分析：提高债务上限是拆东墙补西墙

    关于债务上限辩论的讨论已经成为全球市场过度炒作最严重的因素之一，而且，分析正在华盛顿上演的这出政治闹剧难免使人沮丧。不管怎么样，敝人颇有感触，不吐不快。

    美国众议院发言人博纳在为自己的债务及赤字议案争取赞成票时可谓是碰了一鼻子灰。投票本来应该于上周四举行，最终却被推迟。尽管白宫却一再恐吓如果短时间内不能通过长期债务解决方案，今年圣诞必将愁云惨淡，但似乎茶党（Tea Party）并未因此转而与博纳同舟共济。虽然我并不是事事都与茶党意见一致，但他们贯彻信念的作风值得褒扬。

    债务上限的期限是8月2日，而现在离限期仅剩4天。现今来看，该问题的结局仍是个未知数。茶党有可能最终对此事保持默许态度，随后众议院将通过方案，虽然昨晚的一切表明，这一局面并不确定。即便果真如此，参议院多数党领袖里德和奥巴马一直以来都反对任何分两步走的方案以及将债务上限仅提升至2012年大选期限的

    里德议案与博纳分两步走的议案有巨大的差别。就削减面值而言，两个议案的所涉及的总数相差不大——博纳计划中涉及的削减总数超过了2.7万亿美元，然而里德的削减总数接近2.2万亿美元。虽然两者在数量级上都差不多，但是削减的途径却大相径庭。

    里德的方案中的实际预算削减只有7，100亿美元——其他赤字的削减则有赖于减少伊拉克和阿富汗的战争开支。抛开削减方式不谈，两党之间的赤字削减计划竟有2万亿美元的差距。对于4天来说，这可是个天价的和解。

    就长期性而言，两党目前的计划充其量只能算是国会遮掩秃顶（comb-over）的手法而已。韦氏词典（Merriam Webster）对这一行为的解释如下：

    “谢顶人士将头发由一侧梳至谢顶部位的一种处理方式”

    我本人留的就是这种发型，我可以担保这是一个十分贴切的描述。但是这种发型的缺陷在于，它同时也向世人昭告了秃顶的存在。

    在今天的图表中，我已经生动地向大家展示了里德议案中权衡性支出削减所占赤字的比率。与很多不良商业计划相同的是，里德的议案太过倾向于后期削减（顺便说一句，博纳的计划也好不到哪去）。在2012财政年度，里德所提倡的权衡性支出削减占国会预算办公室（CBO）目标赤字的2.2%，2020年占到了14%。

    审视目前的国会减赤方案还必须考虑国会预算办公室对于GDP增速的预测。在附表中分析时所显示的预测期内，2012年-2020年联邦政府预算年的年均GDP增速需达到2.9%。相比之下，过去10年中实际GDP增长率为1.7%。很明显，如果后十年的经济增速与过去十年的增速持平，未来的赤字将会进一步恶化。

    过去几个月在华盛顿上演的这出政治闹剧可谓娱乐性十足，但需要记住的一点是，即便达成和解，由于目前削减赤字的议案只是暂时掩盖了长期性的赤字问题，12-18个月后，这一难题将再次浮出水面。有鉴于此，需要谨慎看待短期内股市可能出现的积极反应。

    Discussion of the debt ceiling debate has become the one of the most overhyped factors in global markets and it is a little depressing to analyze the political shenanigans going on in Washington. Nonetheless, I feel compelled to comment.

    Speaker Boehner is having serious issues garnering votes for his debt and deficit plan. The vote was scheduled yesterday and is now postponed. It seems the Tea Party is not on his political side, despite fear mongering from the White House that Christmas will be ruined if a long term debt deal is not passed in short order. I can't say I agree with the Tea Party on everything, but I will give them credit for a conviction of their beliefs.

    The debt limit deadline is August 2nd, which is now four days away. Between now and then, how this plays out is really anyone's guess. It seems likely the Tea Party will acquiesce and a deal gets passed in the House, although as we saw yesterday evening, even that is uncertain. If that does occur, Senate Majority Leader Reid and President Obama have been adamant that they will not support any bill that has a two-step process and that doesn't extend the debt ceiling past the 2012 election.

    Regardless of the two-step process in the Boehner bill, the Boehner and Reid bills have dramatic differences regardless. At face value they are talking about similar numbers -- the Boehner plan, in total, is looking for more than $2.7 trillion in cuts, while the Reid plan is proposing almost $2.2 trillion in deficit cuts. While those numbers are in the same area code, the methodology for getting to the cuts is dramatically different.

    The Reid plan only has $710 billion in real budget cuts -- the remainder of the deficit reduction plan comes from the winding down of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Setting aside the differences in process, that leaves us with a $2 trillion difference in the nature of deficit cuts between the parties. That's one mother of a compromise for four days.

    Stepping back to the longer term, we need to keep in mind that both of the current bills proposed are really nothing more than Congressional comb-overs. As a refresher, Merriam Webster describes a comb-over as follows:

    "An arrangement of hair on a balding man in which hair from the side of the head is combed over the bald spot."

    As a man who sports a comb-over, I can vouch that is an apt description. The sneaky thing about a comb-over is that while you can comb your hair over, the rest of the world can usually tell that there is a bald spot lingering beneath.

    In the chart of the day, I've shown what I mean graphically by comparing proposed Reid plan discretionary spending cuts as a percentage of the estimated deficit. Similar to many a bad business plan, the Reid plan is very back-end loaded (by the way, so is the Boehner plan). In fiscal 2012, the discretionary spending cuts as proposed by Reid ramp from 2.2% of the CBO's projected deficit to 14.0% of the CBO's projected deficit by 2020.

    The other key assumption to keep in context when considering the currently proposed Congressional comb-overs are the GDP growth assumptions proposed by CBO. In the projection period used in my analysis in the attached chart, the federal government budget years from 2012 to 2020 at an average real GDP growth rate of 2.9% per year. This compares to the actual real GDP growth rate over the last ten years of 1.7%. Obviously, future deficits will be much higher if growth in the next decades tracks similar to the last decade.

    While the political drama in Washington has been entertaining over the last few months, we need to keep in mind that even when the compromise is reached, the current bills proposed are merely covering up long term budget deficit issues that will again need to be addressed in the next 12 – 18 months. Therefore any short term positive stock market reaction should be taken with a grain of salt in the context of continued long term issues.