Hasteko, ikus Elkarrizketa W. Mosler-ekin (zenbait zipriztin-1)1.
Zenbait zipriztin (segida):
(e) Grezia eta defizitaren mugak: zein da zuk emandako irtenbidea?
Ekonomia gastatzea da. Ekonomian BPG gastatze totala da, salmentak dira… Beraz, errentan mozteak, interes errenta mozketak, tasak mozteak, ekonomian errenta gutxitzen dute 2.
Banku zentralak bonoak erosten dituenean eta beraiek eduki, hori quantitative easing deitzen da. Banku zentralak (BZ) bono horiek edukitzen ditu, aurrezki horiek, ez ekonomian dagoen baten batek edo erakunde batek. Beraz, BZ-k irabazten du interesa ez ekonomiak. BZ-k mozkin handiak ditu, interes guztiak ekonomiak irabazi beharko lituzkeen bitartean. Zer egiten du BZ-k? Gobernuari itzuli, ez dute hori gastatzen. Erabiltzen dute zorra gutxitzeko. Beraz, berriz, errentaren galera da. Politika monetarioa deitzen denak ekonomia errealean errentaren galera handia suposatzen du3.
Ekonomiak ez du dena gastatu, aurrezkiak daude, jendearenak eta korporazioenak, zirkulatzen duen esku dirua ez da gastatzen, gauza bera atzerriko banku zentralen kasua, aurrezkietan euroak edukitzen dituzten banku zentralen kasua. Errenta guzti hori ez da gastatzen. Hortaz, zerbait egin behar da, ekonomia txar bat ez edukitzeko4.
Gobernuek oso erraz egokitze bat egin dezakete beren errenta baino gehiago gastatzearren. Haiek zergak jaitsi ditzakete, gastu publikoa handitu, gobernuak aipatutako errenta ez gastatuaren zuloa bete dezake. Zergak gutxituz, sektore pribatuari errenta gehiago edukitzea permititzen zaio, gehiago gastatzearen, eta berriro, aipatutako zuloa betetzeko. Zure politikari dagokio, zergak murriztu ditzakezu ala gastu publikoa handitu5.
EBko gobernuek hori egin dezakete, zeren murriztuta daude %3ko defizitak direla medio, eta hori ez da nahikoa sektore pribatuko kredituaren gabezia dela kausa6.
(f) EBrako proposamena: defizit handiagoak edukitzea
Defizitak igo daitezke %3tik %8ra. EBZ-ren bermearekin, ez duzu kezkatu behar merkatuez. Interes tasa EBZ-ren politika tasari dagokio, merkatuetatik at.
Defizit muga %3tik %8ra mugituz, BPG gehituko da, BPG-ren %3, %4, %5tan7.
Orduan EBko estatu kide bakoitzak aukera dezake zergak gutxitzea ala gastu publikoa handitzea. Langabezia gutxituko da8.
Baina EBko estatuak itxaroten ari dira politika monetarioa, interes tasen bidez, arrakastatsua izatea. Jadanik itxaroten egon dira 20 urte Japonian, 7 urte AEBn, eta 6 urte EBn9.
(g) Grezia eta zorra: ez ordaintzea, murriztea ala zer?
Sektore pribatuaren parte hartzea? Grezian, azken sektore pribatuaren parte hartzarekin, zorra murriztu zen 100.000 milioi eurotan. Zer gertatu zitzaion ekonomiari? Txartoago bilakatu zen. Zergatik? Zer zen zorra?
Zorra bono greziarrak dira. Zer dira greziar bonoak? Greziar bonoak EBZ-n aurrezki kontuak dira, eta Greziako Bankuan pertsonaren bat, korporazioren bat, entitateren bat, hori haien dirua da. Haiek milioi bat euro lortu dute Greziako Bankuko interes-sarrera greziar bonoa deitutako aurrezki kontu batean. Hori kentzean, zorra 100.000 milioi eurotan gutxitzean, diru eskaintza murrizten da, diru eskaintzaren parte handi bat, Mosler-ek oinarri dirua deitzen duena 100.000 milioi eurotan. Zerga bezalakoa da. Beraz, ez kendu diru eskaintza ekonomia zergatzeko. Zergatzeak ekonomia txartuko du, eta zorraren murrizketa zerga bat da, eta zergak ekonomia txartoago bilakatzen du10.
Greziako zorra ez da Greziarentzat inongo zama, gaur egun. Agian zama psikologikoa da, baina ez zama ekonomikoa. Epemuga 20 urte dira. Interes tasa oso txikia. Praktikoki orain ez dago zerga zama. Zor murrizketak ekonomia txartu egingo luke11.
Greziak benetan behar duena zor handiago edukitzea da. Hori da erantzuna. Erantzuna hauxe da: zergak murriztu ala gastu publiko handitu, bietatik bat edo bien konbinaketaren bat behar dute. Greziarrak aurrezle onak dira. Entitateren bat egon beharko litzateke permititzeko gehiago gastatzearren bere errenta baino, jendeari permititzearren gutxiago gastatzeko bere errenta baino. Hortaz, permititu behar zaie aurrekontu defizit handiagoa edukitzea, aurrezle onak direlako. Zergak gutxiagoak eta gastu publiko handiagoak edukitzeko permititu beharko litzaieke, zeren sektore pribatuak ez baitu gasturik egiten. Gastua sektore publikoari lehenesten diote12.
