|
May 20, 2007
Debt: An
Inescapable Concept - Conclusions
by Gary North, Ph.D.
One
last time: Private debt is an inescapable concept.
It is never a question of debt or no debt. It is
always a question of which kind of debt, owed to
whom, when.
You are from birth either a creditor or a
debtor. As an adult, you are probably both. Workers
are creditors in their capacity as pension owners.
Workers are debtors in their capacity as home
owners carrying a mortgage. There is a balance
between household debt and credit.
Your financial future depends on your ability to
understand debt and credit and then apply what you
know to your situation.
There are advocates of maximizing debt for
investment leverage. Virtually all of the modern
economy is based on leverage. The derivatives
market is estimated at $300 trillion of promises to
pay. It is entirely leveraged and highly leveraged.
The modern world economy rests on a gigantic system
of promises to pay -- promises that are never met.
These promises are rolled over when they come due
-- replaced by new promises. The same is true of
the commodity futures markets.
There are also advocates of zero personal debt.
They tell people to cut up their credit cards. Some
say people should not borrow even to buy a home.
They recommend renting until you can afford to pay
cash for a home. Problem: A rental contract is a
promise to pay. So, there is no escape from
debt/credit.
Most advisors fall somewhere in between. They
advocate buying a home with a mortgage. They
recommend using credit cards, but paying the debt
off every month. They recommend setting aside money
monthly to buy a car. They recommend a combination
of thrift and debt.
Credit/debt is a system for allocating different
kinds of risk. Some people would rather risk paying
a mortgage than risk being evicted at the end of a
house-rental period. There are creditors who would
rather risk lending money to home-buyers money than
lend to other kinds of debtors. The credit markets
allow people to exchange the kinds of risks they do
not want to bear for the kinds of risks they are
willing to bear.
TRUST AS CREDIT
Debt is the other side of credit. Debt and
credit are inescapable in a world of imperfect
knowledge about the future. Time and imperfect
knowledge of the future together mandate trust.
Without trust, society could not exist.
Extending trust is a way to extend credit. We
rely on others' cooperation. We make plans. We seek
the cooperation of others in the future. We can ask
for cooperation, but when we offer a benefit for
extending cooperation, we present a more compelling
case.
We should think of the debt/credit relationship
as a way to increase the likelihood that others
will cooperate with us when we seek our goals. When
we pay someone in advance to show up on time and
perform a specific task, we become creditors.
Conversely, when someone shows up on time and
performs a specified task in exchange for a promise
of future payment, he becomes a creditor. In each
case, there is an inescapable aspect of credit and
debt.
Sometimes the task to be performed is a matter
of tradition, as in a family. Sometimes it is a
matter of a voluntary contract which is enforceable
by civil law. Sometimes it is a matter of
legislation. But there is always risk that one of
the two parties will not perform the task or
perform it at a level below expectations. There can
be defaults in this world. When they take place,
those who had relied on the other party to perform
according to one set of standards suffer a
loss.
LENDERS AND BORROWERS
As you grow older, you should owe less money
than when you are starting out. You should be in
the creditor category. This is because of your
earning ability. Usually, it drops as you get older
than age 55, unless you own your own business or
unless you are a senior manager.
A May, 2006 study published by the Social
Security Administration, "Income of the Population
55 or Older, 2004," indicated the following decline
in median income by age group and by marital
status.
- Married
- 55-61: $69,000
- 62-64: $55,000
- 65-69: $44,000
- 70-74: $37,000
- 75-79: $30,000
- 80+: $28,000
-
- Single
- 55-61: $24,000
- 62-64: $19,000
- 65-69: $16,000
- 70-74: $14,000
- 75-79: $14,000|
- 80+: $13,000
Singles start at a much lower level of income,
but the decline is less sharp. Couples who do not
factor in this decline after age 65 are probably
making a big mistake.
The reason why people need to be creditors as
they age is because they move into capital
consumption mode. They lack the income-producing
strength and opportunities as salaried workers. So,
they must build up capital in their years of
productivity.
This is no longer being done in the United
States. Personal saving has disappeared in the
population at large. But dreams of a comfortable
retirement have not faded. There is a looming
disconnect.
PRODUCTIVE DEBT
Debt that increases a person's ability to
produce is productive debt. He takes on debt
because he expects to be able to repay this debt
with money to spare -- money that he could not
generate apart from the debt.
The same is true of business debt. Debt that is
used to increase future productivity can be a wise
decision. It may allow a faster response to
increased market demand than by accumulating
retained earnings or issuing new shares of
stock.
Debt taken on at the beginning of an economic
boom can benefit buyers of capital equipment, land,
or other assets. Of course, the opposite is true at
the end of a boom.
It takes entrepreneurial foresight to assess
such matters.
