The United States is bankrupt, flat broke. Thanks to accounting that would make Enron blush, America's insolvency goes far beyond what our leaders are disclosing. The United States is a fiscal basket case, in worse shape than the notoriously bailed-out countries of Greece, Ireland, and others. How did this happen? In The Clash of Generations, experts Laurence Kotlikoff and Scott Burns document our six-decade, off-balance-sheet, unsustainable financing scheme. They explain how we have balanced our longer lives on the backs of our (relatively few) children. At the same time, we've been on a consumption spree, saving and investing less than nothing. And that's not to mention the evisceration of the middle class and a financial system that has proven it can't be trusted. Kotlikoff and Burns outline grassroots strategies for saving ourselves--and especially our children--from what could be a truly catastrophic financial collapse. Kotlikoff and Burns sounded the alarm in their widely acclaimed The Coming Generational Storm, but politicians didn't listen. Now the need for action is even more urgent. It's up to us to demand radical reform of our tax system, our healthcare system, and our Social Security system, and to insist on better paths to investment return than those provided by Wall Street (mis)managers. Kotlikoff and Burns's "Purple Plans" (so called because they will appeal to both Republicans and Democrats) have been endorsed by a who's who of economists and offer a new way forward; and their revolutionary investment strategy for individuals replaces the idea of financial capital with "life decision capital." Of course, we won't be doing all this just for ourselves. We need to fix America's fiscal mess before our kids inherit it.
The Clash of Generations
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle.
Learn more
| |||||||||||||||
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
Review
"The United States doesn't have a problem with debt it cannot pay, but rather with promises it cannot keep--promises to older Americans that, as things stand now, will bankrupt younger Americans. Intensely informative and entertaining at the same time, The Clash of Generations will lead you through the fiscal minefield that lies in our nation's future path and show you the way safely out of it. If you care about your grandchildren and the nation they will inhabit, you owe it to yourself and to them to read this book."--William J. Bernstein, author of The Investor's Manifesto and A Splendid Exchange
"Economics doesn't get better or more disturbing than this. The Clash of Generations will tell you things you never knew and hoped you'd never learn. They are straight truths about our country's relentless expropriation of the next generation that will either land young and old alike in an early economic grave or culminate in generational war. Read this book if you care about your children. Read this book if you care about yourself. And read this book if you care about our country."--John Silber, President Emeritus, Boston University
" The Clash of Generations is so well written that Scott Burns and Laurence Kotlikoff should be considered the Stieg Larssons of economics. But there is one difference: the horror story they tell -- about the debts that burden the young -- are not fictional. This is a great book of great importance, and every paragraph contains some new and interesting observation."--George Akerlof, Nobel Laureate in Economics, 2001
"A clarion call for those who love America, and wish to preserve its virtues for future generations. A look down into the abyss to which we are headed, and some serious, well-considered recommendations for getting us back on track. The Clash of Generations is a compelling and fluid read, a don't-put-it-down-till-you-finish-it book, at once both scary and hopeful."--William P. Bengen, independent financial advisor
About the Author
Laurence J. Kotlikoff, one of the nation's leading experts on fiscal policy, national saving, and personal finance and a columnist for Bloomberg, is Professor of Economics at Boston University.
Scott Burns's personal finance column has been nationally syndicated since 1981. He is Chief Investment Strategist for AssetBuilder, an Internet-based registered investment advisory firm.
Scott Burns's personal finance column has been nationally syndicated since 1981. He is Chief Investment Strategist for AssetBuilder, an Internet-based registered investment advisory firm.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
44 of 52 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
This book covers three themes: 1) a fiscal analysis of the US; 2) a set of related policy recommendations; and 3) financial planning to survive the prospective challenging times. In summary, the fiscal analysis is absurd. The policy recommendations are often quite all right. And, the financial planning is outstanding. Kotlikoff (the main author) does not have a good handle on macroeconomics (poor fiscal analysis). But, the more he drills down to the individual level (financial planning) the more he excels.
