2023年5月16日火曜日

Life and Debt: Unpacking the federal debt ceiling | 1A 2023/05/15 Kelton

Life and Debt: Unpacking the federal debt ceiling | 1A

 
 
Stephanie Kelton
⁦‪@StephanieKelton‬⁩
I did Sirius XM with Steve Scully two days ago after *listeners* demanded it. I’ll do The Rising on Hill TV tomorrow. I’ll do NPR (national) on Monday morning. 

I did these/this. 
stephaniekelton.substack.com/p/the-debt-cei…

Don’t write to *me*. Write to the studios. pic.twitter.com/XHNuTc4opN
 
2023/05/12 0:07
 
 
https://twitter.com/stephaniekelton/status/1656677459289309184?s=61


Life and Debt: Unpacking the federal debt ceiling | 1A 2023/05/15 ケルトン


Talking Default with NPR and Bloomberg TV

The debt limit is destructive, duplicative, and dumb. That was the title of a post I wrote a few days after the US hit this self-imposed anachronism back in January. Since then, I've done countless interviews about the state of play in the fight to raise the "debt" ceiling in time to avoid an unprecedented and catastrophic default. 

Today, I will do two more interviews on the topic. The first will air live on NPRat 11am ET. This should be a good one, because we have the full hour to explore the issue, and they're explicitly promoting the MMT lens. Other guests include Wally Adeyemo, US Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, Shai Akabas, Director of Economic Policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and Peggy Collins, Washington Bureau Chief for Bloomberg. 

The second interview is with Bloomberg TV Asia. It's a global program, however the segment will be short (5-7 minutes). It will air at 6:30 pm ET. The world is watching, and it is an utter embarrassment for the United States of America to be making headlines (again) over a potential default. 

I'll reflect on both interviews in a longer post tomorrow.

債務上限は破壊的であり、重複的であり、間抜けである。これは、1月に米国がこの時代錯誤の自主規制に踏み切った数日後に私が書いた記事のタイトルであった。それ以来、私は、前例のない破滅的なデフォルトを回避するために、「債務」上限を引き上げるための戦いの状況について、数え切れないほどのインタビューに答えてきました。

今日、私はこのテーマでさらに2つのインタビューに答える。1回目はNPRで午前11時(米国東部時間)に生放送される予定です。1時間という長い時間を使ってこの問題を掘り下げることができ、しかもMMTの視点を明確に打ち出しているので、これは良いものになるはずだ。他のゲストは、米国財務副長官Wally Adeyemo氏、超党派政策センター経済政策部長Shai Akabas氏、Bloombergワシントン支局長Peggy Collins氏です。

2つ目のインタビューは、ブルームバーグTVアジアです。世界的な番組ですが、セグメントは短く(5-7分)なります。放送は午後6時30分(米国東部時間)です。世界が注目している米国が、デフォルトの可能性で(再び)話題になるのは、まったく恥ずかしいことです。


'Bloomberg Daybreak: Australia' Full Show (05/16/2023) 
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2023-05-16/-bloomberg-daybreak-australia-full-show-05-16-2023

24:20~

この2つのインタビューについては、明日、もっと長い記事で紹介する予定です。


Life And Debt: Unpacking The Federal Debt Ceiling | 1A

2023/05/16

https://youtu.be/gWiF5Tzlcr0



https://www.npr.org/2023/05/15/1176196528/life-and-debt-unpacking-the-federal-debt-ceiling


https://edge2.pod.npr.org/anon.npr-mp3/npr/1a/2023/05/20230515_1a_3a73e638-ffab-485e-88ad-ae1b2027dd65.mp3/20230515_1a_3a73e638-ffab-485e-88ad-ae1b2027dd65.mp3_ywr3ahjkcgo_24964a75d7e53c499fe67a879dff3cf4_43026868.mp3?d=2648&size=42378598&e=1176196528&t=podcast&p=510316&awEpisodeId=1176196528&awCollectionId=510316&sc=siteplayer&aw_0_1st.playerid=siteplayer&hash_redirect=1&x-total-bytes=43026868&x-ais-classified=streaming&listeningSessionID=0CD_382_135__db9eaef7aca75b9664868c09299a7c2779fd2246

44分

https://the1a.org/segments/life-and-debt-unpacking-the-federal-debt-ceiling/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Life and Debt: Unpacking the federal debt ceiling

U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and U.S.11 President Joe Biden, meet with other lawmakers in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC.

Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Congressional leaders will meet with President Joe Biden next week to discuss the federal debt ceiling as they face a looming deadline to avoid a default on U.S. debt obligations. Talks stalled after a meeting on Tuesday with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

The Treasury Department has warned that if an agreement isn't reached prior to June 1, there could be severe implications for global markets and the U.S. economy. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen spoke with reporters ahead of a summit with G7 finance ministers and central bank governors.

"There is no good reason to generate a good crisis of our own making. The U.S. Congress has raised or suspended the debt limit almost 80 times since 1960. I urge it to act quickly to do so once again," Yellen said.

The federal debt ceiling has been in place for more than a hundred years. But it's been the subject of consistent conflicts internally between congressional leaders and the White House for more than a decade now. Stonybrook University economist Stephanie Kelton, a champion of Modern Monetary Theory, argues the federal debt limit is a self-imposed and unnecessary measure.

"Everyone is back to asking 'How will you pay for it?' It's the wrong question," Kelton explained.

We'll have a panel conversation about the debt ceiling and potential solutions to avoid a government default. It's the first installment of our ongoing series with Bloomberg: Life and Debt.



