美国债务触及 40 万亿美元背后的真相与隐情
Truths And Omissions As US Hits $40 Trillion In Debt

原始链接: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/truths-and-omissions-us-hits-40-trillion-debt

美国国债已突破40万亿美元,在不到十年内翻了一番。尽管政客们一如既往地互相指责——民主党抨击减税政策,共和党则归咎于政府开支——但维罗妮克·德·鲁吉(Veronique de Rugy)认为,两党都应对这场财政危机负有责任。 数据显示,自2000年以来,尽管减税导致收入减少了约占GDP 2%的份额,但政府支出却激增了5.7%。这一趋势的主要驱动因素是福利项目(社会保障和医疗保险)以及利息支出,然而两党始终未能实施有效的改革。 德·鲁吉认为,这笔债务不仅仅是预算上的麻烦,更代表了一种可能引发进一步通胀的未注资承诺。当投资者对政府通过未来盈余偿还债务的能力失去信心时,市场会通过物价上涨和利率提高来进行调节——2021年至2022年的通胀便是明证。华盛顿在没有财政支持计划的情况下维持不可持续的福利承诺,实际上是在预支未来的经济动荡。作者总结称,除非政客们停止党派间的推诿,转而着手进行结构性的福利改革,否则美国将不可避免地走向财政危机。

相关文章

原文

Authored by Veronique de Rugy via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. national debt just crossed the $40 trillion threshold, doubling in less than a decade. Washington politicians have responded with their favorite fiscal game: blaming the other party. Democrats say Republican tax cuts are the culprit. Republicans say Democratic spending is the root cause. But both parties are responsible, with both hiding behind a lie of omission. And if we let them, they'll keep driving us into the same wall together.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) recently called Republican tax cuts "the single biggest driver" of the debt across the last 25 years. The number uses an unrealistic 2001 baseline that projected endless surpluses, as if the late-1990s revenue windfall would last forever. The Brookings Institution's Jessica Riedl makes a more honest comparison by lining up the actual budget in 2000 against 2026. Tax cuts have reduced revenue by roughly 2 percent of gross domestic product. Spending rose by 5.7 percent, nearly three times as much.

Tax cuts can be great, especially when structured to move us toward a better overall tax code. But they are not free and often do not pay for themselves, largely because they come with lots of nonproductive handouts to special interests.

Yet the fact of the matter is that despite every tax cut since 2001, revenue today sits near its long-run average as a share of the GDP. With spending climbing nearly six points, we know exactly where the problem lies.

The Congressional Budget Office projects federal spending to rise further, from 23.3 percent of GDP this year to 24.4 percent in 2036. For those paying attention, the drivers won't come as a surprise: entitlement programs and interest payments. Discretionary spending, defense included, is poised to shrink relative to GDP. Revenue holds near its average.

But while Republicans blame Democrats for expanding spending, they have joyfully participated. As David Stockman documented in his 1986 book, "The Triumph of Politics," the Reagan Revolution failed to truly reform welfare and entitlement spending because Republicans were active in their expansion in the decades before.

More recently, Republicans who spent years complaining about Obamacare have failed to abolish it, let alone reform its finances. Today, you don't hear a peep out of Republicans about reforming Social Security and Medicare, though they have made some cosmetic adjustments to Medicaid and SNAP as they were cutting taxes.

This is not new. About 26 years ago, Social Security's trustees were already projecting the trust funds to run dry in 2037, after which payroll taxes would cover only 72 percent of benefits. Today, the trustees expect the old-age fund to be depleted by around 2032, covering about 77 percent of benefits thereafter. And we have always known why: longer lives, lower birth rates, fewer workers per retiree. Maintaining these benefits without crushing taxes was always going to mean a lot of debt.

Medicare's Hospital Insurance fund is estimated to run dry around the same time. But as the Hoover Institution's Tom Church notes, Medicare's real fiscal problem is that we now rely on general revenue to cover more than half of its outlays. This amounts to roughly $10 trillion over 2026-2035, mostly from Part B (a medical insurance program for outpatient and doctors' visits). That's huge, but it's not news, either.

All of this has frustrated me for years. Those of us warning about debt have been dismissed as primitives. When interest rates were low, debt was cheap. We were assured that if growth beat the borrowing rate, we could roll it over almost for free. The reality is that even low rates on explosive debt aren't cheap, and there was little chance that rates would stay low forever.

Here's what the low-rate crowd never understood, and what this decade's inflation should have taught everyone: Government debt is a promise to run future surpluses. The market expects no less, and thus, the debt's real value depends on whether investors believe that promise.

When Washington dropped roughly $5 trillion in pandemic dollars into the economy with no plan to pay for any of it, investors reappraised this promise and the price level adjusted. The inflation of 2021 and 2022 was not an unlucky storm. It was the market's response to a government taking on debt it didn't have fiscal backing for. Higher interest rates followed, and we are still living with them.

That's the risk Washington is not pricing into its complacency. The danger of an unreformed entitlement state is about more than interest payments crowding out the rest of the budget. It's that bondholders will stop believing future surpluses will materialize, and the adjustment comes through the price level again. Unfunded Social Security and Medicare promises are, in effect, a standing commitment to more debt and future inflation.

So, the question is whether the politicians who claim to be alarmed by the crossing of this threshold will stand up and turn the tide of red ink heading our way.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com