本文為彼得希夫(Peter Schiff)在2012/7月寄給其Euro Pacific Capital客戶之電子郵件中文章“The Real Fiscal Cliff”中文翻譯
原文在本文的下方。
媒體們最近都在關注美國財政懸崖”Fiscal Cliff”，一個新的主宰未來經濟走向的因素，一個美國即將在2013年1月面臨的問題。他們看到兩件事同時發生而令危險升高：在2011年中的債務上限國會投票中同意的2兆美元的自動減赤計劃即將啟動(分散於10年中)，及布希減稅計劃到期即將結束。大部分記者們所相信的經濟學家們警告，上述自動減赤和減稅兩件事情的合併綜效，將導致”經濟復甦”遲緩，及導致經濟或許又將再衰退。雖然經濟體的確有值得讓我們擔心的地方，但是這個懸崖並不在我們注意事項的清單之中。
大部分的恐懼，來自於政府開銷將產生經濟成長這個錯誤的前提上。人們常常忘記政府只能從課稅，或是印鈔票才能拿得到錢。沒有任何政府的開銷是免費的。政府借來的錢，不是從私人企業部門課稅來的，就是從私人企業部門借來的。但這些課稅來的或是藉來的錢，若能留在私人企業部門，可以浪費更少，生產力更多。印鈔票僅只是產生通貨膨脹而已。是故，自動減赤計劃在被真正執行的範圍內，是會促進經濟成長，而非壓抑經濟。即便是共和黨的支持者們也常陷入政府消費可以刺激經濟這樣的迷思。但即便沒有這樣迷思的政客，也會盡其所能地去避免降低政府消費，以免讓原本的既得利益的人們受到損失。
自動減低政府開銷計劃(自動減赤計劃)之所以會存在的唯一理由，是因為國會缺乏道德良心去辨明是非。我們可以保證國會絕對可以發明另外一些逃避的手段再次去擴大政府開銷。在自動減赤計劃開始之前就先”自動撤銷”這樣的減赤計劃，然後再研議一些後續的可笑赤字減低計劃。政客們在面對挫折時寧願選擇不行動，而非做對的事情惹來大眾爭議。在這個現實底下，只有極端少數的開銷會在2013被剔除，如果連僅僅一年的降低政府開銷都做不到，我們怎麼可能期待他們做連續十年的降低政府開銷計劃？
另一方面，小布希時代的減稅即將終止(故相當於明年開始要加稅)，這個衝擊比減赤計劃更難評估。加稅的負面效果可能會被降低政府借貸的正面效果所抵銷(假設加稅能真的增加政府收入)，但加稅的負面誘因，特別是對儲蓄與資本投資的傷害，也很有可能會導致政府稅收不增反減，於是反而更加擴大政府預算赤字。
還有另外一個問題，2013年時美國又要面臨一個極端危險的情況，一件債務緊身衣。美國背在身上的債務負擔，若面臨債券殖利率上升所產生的更大”財政懸崖”，這才是真正的財政懸崖，但沒有人在討論這個！
目前的國債為15.8兆美元(這只是有列預算的赤字，不知道錢在哪裡但早已花掉或替人擔保的負債，即沒列預算的赤字，已經來到119兆美元，實在可怕的天文數字。)美國已經有這麼恐怖的負債，但到現在還能勉強撐在這裡的唯一原因是，現在這些債務的利率非常低(大約只有2%)，所以每年的利息負擔大約三千億美元。
若照目前這樣的趨勢，在幾年內有預算的債務就會來到20兆美元。如果，只要債券殖利率回到歷史上正常的利率，5%就好。光是利息支出每年就需1兆美元。 1兆美元這個金額是2012年全美國一年政府稅收的40%了。
除了債務將無法應付外，更高的利率將導致經濟活動下降，因為反過頭來更加降低政府稅收，及增加相對應所需要的失業救濟等開銷。這會導致政府赤字更大，更加重利率上升的壓力，於是變成惡性循環。還有，國債的殖利率上升意味無風險利率上升，進而導致房貸車貸卡債利率等種種民間借貸利率飆高。這些飆高又會導致失業潮大舉爆發，而且很有可能令一波次級房貸的法拍屋潮又再出籠。我的看法是，若房貸又開始不穩，光是美國fannie mae and freddie mac這兩個政府擔保民間的房貸之損失，就至少幫美國政府赤字自動加上了數千億美元了！當您考慮所有以上的因素，我相信美國預算赤字會快速來到3兆美元，甚至超過。這些都只是一連串的骨牌效應，只要國債殖利率來到歷史上正常的，溫和的5%，美國就在劫難逃！
如果僅只純粹的巨額赤字最後就可以導致債權人恐慌，5%的殖利率可以快速地上升到10%，就如同歐債恐慌快速蔓延一樣。那麼，在10%的殖利率時，全年的償還國債利息支出就已經等於所有的美國政府所有財稅收入的加總了。若是這種情況發生，美國要不是只能大砍預算開銷(包含那些很政治敏感，會影響選票的開銷如社會福利，失業救濟)，對貧窮階級與中產階級同步加重課稅(當然富有階級會加課更多稅)，或是乾脆對債務違約，或是狂印鈔票來支應進而導致惡性通膨，等到那時，這種慘狀 ，那個，才是真正的”財政懸崖”。
政府藉由如此高額的愚蠢借貸，在國債殖利率目前如此低時，就如同正在駕駛著一輛車，但政府這位瘋狂駕駛眼睛永遠只看後照鏡，不看前方擋風玻璃。許多年來，我早已警告大家金融危機會被房地產泡沫破裂所引爆。我的警告總是被人們忽略，因為人們總是先天性地假設一件事，”房地產只會漲不會跌”。我現在對人們的警告，說真正的財政懸崖就在眼前，也總是被人們忽略，因為人們也總是先天性地假設一件事，”利率永遠不可能會上升”，這和”房地產永遠都會漲”的荒謬迷信一模一樣，看看現在的歐洲，看看希臘，看看西班牙，再看看法國，如果歷史是我們的嚮導，我們應該了解到一個事實，目前的超低利率是一個短暫的例外，而非永恆的必然！
The Real Fiscal Cliff By: Peter Schiff, CEO and Chief Global Strategist The media is now fixated on an apparently new feature dominating the economic landscape: a "fiscal cliff" from which the United States will fall in January 2013. They see the danger arising from the simultaneous implementation of the $2 trillion in automatic spending cuts (spread over 10 years) agreed to in last year's debt ceiling vote and the expiration of the Bush era tax cuts. The economists to whom most reporters listen warn that the combined impact of reduced government spending and higher taxes will slow the "recovery" and perhaps send the economy back into recession. While there is indeed much to worry about in our economy, this particular cliff is not high on the list. Much of the fear stems from the false premise that government spending generates economic growth. People tend to forget that the government can only get money from taxing, borrowing, or printing.
Nothing the government spends comes for free. Money taxed or borrowed is taken out of the private sector, where it could have been used more productively. Printed money merely creates inflation. So the automatic spending cuts, to the extent they are actually allowed to go into effect, will promote economic growth not prevent it. Even most Republicans fall for the canard that spending can help the economy in general. But even those who don't will surely do everything to avoid the political backlash from citizens on the losing end of any specific cuts.
