave were to try nonetheless.

    It seems like everyone has their favorite date in history to point to that serves to signify the death of what was apparently at one time our republic. For many it’s 1913 and the formal creation of US branch of the International BANKSTERS club off the coast Georgia. For Oliver Stone, it apparently died with JFK. For me, well, I’ve revised it several times in the past 20 years usually starting from the most recent debacle and consistently trending backwards in time. As of now I’m inclined to stick with April 12th, 1865. However, the reading and thinking that I’m doing now may actually force me to admit that this entire edifice was a mere CON job prior to even and including its inception. So where am I now? I’m nearly exactly where I was when Rick published the short essay in which I suggested that the only way to win the game was to not play the game. The only silver lining now vs. then is that I have seen more and more folks realize that this is the simple truth of our predicament.

  • Mava August 2, 2011, 9:19 pm

    Chris T.,

    Very much agree with you on the presidents and the fake dichotomy.

  • Mava August 2, 2011, 9:12 pm

    Thanks Rick, for a correction, I now do feel better. I did miss the intro.

    Chris T.,

    Yes, I do pay attention. This is really amazing, there are virtually no capitalists /Americans left in this country. So, it seems to be set for some bloody madness, which I believe will happen.

    Everyone has someone to blame. Rich, for instance.

    How about yourself? Did you not vote? If you did, it doesn’t matter if you won or not, you’re guilty, because voting presumes that you are ACCEPTING the result, what ever it may be.

    Americans have been voting for socialism for decades, and now that it falls apart and looks posed to take the country with it, everyone blames the rich.

    What have the rich ever done to you that you didn’t vote for? Did you ever supported Jeffersonian idea that “no one should be able to vote on the property of another”? Why, that would have made it inconvenient to steal! And now, that the rich turned out to be much more skillful at this game of stealing, now that even your president simply steals from you to pay the bankers, now everyone is alarmed.

    I expect the next step of the mad welfare society will be that they will make the rich “pay”, for “all the crimes” that they themselves have committed. Thus, the rich will flee, as they should.

    There will be no capital available to build anything. And if there would be by some miracle a capital available, it will be stolen before it could be efficiently deployed.

    Without capital, the output will be so low, that there would need to be 100 years of redistribution before the population dies off enough to allow some excess production.

    This all has been played over and over and is nothing new. What no one expected was to see Americans forgetting their Anglo-Saxon roots of independence and respect to property. Who would have thought that the children of the most honest and rugged men will allow themselves to be beaten by a simplistic sin of desire of that which belongs to another man?

    • mario cavolo August 3, 2011, 2:37 am

      Are you kidding with this line?

      “What have the rich ever done to you that you didn’t vote for?”

      Mava, when people voted for their leadership to be put in office, they did so with TRUST, with the expectation of good governance, of being represented, of the people, by the people, for the people, not used. Instead, the system was manipulated and shifted, mostly for their own benefit to make themselves rich in ways countless to list. I’ll stop there…Cheers

  • Chris T. August 2, 2011, 8:59 pm

    Jill,

    just looked at the link you provided further up.

    From that article:
    “In Hoover’s world (and virtually all the Republicans since reconstruction with the exception of Teddy Roosevelt), market fundamentalism was a virtual religion”

    That is not true.
    The comment about TR is correct, he is as culpable as Wilsen after him, for introducing the disastrous and subversive idea(l)s of progressivism into this country.
    It is the people who stand behind progressivism, that I refer to in my prior post.
    Progressivism is the brainwashing of the masses into believing that there is something to be gained (by whtat they receive), without loosing something (which is what they do not see).
    The loss is much greater than the gain, and this difference is what goes to our rulers.
    It is the reason why people like Buffet, the Kennedys, the Rockefellers, etc are in favor of taxes for all, they know their loss from the visible take is LESS than their gain. It is also the reason why FDR was NO traitor to his class, he continued that scheme exactly.

    As to the initial comment:
    Hoover was a big government interventionist, no free marketer in the Smithian sense. Just look at his deeds: Tariffs, bailouts, controls, etc.
    Not much of what FDR implemented in the beginning had not already been tried by Hoover.

    This is true too of Lincoln, a corporatist if there ever was one, serving the big RR interests and the protectionist North (as seen in his first inaugural speech, where he allowed any state, the south, anything, so long as they did not impede the collection of the newly imposed (by the northern industrialists’ new tariffs).

    This basic flaw in diagnosis and understanding, as evinced by the comment about Hoover in that article renders most of the rest of it moot.
    It is also why the D vs. R dichotomy keeps being believed, when in fact, there is no such dichotomy at all:
    They both serve one caste, and this country has been ruled by one party (just wearing a different coat) for many, many decades.
    The few that stand up (Jackson, Cleveland, NOT WJBryant) are the exceptions. Perhaps even McKinley falls in there, seeing as his assassination opened the way for all this.
    Eisenhower may have partially come to understand this, if one looks at his farewell speech, but of course, too late.