Not all people who think they possess this
ability really do. They can be whipsawed by the
business cycle. They take on debt late in the
cycle. They suffer falling revenues in the
contraction phase, yet the debt meter keeps
ticking. But the fact that some debtors are
ineffective entrepreneurs is not an argument
against all forms of debt.
UNPRODUCTIVE DEBT
Consumer debt lets us buy now, pay later. There
are emergency periods in which such debt is wise. A
car's breakdown on the road or an illness requiring
hospitalization are such times of crisis. But these
events are rare.
When someone borrows to finance the purchase of
depreciating assets, which most consumer goods are,
he decides to fund present consumption at the
expense of even greater future consumption, which
he will not enjoy. He allows his innate
present-orientation manifest itself at present
interest rates. He obligates himself to pay future
money for a depreciating asset.
The West has long placed a moral premium on
future-orientation. This is one of the causes of
economic growth. This was especially true of
monasteries during the Middle Ages. Men who had
taken vows of poverty were put to hard work. The
result was an increase in retained earnings. The
first great examples in the West of long-term
economic growth -- compound growth -- were the
monastic orders. Every few centuries, the church
called for moral reform of the monastic orders,
which had accumulated property in the name of
poverty.
People in a free market are allowed to purchase
the kind of future they prefer. Creditors purchase
streams of future income. Debtors purchase goods
and services now in exchange for payments in the
future. The market lets debtors and creditors
negotiate the exchange of complementary futures
over time.
GOVERNMENT DEBT
Here is where the quest for security finances
the creation of great insecurity. Investors trust
politicians' promises. So do voters. The result is
dependence on a system which ends in default. Why
does it end in default? Because state financing
substitutes coercion for voluntarism, unfunded
promises for funded promises.
Government debt finances the growth plans of
agencies that by nature are not run by people who
must satisfy consumers. They must satisfy
voters.
Voters in turn expect to pass on their expenses
to the government. So, they vote for grand schemes
of wealth redistribution because, one by one, each
expects to do better than the average taxpayer or
recipient of extracted wealth. It is the triumph of
hope over statistical reality. It is tooth fairy
economics, except that this fairy knocks out every
tooth it collects. Resting their heads on tens of
millions of pillows, slumbering voters expect
something for nothing in the morning. Most of them
will wake up with fewer teeth than they had when
their slumber began.
Because government debt is unspecific with
respect to the sources of its future funding, yet
broad in the scope of its promises, there is a
fundamental disconnect between promises and
liabilities. In this gap stands the central bank.
It is in a position to write checks to meet
liabilities, but only nominally. Under mass
inflation, liabilities exceed funding, for
liabilities are real, while their funding is
digital.
Government debt is transacted in promises that
can be revoked at will, unlike insurance contracts.
The promising agency sets the terms of repayment.
The words may stay the same -- "dollar," "a moral
obligation of the government" -- but their
substance does not.
CONCLUSION
Debt/credit and trust/time necessarily go hand
in hand. To abolish the use of debt/credit
relationships would be to abolish trust/time
relationships. This could not be done without
destroying the division of labor and therefore
society.
Rhetoric against debt is often misused. The
critics of debt too often do not understand the
trust/credit aspect of the division of labor. They
do not acknowledge that risk is inescapable in
life, and that credit markets allow people to
exchange one kind of risk for another kind. In
short, they have not thought through the
implications of their position.
Something similar can be said of defenders of
government debt, which also rests on the trust/time
relationship. Civil governments have repeatedly
violated those who have trusted them. This
especially includes creditors. Creditors hope that
with each new extension of credit to the state,
"this time, it's different." It rarely is.
Debt/credit is as legitimate as trust/time. You
are wise to select carefully that agency you will
trust over time, either as a debtor or as a
creditor. When it comes to the state, you are both:
a creditor (taxpayer today) and a debtor (dependent
ward of the state later). In the latter position,
you should make plans on the assumption that you
will receive less than has been officially
promised.
Dr.
Gary North earned a Ph.D. in history and is one of
America's keenest economic analysts and
commentators. He supports the Austrian school of
economics and is a previous assistant to
libertarian congressman Dr. Ron Paul. Visit his
website at http://garynorth.com.
To
subscribe to Gary North's Reality Check go to
http://www.dailyreckoning.com/sub/GetReality.cfm
If
you enjoyed this essay and would like to read more
of Gary's writing please visit his website at
http://www.garynorth.com
or http://www.freebooks.com
Because
The Radical Academy publishes essays and articles
on its website does not imply acceptance or
approval of the comments or opinions expressed by
the author of the material. Nor is the Academy
responsible for any misrepresentation of the facts
included. It is your job to be a critical
reader.
Enrich
Your Life With A Business Or Finance
Book
|