The New Economy

Dressed as Uncle Sam, J. Justin Wilson of Employment Policies Institute, solicits passersby on North Capitol Street for $12 trillion to pay for the national debt in early October. While liberals and conservatives alike are concerned about the national debt, one question remains: What to do about it?

(Roll Call Photos/Newscom)

Photos (1 of 1)

ECONOMIC SCENE: On national debt, worries are bipartisan

The national debt is worrying to conservatives and liberals alike. The question? What to do about it.

By David R. Francis  |  November 2, 2009 edition

There’s one issue that still has broad bipartisan support: At some point, Washington will have to rein in its budget deficits – hard – or the national debt will explode.

“It’s dangerous because the US debt will be so large the government may have trouble finding buyers for that debt,” says Brian Riedl, a budget expert at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank. The result would be far higher interest rates to attract whatever investment money can be located in the world.

“We are on the path to building up debts that are unsustainable,” says James Horney, an economist with the more liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP). He worries that international lenders will get “spooked” – even in the short run – about the safety of US debt.

To dramatize the risks, another Washington think tank sent 17 men onto the capital’s streets wearing Uncle Sam suits to beg with handwritten cardboard signs pleading, “I want you to give me $12 trillion.” Federal debts currently stand at $11.9 trillion, a total that includes reserves of Social Security and Medicare trust funds as well as debt owned by the public in the US and abroad.

The Uncle Sams were part of a million-dollar-plus campaign by the Employment Policies Institute to raise awareness of the “frightening reality” of the swelling debt and the need to do something about it, explains Richard Berman, executive director of the EPI. The think tank will start advocating solutions, maybe in January, he adds. “A lot of people have their heads in the sand.”

Many analysts agree on the basic debt problem:

•Within a few weeks or months, the Obama administration will need to ask Congress to boost the $12.1 trillion debt ceiling. On a new website, the EPI has posted a debt clock with the lower numbers rising rapidly.

•Even at today’s low interest rates, servicing the debt is costly. The EPI says it costs almost $500 million a day, much of it going to foreign banks and governments.

•Budget deficits will total $9 trillion over the next decade, a White House budget review forecast in June. That number, Mr. Riedl holds, underestimates the deficit by nearly $4 trillion. The biggest problem isn’t the cost of the stimulus, it’s retiring baby boomers swelling the expenses of Medicare and other federal programs.

•Looking at debt held by the public (not debt owned by US government entities), Riedl projects the total will reach $20 trillion by 2019. That sum would match 100 percent of gross national product, the total output of goods and services. That projection is similar to the CBPP’s, which reckons US debt will reach 300 percent of GDP by 2050.

Today US federal debt is a bit above 40 percent of GDP. That compares favorably with those of some other nations as reckoned recently by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris: Japan’s is at 163 percent; Britain’s, 60.6 percent; Austria’s, 59.5 percent. But Germany’s debt is lower, 38.9, as is Canada’s, at 28.6 percent.

Britain’s government last month proposed selling $25 billion in assets, including part of the Channel Tunnel it owns, to pay off debt. What divides left and right on rising federal debt is what to do about it.

Mr. Horney doesn’t want to restrain stimulus spending “for the next few years” unless the economy bounces back rapidly. The right uses the debt as a weapon against any costs arising from healthcare reform or other extra spending.

In 2009, federal receipts declined 16.6 percent. To tackle the rising debt problem, taxpayers may face bigger tax bills in the future – or huge spending cuts.

____

Want your economic news in 140 characters? Follow us on Twitter.

( More stories )

Comments

1. James Corbin | 11.02.09

“The question: What to do about it” If we have no idea, then we are destined to become a banana republic. Americans, if you are unwilling to demand that your politicians stop spending like there is no tomorrow, you will see your standard of living dramatically reduced. If you continue to believe that the government should provide you with everything, don’t complain when that same government takes everything first in order to do that. Remember, government services are never free and always cost more than the private sector could provide those same services.

2. John Kistler | 11.03.09

Mr. James Corbin’s comment was right on the money; I can’t improve upon his observation. Now it is up to the electorate to persuade Congress to do its duty specified in the U.S. Constitution and pass a proper budget.

3. Bruce from Oak Harbor | 11.05.09

Good comedy from CSM. “Liberals and conservatives alike are concerned about the national debt.” Very funny. Name 2 conservatives on Capital Hill. Not self-identified conservatives who use the c-word to manipulate. Two real conservatives. Good luck with that.

4. Hugh Higgins | 11.07.09

I am amazed that people think we can reduce the national debt without reducing military spending! It makes up more than half the annual budget, according to all analysts, if all military expenses (and not just some) are included. Yet the Republicans always want to cut spending on human needs in the U. S., rather than cut the bloated and largely ridiculous and wasteful military budget.

5. Peter | 11.11.09

@ Hugh Higgins:

Where do you get your figures? The military claims nowhere near 50%. Try 20%. There are plenty of areas to reduce spending, including the military, but social programs claim the vast majority of spending and will also need to be cut.

6. Ian | 11.11.09

To Hugh: my research on the web indicates that the U.S. spends around 4.28% of GDP on military spending. There are many countries which spend a larger percentage of GDP on their military. The interest on the national debt alone is approaching what we spend on the military. The supposedly “bloated and largely ridiculous and wasteful” military budget of which you speak is the only thing that prevents your freedom to speak from being shutoff. I think that is worth 4.28% of GDP even if I don’t agree with what you have to say.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

Leave a Comment

  By clicking "Submit Comment", you agree to our Terms of Service.

We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.

Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.

Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.

Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.