    From his words, certainly not his deeds, Reagen may have also known this, but forgotten it all by the middle fo 1981 at the latest.
    The Bushes certainly only served their caste, they both were as much tools as masters, who knows how much of each, and who really cares?

  • Jill August 2, 2011, 8:25 pm

    We are all tools and puppets, as long as we vote for candidates whose campaigns are financed by Special Interest Groups– political party notwithstanding. After the election, middle class taxpayer money is transferred by the boatloads over to these groups, as a ROI for them.

    The voters are thrown under the bus, with nothing to console them except empty promises and an ideology that the politician pretends to share with his constituents. His actual ideology is far simpler: “Feed at the public trough.”

    • mario cavolo August 3, 2011, 2:28 am

      This is the part that I really don’t understand! The political system is an entity unto its own run by and for rich people for their own interests. That is beyond obvious, no?

      Like I said a couple days back, why would a middle class person with not enough money give a $1 of their money to a person richer than them? The correct answer would be, in the hope that the rich person could ultimately help them get what they want, but that does certainly NOT happen in our political system.

      You’re running for office, you get huge bucks in political contributions from special interest groups, lobbyists, rich contributors, your salary and other benefits top way over $100,000 and maybe even millions per year. Your children undoubtedly go to Harvard or similar. Then a middle class citizen who can’t afford to send their child to college at all would give you a campaign contribution, and “vote” for you too? Out of some sense of patriotic freedom and duty? Nuts!

      I have a child on the way, I’ll keep the dollar for his future, for my wife, for my family, for my welfare, not give it to a politician or any other person who is richer than I am! Wake up to reality folks.

      Nuts!

  • Chris T. August 2, 2011, 8:00 pm

    “Want proof? Read a Yahoo message board sometime – on any revolving news story – of political nature especially. Read the comments and observe what a large number of people think should be done with the ‘rich’ to get a baseline on my sentiments.”

    It all comes down to what “RICH” is.

    While it may be anyone with more than oneself, there is no denying the fact that those really running this welfare/warfare state are rich by just about anyone’s measure (by anyone’s who is not a member of that group).

    They are and have been ruining us for their own gain, and anything that the Yahoo groups say about these critters they well deserve.

    The problem with the Yahoo opinion is that most of the poster there don’t realize that most of those they believe to be “the rich” are just as much victims of the controlling group”.
    If they did, there would be nothing to quibble about with anything they say.

    And WHY is there this general confusion about the nature of the “rich”?
    Because it is what the controlling groups need:
    That one part of their victims is sore at another part of their victims, rather than at their victimizers.

    That’s why Marx was partly right:
    The rich do the taking, but not from the poor, but the haves who are not a part of their group…
    Of course Marx’ error was not nec. unintentional, he was actually a tool of those oligarchs, whether he knew that or not, by deceiving the masses as to their real foe.

  • mikeck August 2, 2011, 7:48 pm

    Hello everyone,

    Not to put too fine a point on it, but businesses DO NOT PAY TAXES…people pay taxes. Regardless of the name put upon a tax by politicos, in the end, all taxes are paid by people.

    When you buy a product you pay the business tax and every other tax, fee, regulatory infringement, etc. that politicians tried to hide from you by calling it something besides a tax on we the people. They give these taxes deceitful names so they can hide what they are doing and sell influence for campaign contributions or other favors.

    Mike

  • Dan August 2, 2011, 5:40 pm

    “there will be growth in the summer”
    chauncey gardener
    Presidential Candidate for 2012

  • Mava August 2, 2011, 3:58 pm

    Rick, are you kidding me? Do you really believe we are now in the process of saving? Raising revenue may-be, it is always easy to steal, so I would not be surprised, but cutting anything?

    If we were in the mood to do so, the first and best start would be to permanently ban any debt increases, and simply pay down all the debt on maturity, instead of paying the largess to all these commies (medicare, SS).

    I am guessing you really want them to do the right thing, man. But they never will. History is full of examples of commies dragging their countries down, every one of them.

    • Elouwen August 2, 2011, 4:12 pm

      Are you calling me a “Communist” because I collect 1,200 a month in Social Security pension? I will gladly forego that pension. Just give me back all the money that was stolen from my paychecks and my employer contributions over 50 years, and I want it corrected for rampant inflation since the government did nothing to preserve it’s value.

    • Rick Ackerman August 2, 2011, 4:12 pm

      See my intro, Mava. This essay was written by Doug Behnfield, not by me. An important goal of Rick’s Picks is to present different points of view, and although this essay does not represent my own thoughts, it makes arguments that some, if not most, will surely agree with.

