????關于債務上限辯論的討論已經成為全球市場過度炒作最嚴重的因素之一，而且，分析正在華盛頓上演的這出政治鬧劇難免使人沮喪。不管怎么樣，敝人頗有感觸，不吐不快。

????美國眾議院發言人博納在為自己的債務及赤字議案爭取贊成票時可謂是碰了一鼻子灰。投票本來應該于上周四舉行，最終卻被推遲。盡管白宮卻一再恐嚇如果短時間內不能通過長期債務解決方案，今年圣誕必將愁云慘淡，但似乎茶黨（Tea Party）并未因此轉而與博納同舟共濟。雖然我并不是事事都與茶黨意見一致，但他們貫徹信念的作風值得褒揚。

????債務上限的期限是8月2日，而現在離限期僅剩4天。現今來看，該問題的結局仍是個未知數。茶黨有可能最終對此事保持默許態度，隨后眾議院將通過方案，雖然昨晚的一切表明，這一局面并不確定。即便果真如此，參議院多數黨領袖里德和奧巴馬一直以來都反對任何分兩步走的方案以及將債務上限僅提升至2012年大選期限的

????里德議案與博納分兩步走的議案有巨大的差別。就削減面值而言，兩個議案的所涉及的總數相差不大——博納計劃中涉及的削減總數超過了2.7萬億美元，然而里德的削減總數接近2.2萬億美元。雖然兩者在數量級上都差不多，但是削減的途徑卻大相徑庭。

????里德的方案中的實際預算削減只有7，100億美元——其他赤字的削減則有賴于減少伊拉克和阿富汗的戰爭開支。拋開削減方式不談，兩黨之間的赤字削減計劃竟有2萬億美元的差距。對于4天來說，這可是個天價的和解。

????就長期性而言，兩黨目前的計劃充其量只能算是國會遮掩禿頂（comb-over）的手法而已。韋氏詞典（Merriam Webster）對這一行為的解釋如下：

????“謝頂人士將頭發由一側梳至謝頂部位的一種處理方式”

????我本人留的就是這種發型，我可以擔保這是一個十分貼切的描述。但是這種發型的缺陷在于，它同時也向世人昭告了禿頂的存在。

????在今天的圖表中，我已經生動地向大家展示了里德議案中權衡性支出削減所占赤字的比率。與很多不良商業計劃相同的是，里德的議案太過傾向于后期削減（順便說一句，博納的計劃也好不到哪去）。在2012財政年度，里德所提倡的權衡性支出削減占國會預算辦公室（CBO）目標赤字的2.2%，2020年占到了14%。

????審視目前的國會減赤方案還必須考慮國會預算辦公室對于GDP增速的預測。在附表中分析時所顯示的預測期內，2012年-2020年聯邦政府預算年的年均GDP增速需達到2.9%。相比之下，過去10年中實際GDP增長率為1.7%。很明顯，如果后十年的經濟增速與過去十年的增速持平，未來的赤字將會進一步惡化。

????過去幾個月在華盛頓上演的這出政治鬧劇可謂娛樂性十足，但需要記住的一點是，即便達成和解，由于目前削減赤字的議案只是暫時掩蓋了長期性的赤字問題，12-18個月后，這一難題將再次浮出水面。有鑒于此，需要謹慎看待短期內股市可能出現的積極反應。

????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.