The only reason the automatic spending cuts exist at all is that Congress lacked the integrity to identify specifics. Rest assured that Congress will likely engineer yet another escape hatch when it finds itself backed into a corner again. Repealing the cuts before they are even implemented will render laughable any subsequent deficit reduction plans. But politicians would always rather face frustration for inaction than outright anger for actual decisions. In truth though, only an extremely small portion of the cuts are scheduled to occur in 2013 anyway. If it comes to pass that Congress cannot even keep its spending cut promises for one year, how can they be expected to do so for ten? The impact of the expiring Bush era tax cuts is much harder to assess.
The adverse effects of the tax hikes could be offset by the benefits of reduced government borrowing (provided that the taxes actually result in increased revenue). But given the negative incentives created by higher marginal tax rates, particularly as they impact savings and capital investment, increased rates may actually result in less revenue, thereby widening the budget deficit. In reality, the economy will encounter extremely dangerous terrain whether or not Congress figures out a way to wriggle out of the 2013 budgetary straightjacket. The debt burden that the United Stated will face when interest rates rise presents a much larger "fiscal cliff."
Unfortunately, no one is talking about that one. The current national debt is about $16 trillion (this is just the funded portion...the unfunded liabilities of the Treasury are much, much larger). The only reason the United States is able to service this staggering level of debt is that the currently low interest rate on government debt (now below 2 per cent) keeps debt service payments to a relatively manageable $300 billion per year. On the current trajectory the national debt will likely hit $20 trillion in a few years. If, by that time interest rates were to return to some semblance of historic normalcy, say 5 per cent, interest payments on the debt would then run $1 trillion per year.
This sum could represent almost 40 per cent of total federal revenues in 2012! In addition to making the debt service unmanageable, higher rates would depress economic activity, thereby slowing tax collection and requiring increased government spending. This would increase the budget deficits further, putting even more upward pressure on interest rates. Higher mortgage rates and increased unemployment will put renewed downward pressure on home prices, perhaps leading to another large wave of foreclosures.
My guess is that losses on government insured mortgages alone could add several hundred billion more to annual budget deficits. When all of these factors are taken into account, I believe that annual budget deficits could quickly approach, and exceed $3 trillion. All this could be in the cards if interest rates were to approach a modest five per cent. If the sheer enormity of the red ink were to finally worry our creditors, five per cent interest rates could quickly rise to ten. At those rates, the annual cost to pay the interest on the national debt could equal all federal tax revenues combined. If that occurs we will have to either slash federal spending across the board (including cuts to politically sensitive entitlements), raise taxes significantly on the poor and middle class (as well as the rich), default on the debt, or hit everyone with the sustained impact of high inflation. Now that's a real fiscal cliff!
By foolishly borrowing so heavily when interest rates are low our government is driving us toward this cliff with its eyes firmly glued to the rear view mirror. For years I have warned that a financial crisis would be triggered by the popping of the real estate bubble. My warnings were routinely ignored based on the near universal assumption that real estate prices would never fall. My warnings about the real fiscal cliff are also being ignored because of a similarly false premise that interest rates can never rise. However, if history can be a guide, we should view the current period of ultra low rates as the exception rather than the rule.
Original Source
沒有留言:
發佈留言