Life And Debt: Unpacking The Federal Debt Ceiling | 1A

2023/05/16

https://youtu.be/gWiF5Tzlcr0


音声のみ


foreign [Music] leaders are set to meet with President Biden again as negotiations over raising the nation's debt limit continue the treasury Department warns that the U.S could default on its debts if an agreement isn't reached as soon as June 1st and there could be dire consequences for the U.S economy and financial markets across the globe the federal debt ceiling has been in place for more than a hundred years but raising the debt limit has been the subject of conflicts between Congressional leaders in the White House consistently only over the past decade or so it's also a big issue with a lot of you Kevin McCarthy is talking about cutting the national debt I suggest all elected officials take a salary deduction but I truly believe that we need to stop spending money we don't have the debt ceiling is the debt ceiling if they want to talk about the budget they can do that do that by the appropriate time so how could a federal government default impact your job and your retirement do we really need a federal debt limit at all we're launching a new series in partnership with Bloomberg it's called life and debt we're going to talk about credit cards student loans medical debt and a lot more after the break we start the series by taking a look at the federal debt limit I'm Todd willick from Vice news in for Jen white you're listening to the 1A podcast where we get to the heart of the story we've got a lot to get to so stay with us thank you joining us in studio is Peggy Collins she's the Washington bureau chief at Bloomberg News Peggy thanks so much for being here today hi there also with me in studio is Shai akabas he's the director of the economic policy a director of Economic Policy rather at the non-profit by bipartisan policy Center shy thanks for being here thanks son and on the line from Long Island in New York is Stephanie Kelton she's a professor of economics and public policy at Stony Brook University she's also author of The New York Times bestseller the deficit myth modern monetary Theory and the birth of the people's economy she was a senior economic advisor to Senator Bernie Sanders presidential campaign Stephanie great to have you here great to be with all of you so Peggy let's do some Basics Congress has raised or suspended the debt limit almost 80 times since 1960 up until the last decade for the most part it was raised more or less routinely what changed well I think the politics change somewhat significantly we see a lot more Rancor on the hill and we've seen the debt limit become somewhat of a political football but what's happening right now Todd is that that metaphor metaphor of it being a political football really doesn't seem to do the trick because it of the gravity of what could happen if we really don't reach a compromise it could really affect businesses big and small people and The credibility of the US government and our markets worldwide football is something that's played on a field between two sides this is heavier and more important than a football but is it a football anymore I think it's more like a gun at this point well it has been weaponized as you're talking about in terms of people really on Capitol Hill saying you know what we're going to use this moment of the debt ceiling to demand in this case spending cuts for example and there is a lot of debate there but I do think to your point you know the American people are looking for our leaders to do what we do by by Design in the US which is have a government where lots of people come together and and come to a compromise or a consensus and what we're seeing right now is a lot of back and forth where people are saying we may not do that and that's where investors are Mark and markets are really starting to sit up and think about it and we're going to talk about the impact on markets and investors too one more question for you about this though in 2011 after another debt limit confrontation initiated by Republicans as this one has been when President Obama was in office then minority leader in the Senate Mitch McConnell you've heard of him he said what we learned from this and this is a quote that the debt image debt limit is a hostage that's worth ransoming what was he talking about there and how is that attitude playing out today well I think that that rhetoric is what people are thinking about is that can you you know hold the government kind of in a way that they are that backed up against a wall you know Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen has said to Congress we aren't going to be able to pay our our debts by as soon as June 1st so it's essentially sort of coming up to the brink of whether or not we're able to pay our bills which lots of people in America know what that's like and the importance and responsibility around that and people saying you know what we may go over the cliff there because we want certain other things and if you don't we're going to put markets at risk there and regular Americans as well so Stephanie the debt limit was established more than a hundred years ago during World War One under the second Liberty Bond act 1917 old history why was the debt limit created in the first place I mean the Constitution says Congress has the sole power of the purse doesn't say what does actually talk about debt that it can't be violated but why do you even need this thing well it was actually created if you can believe this to make it easier for the executive branch to carry out the spending that had been authorized by Congress so here we are today we tend to think of the debt ceiling limit I think as some kind of intentional way to obstruct government spending and that isn't uh the original purpose at all it was because during World War One uh Congress decided that it was just going to be way too cumbersome too messy to have to give specific instructions to the treasury Department about what type of instrument it could issue T bills very short-term government securities longer term how many of this kind and that kind because that's the way it was originally done Congress was very involved in the decision making and you know they decided look we want to give the executive branch discretion to decide for itself when and how many instruments of different maturities to issue to facilitate mostly the war spending but other spending as well and so we'll just put a limit you know way up high so that they have plenty of room to maneuver and it just became something else entirely over time I mean did they're not quite founding fathers in 1917 but those ancient great grandpas and most of them were grandpas at the time did they ever Envision Stephanie when they were going through this exercise in 1917 that they would be essentially putting a gun in in the hands of one political party to exercise leverage and and threaten the economy this they were uh this was a political expedient right and it was a bipartisan effort and the understanding was that you know the country was at War and they weren't playing games they were looking out for the best interest of the country and wanted to win the war and wanted to make sure that the government uh had the could be nimble and could uh you know facilitate all of the spending that was going to be required to carry out uh the the war effort shy the bipartisan policy Center has been working with members of Congress over the past 15 years this isn't your first your first go-around with with the leveraging of the debt limit I hear rhetoric from lawmakers all the time about you know if your kid is overspending on the credit card you have to cut up the credit card I get the rhetoric a lot of it completely probably intentionally misunderstands what the debt limit even is but in your conversations with lawmakers do they get it do they know what the debt limit is and and the risk of use using it as as really um as really catastrophic leverage in this way I think most of them do I want to take a step back though and the reason we're in the predicament that we are is because the budget process in Congress is fundamentally broken pretty much everybody agrees on that it's been broken for decades we almost never go through the process as it's been intended and appropriate funding for the annual programs in advance meaning no government shutdown no continuing resolution which means we're not doing the job this year we're just going to do last year's levels for this year all of those are sort of elements of the breakdown of this process and the reason that we end up with the debt limit being the end-all and be all of budget negotiations is because there's no other time to do that so even in the annual budget process if it were working effectively there isn't really a time to talk about taxes entitlements all those that doesn't mean that the debt limit should be used this way but that's the reason we have to look back at the reason why we end up in this place I mean because there's no other time to have that conversation there is you're the expert and I and I I think that's not wrong but we're in this situation not because the budget process is broken we're in it because of the choices that people are making the debt limit was raised three times by Congressional Republicans When Donald Trump was president with none of this now Donald Trump is not President Joe Biden is President and we're in this conversation these this is not a broken budget process these are choices so we can certainly go back and argue budget hypocrisy and I think there is there's plenty of that to go around we've certainly seen members of the Republican Party care about deficits more when there's Democrat in office I think that's inarguable but if even under President Trump there were discussions about the budget in the context of the debt limit so it's not new that we have had these negotiations around the debt limit frankly I don't think we should be and I'm happy to talk about a reform proposal that we've put out there the bipartisan policy Center that would de-risk the debt limit and take away the brinksmanship that we see and replace it with a much more sane process but the fact of the matter is we have had these discussions around the budget and the debt limit for many years and so this is not a new thing albeit it is continuing to be a very dangerous thing for it some of the tax the tactics are relatively new and that's what's so troubling about it well here's the Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy who is leading House Republicans he's been focusing this discussion strictly on federal spending listen would it be wrong to put some control remember what we're talking about a debt ceiling is like your your child having a credit card we reached the limit we're responsible for paying it but would you just raise the limit without seeing how you're spending your money that's all we're talking about all right Stephanie the strange thing here is that some big spending items are not even on the table Medicare Social Security defense spending these are the big things that are driving um at least on the spending Side Federal deficits so so what are we actually talking about when it comes to spending doesn't drive the deficit um look when when speaker McCarthy says you know we want to take a look at how we're spending our money of course he has that opportunity every year I worked for a period of time as the chief Economist for the Democrats on the U.S Senate budget committee and as I recall uh we revisit the federal budget on an annual basis so there is ample opportunity for lawmakers in Congress to consider how they're spending money so to speak uh what you know this is we started this conversation off talking about a political football and I think that you know you're tapping into exactly the right line of argument well Stephanie you hold the football for one second because we're going to get back to that game sorry to cut you off but we have an official from the U.S department of the treasury on hold it's going to talk to us next about how treasury views the X date and all this leverage stay with us [Music] let's get back to the conversation with some messages that we got from some of you not negotiate the debt ceiling it should be free and clear but if you are going to go into negotiations make sure that tax revenue is on the table now I know Joe Biden thinks he's just going to force the debt ceiling through but I truly believe that we need to stop spending money we don't have quite frankly we cannot cut our way out of our debt crisis issue and if we have to crash and burn right now at least we won't hand this debt bomb off to our children and grandchildren so the date for the White House in Congress to reach an agreement is fast approaching nobody knows the exact date but the treasury Department is estimating that it could fail to cover its debt obligations as soon as June 1st that's in two and a half weeks by the way Wally adiemo is the Deputy Secretary of the Treasury he's also worked at treasury in the Obama Administration as a senior advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff deputy secretary thanks for being here it's good to be here with you thanks for having me so I just mentioned June 1st it's a critical deadline around here it's called The X date what exactly is the X date and why is it so difficult to predict exactly when the X falls on us so the truth is the United States government pays billions of dollars of bills every day and also receives billions of dollars in tax receipts and other revenues every day and for our more than 200 year history what we've done is we paid every bill on time and we haven't decided which pills we pay on which day so it's incredibly hard to predict which day we will frankly no longer have the resources to continue to pay those bills what the secretary has done is she sent a letter to Congress notifying them that that could be as early as June 1st and she's committed to keeping them up to date as we get closer but frankly we shouldn't be here ultimately the United States has the ability to pay all its bills we shouldn't be in a position where we're talking about potentially defaulting on our bills for the first time in our more than 200 year history and that's why the president has called on Congress to raise the debt limit as quickly as possible which they did three times in the last Administration without negotiations what are the real world implications if the X date is passed um try to paint a picture I don't think it's that like the lights go out all at once probably not the case I don't think that airplanes fall out of the sky but what does it really look like if the U.S starts to not meet all of its debt obligations I heard your I heard about some of the comments that you played um before I came on and I think the truth is that if we were to default on our debt we would be handing our children a worse situation um because what would happen is that for the first time in history the United States would be in a position where we didn't meet our obligations that would mean that for example we'd be unable to pay social security recipients potentially on time be unable to pay our troops on time be unable to pay the people who are securing the border on time but more fundamentally it would also mean that our financial markets for which treasuries are the Bedrock would be roiled in such a way that it would be worse than Lehman Brothers the estimate is that it would cost us somewhere in the neighborhood of 8 million jobs and lead to a recession this would all be happening at a moment where the economy is actually growing we created more than 200 000 jobs last month and inflation's coming down so it would in lots of ways throw our economy off track and throw the global economy off track in a way that would impact America a great deal not just for the next several weeks but for years to come so you mentioned U.S treasuries T bills there are other kinds of treasuries simplify that for me just a little bit what does that mean U.S treasuries I know that they're super super safe really really reliable Investments if I'm an investor I say oh a U.S treasury I'm definitely gonna get my return 100 does that calculus start to change if we go past the X date yes if we were to default on our debt what is considered in the world the safest investment and four decades the safest investment has been investing in the United States because our economy is strong and it's growing and we've made a number of choices that demonstrate to the war world that the United States economy is a leader if we were to default on our obligations to the people who have loaned US money that would no longer be the case it would mean that um people who have relied on us to pay our bills on a regular basis would no longer be able to do that which would likely raise the cost of borrowing for not only the United States government but for people who want to buy their houses buy a house or someone who wants to buy a car or for small businesses that want to get a loan it would make it far more expensive to do those things as well going forward well we got this message from Christopher it's an important question can you address the risk that default would make the debt worse and beyond that would invite catastrophe by threatening the dollar status as the global default currency the a default on our debt would make our debts and deficits worse it would also make the economy worse in significant ways which would mean that people would be less likely to want to invest in the United States and the dollar fundamentally the thing the United States has is that for our entire history we have always paid our bills on time Congress has raised the debt limit nearly 80 times um since it's been created and by doing this by making the Investments we've made the United States has been seen as a credible invest investment by people and that's why people have been willing to buy treasuries um treasuries the key for us is that if Congress doesn't raise the debt limit all of that would be put in question that's why the president's made really clear that we can't um we can't toy with default ultimately we have to take default off the table and raise the debt limit in order to continue to demonstrate not just to people who are investors in our country not just the financial markets but also to seniors think about people who went to work for decades and they paid into Social Security knowing the government had made a commitment to them the president doesn't want us to default on our debt to them either or default on our debt to our troops who are defending our country which is also critically important so it wouldn't only be a catastrophe for financial markets it'd be a catastrophe for the Americans who we've made commitments to if the United States was unable to pay its bills on time Deputy treasury secretary Wally adiemo uh deputy secretary I'm going to let you go in just a minute I know you're busy but I know you're prepared for this question treasury is legally authorized to Mint Platinum coins in any denomination it chooses I know you've heard this question before but are you going to Mint the trillion dollar platinum coin it's kind of a joke but actually it isn't it's legal and people are looking for ways out of this crisis in a dysfunctional Congress so I've been doing this for a long time and each time we get to a point where Congress needs to pass the debt limit someone has a new creative interesting idea on how we can do it what I can tell you is that each time we reach this point the only thing that has worked to lift the debt limit has been for Congress to act to prevent default and they've done it 78 times throughout history including three times the last Administration without without negotiating what I can tell you is the only thing that we can do that will maintain our credibility for investors in the United States our credibility with the people who we've made commitments to is for Congress to raise the debt limit we're not going that is the only thing that we can do that will maintain our credibility as a borrower and also somebody who's made commitments to the American people so fundamentally the president's made clear that Congress needs to do this as soon as possible because we're already seeing the impact of this in yesterday day I looked at the data and the Michigan survey of consumer sentiment showed the consumer sentiment had taken a hit because the American people were starting to worry about whether the government is going to pay the bills that it owes and ultimately the key for us to demonstrate to the American people to our small businesses is that Congress needs to take the actions that they can which is raising the debt limit and preventing default treasury secretary Janet Yellen says she's not going to Mint the trillion dollar platinum coin the deputy secretary Wally Adamo says he's not interested in minting the trillion dollar platinum coin I think that that Avenue out of this crisis is probably foreclosed deputy secretary Wally Adamo thanks for joining us thanks for having me um Peggy did anything from the deputy secretary strike you there that you heard well one of the things that stuck out to me was his comments related to recession so I think that's an important context essentially the timing for all of this is bad um and that's in part because of the fact that a lot of people are watching including us at Bloomberg and our Bloomberg economics division on in terms of whether or not we will see a recession in the second half of this year you know the Federal Reserve has been dialing up interest rates in order to try to drive down inflation but that's putting a strain on the economy whether we had this debt ceiling debate or not and so if we do barrel into a volatile period and potentially get to a situation where we're not able to pay our bills and markets tank as a result of it as a result of it it could really exacerbate or accelerate a recession we got this message from Zach who emails I will never hear rhetoric from Republicans about student loan forgiveness ever again they're unwilling to pay their own debts unconditionally as they're expected to do and surely their beliefs are consistent and Matthew emails to say why is no one talking about the tax cuts that Republicans instituted several years ago and its impact on the national debt and we heard this from Helen President Biden should settle this issue by raising the debt limit by invoking the 14th Amendment of the Constitution section 4 of the 14th Amendment says the validity of the public debt of the United States shall and that's the important word shall not be questioned and shy Helen raises an important Point aside from the trillion dollar platinum coin a lot of other people say hey forget about Congress forget about this leverage forget about the weaponization the 14th Amendment is clear President Biden just keep paying the debts how viable is that ID I think Biden said made kind of an offhand remark that he was considering it I don't know that he really is but how how legitimate is that well full disclosure I'm not a lawyer so I'm not going to argue the merits on the law but I actually think the more important piece of this is the potential Economic Consequences and frankly I think that's why the treasury Department has not gone this route in the past and would be unlikely to here what we have to think about is how are markets going to react and other economic actors if the treasury Department unilaterally takes action that nullifies the debt limit some of the possibilities include credit rating agencies downgrading us they include somebody bringing a lawsuit against the treasury Department even if the treasury Department is likely to ultimately win that lawsuit if there is a legal cloud surrounding debt that the treasury Department is issuing that means again the credit rating agencies might downgrade it means that investors are probably going to be demanding higher interest rates it means that financial markets are likely going to be reacting and economic actors businesses individuals are going to see what's going on here and start hunkering down because they're going to see things going south the final point I'll make is that I think the politics of this are also really challenging because in that situation the treasury Department has taken unilateral action to address this and so if there is that kind of financial Fallout that Cascades very quickly it will be very easy for Republicans to point and say look at what you have caused by these unilateral actions which are unconstitutional or illegal or whatever argument they make and I think that is why the treasury Department continues to emphasize that it needs to be negotiated in Congress on a bipartisan basis Stephanie that the health of markets and and bond prices markets in general are based on confidence I know that's sort of basic but it's kind of true even if we get past this crisis without 14th Amendment trickery or a trillion dollar platinum coins or defaults are we getting to a point where investors worldwide can start to look at the United States and say I'm not sure they have it together over there I'm not sure that my money is as safe as I thought and I'm not sure that investing in the United States economy is as good a bet as I thought 20 years ago oh it's it well look it's certainly embarrassing globally to be in this situation but when you look at financial markets today for example and where we've been I mean we hit the debt limit uh sometime in January so we've been watching for a period of months now and financial markets seem to be more or less shrugging this office almost business as usual at this point so you know I don't know the answer to the question I guess my gut would tell me that financial markets are smart enough for investors are smart enough to understand at this point that this is just sort of what we in the United States do on a fairly regular basis uh pulling ourselves to the brink and then at the last minute pulling back and doing what we've always done before which is making good on-promised payments so I don't know that it does the kind of long-term scarring but it's certainly uh not ideal and wish we weren't doing it Stephanie you've championed speaking of not doing this you've championed a new framework of essentially economic theory it's been adopted by a lot of progressive lawmakers and economists and candidates frankly to think about the federal debt and deficit a little bit differently it's called mmt modern monetary Theory how is that relevant to this discussion well it's relevant because you know you've played these clips now and and we've heard a number of comments about you know running up the credit card and that sort of a thing and so mmt is relevant in that it reminds us that the federal government isn't at all like the rest of us that these metaphors that we use uh that lawmakers like to use about burdening future generations and piling debt onto a credit card and so forth are completely inapplicable to a currency issuing government like the federal government of the United States of America so uh mmt is helpful because it says the federal government can do what the rest of us can't do it literally does spend money that it quote unquote doesn't have the rest of us can't do that we've got to get the currency in order to be able to spend it we have to be able to earn it or borrow it or somebody has to give it to us uh the federal government issues the US dollar it can never run out of money it can run run out of things to buy and there is a limit to how much it can safely spend at any point in time and so inflation is a very real constraint but the government isn't like a household it's not going to run out of money com you know face bills that it can't afford to pay what we're talking about with the debt ceiling and a potential default it would be a voluntary default not an involuntary default if we were to do that it would be a choice that we're making based on our unwillingness to pay our bills not based on our inability to pay Stephanie Kelton of Stony Brook University professor of economics and public policy Waging War on political Messengers and press release writers everywhere saying that the federal government is not like your kitchen table it's not like your household budget you don't have to get the money to spend the money would a paradigm shift oh you're going to put a lot of political Messengers out of work Stephanie if that thing ever takes hold because people are using this idea that the national debt is just like your Visa card and they're using it to great effect I think I even heard the speaker of the house doing it a minute ago we're going to talk more about mmt about the federal debt limit about the leverage and where we might all be headed in this latest confrontation over the federal debt limit we're talking about it it's part of our week-long series with Bloomberg called life in debt coming up we'll talk about solutions to the debt ceiling standoff and ask if we even need to keep doing this we'll get back to more in just a moment stay with us [Music] let's get back to the conversation with this message from one of you sector parallel to 2011 according to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta in his Memoir worthy fights Canada describes how Congress drifted toward the default Abyss under a similar lack of serious leadership eventually congress's shameful action devolved into budgetary sequestration with severe across-the-board cuts to government programs as final as National Defense thanks to Marianne in Michigan for that message and that's not all that happened I was there and I'm dating myself a little bit but there was also a downgrade bystandard and poor is s p of the of the value of U.S treasuries the first time in history it had a real world world impact we went from AAA to double A Plus and um double A plus I guess isn't bad but if you're an American AAA is the only way to go what do you think of Congress and the White House what do you think they should do about this federal debt ceiling email is 1A wamu.org well Republican lawmakers have repeatedly argued that federal spending needs to be reduced because it's contributing to a rise in inflation this argument's not new but inflation is high very very high right now and that argument is gaining a lot of new salience here's Republican senator Mike Lee from Utah speaking at a press conference uh in early may people have been suffering under the oppressive yoke of inflation over the last two and a half years in Utah this has meant that the average family shells out an additional thousand dollars a month every single month for their basic living necessities this is all the predictable foreseeable and in fact foreseen result of excessive federal spending trying to get a handle on that is difficult Stephanie Mike Lee of Utah says excessive federal spending is the reason that chicken is 6.99 a pound for instance at the grocery store is he right?


Kelton:
no he's not right uh can the deficit get too big and contribute to inflationary pressure sure it can but remember that the deficit had been falling at the most rapid clip on record you might remember President Biden saying that you know look at this I'm presiding over the most rapid uh reduction in the federal deficit in the history of the United States.
now that was taking place because of course the economy was recovering very strongly that job market is very strong spending is very high GDP growth was uh high and so the deficit was coming down quite naturally as tax revenues were increasing and spending to support a weak economy a coveted stricken economy was uh coming down but listen the Federal Reserves rate hikes these aggressive interest rate hikes are pushing the deficit back up.
so if you look at the latest report from the Congressional budget office they tell you that they have revised their s estimates of where the federal deficit is going to be over the course of the next 10 years and in part they are forecasting larger deficits because of the fed's rate hikes the rate hikes are going to increase says the CBO um spending on interest by 688 billion dollars over the next five years that's in addition to how much we would have spent otherwise but the rate hikes are uh forcing treasury to pay out more in interest all of those bondholders.
 we've been talking about so you know that has the potential to put more money into people's hands that they could turn around and spend so one of the things Senator Lee might want to think about if he's worried about inflation and federal spending are the impacts of the rate hikes themselves.