Ironia hauxe da: EBko defizit mugek saritzen dituztela aurrezle txarrak eta aurrezle onak zigortzen. Zorretan urtero permititutako %3ko handitzeak esan nahi du aurrezkiak, EBko aktibo finantzarioen aurrezki netoak soilik permitituta daudela %3tan urtero handitzearren. Hori baino gehiago behar duen edozein herrialdek langabezia handia pairatzen du. Sektore pribatuko zor hazkuntza duten herrialdeak, beraz, aurrezki neto handien desioak ez daukatenak, profitatzen dira: ba ote dauka zentzurik horrek? EBko aurrezkiak bertute bat dira13.
Sektore publikoak finantzatzen du sektore pribatuan gertatzen dena. Kontuak ematen ditu sektore pribatuan gertatzen denagatik. Sektore publikoak euro bat gastatzen duenean, sektore pribatuak euro bateko errenta dauka. Sektore publikoak 100.000 milioi euroko zorra, sektore pribatuko aurrezkiak 100.000 milioi eurokoak dira. Sektore publikoaren zorra sektore pribatuaren kontabilitate-agiria da, EBZ-ren sistemako banku kontuetan dauden euroen kopurua. Honela funtzionatzen du kontabilitateak: liburu nagusiaren alde batean zorra eta bestean kreditua. Sektore publikoa liburuaren alde bat da, sektore pribatua bestea, ispilu irudia da14.
Bai, aurrezkiak gauza onak dira. EBn sektore pribatuko zor gehiegi dago, sektore pribatuko aurrezkiak nahi ditugu, eta kontabilitate-agiria, sektore pribatuko aurrezkien froga sektore publikoko zorra da.
Grezia eta Italia dira zor handiena daukatenak. Zergatik? Zeren horixe baita aurrezki pribatu altuen kontuak nola ematen diren. Maileguek gordailuak sortzen dituzte. Zorrak aurrezkiak hornitzen ditu. Ez da alderantziz15.
(Zabaldu arren)
1 Ikus https://www.unibertsitatea.net/blogak/heterodoxia/2015/12/02/elkarrizketa-w-mosler-ekin-zenbait-zipriztin-1/.
2 Ingelesez: “The economy is just spending. GDP is total spending in the economy, it’s sales. A strong economy means there’s strong sales, and a weak economy means there’s weak sales, and so cutting back on income, reducing interest income, reducing rates reduces income to the economy.”
3 Ingelesez: “When the central bank buys bonds and holds them, that’s called quantitative easing. The central bank holds those bonds, those savings accounts, instead of somebody in the economy, some entity in the economy. And so, the central bank’s earning the interest instead of the economy, and the central banks have started showing large profits, when all that interest would have been earned by the economy. What does the central bank do with the money? Well, they turn it back to the government, so to speak, but they don’t spend it. They just use it to reduce the debt. So, again, it’s a drain on income. What they call monetary policy, in the first instance drains a substantial amount of income from the real economy, and to me, that should give you a first clue as to why this policy doesn’t work to make the economy better.”
4 Ingelesez: “A large part of the economy that naturally spends less than their income are people who, when they get paid, money goes into a pension fund or a contribution or it gets withheld, they don’t get all their income to spend, and they don’t spend it all anyway, they keep a little bit in cash. And then you’ve got corporations that build reserves, they don’t spend their income, insurance companies take in premiums and they don’t spend all their income, they save some for later. All the cash in circulation is income that hasn’t been spent yet. And then you have foreign central banks that will hold euros in savings. That’s income that hasn’t been spent yet. So you’ve got all these savings desires, all these entities that try to save euro and spend less than their income. Well, something has to make up for that or else you get a bad economy.”
5 Ingelesez: “Now, governments could very easily make an adjustment to spend more than their income. They could lower taxes and they could increase public spending, public services, and the government could make up for the lost spending, make up for people’s savings, spend more than their income and fill that gap. And by cutting taxes, they could allow the private sector to have more income, to have more spending, and again fill up the gap. Depending on your politics, you could either reduce taxes or you can increase public spending.”
6 Ingelesez: “… governments can’t do that in the European Union because they’re all limited by three percent deficits, and that’s not enough given the lack of private sector credit and the natural desire to save. Europeans are very good savers. It’s not enough to make up for the people not spending their income, so all this income goes unspent and the economy suffers.”
7 Ingelesez: “… you reduce the limit from three to maybe eight percent. Now, with the central bank guarantee in place, you don’t have to worry about markets. The interest rate is going to stay at the ECB policy rate, so the markets have nothing to say about this. So, you change the deficit limit from, let’s say, three to eight, you just add five percent, and that will add approximately three, four, five percent to GDP.”