  • Elouwen August 2, 2011, 3:57 pm

    We do speak German.
    English is the language of the German Angle tribe, and the third Reich is now the United States Military Industrial Complex financed by the Fed.

    There will never be prosperity for the common American unless we stop war mongering the rest of the world. Any other effort is useless self serving politics.

    • redwilldanaher August 2, 2011, 8:50 pm

      Well done! Great points!

  • kevin August 2, 2011, 3:54 pm

    With all due respect, this is fiction and lies. Americans ready for austerity? Yeah, right.

    How can you have deflation with 2.1 trillion new dollars set to defend inflation. IMPOSSIBLE. Deflation of assets because of poor demand is not deflation, that’s the business cycle. Contraction, forced, is caused by reducing the money supply thus less dollars to pay asking prices. THAT’S DEFLATION.

    Jesus, you don’t need a fancy degree to figure out that 2.1 trillion dollars is going to fuel inflation. Look what 1.3 trillion did the last three years.

    When Americans decide to forgo their Social Security and the army of death to pay creditors then I’ll be convinced deflation is here. Otherwise it will be a default at much higher levels. BUY GOLD AND SILVER and SIT.

    • Elouwen August 2, 2011, 4:02 pm

      BUY GOLD AND SILVER AND SIT.
      Well spoken Kevin. A motto to live by (survive by).

  • Jeff August 2, 2011, 3:22 pm

    ” We are now beginning the process of radically cutting spending and increasing revenues to eliminate our budget deficits. ” What frigg’in world is he living in ????

  • Novie Cleveland August 2, 2011, 2:59 pm

    I’m just a working stiff with marginal investment experience; had little or nothing to work with most of my 58 years, nevermind the ignorance. I read all this with great interest but little satisfaction. A lifetime of work in manufacturing, mostly in the trenches, has left me facing a “Grimm” retirement. 4 layoffs and 5 plant closings spread over 40+ years of work while trying to maintain a somewhat acceptable standard of living has left me what I’ve come to dread, lately: dependent on those self-serving decepticons in D.C. to see me through. Thanks and Godspeed to all like me who’ve kept this machine running but were just given enough to survive.

  • Derek August 2, 2011, 2:43 pm

    I think that there is a quiet majority out there that are willing to take on extra taxes, if it meant seriously tackling our debt problem. Part of our economic trouble is self imposed by us the US ‘Consumer’ who is no longer ‘Consuming’. The media never really touches on the amount of debt being paid off by those still working.
    We should really redefine what economic health is. The Banks have reduced me to a debt to income ratio. According to them I am pretty sick. The only option I have is to eradicate my cancerous debt.
    I also wonder why GVT activity is included in GDP? I really think it should be called out seperate from the Private sector. We want the Private sector to grow. We want Gvt to shrink, but GVT is so big now, that its shrinkage could overshadow any positive outcomes in the private sector.
    To get back to point, I would suggest 3 succinct things other than just the need for overall tax reform. I would accept the expiration of the Bush Tax cuts for Everyone across the board. That would be fair. I would institute a 0.01% Federal sales tax. I would legalize marijuana and tax it. I would downsize and combine the DEA and ATF. 100’s of billions would be saved by downsizing the war that no one really mentions the cost of, the War on Drugs.

    • Rob P August 2, 2011, 9:42 pm

      Why do you think the problem is consuming? Could it be that you look at the simplified GDP equation and think the customer is not holding up his end?

      Repeat after me: Production precedes consumption. Always. Even if you’re consuming the production of others at their loss. If you talk about consumption, you’re putting the cart before the horse.

      Side note – all that debt of yours is from when you consumed before you produced. Someone else produced (or got a banking license) before lending you all that debt.

      If you still don’t understand, or think I could be wrong, just repeat after me: Production precedes consumption. Always.

    • Derek August 3, 2011, 2:52 am

      @ Rob P,
      In my Economic World you need Demand. If there are not consumers demanding production, then production for productions sake is folly and will lead to ultimate loss. That is why I question adding GVT activity to GDP. GVT does not produce anything.
      America is a consumer driven economy. To give you credit, our homes produced equity, which Americans turned into consumption. That is no longer the case. Americans are now paying off their past consumption which now has turned into debt.
      So, to your point, a product must exist before it is consumed. But, if a product exists that is not consumed, that product will become a loss. Once losses occur, that product will no longer be produced, and thusly GDP will decline, because there is no consumer demand for said such produced product.
      So repeat after me: Without demand, production ceases. Always.

    • Rob P August 3, 2011, 7:50 pm

      Derek, your economic world is not reality, and you’re being a little hard-headed here. Just because you’re told that America is a “consumer-driven economy” doesn’t make it true. It only appears true because the Keynesian formula is true by definition. In economic terms, the formula for GDP lacks utility, as I will certainly give you credit for pointing out in questioning why government expenditures are part of total GDP.