 speaking of rate hike Shea you've worked closely in the past with fed chairman Jerome Powell right you've worked closely with him you probably have a better understanding than most of us about the thinking that's going into these rate Heights but also the blowback effect that Stephanie's talking about on inflation as um as the treasury has to service these higher interest rates all of that discussion can get a little bit confusing but you know Jerome Powell pretty well what's your Insight to where where we're going with rate hikes in the economy but also the impact on this very debate the debt limit sure well I have a little bit of a different perspective I think that the reason why the FED is hiking rates right now is because of course we had very high inflation in the past 12 18 months and that inflation was partly caused by the federal spending that went on in response to covet now don't get me wrong much of that federal spending was absolutely necessary to get us out of that downturn but most economists agree that the amount that was pumped into the economy was at least somewhat excessive and contributed not entirely but contributed to the inflationary impacts that we've seen over the past 12 or 18 months so what the FED is doing now is responding with interest rate hikes that are attempting to slow the economy down slow that heat overheating of prices and it is seems to be having some progress inflation has now come down from about nine percent to the four to five percent range but I think they're probably they're going to need to at least wait and see and maybe need to do more what they absolutely do not want to see happen What chair Powell and others at the FED do not want to see happen is them effectively declare Victory or say that they've done enough and then inflation continues to rise because then that that damages The credibility of the FED to fight inflation again and could have could put us into a never-ending cycle of chasing those price hikes Peggy how is the Fed responding if at all to this current standoff on the debt limit they have a role in this are they kind of standing back and like silently waving their hands like don't do this well Fed chair pal has been asked about it directly as recently as the last fed decision earlier this month and he's been very clear in saying that please do not mistake my Powers at the FED for what the government has to do in this situation the FED cannot rescue the economy from the disaster that could happen if we start defaulting on some of our payments so he's been very clear like we're not going to be able to bail you out of this I am not your life raft do not look to me to help someone we got an interesting email from Bill Mill who says the real elephant in the room is military spending this is what needs to be lowered we need to find ways to lower military spending we do not need that much spending on the military Bill raises an interesting point which is um we sort of mentioned it earlier in the show guys we're kind of only talking about one thing here it's called discretionary spending like the stuff we spend on well food stamps and Roads and Veterans health care we're not talking about the big stuff the big stuff that really drives debt Medicare Medicaid Social Security defense and we're sure as heck not talking about taxes I feel like we're in this hostage situation with a big gun to the head of the economy and we're not even getting real in terms of policy yeah I mean that you're talking about exactly why this whole situation is so broken because even if we want to be having a debate over the budget both sides have sworn off talking about entitlement programs you saw the president at the State of the Union get everybody to get stand up and cheer and say we're not touching Social Security we're not touching you know so so entitlements are not on the table taxes as you said are not on the table so we're debating a very small portion of the budget here that's why we really need a change in the Paradigm we need to have a budget process in Congress where those programs those important programs can be subject to review and debate and consider what the future looks like and the tax code of course we only have a debate about the tax code once a decade or so and that's not often enough to keep up with economic activity we have the 2017 tax cuts a lot of those will expire in 2025 that's probably the next time taxes will be on the table we shouldn't be going eight years without considering the revenue side of the budget um Stephanie we keep talking about whether we even really need to be doing this a do we need a debt limit I think you were pretty clear that you said no and our entire framework about what debt and deficit is when it's the US government according to mmt Modern monetary Theory really needs to be rethought you say well Jerome Powell the chairman of the FED we've been talking about him he's addressed this here he is talking about mmt on Capitol Hill uh just a couple years ago the idea that deficits don't matter for countries that can borrow in their own currency I think is just wrong I think U.S debt is fairly high at a level of of GDP and much more importantly than that it's it's growing faster than GDP fairly significantly faster you know the to the extent people are talking about using the FED as a sort of our role is not to to to provide support for particular policies it is to and that's central banks everywhere um it is to try to um you know achieve maximum employment and stable prices Stephanie Kelton chairman Powell has been listening to this discussion on 1A and he would like a word with you well I'd like a word with him listen I think that uh I agree completely what we need is a paradigm shift and I think we have to move well beyond this conversation about whether we need to cut spending or increase taxes or do some combination of the two in order to quote unquote deal with the deficit and the debt I think that we need to be asking very different questions for example why are we trying to deal with the deficit in the debt why are we so convinced that these are uh problems that need to be dealt with so um look I will say this every deficit is good for someone okay and that's a point that I think is too often missed because people hear this word deficit and it's it's loaded term you immediately think of something that's negative nobody ever uses the word deficit in a sentence where they're saying something good is happening so I think it's important for people to understand what this thing actually is the federal deficit so-called is just the difference between two numbers that's all it is and and one of the numbers refers to outlays it's how many dollars the government is putting into people's hands let's say every year the other number is the revenues it's how many dollars the government is subtracting away from people's hands every year so when the government adds more than it subtracts let's say it spends a hundred and it only taxes 90 back we label that a deficit but what we forget is if the government puts a hundred in and only takes 90 back somebody gets to keep 10. in other words this thing we call the government deficit is really a financial contribution a deposit into some other part of our economy in that respect in financial terms every deficit is good for someone the question is for whom and for what are those deficits being run are they largely being used to send a windfall to the people at the very top let's say like the 2017 Republican tax cuts or are they being used to make investments in education and infrastructure and health care and the rest of it so I think we we have a national conversation that's very broken and what I've tried to do in my own work is to recast the debate so that we can have a better more productive debate about questions surrounding taxing and spending but without the focus and this belief that we ought to be budgeting like a household Stephanie Kelton you've got me feeling like Neo in The Matrix you know the the first thing to understand about the deficit is that there is no deficit it's not real and then you can see the world the economic world and the debt world for what it truly is that's Stephanie Kelton of Stony Brook University I'm speaking with Peggy Collins of Bloomberg and and Shea acabus pardon me with the non-profit by bipartisan policy Center guys we have to talk about something important because last week on the much maligned CNN Town Hall we all watched it and we're not going to have a media discussion right now but former president Trump made news and he made some important news he said essentially his message to Republicans on Capitol Hill and I think this is a quote do a default you should consider doing a default if you can't extract a pound of Flesh from Democrats in this negotiation Caitlyn Collins said gosh that sounds dangerous and he said ah it's all psychological it could be bad it might be not bad sort of a trumpian answer I took that as extremely serious I took that as a signal especially to House Republicans to consider going over the brink and they're getting a green light essentially from the leader of their party certainly the front runner Peggy it does turn up the heat for sure in the sense that we are getting very close to that X date that we've been talking about June 1st where we could potentially start to have trouble paying some of our bills and it does put it into play whether or not some of the Republicans as you said that are more aligned with President Trump of whether or not they would feel more emboldened um to go right up to that I will say though we should inject a little bit of positivity here in the sense that we are expecting as we're reporting at Bloomberg for the president and house Speaker McCarthy and some other leaders to meet again tomorrow and that their staff people have been saying and we've been reporting has been making some progress over the weekend so we do have another important day coming up tomorrow but here's here's the problem with it and I'll just add one more thing before I come to you shy um Mitch McConnell said at one point in the last couple of weeks this will be settled when Kevin McCarthy and Joe Biden reach an agreement that's actually not true this will be settled when that agreement can be passed by House Republicans and to me that was why the statement from former president Trump was so very dangerous green lighting some extremist members of the House Republican conference who ultimately have to vote for this thing they don't get final say in the white house um green lighting them to maybe go over the brink well let me make two points first is I think the rhetoric here has really dominated the substance and that's a problem because both sides have sort of boxed themselves into lines that they feel like it's very difficult for them to cross and whether that's led by President Trump or quotes the President Biden have said not equating the two but they put themselves in their Corners the substance I think is fairly straightforward here the two sides have a place that they can come to agreement on a deal and as Peggy said hopefully things are moving in the right direction there the other point that I want to make is I think Americans need to understand that doing a default or going into default would be entirely unprecedented in the history of our country we don't know what it would mean but it really could lead to catastrophic consequences that would affect every American household I want to thank all of you who joined me for this really important sometimes confusing but but very momentous discussion we're headed for something very very important shayakabus director of economic policy at the nonprofit bipart bipartisan policy Center Peggy Collins Washington bureau chief at Bloomberg and Stephanie Kelton professor of economics and public policy at Stony Brook also author of The New York Times bestseller the deficit myth modern monetary Theory mmt and the birth of the people's economy shy Peggy Stephanie thanks so much for your time appreciate all of you earlier we heard from deputy secretary Wally adiamo as well and we thank him for his time our series with Bloomberg life and debt continues this week we'll look at credit card debt and what you can do to take control of your finances we'll also get into medical debt and student loans today's producer was Chris Remington this program comes to you from WAMU part of American University in Washington it's distributed by NPR I'm Todd zwillik with Vice news in for Gen white thanks so much for joining us this is 1A [Music] foreign [Music] [Applause] [Music] 