8 Ingelesez: “...then, each member can decide to either reduce taxes or to increase public spending. They could have a big debate about how to get to the new limit, if they want to. If they don’t want to they could stay where they are, but they have the option to increase the deficit limit. Unemployment will, every forecast will immediately drop from wherever it is now, somewhere around eleven percent, to probably nine or maybe even less. So unemployment would come down pretty dramatically, by full points, and GDP will go up from near zero to maybe three, four, five percent, and the European Union will be deemed a big success, and there will be big parties and the streets and the crisis will be over.”
9 Ingelesez: “… They believe we just have to wait more time for these interest rates to kick in, and they’re willing to do that, and they’ve been waiting, again, 20 years in Japan, seven years in the U.S., and six years in the European Union. What I’m saying is, make the fiscal adjustment, if the interest rates do kick in like you think, just reverse the fiscal adjustments. If the economy starts getting too hot and unemployment drops too far and everybody is worried about inflation, then go back to three percent. You don’t have to stay there forever if things heat up too much for you–I don’t think they will…”
10 Ingelesez: “(Galdera) … what is the real debt solution for Greece, as you have proposed it? Does it involve Greece paying off its debt, or perhaps does it involve a so-called haircut such as the PSI in 2011-12?
…in the last PSI the debt was reduced by 100 billion euros or something, right? And what happened to the economy? It got worse. Why? Because what was the debt? The debt is Greek bonds. What are Greek bonds? Greek bonds are savings accounts in the European Central Bank system, at the Bank of Greece, and some person, some corporation, some entity, that’s their money. They’ve got a million euro in the Bank of Greece earning interest in a savings account called a Greek bond. When you take that away, when you reduce the debt by 100 billion, you’ve reduced the money supply, an important part of the money supply, what I call base money, by 100 billion. It’s like a tax. You’ve taxed the economy by 100 billion euro when they removed the 100 billion euro of Greek debt. So, the answer is not, right now, to remove the money supply to tax the economy. Taxing will make it worse, and debt reduction is a tax, it makes it worse.”
11 Ingelesez: “The Greek debt now is not any kind of a burden to Greece. It’s maybe a psychological burden, but it’s not an economic burden. First of all, the maturity rate is 20 years. Second of all, the interest rate is almost nothing, so there’s no annual tax, so to speak, that’s dedicated to debt reduction right now. Whatever debt service is there just gets refinanced and piled on to the end. So for all practical purposes, there is no debt burden for Greece right now. That is not the problem. Debt reduction would only make it worse.”
12 Ingelesez: “What Greece actually needs is to have more debt. That’s the answer. The answer is, they need to reduce taxes or increase public spending, one of the two or some combination. You reduce taxes to increase private sector spending, or you increase public sector spending, but the problem in Greece is the Greeks are very, very good savers. They save a higher portion of their income than other Europeans. Where does that come from? There has to be some entity that’s allowed to spend more than its income to make up for the people spending less than their income, otherwise the output doesn’t get sold. It comes back to the same thing. Because they’re good savers, they should be entitled to having a larger budget deficit. They should be able to have lower taxes and higher public spending because the private sector is not doing the spending. They’re defaulting the spending to the public sector.”
13 Ingelesez: “The irony is that the deficit limits in the European Union are rewarding the bad savers and punishing the good savers. The three percent increase in debt allowed every year means that savings, net savings of financial assets in the European Union are only allowed to grow at three percent per year, and any country that requires larger savings than that because of its institutional structure suffers the consequences of high unemployment. And, the countries that have high private sector debt growth and therefore don’t have high net savings desires, they benefit. What sense does that make? The European Union’s savings is a virtue.”
14 Ingelesez: “The public sector finances, they are just the accounting record of what’s going on in the private sector. They account for what’s happening in the private sector. When the public sector spends a euro, then they say, there’s public sector spending of one euro, that means there’s private sector income of one euro. So the public sector spending is the accounting record of the private sector income. When they say there’s public sector debt of 100 billion euro, that means there’s private sector savings of 100 billion euro. The public sector debt is the accounting record, it’s the number of euro in bank accounts at the ECB system, of the private sector. That’s how accounting works, there’s a debit on one side and a credit on the other side of the ledger. The public sector is one side of the ledger, the private sector is the other side, it’s a mirror image, it has to be, or some accountant’s made an arithmetic mistake and he’s got to stay late and find his error.”
15 Ingelesez: “So yes, savings is a good thing. The European Union is a union of people, it’s a union of businesses, it’s a union of private entities. The government is there to service the private sector and to support it. So savings is a good thing, and that means we want to encourage private sector savings. There’s too much private sector debt, we want private sector savings, and the accounting record, the evidence of private sector savings is public sector debt. If you look at the countries that have the highest private sector savings, it’s always the countries that have the highest public sector debt. So it’s Greece and Italy, which had the highest debt. Why? Because that’s how you accounted for the high private savings. That’s how you funded the savings. Loans create deposits. Debt funds savings. It’s not the other way around.”
