Are US credit ratings in trouble again?

Reich writes that Moody's Investors Services may downgrade government bonds if Congress and the White House don’t reach a budget deal before $1.2 trillion in spending cuts and tax increases automatically go into effect.

Mike Segar/Reuters/File
A Moody's sign on the 7 World Trade Center tower is photographed in New York in this August 2011 file photo. Reich writes that despite Moody's threat of a downgrade, the US has never been able to borrow money more cheaply than it can right now.

The rating agencies are at it again. Moody’s Investors Services says it’s likely to downgrade U.S. government bonds if Congress and the White House don’t reach a budget deal before we go over the so-called “fiscal cliff” on January 2, when $1.2 trillion in spending cuts and tax increases automatically go into effect.

Apparently the credit rating agencies can’t decide which is more dangerous to the U.S. economy – cutting the U.S. budget deficit too quickly, or not having a plan to cut it at all.

Last year’s worry was the latter. In the midst of partisan wrangling over raising the nation’s debt limit, Standard & Poor’s downgraded U.S. debt – warning that Republicans and Democrats didn’t have a credible plan to tame the deficit. 

Now Moody’s is worried about the opposite: The spending cuts and tax increases in the Budget Control Act that will automatically kick in at the start of 2013 – unless Congress decides on a better and presumably more gradual approach — are so draconian they’ll push the economy into a recession.

The ratings agency schizophrenia is understandable. Everyone in Washington – and just about everywhere else – knows the budget deficit has to be dealt with. But anyone with half a brain (including Washington) also knows that when unemployment is high and economic growth still painfully slow, cutting the deficit too much now would make a bad situation even worse.

Remember, the real problem isn’t the deficit per se. It’s the deficit in proportion to the size of the economy. Cutting too much too soon will tip the economy into recession because it would reduce overall demand for goods and services when private demand falls way short of what’s needed. And if the economy goes into recession and begins to shrink, the ratio of deficit to the economy gets worse. That’s the austerity trap Europe has fallen into.

Even if the deficit continues to grow in proportion to the economy, we’re safe as long as those who lend money to the U.S. aren’t worried about being repaid and therefore don’t demand high interest rates in return for their loans.

By this measure, the American economy appears safer than ever. Despite all the harrumphing from the credit-rating agencies, the United States has never been able to borrow money more cheaply than it can right now. That’s because no matter how bad the deficit situation looks here, it’s worse in places like Spain and Italy. And no matter how deadlocked Congress becomes, the U.S. is still the most stable and reliable system in which to put your savings.

The fiscal cliff is a real worry. And it’s a worry precisely because the budget deficit isn’t — at least not now. When unemployment is high and growth is anemic, we need as much fiscal stimulus as we can manage.

As long as the rest of the world is willing to lend us their savings so cheaply, we’d be wise to use it to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and our schools and parks — and thereby put more Americans back to work – rather try to cut the deficit too much and too soon.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.