国の債務上限引き上げを巡る交渉が続く中、外国の音楽関係者らは再びバイデン大統領と会談する予定であるが、財務省は6月1日までに合意に達しなければ米国が債務不履行に陥る可能性があると警告している。米国経済と世界中の金融市場に悲惨な結果をもたらす 連邦債務上限は100年以上実施されてきたが、債務上限引き上げがホワイトハウスの議会指導者間の衝突の主題となったのはここ10年間だけだそれはあなた方の多くにとっても大きな問題です ケビン・マッカーシーは国債削減について話しています 私は選挙で選ばれたすべての役人に給与控除を受けることを提案しますが、私は必要のないお金の支出をやめるべきだと心から信じています債務上限がないのは債務上限です、彼らができる予算について話したいなら、適切な時期までにそれをしなさい、では連邦政府の債務不履行があなたの仕事や退職にどのような影響を与える可能性があるのか​​、そもそも連邦債務制限は本当に必要なのでしょうか?ブルームバーグと提携して新しいシリーズを立ち上げる予定です。その名も「人生と借金」です。休憩後には、クレジットカード、学生ローン、医療債務、その他多くのことについてお話します。シリーズは、連邦債務制限について見ていきます。バイスニュースのトッド・ウィリックです、ジェン・ホワイトに代わってあなたは1Aポッドキャストを聞いています、そこで私たちは物語の核心に迫ります、私たちにはまだたくさんのことがあるから、私たちと一緒にいてください、ありがとう、スタジオに参加してくれるのはペギー・コリンズです彼女'ブルームバーグニュースのワシントン支局長です ペギー、今日はここに来てくれて本当にありがとう こんにちは、スタジオに私と一緒にいるのはシャイ・アカバスです、彼は経済政策のディレクターです、むしろ超党派の非営利政策センターの経済政策のディレクターです 内気でありがとうここに来てくれてありがとう息子、ニューヨークのロングアイランドから電話で来てくれたのはステファニー・ケルトンです。彼女はストーニーブルック大学の経済学と公共政策の教授です。彼女はニューヨーク・タイムズのベストセラー『赤字神話現代貨幣理論と通貨の誕生』の著者でもあります。人々の経済 彼女はバーニー・サンダース上院議員の大統領選挙キャンペーンの上級経済顧問でした ステファニー ここに来られて嬉しいです 皆さんと一緒にいられるのは素晴らしいです それで、ペギー、しましょう基本的なことをやろう 議会は1960年以来、過去10年間に至るまで、債務上限をほぼ80回引き上げたり、停止したりしてきたが、ほとんどの場合、多かれ少なかれ日常的に引き上げられてきたのが良い変化だった 政治はいくぶん大きく変わったと思う より多くの恨みが目に入る丘を登って、債務制限が一種の政治的サッカーになるのを見てきましたが、今何が起こっているのかトッドは、それが政治的サッカーであるという比喩は実際には役に立たないようです、それは起こり得ることの重大さのせいでもし私たちが本当に妥協に達しなければ、それは企業の大小に関わらず大きな影響を与える可能性があり、米国政府と米国市場の信頼性は世界中のサッカーに影響を与えるだろう。」両チーム間のフィールドでプレーされる これはフットボールよりも重くて重要だけど、それはもはやフットボールなのでしょうか この時点では銃に近いと思います まあ、あなたが実際に人々の観点から話しているように、それは武器化されています国会議事堂は、この場合、例えば歳出削減を要求するために、債務上限のこの瞬間を何に利用するかはわかっていますね、そこでは多くの議論がありますが、アメリカ国民が何を求めているかはあなたの指摘通りだと思います。私たちの指導者たちは、私たちがデザインによって行っていることをやろうとしています。米国には政府があり、多くの人々が集まり、妥協や合意に達します。そして私たちが今目にしているのは、人々がどこで行ったり来たりしているのかということです。あれもこれもやってはいけないと言っている』投資家がマークし、市場が本格的に腰を据えて考え始めているところです。市場と投資家への影響についてもお話します。これについてもう 1 つ質問します。ただし、2011 年に共和党によって新たな債務制限に関する対立が始まった後です。これはオバマ大統領が在任中のときと同じように、当時上院少数派リーダーだったミッチ・マコーネル氏のことを聞いたことがあるだろうが、彼はこのことから我々が学んだことを言っており、これは債務イメージの債務制限は人質だという引用である。」身代金を要求する価値がある 彼はそこで何を話していましたか そしてその態度は今日どのようにうまく機能していますか 私はそのレトリックが人々が考えていることだと思います それは政府をある種の裏付けのある方法で保持できるかどうかジャネット・イエレン財務長官は議会で、早ければ6月1日までに債務を返済することはできないと述べているので、本質的には債務を返済できるかどうかの瀬戸際に来ているようなものだ。請求書を支払うことができますが、アメリカの多くの人はそれがどのようなものであるか、その重要性と責任を知っています、そして人々は、私たちが他のことを望んでいるから崖を越えることになるかもしれないことを知っていると言っていますが、あなたがそれをしなければ、私たちは私たちになります。」そこの市場を危険にさらすことになり、一般のアメリカ人も危険にさらすことになるので、ステファニー 債務制限は百年以上前に第一次世界大戦中に、1917 年の第二次自由債券法に基づいて設定されました。古い歴史です。そもそも債務制限はなぜ設けられたのですか。つまり、憲法は議会が財布の唯一の権限を持っていると言っているということですが、債務について実際に何を話しているのか、違反することができないとは言っていませんが、なぜこれが必要なのでしょうか、実際に作成されたものです、これを作るためにこれができると信じられるなら議会が承認した支出を行政府が実行するのがより容易になるため、今日私たちは債務上限を政府支出を妨害するある種の意図的な方法のように考える傾向がありますが、それはそうではありません」えーそもそもの本来の目的は第一次世界大戦中、議会がT紙幣をどのような種類の証券で発行できるかについて財務省に具体的な指示を出すのはあまりにも面倒で面倒すぎると判断したからです。短期の政府証券 長期のこの種類とあんな種類の証券が何種類あるか もともとそうやって行われてきたので議会は意思決定に深く関与しており、議会が決定したことはご存知のとおりです。いつ決定するかについては行政府に自ら決定する裁量権を与えたいと考えています。そして、主に戦争支出だけでなくその他の支出も促進するために、さまざまな満期の金融商品をいくつ発行するかということなので、皆さんが知っている制限をかなり高く設定して、彼らが十分に操縦する余地を残せるようにするだけで、それはまったく別のものになりました。時間が経つにつれて、彼らはそうなったのです」私たちは1917年時点では建国の父ではありませんでしたが、古代の曽祖父たち、そして彼らのほとんどは当時はおじいちゃんでした。1917年にこの演習を行っていたとき、ステファニーが本質的に一政治家の手に銃を渡すことになるということを想像したことがありましたか?影響力を行使し、経済を脅かす政党だった、これは政治的便宜上の権利であり、超党派の取り組みであり、この国は戦争中であり、彼らはそうではないという理解だった」ゲームをしているのではなく、彼らは国の利益を考えて戦争に勝ちたかったし、政府が機敏に動けるようにして、必要となるすべての支出を促進できるかどうかを確認したかったのです。ああ、戦争努力を実行するのは恥ずかしい、超党派の政策センターは過去15年間にわたって議会議員と協力してきたが、これはだめだ」債務制限を活用して初めての解決策だ 議員らからは、子供がクレジットカードを使いすぎているなら、クレジットカードを減らさなければならないというレトリックをいつも聞いている。そのレトリックはよくわかるおそらく完全に意図的に債務上限が何であるかを誤解しているのでしょうが、議員との会話の中で、彼らはそれを理解していますか、債務制限が何であるか、そしてそれをこのように本当に壊滅的なレバレッジとして使用するリスクを知っていますか?ほとんどの人がそうだと思いますが、私は一歩下がりたいのですが、私たちが今のような窮地に陥っているのは、議会の予算プロセスが根本的に破綻しているからです、何十年も破綻しているということはほぼ全員が同意しているので、私たちはほとんど行っていません。そのままのプロセスを通して年次プログラムには事前に意図され、適切な資金が投入されているということは、政府機関の閉鎖はなく、継続的な決議も行われていないということは、今年はその仕事をやらないということを意味し、今年は昨年のレベルでやるつもりだということだ、それらはすべてある種の要素だこのプロセスの内訳と、債務制限が最終的に最終的に予算交渉のすべてになる理由は、他にそれを行う時間がないためであり、たとえそれが効果的に機能していれば、年次予算プロセスであってもです。今は税金の権利について話す時ではない それは債務制限をこのように使うべきだという意味ではありません しかしだからこそ、私たちがこのような状況に陥った理由を振り返る必要があるのです他にそんな会話をする時間はない、そこにはあなたがいる』専門家であり、私と私はそれは間違いではないと考えていますが、私たちがこの状況に陥っているのは、予算プロセスが破綻しているからではありません、人々が行っている選択のせいです ドナルドが大統領になったとき、債務上限は議会共和党によって3回引き上げられましたトランプは大統領だったが、今はそのようなことは何もなく、ドナルド・トランプは大統領ではない ジョー・バイデンは大統領であり、我々はこの会話に参加しているが、これは破綻した予算プロセスではなく、これらは選択である、だから我々は確かに戻って予算の偽善を議論することができるし、私はそれがあると思う議論すべきことはたくさんある 民主党が政権を握っているとき、共和党員が財政赤字をより気にするのを確かに見てきた それは議論の余地のないことだと思うが、もしトランプ大統領の下でも債務制限という文脈で予算について議論されていたとすれば、それ'債務制限をめぐってこのような交渉が行われたのは、率直に言って新しいことではありません。率直に言って、そうすべきではないと思います。超党派の政策センターが出した、債務制限のリスクを軽減する改革案について喜んで話したいと思います。債務制限を廃止し、私たちが目にしている瀬戸際政策を取り除き、より健全なプロセスに置き換えますが、実際には、予算と債務制限をめぐってこのような議論を長年にわたって行ってきたため、これは新しいことではありませんが、それは税金にとって非常に危険なことであり続けている 一部の戦術は比較的新しいものであり、それが非常に問題となっている点 さて、ここに下院共和党を率いるケビン・マッカーシー下院議長がいる 彼はこの議論を連邦支出にのみ焦点を当てている聞いてください、何らかのコントロールを置くのは間違っていますか、私たちが何をしたか覚えておいてください債務上限について話しているのは、あなたの子供がクレジットカードを持っているようなものです、私たちが支払う責任がある限度額に達しましたが、あなたがお金の使い方を確認せずに限度額を引き上げるだけでしょうか?私たちが話しているのはそれだけですそうでしょう、ステファニー、ここで奇妙なのは、いくつかの大きな支出項目が議題にさえ上がっていないことです メディケア 社会保障支出 これらは、少なくとも支出面での大きな原因となっているものです 連邦政府の赤字 それで、それで、私たちは実際に何を言っているのですか?支出が財政赤字を拡大させるわけではない ええと、マッカーシー議長が、私たちがどのようにお金を使っているかを調べたいと知っていると言ったとき、もちろん彼にはその機会が毎年あります、私は主任として一定期間働いていました米国民主党のエコノミスト。上院予算委員会で思い出したのですが、私たちは連邦予算を毎年見直しています。そのため、議会議員がいわばお金の使い方を検討する十分な機会があります。ご存知の通り、この会話は雑談から始まりました。政治的なサッカーについてです、あなたはあなたがまさに正しい議論を展開していることを知っていると思います、まあ、ステファニー、あなたはサッカーを1秒間保持してください、私たちはその試合に戻るつもりなので、話を遮って申し訳ありませんが、私たちは次のことを考えています米国財務省当局者は保留中、次に財務省がX日付をどのように見ているか、そしてこのすべての影響力が私たちに留まるかについて話し合うつもりです[音楽]会話に戻りましょう。あなた方の何人かからいただいたメッセージです。債務上限について交渉しないことは自由で明確であるべきですが、もし交渉に臨むのであれば、今から税収をテーブルに乗せるようにしてください。私はジョー・バイデンを知っています。彼は債務上限を強引に押し通そうとしているだけだと思っているが、私は本当に持っていないお金を使うのをやめるべきだと本気で信じている、率直に言って債務危機問題から抜け出すことはできないし、今すぐにでも暴落して燃え尽きなければならないとしたら、少なくとも私たちはこの借金爆弾を子供や孫たちに引き渡すつもりはないので、議会のホワイトハウスが合意に達する日は刻一刻と迫っている 正確な日付は誰も知らないが、財務省は債務をカバーできない可能性があると推定している6月1日までにその義務を負う」あと2週間半です ちなみにウォーリー・アディエモは財務副長官です 彼はオバマ政権で上級顧問や首席補佐官副長官として財務省で働いたこともあります ここに来てくれてありがとう ここにいられてうれしいです来てくれてありがとう、だからさっき6月1日って言ったんだけど、ここら辺では「Xデート」って呼ばれる重要な期限なんだよ、Xデートとは一体何なの、そしてなぜXがいつ私たちに降りかかるかを正確に予測するのはそんなに難しいの、だから真実は米国政府なんだ私たちは毎日数十億ドルの請求書を支払い、毎日数十億ドルの税収やその他の収入も受け取っています。200年以上の歴史の中で私たちがしてきたことは、すべての請求書を期日通りに支払い、どの薬を飲むか決めていなかったことです。私たちはその日に支払いますので、率直に言って、これらの請求書を支払い続けるための資金が私たちにいつ来るかを予測するのは信じられないほど困難です。長官がやったことは、早ければ6月1日になる可能性があることを議会に通知する書簡を送ったことであり、彼女はそれらの請求書を維持することに尽力しています近づき次第、最新情報をお伝えしますが、率直に言って、私たちはここにいるべきではありません。最終的には、米国にはすべての請求書を支払う能力があります。初めて請求書を滞納する可能性について話し合う立場にあるべきではありません。我が国の200年以上の歴史の中で、だからこそ大統領は議会に対し、債務限度額をできるだけ早く引き上げるよう呼びかけ、前回の政権では交渉なしで3回も引き上げを行ったのだ、X日付が過ぎたら現実世界にどんな影響があるのか​​、試してみてほしい絵を描くとは思えない」照明が一斉に消えるのはおそらく当てはまらないでしょう 飛行機が空から落ちてくるとは思いませんが、もし米国が債務をすべて履行できなくなったら実際はどうなるでしょうか?私が来る前にあなたが流したいくつかのコメントについてですが、真実は、もし私たちが債務不履行になれば、私たちの子供たちにさらに悪い状況を与えることになるということだと思います。米国は義務を果たさない立場に立つことになるでしょう。つまり、例えば、d 社会保障受給者への支払いが期日通りにできない可能性がある 我が国の軍隊への支払いが期日通りにできない 国境を警備している人々に期日通りに支払いができない しかし、より根本的には、それはまた、財務省が基盤となっている我が国の金融市場が崩壊することを意味する。リーマン・ブラザーズよりもさらにひどい状況になるだろう 推定では、800万人近くの雇用が失われ、不況につながるだろうが、これはすべて経済が実際に成長している瞬間に起こるだろう先月は20万人以上の雇用を創出し、インフレは低下しているため、さまざまな意味で我が国の経済を軌道から狂わせ、世界経済を軌道から狂わせ、今後数週間だけでなく、米国に多大な影響を与えるだろう。何年も先のことだから、あなたはUのことを言いましたね。S 国債 T 紙幣 他の種類の国庫があることを簡単に説明すると、私にとってそれはどういう意味ですか。 米国国債は超超安全、本当に本当に信頼できるものであることはわかっています。 私が投資家なら、ああ、米国国債だと思います。必ず利益を得るつもりだ 100 X 日を過ぎたら計算は変わり始める はい、もし債務不履行になったら 世界で最も安全な投資と考えられているもの、そして 40 年間最も安全な投資は、米国は経済が好調で成長しているため、私たちは、アメリカ経済がリーダーであることを戦争世界に証明する多くの選択をしてきました。もしアメリカにお金を貸してくれた人々に対する義務を怠ったとしたら、それはもはや当てはまらないでしょう、それは、ああ、アメリカの人々が定期的に請求書の支払いを私たちに依存してきた人々は、それができなくなり、米国政府だけでなく、家を購入したい人や家を買う人にとっても借り入れコストが上昇する可能性があります。車を購入したい人や、融資を受けたい中小企業にとっては、今後はそれらのことを行うのにもはるかに費用がかかることになるでしょう。クリストファーからこのメッセージを受け取りました。」重要な質問ですが、債務不履行が債務を悪化させ、それを超えると世界のデフォルト通貨としてのドルの地位が脅かされて大惨事を招くというリスクに対処できますか。債務不履行は債務と赤字をさらに悪化させ、我が国の財政も悪化させるでしょう。経済が大幅に悪化するということは、人々が米国とドルに投資したがらなくなることを意味するだろう 根本的に米国が持っているのは、歴史を通じて常に期限通りに請求書を支払ってきたということだ 議会が引き上げた法案は、債務上限は創設されてから80倍近くに達しており、我々が行った投資によってこれを達成することで、米国は人々から信頼できる投資先とみなされるようになりました。」なぜ人々は国債を買いたがるのか、国債を買うのが我々にとって重要なのは、もし議会が債務上限を引き上げなければ、その全てが疑問視されることになるということだ。だから大統領は、我々はできない、いや、できるとはっきりと明言したのだ。」デフォルトをもてあそぶ最終的には、わが国の投資家だけでなく、金融市場だけでなく高齢者にも、働きに行った人々のことを考えていることを示し続けるために、デフォルトをテーブルから外し、債務限度額を引き上げなければなりません。何十年もの間、彼らは政府が彼らに約束したことを知りながら社会保障を支払ってきたが、大統領は私たちが政府に対する債務不履行や、国を守っている軍隊に対する債務不履行も望んでいないが、これも非常に重要であるだからそうなるだろう」金融市場にとっての大惨事であるだけではなく、もし米国が期日までに請求書を支払えなかったら、我々が約束したアメリカ人にとっても大惨事となるでしょう、財務副長官ウォーリー・アディエモ、副長官、私はさせてあげるつもりですちょっと待ってください お忙しいとは思いますが、この質問の準備はできています 財務省は、選択した額面でプラチナ コインを造幣することが法的に認められています この質問は前にも聞いたことがあると思いますが、造幣局に行くつもりですか1兆ドルのプラチナコイン、それは一種の冗談ですが、実際にはそうではありません、それは合法であり、人々は機能不全に陥った議会でこの危機から抜け出す方法を探しています、それで私はこれを長い間続けてきましたが、議会が債務制限を可決する必要があるという点に到達するたびに、誰かがそれを実現する方法について新しく創造的で興味深いアイデアを思いつきます。私が言えるのは、この点に到達するたびにということです債務上限を引き上げるために効果があった唯一のことは、議会が債務不履行を防止するために行動したことであり、彼らは歴史を通じて78回もそれを行ってきたが、その中には交渉もせずに、最後の政権の3回も含まれている、私が言えるのは、それが我々が唯一言えることだそれが米国の投資家に対する当社の信頼を維持することになる 私たちが約束した人々からの信頼は議会に債務上限を引き上げてもらうことである 私たちはそうするつもりはない、それが維持するために私たちができる唯一のことである借り手として、そして誰かとしての私たちの信頼性。大統領はアメリカ国民に対して根本的な約束をしてきたので、議会はできるだけ早くこれを行う必要があると明言しました。なぜなら昨日の時点でこの影響がすでに出ているからです。データを見たところ、ミシガン州の消費者心理調査では、消費者心理が打撃を受けたのは、アメリカ国民が政府が支払うべき請求書を支払うつもりかどうかを心配し始めたためであり、最終的に私たちがアメリカ国民に対して中小企業に対して示す鍵となるのは、議会が次のような措置を講じる必要があるということである。債務上限を引き上げ、債務不履行を阻止するためにできる行動は、ジャネット・イエレン財務長官が1兆ドルのプラチナコインを鋳造するつもりはないと述べ、ウォーリー・アダモ副長官は言う。1兆ドルのプラチナコインの鋳造には興味がありません この危機から抜け出すためのあの通りはおそらく差し押さえられていると思います ウォーリー・アダモ副長官 参加してくれてありがとう ペギーに何かしてもらってありがとう よく聞いたね私の印象に残ったことの中で、不景気に関連した彼のコメントは、重要な文脈だと思います。基本的に、これらすべてのタイミングが悪かったのです。それは、ブルームバーグの私たちを含め、多くの人が見ているという事実のせいでもあります。そして私たちのブルームバーグ経済部門は、今年下半期に景気後退が起こるかどうかについて議論している。ご存知の通り、連邦準備理事会はインフレを抑制するために金利を引き上げているが、それは債務上限の議論があったのかどうかに関係なく、経済に負担がかかっているので、もし私たちが不安定な時期に突入し、請求書を支払えなくなり、その結果として市場がパンクするような状況に陥る可能性があるのです。その結果、景気後退を本当に悪化させたり、加速させたりする可能性があります。ザックからこのメッセージを受け取りました。共和党員からは学生ローン免除に関するレトリックは二度と聞きません。共和党は無条件で自分の借金を返済する気はないのです。」することが期待されており、確かに彼らの信念は一貫しており、マシューは、なぜ誰も共和党が数年前に導入した減税とその国債への影響について話さないのかとメールで伝え、私たちはヘレンからこのことを聞いた バイデン大統領はこの問題を解決すべきだと聞いた憲法修正第 14 条を援用して債務限度額を引き上げることは、憲法修正第 14 条第 4 条に、米国の公的債務の有効性が定められており、重要な言葉は質問されるべきではない、そして恥ずかしがり屋のヘレンは、1兆ドルのプラチナコインとは別に重要なポイントを提起する 他の多くの人は、議会のことは忘れてください、この影響力のことは忘れてください、武器化のことは忘れてください、憲法修正第14条は明らかです、バイデン大統領はただ支払い続けてください借金 そのIDはどれくらい有効なのか バイデンはそれを検討しているというある種の当たり障りのない発言をしたと思います 彼が本当にそうなのかは知りませんが、その完全な開示がどれほど正当であるか 私は弁護士ではないので、私はそうしますこの法律のメリットを議論するつもりはありませんが、実際、この問題のより重要な部分は潜在的な経済的影響だと思いますし、率直に言ってそう思います」なぜ財務省はこれまでこの路線をとらなかったのか、そして今回もその可能性は低いのか 私たちが考えなければならないのは、財務省が一方的に一部の国の債務制限を無効にする行動をとった場合、市場や他の経済関係者はどう反応するのかということである。可能性としては、信用格付け会社が当社を格下げする可能性があり、財務省が発行している債務をめぐる法的な不透明さがあれば、財務省が最終的に勝訴する可能性が高くても、誰かが財務省に対して訴訟を起こす可能性があり、それが再び信用格付けを意味することになる。政府機関が格下げする可能性があるということは、投資家がより高い金利を要求する可能性が高いということを意味し、金融市場が反応する可能性が高く、経済主体が企業個人にどうなるかを判断することになるだろう」彼らはここで起こっていて、物事が南に進むのを見るだろうから身をかがめ始めている 私が最後に言いたいのは、この状況で財務省が問題に対処するために一方的な行動をとったため、この問題の政治も非常に困難であると思うということですこれなど、非常に急速に連鎖するような金融の破綻があれば、共和党が憲法違反か違法か、あるいは彼らが主張するどんな主張でもある一方的な行動によって何が引き起こされたのかを指摘して言うのは非常に簡単でしょう。そして私はそう思います。財務省が超党派ベースで議会で交渉する必要があると強調し続ける理由はここにある ステファニー 市場の健全性、そして債券価格市場全般は信頼に基づいている、それはある種基本的なことだとはわかっているが、それは」憲法修正第 14 条の策略や 1 兆ドルのプラチナ コインや債務不履行なしにこの危機を乗り越えたとしても、世界中の投資家が米国に注目し始め、彼らがそれを持っているかどうかわからないと言える段階まで来ているのはある意味真実ですあそこで一緒に、私のお金が思ったほど安全かどうかもわからないし、米国経済への投資が20年前に思ったほど良い賭けであるかどうかもわからない、ああ、それはそうだね、確かに世界的に恥ずかしいことだこのような状況に陥ることは想定内ですが、例えば今日の金融市場とこれまでの状況を見ると、つまり、1月のいつかに債務制限に達したということですので、私たちは数か月間監視してきましたが、金融市場は状況が悪化しているように見えます。多かれ少なかれ、この時点ではこのオフィスはほぼ通常通りに仕事をしているので、私がわかっていないことはわかります質問の答えが分からない 私の直感では、金融市場は投資家にとって十分賢明であり、これは米国で私たちがかなり定期的に行っていることのようなものであることを現時点で理解できるほど賢明であると思うでしょう自分自身を瀬戸際まで追い込んで、最後の瞬間に手を引いて、これまでいつもしてきたことをすることで、約束通りの支払いがうまくいくので、それが長期的な傷跡を残すかどうかはわかりませんが、確かにそうではありません理想的だし、やらなかったらよかったのに ステファニー、あなたはこれをやらないことについて擁護してきました 本質的に経済理論の新しい枠組みを擁護してきました それは連邦債務について率直に考えるために多くの進歩的な議員、経済学者、候補者によって採用されていますそして、赤字は少し違うのです」これはMMT現代貨幣理論と呼ばれていますが、それがこの議論にどのように関係していますか。これは関連性があります。なぜなら、あなたは今これらのクリップを再生したことを知っているでしょうし、クレジットカードを使い果たしたことを知っているというコメントをたくさん聞いたことがあるからです。したがって、MMTは、連邦政府が他の私たちとはまったく似ていないことを私たちに思い出させるという点で関連性があります。つまり、私たちが使用するこれらの比喩は、将来の世代に負担を与えたり、クレジットカードに借金を積み上げたりすることについて議員が好んで使用しますこれはアメリカ合衆国の連邦政府のような通貨発行政府にはまったく当てはまらないので、他の国民にはできないことを連邦政府はできると言っているので、うーん、役に立ちます。文字通り、お金を使っているのです。 「残りの私たちにはそれができないのです」それを使うためには通貨を手に入れなければならない、稼ぐか借りることができなければならない、あるいは誰かが私たちにそれを与えなければならない、連邦政府は米ドルを発行する、お金が尽きることは決してない、それができる買うものがなくなり、いつでも安全に使える金額には限界があるため、インフレは非常に現実的な制約ですが、政府は家計のようなものではありません。お金がなくなることはありません。私たちが話している債務上限とデフォルトの可能性について支払う余裕がないという請求に直面していることはご存知でしょうが、それを実行するとしたら非自発的なデフォルトではなく自発的なデフォルトになるでしょう、それは私たちの選択になります。」ストーニーブルック大学の経済学・公共政策教授ステファニー・ケルトン氏は、連邦政府は食卓のようなものではないと、世界中の政治メッセンジャーやプレスリリースライターに戦争を仕掛けているそれはあなたの家計のようなものではありません お金を使うためにお金を得る必要はありません パラダイムシフトが起こると、ああ、あなたは多くの政治メッセンジャーを仕事から追い出すことになるでしょう ステファニー もしそれが定着したら、人々はこれを使っているので国の借金はビザカードのようなもので、彼らはそれを効果的に利用しているという考えです。つい先ほども議会の議長がそうしているのを聞いたような気がします」連邦債務制限について、レバレッジについて、そして連邦債務制限をめぐるこの最新の対立で私たち全員がどこへ向かうのかについて、もっと詳しく話す予定です。私たちが話しているのは、ブルームバーグとの「ライフ・イン」と呼ばれる一週間のシリーズの一部です。借金が迫ってきているので、債務上限の膠着状態の解決策について話し合い、これを続ける必要があるかどうかを尋ねます。もう少ししたらまた戻りますので、お付き合いください [音楽] このメッセージで会話に戻りましょうレオン・パネッタ国防長官は回想録に値する戦いの中で、2011年と並行してあるセクターから、カナダは同様の真剣なリーダーシップの欠如の下で議会がどのようにしてデフォルトの深淵に向かって漂流していったかを述べており、最終的には議会のミシガン州のマリアンヌがそのメッセージをくれたおかげで、彼の恥ずべき行為は予算の差し押さえに発展し、国防と同様に最終的な政府プログラムの全面的な大幅削減に発展した、そして起こったことはそれだけではない、私はそこにいたし、自分自身と少し付き合っているが、基準による格下げもあり、米国国債の価値は最悪でした。歴史上初めて、AAAからダブルAプラス、そしてダブルAプラスへと現実世界に影響を与えました。悪くないと思いますが、あなたがアメリカ人ならAAAが唯一の進むべき道です 議会とホワイトハウスについてどう思いますか この連邦債務上限について彼らは何をすべきだと思いますか 電子メールは1A wamu.org まあ、共和党議員らは連邦支出は重要だと繰り返し主張している削減する必要があるので、インフレ上昇の一因となっている この議論は新しいものではないが、インフレは現在非常に非常に高く、この議論は新たな注目を集めている ユタ州選出の共和党上院議員マイク・リーが5月初めに記者会見で話している ああ、人々は苦しんでいるユタ州では過去2年半にわたるインフレの抑圧的なくびきの下で、これは平均的な家庭が基本的な生活必需品のために毎月追加で1000ドルを支出していることを意味しており、これはすべて予測可能な予測可能な結果であり、実際に予測された結果です。連邦政府の過剰支出の問題を解決するのは難しい ユタ州のステファニー・マイク・リー氏は、例えば食料品店で鶏肉が1ポンド6.99ポンドの値段になっているのは連邦政府の過剰支出が原因だと言っていますよね?新しいことではないが、現在インフレが非常に非常に高く、その議論が新たに注目を集めている。ユタ州選出の共和党上院議員マイク・リーが記者会見で話している。5月初旬、人々はインフレという抑圧的なくびきの下で苦しんできた。ユタ州では過去2年半、これは平均的な家庭が基本的な生活必需品のために毎月追加で1000ドルを支出していることを意味しており、これはすべて予見可能であり、実際に予見された結果であり、社会の安定を達成しようとする過剰な連邦支出の結果である。対応は難しい ユタ州のステファニー・マイク・リーさんは、例えば食料品店で鶏肉が1ポンド6.99ポンドであるのは過剰な連邦支出のせいだと言ってますよね?新しいことではないが、現在インフレが非常に非常に高く、その議論が新たに注目を集めている。ユタ州選出の共和党上院議員マイク・リーが記者会見で話している。5月初旬、人々はインフレという抑圧的なくびきの下で苦しんできた。ユタ州では過去2年半、これは平均的な家庭が基本的な生活必需品のために毎月追加で1000ドルを支出していることを意味しており、これはすべて予見可能であり、実際に予見された結果であり、社会の安定を達成しようとする過剰な連邦支出の結果である。対応は難しい ユタ州のステファニー・マイク・リーさんは、例えば食料品店で鶏肉が1ポンド6.99ポンドであるのは過剰な連邦支出のせいだと言ってますよね?ユタ州選出の共和党上院議員マイク・リーは、5月初旬に記者会見で語った。ユタ州では過去2年半にわたり、人々はインフレというひどいくびきに苦しんできた。これは、平均的な家庭が1人あたり追加で1000ドルを支出していることを意味している。毎月、基本的な生活必需品を賄うのはこれだけであり、これに対処するのは困難な連邦政府の過剰支出の予見可能な結果であり、実際に予見された結果である ユタ州のステファニー・マイク・リー氏は、鶏肉の価格が6.99ドルである理由は過剰な連邦支出であると述べている。たとえば食料品店でポンドを言うのは正しいですか?ユタ州選出の共和党上院議員マイク・リーは、5月初旬に記者会見で語った。ユタ州では過去2年半にわたり、人々はインフレというひどいくびきに苦しんできた。これは、平均的な家庭が1人あたり追加で1000ドルを支出していることを意味している。毎月、基本的な生活必需品を賄うのはこれだけであり、これに対処するのは困難な連邦政府の過剰支出の予見可能な結果であり、実際に予見された結果である ユタ州のステファニー・マイク・リー氏は、鶏肉の価格が6.99ドルである理由は過剰な連邦支出であると述べている。たとえば食料品店でポンドを言うのは正しいですか?たとえば食料品店では1ポンド99ですよね?たとえば食料品店では1ポンド99ですよね?たとえば食料品店では1ポンド99ですよね?たとえば食料品店では1ポンド99ですよね?