      Let’s drop this all down to the base case – you and your farm, with nobody else in the world. If you overproduce your corn crop but let part of it rot in the field, you haven’t suffered a loss on the unharvested part. If you harvest more than a year of excess corn, your silo is overflowing and now you have time for other pursuits. Your GDP hasn’t increased yet, but it can be considered as GDP in the bank. Now you have time to build or fix up your bungalow, build a boat and sail the high seas, or whatever else your heart desires. Since the activities must be the final step in the chain in order to count as “consumption,” it takes a while for these to show up as GDP. However, none of those other activities could happen long-term without first securing an oversupply of your crop. There is no current demand for the excess corn. Production for next year is not guaranteed to stop. The unconsumed oversupply is now savings, capital or equity, which are not counted in GDP.

      To recap: None of the excess corn will be consumed in the next year (there is no demand for it) but the production occurred nonetheless.

      You’ll see that in my one-man example production came first. Production may cease at any given time, but the savings resulting from production aren’t necessarily destroyed immediately nor is production required to permanently cease. There is nothing to stop you from overproducing year after year until you have enough to retire. A lot of production just sits on the shelf waiting for the time that it is needed later so that it can be called GDP. That’s not a loss in reality because you still have the same product unless it spoiled. Production for production’s sake means that ultimately everyone will have more toys. It’s not the money behind the product that has value – rather, it’s the product itself that has value. Kind of like gold.

      Your claim is now destroyed with a single counterexample. (Don’t worry – you can take the “always” out and maybe salvage your case. But then it wouldn’t be a universal law.) Unfortunately, production isn’t directly calculated in GDP until it is consumed, invested, or shipped overseas. That fact alone makes GDP a useless artifact, since by definition Gross Domestic Product = products produced and consumed in final form. Somehow GDP ignores production and the savings that inspired the additional production, and waits to measure until the end of the pipeline at final consumption, which is rather late in the process. After all, production precedes consumption. Always.

  • rob August 2, 2011, 1:52 pm

    There is a lot of talk that big corporations are not paying their share in taxes. Is this true?
    If corporations have to pay taxes wouldn’t they need to raise the price of their products to pay the tax bill so that in the end it is really the customer who is paying the tax bill? Why is there so much noise on this subject if in the end a GE customer really pays the taxes charged to GE in the cost of their product?

    • mario cavolo August 2, 2011, 3:07 pm

      Hi rob, that’s a rather twisted way of looking at it…

      If I earn a genuine $60,000 and have to pay $15,000 in income and and if GE earns a genuine $600,000,000, and has to pay zero in income tax….er um, I’m pissed. I’m not just pissed because the govt is getting my money to support it, which isn’t all bad. I’m pissed because GE is NOT giving ANY money to the govt to support the country while raking in billions of profits.

    • Benjamin August 2, 2011, 3:39 pm

      Mario: “er um, I’m pissed.”

      Understandable, beleive me! But how is it that big companies are able to afford hiding all their profits? As I pointed in another post, the bigger the amount that needs hiding, the more profitable it becomes to the incredibly Big business of tax sheltering. And as evidenced by the numbers, they will focus on doing the absolute best job they can!

      Someone said, earlier, that we should all be given a break. I agree. Eliminate income taxes, and slash corporate taxes at least two-fold. Or whatever it takes in order to make the business of innovation and job creation more lucretive than the task of sheltering.

      And the debt? Default on it, in exchange for a much lower corporate tax rate. If interest needs to go much higher, so be it. High interest and low tax doesn’t seem such a bad combo, imv. In fact, it makes perfect sense.

    • rob August 2, 2011, 4:46 pm

      mario – isn’t it the case that corporation profits should flow to the investors/ shareholders and they pay the tax ? Is it right to double tax corporation income, once at the corporate level and then again by the shareholder with the dividend tax? Shouldn’t the tax be one time, either at the corporate level or at the personal level but not at both levels?
      By comparison, the S corporation is taxed as the profits flow to the individual. Right?

    • mario cavolo August 2, 2011, 5:41 pm

      …i’m trying to get my head round what you’re suggesting… in fact what you say that the tax should be once sounds right. The damn tax code is a mess though.

      Meanwhile here in China every company pays a flat biz tax right off the top of every cent of revenue. It ranges from 3% to 10%. In addition, there is income tax on corporate profits and of course income tax to an employee on their salary, plus a company has to pay quite a load of additional govt benefit expenses totalling an additional 30-50% of the employee salary. That seems fairly similar to the tax system in the states.

