|
|
|
|
|
|
by fennecfoxen
4911 days ago
|
|
|
Deficit-financed credit to expand demand sounds great, just like using credit card debt to finance an expansion in my own personal spending power sounds great: there are some times it makes sense but by and large you're fooling yourself if you think it leaves you more financially sound. But... Treasuries? Another day, I'd contest your zero-opportunity-cost suppositions (cf. "crowding out") but more importantly, Greece's bonds don't have anywhere near the credibility of Treasuries, and they're having real problems issuing new ones. You can't finance expansion with deficits if no one will lend you money. |
|
|
There's no reasonable analogy between the US running a deficit and anyone's credit card. Again, like the commenter at the top of the thread, public and private finance are two different things. The US has infinite spending power. The constraint is not "affordability" but inflation. That's it. A "financially sound" budget for the US is one that maximizes employment with the minimal amount of inflation. It has nothing to do with deficits or surpluses.
You need to look at the federal budget as part of a closed loop of spending and income flows with the private, public and foreign sectors. Just like every country can't run a trade surplus, the public private and foreign sectors can't all run a surplus or a deficit. It has to net out. If the private sector runs a surplus (spends less than it earns) of 4% GDP and we have a current account deficit of 4% GDP, the gov't deficit will be 8%. It's just accounting.