ケルトン:
いいえ、彼は正しくありません、財政赤字が大きくなりすぎてインフレ圧力に寄与する可能性は確かにありますが、覚えているかもしれない記録上最も急速なクリップで財政赤字が減少していたことを覚えておいてくださいバイデン大統領は、私が議長を務めていることを知っていると言いました米国史上最も急速な連邦財政赤字の削減をめぐって。
現在それが起こっているのは、もちろん経済が非常に力強く回復しており、雇用市場が非常に好調で、支出が非常に高いためです。GDP成長率が非常に高かったため、税収が増加し、弱い経済を支えるための支出が増えたため、赤字は極めて自然に減少していました。誰もが欲しがる大打撃を受けた経済は落ち込んでいるが、連邦準備制度の利上げを聞いてください、この積極的な利上げが財政赤字を再び押し上げているのです。
したがって、議会予算局の最新の報告書を見ると、連邦財政赤字が今後 10 年間でどの程度になるかについての推定を修正し、部分的には次の理由により赤字がさらに拡大すると予測していることがわかります。 FRBの利上げ 利上げは増加する予定です CBOは、ええと今後5年間で利息に6,880億ドルを支出すると述べていますが、これはそうでなければ我々が費やしたであろう金額に追加されますが、利上げにより財務省はより多くの支払いを余儀なくされていますすべての債券保有者に利益をもたらします。
 これについてはずっと話してきましたが、ご存知のとおり、これは人々が振り向いて使えるより多くのお金を手に入れる可能性があるので、リー上院議員がインフレと連邦支出を心配しているのであれば、その影響について考えるべきかもしれません利上げ自体のこと。

