08.08.2015 Views

Economic Report of the President 1994 - The American Presidency ...

Economic Report of the President 1994 - The American Presidency ...

Economic Report of the President 1994 - The American Presidency ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

for inflation was on average roughly balanced for decades (Table 1-1). This approximate balance was not achieved by any formal, legalrequirement, but ra<strong>the</strong>r through an informal, unstated politicalconsensus.TABLE 1-1.—Structural Budget Deficit as Percent <strong>of</strong> GDPFiscal yearsAdjusted deficit as percent<strong>of</strong> GDPi1959-19821983-1993<strong>1994</strong>-1998 (forecast)1 Adjusted deficit is unified structural budget deficit corrected for depreciation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> value <strong>of</strong> Federal debt due to inflation.Sources: Office <strong>of</strong> Management and Budget, Congressional Budget Office, and Council <strong>of</strong> <strong>Economic</strong> Advisers.<strong>The</strong> budget picture changed dramatically with <strong>the</strong> tax cuts <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>early 1980s, and <strong>the</strong> structural, inflation-adjusted budget began todisplay chronic, large deficits for <strong>the</strong> first time. <strong>The</strong> deficit in fiscal1992, <strong>the</strong> last year before <strong>the</strong> election <strong>of</strong> <strong>President</strong> Clinton, was awhopping $290 billion in <strong>the</strong> unified budget and $131 billion on astructural, inflation-adjusted basis. Worse yet, both <strong>the</strong> deficit and<strong>the</strong> debt-GDP ratio were expected to rise fur<strong>the</strong>r (Charts l-4a andDeficits <strong>of</strong> this magnitude—around 5 percent <strong>of</strong> GDP—wouldhave been far less worrisome if <strong>American</strong> households were savingenough to cover both <strong>the</strong> government budget deficit and <strong>the</strong> needs<strong>of</strong> business to finance investment. But, in fact, <strong>American</strong> householdsaving rates not only are among <strong>the</strong> lowest in <strong>the</strong> world, but actuallyfell in <strong>the</strong> 1980s. So for both <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se reasons—declining householdsaving and rising budget deficits—national saving as a share<strong>of</strong> GDP dropped sharply in <strong>the</strong> 1980s.Casual discussions <strong>of</strong>ten equate national saving with domesticinvestment, but <strong>the</strong> two can differ in an open economy (Box 1-2).And in <strong>the</strong> United States <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 1980s, <strong>the</strong>y differed dramatically.While national saving was falling as a share <strong>of</strong> GDP, <strong>the</strong> share <strong>of</strong>domestic investment, although low by international standards, wasroughly constant. To plug <strong>the</strong> gap between saving and investment,<strong>the</strong> United States had to import massive amounts <strong>of</strong> foreign capital.In consequence, our current account balance went from asmall surplus to a large deficit in <strong>the</strong> 1980s.All this foreign capital had its positive side: By limiting <strong>the</strong> rise<strong>of</strong> real U.S. interest rates, it partly shielded investment from <strong>the</strong>consequences <strong>of</strong> huge Federal deficits. But it left <strong>the</strong> United States<strong>the</strong> greatest debtor nation in <strong>the</strong> world. Even more disturbing, allthis borrowing from abroad went to maintaining <strong>the</strong> Nation's comparativelymeager investment rate, not to increasing it.-0.11.9.827

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!