  • Market Sniper August 2, 2011, 12:52 pm

    Interesting thesis. Doubt that we go deflationary and as for getting budgets under control, that will also not happen. Budget “cuts” are a joke as they are speaking of decreasing the rate of increase in budgets, NOT cuts. If spending is slated to increase by 1 trillion over the next 3 years, and they “cut that down to 500 billion instead, a budget “cut” of 500 billion is then declared? This is Orwellian double speak and has no useful purpose for any rational beings. Wake me up when the top left number starts to run backwards on this clock. http://www.usdebtclock.org/

  • John Jay August 2, 2011, 10:51 am

    The problem is we will never turn things around in the USA as long as TPTB grow ever bolder in their looting of our wealth and freedoms.
    The housing/MBS fraud and “War on Terror” show how bold they have become now that we are near the end.
    Soon we won’t have any more wealth or freedom left to be stolen.
    Since the 1970’s there has been a steady drain of our jobs and factories, and our wealth to pay for ever more government, MIC, and imported oil.
    Add to that unrestricted immigration, legal and illegal to further depress wages.
    All of these problems have a simple fix if the people in charge had any other agenda other than cleaning us out, they don’t.
    What would our financial situation be today if the Dept. of Energy had converted us to methanol for our automobiles back in the 70’s? That seems to be easy to do from coal or natural gas. All that money we sent to OPEC for decades would still be here.
    China is already introducing flex fuel cars that run on methanol they make for $.50 a gallon, Brazil runs 95% of their cars on alcohol.
    How about some common sense as far as Free Trade goes, we were doing fine before all that NAFTA/GATT fraud, weren’t we? Are things better or worse after decades of Free Trade?
    The MIC situation speaks for itself, a huge standing army supplied by equally huge corporations will always be getting us into trouble.
    Unless there is some sort of major political change soon, common sense solutions will continue to be trumped by the destructive agenda that has been in place here.
    Soon TPTB will not even bother to go through the motions of listening to us, they will just leave us to our own devices in the wasteland left to us.

    • mario cavolo August 2, 2011, 3:16 pm

      Evening John Jay, In fact, Shanghai’s entire fleet of 60,000 plus Volkswagen sedan taxis runs on LPG and has for years. You’d never know the difference.

  • mario cavolo August 2, 2011, 8:17 am

    On your touts Rick, despite your appreciated warnings against straight option buying, I picked up a few of those SLW September 42 calls yesterday for .92 each. It may not end up being the worst option play I’ve ever made 🙂

    • Robert August 2, 2011, 5:51 pm

      That’s like printing money, Mario…

    • Rick Ackerman August 3, 2011, 12:04 am

      Please let me know if they produce a profit, Mario, since I’d want to enshrine the trade at Rick’s Picks as the first to have made money for a retail customer who bought call options on a directional play. For the record, we’re looking to short some September 46 calls against Sep 42s and 50s bought earlier. If we can sell them off for 0.79, we’ll have a butterfly position with $1600 of profit potential and no possibility of loss.

  • C.C. August 2, 2011, 6:10 am

    Jill – it won’t matter when the long knives come out. If it can be found that you are making in excess of $250k/year, well…

    Once an idea has been established in the minds of an ignorant populace by those clever and cunning enough to understand the ‘madness of crowds’ and how to manipulate an issue to their favor, look out…

    It’s as old as the hills, and despite what some may think, we here in America are Not immune to the atrocities that can and do result from class envy.

  • Jill August 2, 2011, 5:37 am

    CC, I don’t know how we could not expect class warfare, given that people were recently being told that corporate welfare and tax breaks for corporate jet owners were sacrosanct, but Social Security/Medicare might get cut.

    It’s interesting in class warfare, which side people think they are on. Small business owners think they are on the same side as the wealthiest folks. But they are getting the same deal tax-wise as the middle class– getting drained through taxes levied on the middle class and small businesses. Big corporations must pay Social Security and Medicare taxes too. But they may receive so much corporate welfare that otherwise they pay no taxes at all– GE being an example, having paid no federal taxes at all in 2010, and having recieved a $3.2 billion tax benefit. Did Rick or any small business owners here get a $3.2 billion tax benefit for 2010?

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/general-electric-paid-federal-taxes-2010/story?id=13224558

    GE says: Thanks very much to all the middle class individuals and small business owners who paid for our $3.2 billion tax benefit. Especially our heart goes out to all the small business owners who vote for “no tax increases for the rich”– thus voting to keep footing the bill for such corporate welfare.

    The middle class doesn’t have a party that represents their interests.

    • Benjamin August 2, 2011, 7:58 am

      Jill,

      Here’s another way to look at it. The highest corporate tax is 35%, or over 1/3rd.

      What does that have in common with pre-industrial society?