 利上げについて言えば、シア、あなたは過去にジェローム・パウエルFRB議長と緊密に仕事をしたことがありますよね、彼と緊密に仕事をしてきたあなたは、おそらくこれらの金利の高みだけでなく、その逆効果についても私たちのほとんどよりよく理解しているでしょう。ステファニーがインフレについて話しているのは、財務省がこれらのより高い金利に対応しなければならないことについてです。その議論はすべて少し混乱する可能性がありますが、ジェローム・パウエルが私たちがどこまで進んでいるのかについてあなたの洞察力が何であるかをよく知っています。経済の利上げは進んでいますが、債務上限に関するまさにこの議論への影響も確かにあります。私は少し異なる視点を持っています。FEDが今利上げをしている理由は、もちろん、私たちが非常に利上げしてきたからだと思います過去 12 年 18 か月の高いインフレ、そしてそのインフレの一部は、今の物欲しさに応じて行われた連邦支出によって引き起こされたものであることを誤解しないでください。連邦支出の多くは、私たちをあの不況から抜け出すために絶対に必要でしたが、ほとんどのエコノミストは経済に注入された金額は少なくともある程度過剰であり、完全に貢献したわけではないが、インフレへの影響に貢献したという点で同意する。過去 12 ~ 18 か月にわたって見られてきたことなので、FED が現在行っていることは、経済を減速させようとする利上げで対応し、価格の過熱を遅らせ、インフレは現在ある程度の進歩を見せているようです約9%から4〜5%の範囲にあるが、おそらく彼らは少なくとも様子見する必要があるだろうし、絶対に起こってほしくないことをさらに行う必要があるかもしれないと思う パウエル議長らはどうなるのかFEDが事実上勝利を宣言したり、自分たちが主張したりすることを望んでいない。十分なことをしたのにインフレが上昇し続けるのは、それが再びインフレと戦うFEDの信頼性を損ない、物価上昇を追いかける終わりのないサイクルに陥る可能性があるからです ペギー FRBはもし対応するとしたらどのように対応しますか債務制限をめぐる現在の対立は、この点で彼らが役割を果たしている、彼らは一種の一歩下がって、これをうまくやらないでと黙って手を振っているようなものである、FRB議長の友人は、この前の最後のFRB決定と同じくらい最近、このことについて直接質問されている彼は、FED における私の権限を、この状況で政府がしなければならないことと誤解しないでください、FED は、私たちが支払いの一部を滞納し始めた場合に起こり得る災害から経済を救うことはできない、とはっきりと言いました。彼は私たちと同じようにとてもはっきりしていました」ここからあなたを救い出すことはできないでしょう 私はあなたの救命いかだではありません 誰かを助けるために私に目を向けないでください ビル・ミルから興味深いメールを受け取りました 部屋にいる本当の象は軍事費であると言います これが必要なことです削減されるべきだ 軍事費を削減する方法を見つける必要がある 軍事費にはそれほど多くの支出は必要ない この法案は興味深い点を提起しています それはええと、番組の中で少し前に話しましたね ここで話しているのは 1つのことだけですそれは、私たちが井戸のフードスタンプや道路、退役軍人の医療費に費やしているような裁量的支出と呼ばれるものです。私たちは大きなことについて話しているのではありません。実際に債務を増大させる大きなことについて話しているのではありません。メディケア、メディケイド、社会保障の防衛、そして私たちは絶対に話していないはずです。税金、私たちのような気がするこの人質状況では経済界のトップに大きな銃が突きつけられているのに、政策の面でも現実味を帯びていないのです、つまり、あなたが言っているのは、なぜこの状況全体がこれほど破綻しているのかということについて正確に話しているのです。予算をめぐって議論している 双方とも受給権プログラムについて話すことを宣誓した 一般教書演説で大統領が全員を立ち上がらせて歓声を上げているのを見た 社会保障には触れていないと言おう 私たちは触れていないしたがって、権利は検討の対象になっていません。あなたが言ったように税金は検討の対象になっていません。そこで、私たちがここで議論しているのは予算のごく一部です。」なぜ本当にパラダイムの変化が必要なのか、議会で予算プロセスを行う必要があり、重要なプログラムは見直しと議論の対象となり、将来がどうなるか、もちろん税法についても検討する必要があります。もちろん私たちは議論するだけです。税法については10年に1回程度だが、経済活動を維持するには十分ではないことが多い 2017年には減税があり、その多くは2025年に期限切れとなるが、次に税金が議論の対象となるのはおそらくその時だろう。予算の収入面を考慮せずに 8 年も続けるのですか、
ステファニー、私たちは本当にこれを行う必要があるのか​​どうか、債務制限が必要なのかについて話し続けています。あなたがノーと答えたことと、債務に関する私たちの枠組み全体についてはかなり明確だったと思いますそして赤字のときは』mmtによると米国政府は本当に再考する必要がある 現代金融理論は本当に再考する必要がある あなたはよく言ったね ジェローム・パウエルFED議長 私たちは彼のことをずっと話してきた 彼はここでこれについて言及した 彼は国会議事堂でmmtについて話している えー、ほんの数年前自国通貨で借り入れができる国にとって赤字は問題ではないという考え方は、私は間違っていると思います。米国の債務はGDPの水準でかなり高いと思いますが、それよりもはるかに重要なことは、GDPをかなり上回るペースで成長していることです。人々が FED を一種の役割として利用することについて話している程度は、我々の役割は特定の政策への支援を提供することではなく、それが目的であることはご存知でしょう。」どこの中央銀行も、ええと、それは最大雇用と安定した物価を達成しようとしているのです、ステファニー・ケルトン議長パウエルは1Aに関するこの議論を聞いていて、あなたと一言聞きたいのですが、よく聞いてください。私たちが必要としているのはパラダイムシフトであり、財政赤字に対処するために引用せずに、歳出削減か増税か、あるいはその二つの組み合わせを行う必要があるかどうかについての議論をはるかに超えて進む必要があると思います。それと借金について、私たちはまったく異なる質問をする必要があると思います。たとえば、なぜ私たちは借金の赤字に対処しようとしているのですか、なぜ私たちはこれらが対処する必要がある問題だとそんなに確信しているのですか、それでは見てください、私は言いますこれはすべての赤字が誰かにとって良いことです、それでいいのです」この点は、あまりにも見逃されがちだと思います。なぜなら、人々はこの赤字という言葉を聞くと、すぐにネガティブなことを思い浮かべてしまう、使い古された言葉だからです。何か良いことが起こっていると言っている文章の中で赤字という言葉を使う人は誰もいないので、これは重要だと思いますこれが実際に何であるかを人々に理解してもらうために、いわゆる連邦赤字は2つの数字の差にすぎず、それがすべてであり、数字の1つは支出を指しており、それは政府が毎年何ドルを国民の手に渡しているのかを示しているとしようもう一つの数字は歳入であり、政府が毎年国民の手から何ドルを差し引いているかということなので、政府が差し引く額よりも多く足すときは、100を使って90しか税金が戻ってこないと言っているのですが、それを赤字だと決め付けていますが、私たちが忘れているのは、政府が100を投入して90だけ戻ってきた場合、誰かが10を保持することになるということです。言い換えれば、これを私たちは政府の赤字と呼んでいます。それは実際には財政的貢献であり、経済的な観点から見ると、経済の他の部分への預金である。すべての赤字は誰かにとって良いことである。問題は、その赤字が誰のために、何のために運営されているのか、主に国民に棚ぼたを送るために使われているのかということである。最上層部の人たちは、たとえば2017年の共和党減税のように、あるいはそれが教育、インフラ、医療、その他への投資に使われているので、私たちの国民的な会話は非常に壊れていると思います、そして私はそう思います。」私自身の仕事でやろうとしたのは、議論を再構成して、課税と支出をめぐる問題について、より生産的な議論ができるようにすることですが、焦点を絞らず、家庭のように予算を組むべきだという信念を持たないことです。
ステファニー・ケルトンマトリックスのネオのような気分になった 赤字について最初に理解すべきことは、赤字など存在しない、現実ではないということだ、そうすれば世界、経済界、債務世界の本当の姿がわかるようになる、それがステファニー・ケルトンだストーニーブルック大学のペギー・コリンズとブルームバーグとシェイ・アカバスと話しています超党派政策センターの非営利団体の皆さんとごめんなさい、何か重要なことについて話さなければなりません。なぜなら先週、非常に中傷されたCNNタウンホールで私たちはそれを見ていたからです。そして、私たちは'今はメディアで議論するつもりはないが、トランプ前大統領はニュースを作り、いくつかの重要なニュースを発表し、基本的に国会議事堂で共和党員に向けたメッセージを述べた。これはデフォルトをするという言葉だと思うが、もしあなたがデフォルトをするならデフォルトを検討すべきだこの交渉では民主党から1ポンドも肉を引き出すことはできないケイトリン・コリンズは、それは危険に聞こえると言いました、そして彼は、ああ、それはすべて心理的なものです、悪いかもしれません、悪くないかもしれません、ある種のトランプ的な答えだと私はそれを非常に真剣に受け止めました特に下院共和党議員に対しては瀬戸際を越えることを検討するようシグナルとして送っており、彼らは基本的に党首、間違いなく最有力候補のペギーからゴーサインを得ているが、我々が非常に近づいているという意味で、確実に熱が高まっている。そのX日まで私たちは6月1日について、私たちは請求書の一部の支払いが困難になり始める可能性があると話してきましたが、あなたが言ったように、トランプ大統領に同調している共和党員の一部がそう感じるかどうかは関係あります。もっと勇気を出してそこまでいきたいと思いますが、ブルームバーグで報道しているので、大統領とマッカーシー下院議長、その他の指導者たちが再会することを期待しているという意味で、ここで少し前向きな気持ちを注入する必要があると思います。明日は明日だ、とスタッフが言っていて、我々も週末の間に進展があったと報告してきたので、明日はまた重要な日が控えているが、ここに問題がある、そして私は」恥ずかしながら、ここに来る前にもう一つだけ付け加えておきますが、ミッチ・マコネルはここ数週間のうちのある時点で、ケビン・マッカーシーとジョー・バイデンが合意に達した時点でこの問題は解決されるだろうと言いましたが、実際にはそうではありません。これは合意が得られるときに解決されるでしょう。下院共和党で可決され、私にとってそれが、トランプ前大統領の声明が、下院共和党会議の一部の過激派議員にとって非常に危険な青信号だった理由であり、彼らはホワイトハウスで最終決定権を得ることができないこのことに最終的には賛成票を投じなければならないのである。ええと、瀬戸際を越えるために彼らに青信号を灯すのですが、最初に2点だけ言わせてください。私はここでのレトリックが実質を支配していると思います。それは問題です。なぜなら、双方が自分たちを自分たちの思い通りの線に閉じ込めてしまっているからです。」彼らにとってそれを越えるのは非常に困難であり、それがトランプ大統領によって主導されているのか、それともバイデン大統領が両者を同等ではないと述べた言葉を引用しているのかはわかりませんが、彼らはコーナーに身を置いているという本質はかなり単純だと思います、ここでは双方が到達できる場所がありますペギーが言ったように、物事が正しい方向に進んでいることを願っていますが、私が言いたいもう一つの点は、デフォルトをすること、あるいはデフォルトに陥ることは、我が国の歴史の中でまったく前例のないことであることをアメリカ人は理解する必要があると思います。それが何を意味するかはわかりませんが、実際にはアメリカの全世帯に影響を与える壊滅的な結果につながる可能性があります。この本当に重要な、時には混乱を招く、しかし非常に重要な議論に参加してくれた皆さんに感謝したいと思います。」非常に重要な何かに再び向かう シャヤカバス 非営利超党派政策センター経済政策ディレクター ペギー・コリンズ ブルームバーグワシントン支局長、ステファニー・ケルトン ストーニーブルック経済学・公共政策教授 ニューヨーク・タイムズのベストセラー「現代の赤字神話」の著者でもある貨幣理論MMTと人民経済の誕生 内気なペギー・ステファニー、お時間を割いていただき誠にありがとうございます 先ほどウォーリー・アディアモ副長官からもお話を伺い、時間を割いていただいたことに感謝いたします ブルームバーグの人生と借金に関するシリーズは今週も続きます今日はクレジットカードの負債と、家計を管理するために何ができるかについて見ていきます。今日は医療負債と学生ローンについても取り上げます。」プロデューサーはクリス・レミントンでした この番組はワシントンのアメリカン大学の WAMU 部門からお届けします NPR が配信しています 私はトッド・ズウィリックです ホワイト将軍のために副ニュースを担当しています 参加してくれて本当にありがとう これは 1A [音楽] 外国語 [音楽] [拍手] [音楽] 

