In his seminal 1986 book, The Alchemy of Finance, George Soros issued a caution about the U.S. stock market, which had surged in value, distracting attention from the deteriorating state of public finances. Soros’ words became eerily prescient the following year when the U.S. equity market recorded its sharpest crash in history. Today, amid record levels of debt, global financial instability, and heightened geopolitical risk, Soros' warning resonates more than ever.
The U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio is currently on track to break post-World War II records by 2027. With public debt mounting, the outlook seems even more precarious. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, President Trump’s campaign plans alone could add $15.6 trillion to the national debt by 2035, further straining government finances. Today, as in the past, Soros’ warning suggests a path forward that may be neither politically nor practically viable in its purest form.
However, it’s not just the United States grappling with debt. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) projects that global public debt will soon reach a staggering $100 trillion, equating to 100% of global GDP by 2030. The economic implications are daunting: as the IMF notes, past debt projections have consistently underestimated actual debt levels. Governments face a fiscal “trilemma”—a choice between spending, taxation, and financial stability—that continues to evade straightforward solutions.
Historically, austerity has been the preferred solution to rein in public debt. For example, France recently opted to cut public spending by delaying inflation-based pension adjustments. But as recent protests demonstrate, austerity is politically fraught. Countries scarred by the austerity measures of the 2010s are particularly reluctant to revisit such policies.
In contrast, the United Kingdom has opted for a different strategy. Finance Minister Rachel Reeves has introduced a budget focusing on public investment while stabilizing finances through higher taxes. However, the U.K.’s Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) suggests this may yield limited long-term benefits, predicting stagnant GDP growth alongside higher inflation. This approach might lead to stagflation—where economic growth stalls, inflation rises, and public debt continues to swell.
The U.S. approach has been a combination of increased spending and tax cuts, hoping that its financial preeminence will stave off instability. The results have been favorable thus far, with bondholders showing little resistance. However, recent increases in Treasury yields indicate that this reliance on financial stability may soon waver.
Looking back, today's high levels of debt stem primarily from two pivotal crises: the 2008 global financial crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic. For instance, the debt-to-GDP ratio for the Group of Seven (G7) countries increased significantly, jumping from 81% in 2008 to 112% in 2010, and again from 118% in 2019 to 140% in 2020. Nations handled these crises differently, with diverging outcomes for their respective public debt levels.
Take Iceland, which allowed its banks to fail during the 2008 crisis. Ten years later, its debt-to-GDP ratio was back to pre-crisis levels. Ireland, which bailed out its lenders, still contends with a debt ratio three times higher than in 2007. The Covid pandemic saw similar divergence. While the United Kingdom implemented long lockdowns and accumulated debt, Sweden's more relaxed approach saw it emerge from the crisis with a public debt ratio lower than in 2019.
Rather than grappling with an unsolvable fiscal trilemma, governments might benefit from making informed decisions to manage future crises better, limiting the long-term impact on public finances. For investors, this presents a moment of reflection. Despite today’s roaring bull market and recent record highs for the S&P 500, legendary investor Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway has been reducing its stock holdings for the past eight quarters, amassing over $325 billion in cash.
The warnings from Soros and Buffett could not be more different in style, yet they converge in their caution. Soros’ 40-year-old advice warns against the complacency that booms foster, while Buffett’s actions speak of prudence amid exuberance. In a world of complex fiscal choices and escalating debt, perhaps these insights from two of history's most renowned investors offer guidance that is as relevant today as it was decades ago.
Let me know if you like this article.
Sagar Chaudhary
+1 (234) 385-8228
Comments