Kotlikoff's assessment of the US fiscal problems border on the absurd. He advances that all familiar fiscal measurements like Budget Deficit/GDP or Debt/GDP are completely wrong. And, that the only representative fiscal measure is his own construct: the US Fiscal Gap which he currently calculates at $211 trillion. Kotlikoff artifically boosts his $211 trillion Fiscal Gap in several ways:
... First, he relies on a worst case scenario: the CBO alternative scenario. He wrongly dismisses the CBO baseline scenario as he thinks the latter freezes government spending as if there were no economic growth and no inflation. This is incorrect. The CBO baseline scenario is reasonable and relies on credible economic assumptions of long term GDP growth, inflation, and commensurate increase in Government spending. However, it projects that current laws will be fully implemented. The CBO alternative scenario uses the same economic assumptions, but it assumes that current laws will be tweaked (Bush tax cuts will not expire, AMT to be indexed). Unsurprisingly, the CBO alternative scenario is unsustainable with a resulting skyrocketing US Debt/GDP ratio.
... Second, he discounts future Budget Deficits by a surprisingly low discount rate of only 3%. That is the simplest way to boost his overall Fiscal Gap. Had he used a much more reasonable long term risk free rate of 5% to 6%, his Fiscal Gap would probably be less than half of the $211 trillion.
... Third, his Fiscal Gap beyond 75 years (ending value) accounts for about two thirds of the total. He probably calculates this ending value by taking the last estimated Budget Deficit in 75 years and dividing it by his discount rate minus an estimated growth of such Budget Deficits. By using a growth rate nearly equal to his discount rate, he can generate any huge value he wants.
As you can tell, Kotlikoff can use many levers to create a Fiscal Gap as incredible as he wants. This does not mean this Fiscal Gap measure is representative, or even informative. The opposite is closer to the truth.
Kotlikoff sticking with his flawed Fiscal Gap calculations derives that Greece is in better shape than the US. That's because their Fiscal Gap is only 12 times GDP vs the US' 14 times GDP. Meanwhile, Greece before its most recent Euro Zone bail out had a Debt/GDP ratio close to 300%. It just defaulted on nearly 70% of its Debt (70% write down on all debt held by private investors). Greece is caught in a vicious recession with negative GDP contractions of 7% per year and unemployment of 21%. Its 10 year interest rate on its debt is an unsustainably high 21%. Meanwhile, the US Debt/GDP ratio is still a modest 72%. Its economy is now growing at over 2% per year. Unemployment rate is declining (currently 8.2%) and 10 year interest rates are less than 2%. Last but not least, the US has full sovereign control of its fiscal and monetary policies. Meanwhile, Greece does not, as it has become a ward of the Euro Zone.
Besides his Fiscal Gap, Kotlikoff developed other dissonant macroeconomic constructs. One of them is that foreign exchange levels have no impact on foreign trade flows. Thus, China, in his view, does not manipulate its currency to boost its export to the US. He states that if China would let its currency appreciate by 25% vs the Dollar, it would be associated with a 20% drop in its money supply, lowering its production costs by the same amount so the price of its exports (production costs times FX level) would actually not change! There are several reasons why this principle is false. FX levels are not so directly linked to money supply changes. Also, the 20% drop in money supply, suggested by Kotlikoff, would cause a huge deflationary contraction leading to a potential Chinese Depression. There is no way China could handle the repercution of a 20% contraction in its money supply. Also, another way to demonstrate that Kotlikoff relationship between FX rates and money supply does not hold is how could his model handle a multi-currency world. China has only one money supply that could not possibly manage ten different FX rates with different foreign currencies some being overvalued others undervalued relative to the Chinese currency.
Another of his dissonant concepts is that the household sector is almost solely responsible for the US declining savings rate. But, instead the Budget Deficit has had a huge impact on our nation's savings rate. After all, his Fiscal Gap suggests that too. That's a contradiction.
Kotlikoff's description of upcoming run on Treasuries and related run on banks (depositors to "turn cash into closets full of canned soup") does not make sense. He deducts those from his observations that in August 2011 when S&P downgraded US Debt from AAA to AA+, the stock market dropped by 20%. However, he ommits to mention that at the same time Treasury yield dropped. That's actually the opposite of a run on Treasuries. That is a flight to quality towards Treasuries.
When it comes to his recommendations, they are uneven some bad and some excellent ones.
His plan to fix the international financial system by converting all banks to pass through entities like mutual funds is problematic. It would eliminate credit formation. Without that, an economy stalls. Forget economic growth and rising living standard.
His health care plan is the Paul Ryan plan for all. The voucher system would control how much the Government spends on health care. But, it would not control overall health care costs. Thus, the public would be burdened with a rising portion of health care costs. The CBO analysis of Paul Ryan's plan confirmed that.
His tax plan is excellent. He would replace the income tax by a consumption tax and inheritance tax with provisions to make them progressive. It would raise more Government revenues more efficiently than the current tax code.