      It’s a common misconception that family sizes were once so much bigger because more people were farmers back then. In other words, the kids were for the farm, not the other way around. But that wasn’t the reason why families were larger. Back then, about 1/3rd of all children born simply did not survive into adulthood. To counter the risk of the family genes and name not being passed on, people had more kids. And because no one was ever certain which kids would make it, they had to work hard to feed all the mouths… even though 33% was destined to be wasted effort. Ergo, people were poorer prior to the rise of industry because of a high rate of childhood mortality and all the waste it generated.

      Given that, what might the difference be bewteen a high corporate tax and a lower one?

      As pointed out in the article you posted, big corporations spend no small amount on tax lawyers and bonuses for cutting tax burden. This, presumably, is better than the 35% tax rate. None the less, it is still quite wasteful. This money could be better spent on things like advancing innovation and creating jobs. That won’t happen until it is no longer profitable for the relatively few (lawyers and accountants) to work for that purpose, but rather just a productive job in the corporate structure. And that is what a reduced tax rate would bring about, because when you’re paid from a purse of 5 billion (in taxes that need to be saved) vs 10 billion, the lawyers and accountants will make half as much as before.

    • mojine August 2, 2011, 3:04 pm

      Jill, you have bought into the whole “fair share” B.S.
      There is no such thing as a fair share of taxes, but it sure is easy to demagogue the average American into pointing fingers and saying “Take more from them.”
      I say “Take less from all of us. Let us decide INDIVIDUALLY what to do with our bodies, property and labor.”
      Government has encroached into every sphere of our lives like a rapidly spreading cancer. Taxes feed that cancer. Looking to government for solutions is a variant form of Stockholm Syndrome!

    • mario cavolo August 2, 2011, 3:19 pm

      Mojine I’m going to along with Jill on this; fair share is a reasonable concept along with good governance of the people by the people for the people. Well, both ideals should be part of reality but the situation is shot to hell so far beyond such thinking that its barely worth discussing… Its like lamenting over the loss of cassette tapes or something, pointless…

      Cheers, Mario

    • Rick Ackerman August 2, 2011, 4:04 pm

      Can we put the corporate jet thing aside now that our demagoguing, soak-the-“rich” president has conflated businessmen making $200k with fat cats who own or lease Citations? In fact, the jet deduction reportedly would give us a whopping $3B of savings over ten years. If you want to get budget deficits under control, you cannot do so without making huge cuts in Medicare and Social Security and military spending. Period. To borrow Willie Sutton’s line: That’s where the money is.

    • Larry D August 2, 2011, 5:00 pm

      Delta Airlines actually gets a TAX WRITE OFF for the fuel they buy and aircraft that they lease! And businesses across the country get a TAX WRITE OFF for new company automobiles and gasoline expenses! I’m not making this up! This is an example of outrageous corporate welfare!

      Jill, if you sell your stocks at a loss, and take a capital loss deduction that eliminates all of your otherwise taxable capital gains, by your reasoning you receive government welfare, no?

    • C.C. August 2, 2011, 6:29 pm

      Robert –

      ‘Inconvenient truths’…? Really? In other words, you expect that the worst financial crisis in history will transition bloodlessly – quite unlike the references to other countries you used, but ‘conveniently’ left out the social ramifications of those transitions; how long they lasted, and how many were imprisoned or liquidated in the process…?

      The ‘inconvenience’ will be when you find out just how much $money your federal government has at its disposal to address socio-economic fallout as unemployment rises alongside growing distrust of government. You have not seen anything yet.

    • ful_karboy August 2, 2011, 6:31 pm

      Comrade Jill, I’m sure a balanced review of GE’s profits {mostly from overseas business} would include that they must have had losses to write off after the housing bubble/recession. Their skillful use of “green” credits from their windmill business is fair game for “tilting against” as is their lobbying of Chairman Rangel {D} for a tax break then awarding $11 million to schools in his district. Their holding massive profits overseas, out of the reach of income redistributionists that pumped up the corporate tax levy to an uncompetitive 35%, is surely a sore spot for the Left. Even though Dems controlled both houses of Congress from 2006 to 2010 and now contol the Senate and the White House.

      Take some comfort in the fact that GE is in CALPERS top ten stock holdings, along with Exxon, Chevron and several major banks. SO… this buttresses the pensions of the proletariat in California. “Karl” did want the workers to own the “means of production”.

      Conversely, the Left’s attacks on businesses above, if it results in lower stock prices, harms CALPERS which is not getting the returns it’s used to and may require greater contributions from workers. Karma can get messy!

  • C.C. August 2, 2011, 5:14 am

    “The American people are in remarkable agreement when it comes to the need for spending cuts and revenue increases”

    I must have missed something, because I do not recall seeing/reading/hearing of any reputable polls that indicated a vast majority of the citizenry were up for their taxes being increased, smack in the middle of ~20% unemployment. Perhaps it is so?