01
foreign [Music]
0:08leaders are set to meet with President Biden again as negotiations over raising the nation's debt limit continue the
0:15treasury Department warns that the U.S could default on its debts if an agreement isn't reached as soon as June
0:201st and there could be dire consequences for the U.S economy and financial markets across the globe the federal
0:27debt ceiling has been in place for more than a hundred years but raising the debt limit has been the subject of
0:32conflicts between Congressional leaders in the White House consistently only over the past decade or so it's also a
0:38big issue with a lot of you Kevin McCarthy is talking about cutting
0:44the national debt I suggest all elected officials take a salary deduction but I
0:51truly believe that we need to stop spending money we don't have the debt
0:56ceiling is the debt ceiling if they want to talk about the budget they can do that do that by the appropriate time
1:01so how could a federal government default impact your job and your retirement do we really need a federal
1:09debt limit at all we're launching a new series in partnership with Bloomberg it's called life and debt we're going to
1:15talk about credit cards student loans medical debt and a lot more after the break we start the series by taking a
1:21look at the federal debt limit I'm Todd willick from Vice news in for Jen white you're listening to the 1A podcast where
1:27we get to the heart of the story we've got a lot to get to so stay with us thank you
1:37joining us in studio is Peggy Collins she's the Washington bureau chief at Bloomberg News Peggy thanks so much for
1:43being here today hi there also with me in studio is Shai akabas he's the director of the economic policy a
1:50director of Economic Policy rather at the non-profit by bipartisan policy Center shy thanks for being here thanks
1:56son and on the line from Long Island in New York is Stephanie Kelton she's a professor of economics and public policy
2:03at Stony Brook University she's also author of The New York Times bestseller the deficit myth modern monetary Theory
2:10and the birth of the people's economy she was a senior economic advisor to Senator Bernie Sanders presidential
2:16campaign Stephanie great to have you here great to be with all of you so Peggy let's do some Basics Congress has
2:23raised or suspended the debt limit almost 80 times since 1960 up until the
2:28last decade for the most part it was raised more or less routinely what
2:34changed well I think the politics change somewhat significantly we see a lot more
2:39Rancor on the hill and we've seen the debt limit become somewhat of a political football but what's happening
2:46right now Todd is that that metaphor metaphor of it being a political football really doesn't seem to do the
2:52trick because it of the gravity of what could happen if we really don't reach a compromise it could really affect
2:57businesses big and small people and The credibility of the US government and our
3:03markets worldwide football is something that's played on a field between two sides this is heavier and more important
3:10than a football but is it a football anymore I think it's more like a gun at this point well it has been weaponized
3:16as you're talking about in terms of people really on Capitol Hill saying you know what we're going to use this moment
3:24of the debt ceiling to demand in this case spending cuts for example and there
3:29is a lot of debate there but I do think to your point you know the American people are looking for our leaders to do
3:37what we do by by Design in the US which is have a government where lots of people come together and and come to a
3:42compromise or a consensus and what we're seeing right now is a lot of back and forth where people are saying we may not
3:48do that and that's where investors are Mark and markets are really starting to sit up and think about it and we're
3:54going to talk about the impact on markets and investors too one more question for you about this though in 2011 after another debt limit
4:00confrontation initiated by Republicans as this one has been when President Obama was in office then minority leader
4:07in the Senate Mitch McConnell you've heard of him he said what we learned from this and this is a quote that the debt image debt limit is a hostage
4:14that's worth ransoming what was he talking about there and how is that attitude playing out today well I think
4:21that that rhetoric is what people are thinking about is that can you you know hold the government kind of in a way
4:28that they are that backed up against a wall you know Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen has said to Congress we
4:35aren't going to be able to pay our our debts by as soon as June 1st so it's
4:40essentially sort of coming up to the brink of whether or not we're able to pay our bills which lots of people in
4:46America know what that's like and the importance and responsibility around that and people saying you know what we
4:52may go over the cliff there because we want certain other things and if you don't we're going to put markets at risk
4:59there and regular Americans as well so Stephanie the debt limit was established more than a hundred years ago during
5:05World War One under the second Liberty Bond act 1917 old history why was the
5:11debt limit created in the first place I mean the Constitution says Congress has
5:16the sole power of the purse doesn't say what does actually talk about debt that it can't be violated but why do you even
5:23need this thing well it was actually created if you can believe this to make
5:28it easier for the executive branch to carry out the spending that had been
5:34authorized by Congress so here we are today we tend to think of the debt
5:39ceiling limit I think as some kind of intentional way to obstruct government
5:44spending and that isn't uh the original purpose at all it was because during
5:50World War One uh Congress decided that it was just going to be way too
5:55cumbersome too messy to have to give specific instructions to the treasury Department about what type of instrument
6:03it could issue T bills very short-term government securities longer term how
6:09many of this kind and that kind because that's the way it was originally done Congress was very involved in the
6:16decision making and you know they decided look we want to give the executive branch discretion to decide
6:22for itself when and how many instruments of different maturities to issue to
6:28facilitate mostly the war spending but other spending as well and so we'll just
6:33put a limit you know way up high so that they have plenty of room to maneuver and
6:40it just became something else entirely over time I mean did they're not quite founding fathers in 1917 but those
6:47ancient great grandpas and most of them were grandpas at the time did they ever Envision Stephanie when they were going
6:53through this exercise in 1917 that they would be essentially putting a gun in in the
6:59hands of one political party to exercise leverage and and threaten the economy
7:05this they were uh this was a political expedient right and it was a
7:10bipartisan effort and the understanding was that you know the country was at War
7:15and they weren't playing games they were looking out for the best interest of the country and wanted to win the war and
7:22wanted to make sure that the government uh had the could be nimble and could uh
7:28you know facilitate all of the spending that was going to be required to carry out uh the the war effort shy the
7:35bipartisan policy Center has been working with members of Congress over the past 15 years this isn't your first
7:41your first go-around with with the leveraging of the debt limit I hear rhetoric from lawmakers all the time
7:47about you know if your kid is overspending on the credit card you have to cut up the credit card I get the
7:53rhetoric a lot of it completely probably intentionally misunderstands what the
7:58debt limit even is but in your conversations with lawmakers do they get
8:03it do they know what the debt limit is and and the risk of use using it as as
8:10really um as really catastrophic leverage in this way I think most of them do I want to take a
8:16step back though and the reason we're in the predicament that we are is because the budget process in Congress is
8:22fundamentally broken pretty much everybody agrees on that it's been broken for decades we almost never go through the process as it's been
8:28intended and appropriate funding for the annual programs in advance meaning no government shutdown no continuing
8:35resolution which means we're not doing the job this year we're just going to do last year's levels for this year all of
8:40those are sort of elements of the breakdown of this process and the reason that we end up with the debt limit being
8:45the end-all and be all of budget negotiations is because there's no other time to do that so even in the annual budget process if it were working
8:52effectively there isn't really a time to talk about taxes entitlements all those that doesn't mean that the debt limit
8:57should be used this way but that's the reason we have to look back at the reason why we end up in this place I mean because there's no other time to
9:03have that conversation there is you're the expert and I and I I think that's not wrong but we're in this situation
9:09not because the budget process is broken we're in it because of the choices that people are making the debt limit was
9:15raised three times by Congressional Republicans When Donald Trump was president with none of this now Donald
9:21Trump is not President Joe Biden is President and we're in this conversation these this is not a broken budget process these are choices so we can
9:28certainly go back and argue budget hypocrisy and I think there is there's plenty of that to go around we've certainly seen members of the Republican
9:34Party care about deficits more when there's Democrat in office I think that's inarguable but if even under
9:40President Trump there were discussions about the budget in the context of the debt limit so it's not new that we have
9:45had these negotiations around the debt limit frankly I don't think we should be and I'm happy to talk about a reform proposal that we've put out there the
9:51bipartisan policy Center that would de-risk the debt limit and take away the brinksmanship that we see and replace it with a much more sane process but the
9:58fact of the matter is we have had these discussions around the budget and the debt limit for many years and so this is
10:03not a new thing albeit it is continuing to be a very dangerous thing for it some of the tax the tactics are relatively
10:09new and that's what's so troubling about it well here's the Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy who is leading House Republicans he's been focusing this
10:17discussion strictly on federal spending listen would it be wrong to put some
10:22control remember what we're talking about a debt ceiling is like your your child having a credit card we reached
10:28the limit we're responsible for paying it but would you just raise the limit without seeing how you're spending your
10:35money that's all we're talking about all right Stephanie the strange thing here is that some big spending items are not
10:42even on the table Medicare Social Security defense spending these are the big things that are driving
10:48um at least on the spending Side Federal deficits so so what are we actually talking about when it comes to spending
10:54doesn't drive the deficit um look when when speaker McCarthy says
10:59you know we want to take a look at how we're spending our money of course he has that opportunity every year I worked
11:06for a period of time as the chief Economist for the Democrats on the U.S Senate budget committee and as I recall uh we revisit the federal budget on an
11:14annual basis so there is ample opportunity for lawmakers in Congress to
11:20consider how they're spending money so to speak uh what you know this is we
11:25started this conversation off talking about a political football and I think that you know you're tapping into
11:32exactly the right line of argument well Stephanie you hold the football for one second because we're going to get back
11:37to that game sorry to cut you off but we have an official from the U.S department of the treasury on hold it's going to
11:43talk to us next about how treasury views the X date and all this leverage stay with us [Music]
11:53let's get back to the conversation with some messages that we got from some of you not negotiate the debt ceiling it
12:00should be free and clear but if you are going to go into negotiations make sure
12:06that tax revenue is on the table now I know Joe Biden thinks he's just going to
12:13force the debt ceiling through but I truly believe that we need to stop
12:19spending money we don't have quite frankly we cannot cut our way out of our
12:26debt crisis issue and if we have to crash and burn right now at least we
12:32won't hand this debt bomb off to our children and grandchildren so the date for the White House in
12:39Congress to reach an agreement is fast approaching nobody knows the exact date but the treasury Department is
12:45estimating that it could fail to cover its debt obligations as soon as June 1st
12:51that's in two and a half weeks by the way Wally adiemo is the Deputy Secretary of the Treasury he's also worked at
12:56treasury in the Obama Administration as a senior advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff deputy secretary thanks for being
13:03here it's good to be here with you thanks for having me so I just mentioned June 1st it's a critical deadline around here
13:09it's called The X date what exactly is the X date and why is it so difficult to
13:15predict exactly when the X falls on us so the truth is the United States
13:20government pays billions of dollars of bills every day and also receives billions of dollars in tax receipts and
13:27other revenues every day and for our more than 200 year history what we've
13:32done is we paid every bill on time and we haven't decided which pills we pay on which day so it's incredibly hard to
13:40predict which day we will frankly no longer have the resources to continue to pay those bills what the secretary has
13:46done is she sent a letter to Congress notifying them that that could be as early as June 1st and she's committed to
13:51keeping them up to date as we get closer but frankly we shouldn't be here ultimately the United States has the
13:57ability to pay all its bills we shouldn't be in a position where we're talking about potentially defaulting on our bills for the first time in our more
14:04than 200 year history and that's why the president has called on Congress to raise the debt limit as quickly as
14:10possible which they did three times in the last Administration without negotiations what are the real world
14:16implications if the X date is passed um try to paint a picture I don't think
14:21it's that like the lights go out all at once probably not the case I don't think that airplanes fall out of the sky but
14:27what does it really look like if the U.S starts to not meet all of its debt obligations I heard your I heard about
14:34some of the comments that you played um before I came on and I think the truth is that if we were to default on our
14:40debt we would be handing our children a worse situation um because what would happen is that for
14:46the first time in history the United States would be in a position where we didn't meet our obligations that would
14:52mean that for example we'd be unable to pay social security recipients potentially on time be unable to pay our
14:58troops on time be unable to pay the people who are securing the border on time but more fundamentally it would
15:05also mean that our financial markets for which treasuries are the Bedrock would be roiled in such a way that it would be
15:11worse than Lehman Brothers the estimate is that it would cost us somewhere in the neighborhood of 8 million jobs and
15:17lead to a recession this would all be happening at a moment where the economy is actually growing we created more than
15:23200 000 jobs last month and inflation's coming down so it would in lots of ways
15:29throw our economy off track and throw the global economy off track in a way that would impact America a great deal
15:34not just for the next several weeks but for years to come so you mentioned U.S
15:39treasuries T bills there are other kinds of treasuries simplify that for me just a little bit what does that mean U.S
15:45treasuries I know that they're super super safe really really reliable Investments if I'm an investor I say oh
15:52a U.S treasury I'm definitely gonna get my return 100 does that calculus start
15:58to change if we go past the X date yes if we were to default on our debt what
16:03is considered in the world the safest investment and four decades the safest investment has been
16:10investing in the United States because our economy is strong and it's growing
16:15and we've made a number of choices that demonstrate to the war world that the United States economy is a leader if we
16:21were to default on our obligations to the people who have loaned US money that would no longer be the case it would
16:27mean that um people who have relied on us to pay our bills on a regular basis would no
16:35longer be able to do that which would likely raise the cost of borrowing for not only the United States government
16:41but for people who want to buy their houses buy a house or someone who wants to buy a car or for small businesses
16:46that want to get a loan it would make it far more expensive to do those things as well going forward well we got this
16:52message from Christopher it's an important question can you address the risk that default would make the debt
16:57worse and beyond that would invite catastrophe by threatening the dollar status as the global default currency
17:04the a default on our debt would make our debts and deficits worse it would also
17:10make the economy worse in significant ways which would mean that people would
17:15be less likely to want to invest in the United States and the dollar fundamentally the thing the United
17:22States has is that for our entire history we have always paid our bills on
17:28time Congress has raised the debt limit nearly 80 times um since it's been created and by doing
17:35this by making the Investments we've made the United States has been seen as a credible invest investment by people
17:42and that's why people have been willing to buy treasuries um treasuries the key for us is that if
17:49Congress doesn't raise the debt limit all of that would be put in question that's why the president's made really
17:54clear that we can't um we can't toy with default ultimately we have to take default off the table
18:01and raise the debt limit in order to continue to demonstrate not just to people who are investors in our country
18:08not just the financial markets but also to seniors think about people who went to work for decades and they paid into
18:15Social Security knowing the government had made a commitment to them the president doesn't want us to default on
18:21our debt to them either or default on our debt to our troops who are defending our country which is also critically
18:27important so it wouldn't only be a catastrophe for financial markets it'd be a catastrophe for the Americans who
18:32we've made commitments to if the United States was unable to pay its bills on time Deputy treasury secretary Wally
18:38adiemo uh deputy secretary I'm going to let you go in just a minute I know you're busy but I know you're prepared
18:43for this question treasury is legally authorized to Mint Platinum coins in any
18:49denomination it chooses I know you've heard this question before but are you
18:54going to Mint the trillion dollar platinum coin it's kind of a joke but actually it isn't it's legal and people
19:02are looking for ways out of this crisis in a dysfunctional Congress so I've been doing this for a long time
19:09and each time we get to a point where Congress needs to pass the debt limit someone has a new creative interesting
19:15idea on how we can do it what I can tell you is that each time we reach this point the only thing that has worked to
19:22lift the debt limit has been for Congress to act to prevent default and they've done it 78 times throughout
19:28history including three times the last Administration without without negotiating what I can tell you is the
19:35only thing that we can do that will maintain our credibility for investors in the United States our
19:43credibility with the people who we've made commitments to is for Congress to raise the debt limit we're not going
19:49that is the only thing that we can do that will maintain our credibility as a borrower and also somebody who's made
19:55commitments to the American people so fundamentally the president's made clear
20:00that Congress needs to do this as soon as possible because we're already seeing the impact of this in yesterday day I
20:07looked at the data and the Michigan survey of consumer sentiment showed the consumer sentiment had taken a hit
20:13because the American people were starting to worry about whether the government is going to pay the bills that it owes and ultimately the key for
20:19us to demonstrate to the American people to our small businesses is that Congress needs to take the actions that they can
20:25which is raising the debt limit and preventing default treasury secretary Janet Yellen says she's not going to
20:31Mint the trillion dollar platinum coin the deputy secretary Wally Adamo says he's not interested in minting the
20:36trillion dollar platinum coin I think that that Avenue out of this crisis is probably foreclosed deputy secretary
20:42Wally Adamo thanks for joining us thanks for having me um Peggy did anything from the deputy
20:47secretary strike you there that you heard well one of the things that stuck out to me was his comments related to
20:54recession so I think that's an important context essentially the timing for all of this is bad
21:01um and that's in part because of the fact that a lot of people are watching including us at Bloomberg and our
21:07Bloomberg economics division on in terms of whether or not we will see a recession in the second half of this
21:13year you know the Federal Reserve has been dialing up interest rates in order to try to drive down inflation but
21:19that's putting a strain on the economy whether we had this debt ceiling debate or not and so if we do barrel into a
21:27volatile period and potentially get to a situation where we're not able to pay our bills and markets tank as a result
21:33of it as a result of it it could really exacerbate or accelerate a recession we
21:39got this message from Zach who emails I will never hear rhetoric from Republicans about student loan
21:45forgiveness ever again they're unwilling to pay their own debts unconditionally as they're expected to do and surely
21:50their beliefs are consistent and Matthew emails to say why is no one talking about the tax cuts that Republicans
21:56instituted several years ago and its impact on the national debt and we heard this from Helen President Biden should
22:03settle this issue by raising the debt limit by invoking the 14th Amendment of the Constitution section 4 of the 14th
22:10Amendment says the validity of the public debt of the United States shall and that's the important word shall not
22:16be questioned and shy Helen raises an important Point aside from the trillion dollar platinum coin a lot of other
22:23people say hey forget about Congress forget about this leverage forget about the weaponization the 14th Amendment is
22:29clear President Biden just keep paying the debts how viable is that ID I think
22:35Biden said made kind of an offhand remark that he was considering it I don't know that he really is but how how
22:40legitimate is that well full disclosure I'm not a lawyer so I'm not going to argue the merits on the law but I
22:46actually think the more important piece of this is the potential Economic Consequences and frankly I think that's
22:52why the treasury Department has not gone this route in the past and would be unlikely to here what we have to think about is how are markets going to react
22:59and other economic actors if the treasury Department unilaterally takes action that nullifies
23:04the debt limit some of the possibilities include credit rating agencies downgrading us they
23:10include somebody bringing a lawsuit against the treasury Department even if the treasury Department is likely to ultimately win that lawsuit if there is
23:17a legal cloud surrounding debt that the treasury Department is issuing that means again the credit rating agencies
23:22might downgrade it means that investors are probably going to be demanding higher interest rates it means that financial markets are likely going to be
23:29reacting and economic actors businesses individuals are going to see what's going on here and start hunkering down
23:35because they're going to see things going south the final point I'll make is that I think the politics of this are also really challenging because in that
23:42situation the treasury Department has taken unilateral action to address this and so if there is that kind of
23:47financial Fallout that Cascades very quickly it will be very easy for Republicans to point and say look at
23:53what you have caused by these unilateral actions which are unconstitutional or illegal or whatever argument they make and I think that is why the treasury
24:00Department continues to emphasize that it needs to be negotiated in Congress on a bipartisan basis Stephanie that the health of markets and and bond prices
24:07markets in general are based on confidence I know that's sort of basic but it's kind of true even if we get
24:14past this crisis without 14th Amendment trickery or a trillion dollar platinum coins or defaults are we getting to a
24:21point where investors worldwide can start to look at the United States and say I'm not sure they have it together
24:27over there I'm not sure that my money is as safe as I thought and I'm not sure that investing in the United States
24:33economy is as good a bet as I thought 20 years ago oh it's it well look it's certainly
24:40embarrassing globally to be in this situation but when you look at financial
24:46markets today for example and where we've been I mean we hit the debt limit uh sometime in January so we've been
24:53watching for a period of months now and financial markets seem to be more or
24:59less shrugging this office almost business as usual at this point so you know I don't know the answer to the
25:06question I guess my gut would tell me that financial markets are smart enough
25:11for investors are smart enough to understand at this point that this is just sort of what we in the United
25:17States do on a fairly regular basis uh pulling ourselves to the brink and then
25:23at the last minute pulling back and doing what we've always done before
25:28which is making good on-promised payments so I don't know that it does the kind of long-term scarring but it's
25:35certainly uh not ideal and wish we weren't doing it Stephanie you've championed speaking of not doing this
25:42you've championed a new framework of essentially economic theory it's been adopted by a lot of progressive
25:47lawmakers and economists and candidates frankly to think about the federal debt and deficit a little bit differently
25:54it's called mmt modern monetary Theory how is that relevant to this discussion
25:59well it's relevant because you know you've played these clips now and and we've heard a number of comments about
26:06you know running up the credit card and that sort of a thing and so mmt is relevant in that it reminds us that the
26:13federal government isn't at all like the rest of us that these metaphors that we use uh that lawmakers like to use about
26:20burdening future generations and piling debt onto a credit card and so forth are
26:26completely inapplicable to a currency issuing government like the federal
26:31government of the United States of America so uh mmt is helpful because it
26:36says the federal government can do what the rest of us can't do it literally does spend money that it quote unquote
26:44doesn't have the rest of us can't do that we've got to get the currency in order to be able to spend it we have to
26:49be able to earn it or borrow it or somebody has to give it to us uh the
26:55federal government issues the US dollar it can never run out of money it can run run out of things to buy and there is a
27:01limit to how much it can safely spend at any point in time and so inflation is a
27:08very real constraint but the government isn't like a household it's not going to run out of money com you know face bills
27:14that it can't afford to pay what we're talking about with the debt ceiling and a potential default it would be a
27:21voluntary default not an involuntary default if we were to do that it would be a choice that we're making based on
27:29our unwillingness to pay our bills not based on our inability to pay Stephanie
27:34Kelton of Stony Brook University professor of economics and public policy Waging War on political Messengers and
27:43press release writers everywhere saying that the federal government is not like your kitchen table it's not like your
27:49household budget you don't have to get the money to spend the money would a paradigm shift oh you're going to put a
27:55lot of political Messengers out of work Stephanie if that thing ever takes hold because people are using this idea that
28:01the national debt is just like your Visa card and they're using it to great effect I think I even heard the speaker
28:06of the house doing it a minute ago we're going to talk more about mmt about the federal debt limit about the leverage
28:12and where we might all be headed in this latest confrontation over the federal debt limit we're talking about it it's
28:18part of our week-long series with Bloomberg called life in debt coming up we'll talk about solutions to the debt ceiling standoff and ask if we even need
28:25to keep doing this we'll get back to more in just a moment stay with us [Music]
28:34let's get back to the conversation with this message from one of you
28:40sector parallel to 2011 according to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta in his
28:47Memoir worthy fights Canada describes how Congress drifted toward the default
28:53Abyss under a similar lack of serious leadership eventually congress's
28:58shameful action devolved into budgetary sequestration with severe across-the-board cuts to government
29:05programs as final as National Defense thanks to Marianne in Michigan for that
29:10message and that's not all that happened I was there and I'm dating myself a little bit but there was also a
29:16downgrade bystandard and poor is s p of the of the value of U.S treasuries the first time
29:22in history it had a real world world impact we went from AAA to double A Plus and
29:28um double A plus I guess isn't bad but if you're an American AAA is the only way to go what do you think of Congress
29:33and the White House what do you think they should do about this federal debt ceiling email is 1A
29:39wamu.org well Republican lawmakers have repeatedly argued that federal spending
29:45needs to be reduced because it's contributing to a rise in inflation this argument's not new but inflation is high
29:51very very high right now and that argument is gaining a lot of new salience here's Republican senator Mike
29:56Lee from Utah speaking at a press conference uh in early may people have been suffering under the oppressive yoke
30:02of inflation over the last two and a half years in Utah this has meant that
30:07the average family shells out an additional thousand dollars a month every single month for their basic living necessities
30:14this is all the predictable foreseeable and in fact foreseen result of excessive federal spending trying to get a handle
30:20on that is difficult Stephanie Mike Lee of Utah says excessive federal spending is the reason
30:28that chicken is 6.99 a pound for instance at the grocery store is he
30:33right?