His plan to privatize Social Security is very good. The payroll tax would be 8% invested in a broadely diversified set of indices across numerous asset classes of stocks, bonds, and real estate. The investment allocation would be very conservative with 60% allocated to bonds (this may be a bit too high). And, the Government would guarantee a return equal to inflation so anyone's Social Security retirement (SS) account would at least maintain its purchasing power. At retirement, such SS account would be annuitized so the retirees would not bear anymore investment risk when they can least afford it.
Both Kotlikoff and Burns contributed to the excellent financial planning sections. The entire chapter 12 on the subject is outstanding. Their recommendations to avoid Wall Street and any professional advisors and save the money to invest yourself is excellent. They suggest you stick to index funds and invest in several different asset classes. They suggest just three or four such index funds that cover efficiently the entire investment world. Those index funds typically charge only 0.15% of assets or only one seventh of actively managed funds. Yet, the index funds deliver superior results.
The authors recommendations on retirement (chapter 13) are very interesting. They suggest plenty of ways of reducing costs and increasing income including selling a home, renting, moving to a lower cost State or even country.
As reviewed this book is really uneven. Unfortunately, Kotlikoff's fiscal and macroeconomic fallacies brought the average down. If the two authors had just focused on where they excel (financial planning, retirement strategies), it could have been an excellent book.
Kotlikoff's assessment of the US fiscal problems border on the absurd. He advances that all familiar fiscal measurements like Budget Deficit/GDP or Debt/GDP are completely wrong. And, that the only representative fiscal measure is his own construct: the US Fiscal Gap which he currently calculates at $211 trillion. Kotlikoff artifically boosts his $211 trillion Fiscal Gap in several ways:
... First, he relies on a worst case scenario: the CBO alternative scenario. He wrongly dismisses the CBO baseline scenario as he thinks the latter freezes government spending as if there were no economic growth and no inflation. This is incorrect. The CBO baseline scenario is reasonable and relies on credible economic assumptions of long term GDP growth, inflation, and commensurate increase in Government spending. However, it projects that current laws will be fully implemented. The CBO alternative scenario uses the same economic assumptions, but it assumes that current laws will be tweaked (Bush tax cuts will not expire, AMT to be indexed). Unsurprisingly, the CBO alternative scenario is unsustainable with a resulting skyrocketing US Debt/GDP ratio.
... Second, he discounts future Budget Deficits by a surprisingly low discount rate of only 3%. That is the simplest way to boost his overall Fiscal Gap. Had he used a much more reasonable long term risk free rate of 5% to 6%, his Fiscal Gap would probably be less than half of the $211 trillion.
... Third, his Fiscal Gap beyond 75 years (ending value) accounts for about two thirds of the total. He probably calculates this ending value by taking the last estimated Budget Deficit in 75 years and dividing it by his discount rate minus an estimated growth of such Budget Deficits. By using a growth rate nearly equal to his discount rate, he can generate any huge value he wants.
As you can tell, Kotlikoff can use many levers to create a Fiscal Gap as incredible as he wants. This does not mean this Fiscal Gap measure is representative, or even informative. The opposite is closer to the truth.
Kotlikoff sticking with his flawed Fiscal Gap calculations derives that Greece is in better shape than the US. That's because their Fiscal Gap is only 12 times GDP vs the US' 14 times GDP. Meanwhile, Greece before its most recent Euro Zone bail out had a Debt/GDP ratio close to 300%. It just defaulted on nearly 70% of its Debt (70% write down on all debt held by private investors). Greece is caught in a vicious recession with negative GDP contractions of 7% per year and unemployment of 21%. Its 10 year interest rate on its debt is an unsustainably high 21%. Meanwhile, the US Debt/GDP ratio is still a modest 72%. Its economy is now growing at over 2% per year. Unemployment rate is declining (currently 8.2%) and 10 year interest rates are less than 2%. Last but not least, the US has full sovereign control of its fiscal and monetary policies. Meanwhile, Greece does not, as it has become a ward of the Euro Zone.