    There are many references to politics and political structure in this piece, dovetailed with a deflationary outcome as a result of our spending profligacy. However, if one has observed anything over the past 15 – 20 years, it is that the desire of the political-financial complex has proven the will and capability to postpone, distort and otherwise wreck any possibility of a normal deflationary market clearing event, in favor of currency debasement and political expediency.

    Of course the end result is a deflationary collapse, but at the heights we’re approaching, an economic collapse should be the least of worry. An Authoritarian cum-police-state takeover as a result of societal breakdown is what should be on your radar. One’s ‘investments’ could very well be a trivial matter in the event that you find yourself coming to grips with a financial collapse – and its attendant socio-political ramifications.

    Want proof? Read a Yahoo message board sometime – on any revolving news story – of political nature especially. Read the comments and observe what a large number of people think should be done with the ‘rich’ to get a baseline on my sentiments.

    • Benjamin August 2, 2011, 6:10 am

      I almost forgot about the point made concerning elevated support of increased revenues. The support I’ve seen has been spotty, and almost purely the domain of those with a “soak the rich” philosophy.

      But the reduced spending sentiment has without doubt exploded (!) in more recent years. It’s just that people, as a whole, are not clear on exactly what that is and should be.

      Myself, I can only state my position in general terms, in that it all depends on what the revenues are for. However, if we’re talking about bondholders, then I’ll have to say no to increased revenues. The reason is the bondholders were only gaming the Keynesian policy. Bailing them out will not fix THE problem, which is a lack of savings among the citizens. In that regard, I can wholeheartedly agree with Doug; the war on debt, with paying off bondholders being the objective, will certainly keep us in a long-lived depression!

      Savings among the citizens needs to be restored in order to get out of this blackhole. For that, government needs to raise revenues to pay back the citizens that it has become heavily indebted to.

      I further add that this long overdue payback should be in the form of gold and silver, which I deeply suspect the big bonholders possess large quantities of. That’s why they played the bond game to begin with. It allowed them to to vaccum up as much real money as they could, whilst killing competition for said supply among the general population.

    • Robert August 2, 2011, 5:47 pm

      “An Authoritarian cum-police-state takeover as a result of societal breakdown is what should be on your radar.”

      This is a very common fear, but one that does past the scrutiny of historical reflection.

      The Police state only lasts as long as the state can afford to pay the police…

      The USSR, Zimbabwe, Uganda under Amin, Nazi Germany, even Hussein with his Republican Guard- all these police states failed when economic reality exposed the fact that nobody works for free, not even sadistic, oppressive wanna be soldiers.

      “The Gestapo: a history of horror” By Jacques Delarue does a decent job of explaining this concept in greater detail. The Gestapo was virtually a failed institution that had lost the confidence even of Himler and Hitler well before the end of 1944.

      The trick will be to avoid situations where you might arbitrarily (and randomly) find yourself in the gun sites of some dork wearing fatigues with a colorful patch on the arm…

      If things in the US get bad enough fiscally, then I can guarantee that the DHS’ power base will erode substantially. It will take time, but the US can not print enough dollars to create enough domestic soldiers to keep 330 Million angry people in check, and even if every single “FEMA” camp out there is real, and is truly intended for the roundup of dissidents, there are not still not enough camps for 300 million people….

      Inconvenient truths are still truths nonetheless…

  • FranSix August 2, 2011, 4:43 am

    Something similar to the Pied Piper story in ‘Children Of Men.’

    A virus affects humanities’ ability to procreate. Thus, when the youngest person alive is killed in Buenos Ares, the story is set when a young woman is bearing a child and all political parties want the child for their own political purpose. I see this as an economic metaphor.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/

  • Jill August 2, 2011, 4:13 am

    Chris, I agree. Here’s a (partisan) article that explains some of how we got into so much debt. My apologies to Republicans. I admit that the Dem party has also conned people in various ways for decades. I just couldn’t find a non-partisan article on the 2-Santa theory. We can afford neither corporate welfare nor lavish public employee pensions, far beyond what public employees paid into them. Both parties try to give a lot more to their own Special Interest Group campaign financiers than taxpayers could ever afford to pay for.

    http://www.commondreams.org:80/view/2009/01/26-0

  • Chris T. August 2, 2011, 3:52 am

    Doug talks about *going* to war, on the deficit, to fix the problem, stemming from” post-WWII profligacy that started with unfunded entitlements and ended in an orgy of debt and structural deficits.”

    BUT, we already went to war, are at war, and that is a MAJOR reason, perhaps at least as much, if not more, than the unfunded profligacy.

    Iraq II and Afghanistan alone have cost us 1 trillion, not to mention all the rest from Korea/Vietnam onward.
    And it’s not just the wars, but our military spending in general.