 no he's not right uh can the deficit get too big and contribute to inflationary
30:40pressure sure it can but remember that the deficit had been falling at the most
30:45rapid clip on record you might remember President Biden saying that you know
30:50look at this I'm presiding over the most rapid uh reduction in the federal deficit in the history of the United
30:56States now that was taking place because of course the economy was recovering very strongly that job market is very
31:04strong spending is very high GDP growth was uh high and so the deficit was
31:10coming down quite naturally as tax revenues were increasing and spending to
31:15support a weak economy a coveted stricken economy was uh coming down but
31:20listen the Federal Reserves rate hikes these aggressive interest rate hikes are
31:26pushing the deficit back up so if you look at the latest report from the Congressional budget office they tell
31:32you that they have revised their s estimates of where the federal deficit is going to be over the course of the
31:38next 10 years and in part they are forecasting larger deficits because of
31:44the fed's rate hikes the rate hikes are going to increase says the CBO
31:49um spending on interest by 688 billion
31:54dollars over the next five years that's in addition to how much we would have spent otherwise but the rate hikes are
32:02uh forcing treasury to pay out more in interest all of those bondholders we've been talking about so you know that has
32:09the potential to put more money into people's hands that they could turn around and spend so one of the things Senator Lee might want to think about if
32:16he's worried about inflation and federal spending are the impacts of the rate hikes themselves.

speaking of rate hike
32:22Shea you've worked closely in the past with fed chairman Jerome Powell right you've worked closely with him you
32:29probably have a better understanding than most of us about the thinking that's going into these rate Heights but also the blowback effect that
32:35Stephanie's talking about on inflation as um as the treasury has to service
32:41these higher interest rates all of that discussion can get a little bit confusing but you know Jerome Powell
32:47pretty well what's your Insight to where where we're going with rate hikes in the economy but also the impact on this very
32:54debate the debt limit sure well I have a little bit of a different perspective I think that the reason why the FED is hiking rates right now is because of
33:00course we had very high inflation in the past 12 18 months and that inflation was
33:05partly caused by the federal spending that went on in response to covet now don't get me wrong much of that federal spending was absolutely necessary to get
33:12us out of that downturn but most economists agree that the amount that was pumped into the economy was at least
33:18somewhat excessive and contributed not entirely but contributed to the inflationary impacts that we've seen
33:23over the past 12 or 18 months so what the FED is doing now is responding with interest rate hikes that are attempting
33:29to slow the economy down slow that heat overheating of prices and it is seems to be having some progress inflation has
33:35now come down from about nine percent to the four to five percent range but I think they're probably they're going to
33:40need to at least wait and see and maybe need to do more what they absolutely do not want to see happen What chair Powell and others at the FED do not want to see
33:46happen is them effectively declare Victory or say that they've done enough and then inflation continues to rise
33:51because then that that damages The credibility of the FED to fight inflation again and could have could put
33:57us into a never-ending cycle of chasing those price hikes Peggy how is the Fed responding if at all to this current
34:03standoff on the debt limit they have a role in this are they kind of standing back and like silently waving their hands like don't do this well Fed chair
34:11pal has been asked about it directly as recently as the last fed decision earlier this month and he's been very
34:16clear in saying that please do not mistake my Powers at the FED for what
34:23the government has to do in this situation the FED cannot rescue the economy from the disaster that could
34:30happen if we start defaulting on some of our payments so he's been very clear like we're not going to be able to bail
34:35you out of this I am not your life raft do not look to me to help someone we got an interesting email from Bill Mill who
34:43says the real elephant in the room is military spending this is what needs to be lowered we need to find ways to lower
34:48military spending we do not need that much spending on the military Bill raises an interesting point which is
34:56um we sort of mentioned it earlier in the show guys we're kind of only talking about one thing here it's called
35:01discretionary spending like the stuff we spend on well food stamps and Roads and
35:07Veterans health care we're not talking about the big stuff the big stuff that really drives debt Medicare Medicaid
35:14Social Security defense and we're sure as heck not talking about taxes I feel like we're in this hostage situation
35:21with a big gun to the head of the economy and we're not even getting real in terms
35:27of policy yeah I mean that you're talking about exactly why this whole situation is so broken because even if
35:33we want to be having a debate over the budget both sides have sworn off talking about entitlement programs you saw the president at the State of the Union get
35:38everybody to get stand up and cheer and say we're not touching Social Security we're not touching you know so so entitlements are not on the table taxes
35:44as you said are not on the table so we're debating a very small portion of the budget here that's why we really need a change in the Paradigm we need to
35:50have a budget process in Congress where those programs those important programs can be subject to review and debate and
35:57consider what the future looks like and the tax code of course we only have a debate about the tax code once a decade
36:02or so and that's not often enough to keep up with economic activity we have the 2017 tax cuts a lot of those will
36:07expire in 2025 that's probably the next time taxes will be on the table we shouldn't be going eight years without considering the revenue side of the
36:13budget um Stephanie we keep talking about whether we even really need to be doing this a do we need a debt limit I
36:20think you were pretty clear that you said no and our entire framework about what debt and deficit is when it's the
36:26US government according to mmt Modern monetary Theory really needs to be rethought you say well Jerome Powell the
36:33chairman of the FED we've been talking about him he's addressed this here he is talking about mmt on Capitol Hill uh
36:39just a couple years ago the idea that deficits don't matter for countries that can borrow in their own currency I think
36:45is just wrong I think U.S debt is fairly high at a level of of GDP and much more
36:51importantly than that it's it's growing faster than GDP fairly significantly faster you know the to the extent people
36:58are talking about using the FED as a sort of our role is not to to to provide support for particular policies it is to
37:05and that's central banks everywhere um it is to try to um you know achieve
37:11maximum employment and stable prices Stephanie Kelton chairman Powell has been listening to this discussion on 1A
37:17and he would like a word with you well I'd like a word with him
37:22listen I think that uh I agree completely what we need is a paradigm shift and I think we have to move well
37:30beyond this conversation about whether we need to cut spending or increase taxes or do some combination of the two
37:37in order to quote unquote deal with the deficit and the debt I think that we need to be asking very different
37:43questions for example why are we trying to deal with the deficit in the debt why are we so convinced that these are uh
37:50problems that need to be dealt with so um look I will say this every deficit is
37:56good for someone okay and that's a point that I think is too often missed because people hear this word deficit and it's
38:03it's loaded term you immediately think of something that's negative nobody ever uses the word deficit in a sentence
38:09where they're saying something good is happening so I think it's important for people to understand what this thing
38:15actually is the federal deficit so-called is just the difference between
38:20two numbers that's all it is and and one of the numbers refers to outlays it's how many dollars the government is
38:27putting into people's hands let's say every year the other number is the
38:32revenues it's how many dollars the government is subtracting away from people's hands every year so when the
38:37government adds more than it subtracts let's say it spends a hundred and it only taxes 90 back we label that a
38:44deficit but what we forget is if the government puts a hundred in and only takes 90 back somebody gets to keep 10.
38:50in other words this thing we call the government deficit is really a financial contribution a deposit into some other
38:58part of our economy in that respect in financial terms every deficit is good
39:04for someone the question is for whom and for what are those deficits being run are they largely being used to send a
39:11windfall to the people at the very top let's say like the 2017 Republican tax cuts or are they being used to make
39:18investments in education and infrastructure and health care and the rest of it so I think we we have a
39:25national conversation that's very broken and what I've tried to do in my own work is to recast the debate so that we can
39:33have a better more productive debate about questions surrounding taxing and
39:39spending but without the focus and this belief that we ought to be budgeting like a household Stephanie Kelton you've
39:45got me feeling like Neo in The Matrix you know the the first thing to understand about the deficit is that
39:51there is no deficit it's not real and then you can see the world the economic world and the debt world for what it
39:58truly is that's Stephanie Kelton of Stony Brook University I'm speaking with Peggy Collins of Bloomberg and and Shea
40:04acabus pardon me with the non-profit by bipartisan policy Center guys we have to talk about something important because
40:11last week on the much maligned CNN Town Hall we all watched it and we're not going to have a media discussion right
40:16now but former president Trump made news and he made some important news he said essentially his message to Republicans
40:23on Capitol Hill and I think this is a quote do a default you should consider doing a default if you can't extract a
40:30pound of Flesh from Democrats in this negotiation Caitlyn Collins said gosh
40:35that sounds dangerous and he said ah it's all psychological it could be bad it might be not bad sort of a trumpian
40:41answer I took that as extremely serious I took that as a signal especially to
40:47House Republicans to consider going over the brink and they're getting a green light essentially from the leader of
40:54their party certainly the front runner Peggy it does turn up the heat for sure in the sense that we are getting very
41:00close to that X date that we've been talking about June 1st where we could potentially start to have trouble paying
41:06some of our bills and it does put it into play whether or not some of the Republicans as you said that are more
41:13aligned with President Trump of whether or not they would feel more emboldened um to go right up to that I will say
41:18though we should inject a little bit of positivity here in the sense that we are
41:24expecting as we're reporting at Bloomberg for the president and house Speaker McCarthy and some other leaders
41:29to meet again tomorrow and that their staff people have been saying and we've been reporting has been making some
41:35progress over the weekend so we do have another important day coming up tomorrow but here's here's the problem with it
41:40and I'll just add one more thing before I come to you shy um Mitch McConnell said at one point in
41:46the last couple of weeks this will be settled when Kevin McCarthy and Joe Biden reach an agreement that's actually not true this will be settled when that
41:52agreement can be passed by House Republicans and to me that was why the statement from former president Trump
41:58was so very dangerous green lighting some extremist members of the House Republican conference who ultimately
42:04have to vote for this thing they don't get final say in the white house um green lighting them to maybe go over
42:09the brink well let me make two points first is I think the rhetoric here has really dominated the substance and
42:14that's a problem because both sides have sort of boxed themselves into lines that they feel like it's very difficult for
42:20them to cross and whether that's led by President Trump or quotes the President Biden have said not equating the two but
42:25they put themselves in their Corners the substance I think is fairly straightforward here the two sides have a place that they can come to agreement
42:31on a deal and as Peggy said hopefully things are moving in the right direction there the other point that I want to make is I think Americans need to
42:37understand that doing a default or going into default would be entirely unprecedented in the history of our
42:42country we don't know what it would mean but it really could lead to catastrophic consequences that would affect every American household I want to thank all
42:48of you who joined me for this really important sometimes confusing but but very momentous discussion we're headed
42:55for something very very important shayakabus director of economic policy at the nonprofit bipart bipartisan
43:02policy Center Peggy Collins Washington bureau chief at Bloomberg and Stephanie Kelton professor of economics and public
43:08policy at Stony Brook also author of The New York Times bestseller the deficit myth modern monetary Theory mmt and the
43:15birth of the people's economy shy Peggy Stephanie thanks so much for your time appreciate all of you earlier we heard
43:21from deputy secretary Wally adiamo as well and we thank him for his time our series with Bloomberg life and debt
43:28continues this week we'll look at credit card debt and what you can do to take control of your finances we'll also get
43:34into medical debt and student loans today's producer was Chris Remington this program comes to you from WAMU part
43:40of American University in Washington it's distributed by NPR I'm Todd zwillik
43:45with Vice news in for Gen white thanks so much for joining us this is 1A
43:52[Music] foreign
43:58[Music] [Applause]
44:05[Music]

0 件のコメント:

コメントを投稿