Besides his Fiscal Gap, Kotlikoff developed other dissonant macroeconomic constructs. One of them is that foreign exchange levels have no impact on foreign trade flows. Thus, China, in his view, does not manipulate its currency to boost its export to the US. He states that if China would let its currency appreciate by 25% vs the Dollar, it would be associated with a 20% drop in its money supply, lowering its production costs by the same amount so the price of its exports (production costs times FX level) would actually not change! There are several reasons why this principle is false. FX levels are not so directly linked to money supply changes. Also, the 20% drop in money supply, suggested by Kotlikoff, would cause a huge deflationary contraction leading to a potential Chinese Depression. There is no way China could handle the repercution of a 20% contraction in its money supply. Also, another way to demonstrate that Kotlikoff relationship between FX rates and money supply does not hold is how could his model handle a multi-currency world. China has only one money supply that could not possibly manage ten different FX rates with different foreign currencies some being overvalued others undervalued relative to the Chinese currency.
Another of his dissonant concepts is that the household sector is almost solely responsible for the US declining savings rate. But, instead the Budget Deficit has had a huge impact on our nation's savings rate. After all, his Fiscal Gap suggests that too. That's a contradiction.
Kotlikoff's description of upcoming run on Treasuries and related run on banks (depositors to "turn cash into closets full of canned soup") does not make sense. He deducts those from his observations that in August 2011 when S&P downgraded US Debt from AAA to AA+, the stock market dropped by 20%. However, he ommits to mention that at the same time Treasury yield dropped. That's actually the opposite of a run on Treasuries. That is a flight to quality towards Treasuries.
When it comes to his recommendations, they are uneven some bad and some excellent ones.
His plan to fix the international financial system by converting all banks to pass through entities like mutual funds is problematic. It would eliminate credit formation. Without that, an economy stalls. Forget economic growth and rising living standard.
His health care plan is the Paul Ryan plan for all. The voucher system would control how much the Government spends on health care. But, it would not control overall health care costs. Thus, the public would be burdened with a rising portion of health care costs. The CBO analysis of Paul Ryan's plan confirmed that.
His tax plan is excellent. He would replace the income tax by a consumption tax and inheritance tax with provisions to make them progressive. It would raise more Government revenues more efficiently than the current tax code.
His plan to privatize Social Security is very good. The payroll tax would be 8% invested in a broadely diversified set of indices across numerous asset classes of stocks, bonds, and real estate. The investment allocation would be very conservative with 60% allocated to bonds (this may be a bit too high). And, the Government would guarantee a return equal to inflation so anyone's Social Security retirement (SS) account would at least maintain its purchasing power. At retirement, such SS account would be annuitized so the retirees would not bear anymore investment risk when they can least afford it.
Both Kotlikoff and Burns contributed to the excellent financial planning sections. The entire chapter 12 on the subject is outstanding. Their recommendations to avoid Wall Street and any professional advisors and save the money to invest yourself is excellent. They suggest you stick to index funds and invest in several different asset classes. They suggest just three or four such index funds that cover efficiently the entire investment world. Those index funds typically charge only 0.15% of assets or only one seventh of actively managed funds. Yet, the index funds deliver superior results.
The authors recommendations on retirement (chapter 13) are very interesting. They suggest plenty of ways of reducing costs and increasing income including selling a home, renting, moving to a lower cost State or even country.
As reviewed this book is really uneven. Unfortunately, Kotlikoff's fiscal and macroeconomic fallacies brought the average down. If the two authors had just focused on where they excel (financial planning, retirement strategies), it could have been an excellent book.
9 of 16 people found the following review helpful
Format:Kindle Edition|Amazon Verified Purchase
Laurence Kotlikoff, Economics Professor at Boston University and independent presidential candidate, updated his life long work on the United State's fiscal condition. The book is well written although it can be sometimes a bit repetitive. The book explains the causes and consequences of the fiscal gap of the U.S. and how to react to it... and prepare for the coming fiscal crises. It is worth reading.
10 of 18 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
and what we might be able to do about it.
Larry Kotlikoff and Scott Burns have written another terrific book about the real deficit in this country, the "government conspiracy" to hide the real deficit by cooking the books, the reasons for the real deficit and what can be done about it.
It's a quick and compelling (odd to say that about a fundamentally dry subject like economics, political and otherwise) read, well researched and written and while the future portrayed by Kotlikoff/Burns is dire, it's not black.
Yet.
Larry Kotlikoff and Scott Burns have written another terrific book about the real deficit in this country, the "government conspiracy" to hide the real deficit by cooking the books, the reasons for the real deficit and what can be done about it.
It's a quick and compelling (odd to say that about a fundamentally dry subject like economics, political and otherwise) read, well researched and written and while the future portrayed by Kotlikoff/Burns is dire, it's not black.
Yet.
Inside This Book
(learn more)
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
Listmania!
|
|