    If you can’t address that, then any solution is hopeless.
    Cuts by 60-70% at the minimum.
    A country with about 5% of the worlds population, does not need to spend 50+% of the worlds total military expenditures, p.a.

    (Unless we want to be the world hegemon…)

    Not to mention all the other wars/crusades:
    drugs, for one, how many hundreds of billions, if not trillions have been squandered on “enforcement”, incarceration, etc for the last 40 years?

    Not mentioning in the to-be-blamed pool makes no sense.

    • Arimethius August 4, 2011, 4:16 am

      It makes sense if your goal is not to actually win a war but to create a lot of jobs, a small false economy and sell lots and lots of weapons to both yourself and your enemies for a profit. Just think what would be if just half of that unnecessary spending had taken place…especially right now…the true unemployment rate would be closer to 15% ETC. ETC.

  • Benjamin August 2, 2011, 3:25 am

    I’m pretty certain that in the months to come, the so-called spending cut will turn out to be another case of a new spending increase that wasn’t allowed to happen. In other words, instead of spending an additonal trillion, Congress opts to tack on “only” another 500 billion, thus “cutting” 500 billion.

    As for the rest of the article, I’m inclined toward agreement, but points like these…

    “The war to reduce our nation’s collective debt will keep us in a depression for a long time.”

    If we’re talking about a _real_ reduction, one would think that things would improve as the negative was removed. If you stop a hemophiliac from bleeding, then they’re no longer certainly dead, and begin to bounce back from death’s door.

    So, am I correct to say that Mr. Doug Behnfield, like me, doesn’t see a real effort to reduce debt? Or do we just see this in differing ways?

    • Robert August 2, 2011, 5:18 pm

      “I’m pretty certain that in the months to come, the so-called spending cut will turn out to be another case of a new spending increase that wasn’t allowed to happen. In other words, instead of spending an additonal trillion, Congress opts to tack on “only” another 500 billion, thus “cutting” 500 billion.”

      – Benjamin- didn’t you read the Bill? That’s EXACTLY what it is. There is not a single reduction in there- there is only the pledge to over spend less in some far distant future…. All anchored by this Super Congress abomination.

      I loved Doug’s essay, and he hit the nail on the head when he said we are only year one into a secular bull market for quality information… a perspective I also share.

      I also (unfortunatley) agree that the powerz will choose war over doing the hard work. War has always served to cleanse the Darwinian pool of those who would rather fight than adapt… If the elitists were truly as smart as they seem to think they are, then they would be positioning for this war to occur in an economically un-viable (and undeveloped) region- You know, like the Sahara desert… or maybe Antarctica.

    • Benjamin August 2, 2011, 7:09 pm

      Robert,

      Nah, I didn’t read the bill. What’s the point, when you know how it ends? But I do feel stupid for the way I worded all that. Or posting it at all, for that matter. I mean, the debt ceiling was raised. If there was no increase, they wouldn’t have bothered!

      Oh well. I guess that’s just one indicator of my Darwinian worth (the desire to fight rather than adapt to all this BS being the other) 🙂

    • Robert August 3, 2011, 7:07 pm

      Hahaha…

      Maybe I should also revise:

      “War has always served to cleanse the Darwinian pool of those who would rather fight than adapt… ”

      into:

      “War has always served to cleanse the Darwinian pool of those who would rather kill other people then expend the effort required to understand their differing point of view … ”

      I wouldn’t castigate anyone who signs on to fight an intellectual battle that is just.

  • Jill August 2, 2011, 2:37 am

    Well, this article here will do, for folks who have never heard of Norquist. Plenty of material there for thoughtful reflection:

    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/07/grover-norquist-tax-pledge.html

    • Alchemisteve August 2, 2011, 7:37 pm

      Jill and All,
      If we had more people like Mr. Norquist, we wouldn’t have gotten into this mess in the first place. Hasn’t anyone else noticed that at the end of each of these ‘crises’, we end up with higher debt and higher taxes. You are now an ‘extremist’ if you believe in the Constitution. And you are really a ‘nut’ if you believe in sound money (aka the gold standard). Good luck to all you Sheeple on the way to the shearing …

  • Rick Ackerman August 2, 2011, 2:31 am

    Pretty cryptic, Jill. You’ll need to put more heft behind your own comments before you can expect people to trouble themselves to cull whatever it is you are talking about from the 1.78 million search results that come up for Grover Norquist. This forum isn’t for tweeting, but for more thoughtful reflection.

  • Jill August 2, 2011, 2:27 am

    Revenue increases, if by that you mean tax increases, are not possible at the federal level. Google Grover Norquist if you don’t know why this is so. He is not a Congress person. They are puppets. He is a person of real power.

    • martin snell August 2, 2011, 4:42 am

      To put it as politely as I can, Norquist is a moron.