????削減支出和增加稅收，將導(dǎo)致成千上萬人瞬間失業(yè)（幾百萬美國人的工作都直接或間接地源于聯(lián)邦政府的支出)，推動(dòng)全美失業(yè)率從7.9%上升至9.1%。為此，CBO預(yù)測2013年實(shí)際GDP將下降0.5%，遠(yuǎn)不如2012年2.1%的增幅。預(yù)計(jì)明年上半年實(shí)際GDP將同比下降2.9%，將整個(gè)國家推入衰退，CBO估計(jì)其幅度堪比20世紀(jì)90年代初第一次海灣戰(zhàn)爭后美國經(jīng)歷的那次經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退(很不幸，有些人沒有熬過那段苦日子）。CBO預(yù)計(jì)美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)將再次啟動(dòng)量化寬松，在公開市場買入美國國債，保持低利率——具有諷刺意味的是這個(gè)目的將通過憑空印鈔完成(但似乎除了眾議員羅恩·保羅，華盛頓沒人在乎。)這個(gè)舉措能夠抵消政府支出縮減的影響，有助于提振市場，但可能還不足以抵消股息稅和資本增值稅增加的負(fù)面影響。

????這些聽上去都很令人擔(dān)憂，但CBO表示，美國將開始迅速調(diào)整、應(yīng)對(duì)財(cái)政懸崖，如果政府沒有掉下財(cái)政懸崖，預(yù)計(jì)2014年和2015年的經(jīng)濟(jì)增長將“重現(xiàn)活力”，推動(dòng)經(jīng)濟(jì)產(chǎn)值回到它預(yù)測的水平。失業(yè)率將繼續(xù)保持高位，但2014年第四季度將回到8.4%，然后繼續(xù)慢慢下降，到2017年底降至更合理的5.7%。

????財(cái)政懸崖引發(fā)了很多恐慌，但它似乎并不是什么世界末日。不過，經(jīng)濟(jì)雙重探底的短期沖擊可能會(huì)帶來一些意想不到的后果，CBO在預(yù)測中沒有進(jìn)行充分地量化分析。

????因此，如果什么也不干，美國國會(huì)和總統(tǒng)就假裝從未有過《2011年國會(huì)預(yù)算案》(Congressional Budget Act of 2011）這回事，結(jié)果又會(huì)怎樣？他們可以這么干，他們可以投票決定(無限期）延遲實(shí)施這個(gè)預(yù)算案，也可以通過另一部法案來取代預(yù)算案。要知道，美國國會(huì)是自加鐐銬——它是有鑰匙的，隨時(shí)可以開鎖。如果真的什么也不做，CBO預(yù)測美國經(jīng)濟(jì)2013年的增長率將為0.1%-3.3%。是的，范圍很大，但這樣的結(jié)果顯然要好于財(cái)政懸崖情景下可能出現(xiàn)的0.5%降幅。失業(yè)率將保持約8%的水平直到2013年，然后逐步下降，到2014年底降至約7%。

????如果不掉下懸崖，CBO估計(jì)未來十年的赤字將總計(jì)增加7.7萬億美元（注意，單位可是“萬億”）。由此，美國的總負(fù)債到2023年將升至約24萬億美元，達(dá)到GDP的90%（這將是很高的負(fù)債比）。如果我們掉下懸崖，也別指望從此無債一身輕，到2023年美國的財(cái)政赤字仍將達(dá)到GDP的58%，因?yàn)樯鐣?huì)保障和醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)相關(guān)成本猛增，將導(dǎo)致必需支出大增。

????因此，很難衡量掉下懸崖的好處。既然美國仍然會(huì)有相當(dāng)高的預(yù)算赤字，全美負(fù)債可能仍會(huì)在今天的水平附近，掉下財(cái)政懸崖、承受短期的痛苦還值得嗎？

????The cuts in spending and the increased taxes will cause thousands of people to lose their jobs pretty much overnight (millions of Americans owe their jobs directly or indirectly to federal government spending). This would push unemployment up across the country from 7.9% to 9.1%. As a result, the CBO projects that real GDP would drop by 0.5% in 2013 after growing by 2.1% in 2012. Real GDP would fall at an annual rate of 2.9% in the first half of next year, tipping the nation into a recession that the CBO figures would be similar in magnitude to the one the nation experienced following the first Persian Gulf War in the early 1990s (for those who didn't live through that, it was bad). The CBO anticipates that the Federal Reserve would engage in another round of quantitative easing and buy up bonds in the open markets to keep rates low – this would ironically be done by printing money out of thin air (but no one in Washington, save Rep. Ron Paul, seems to care about that). This counterweight to the spending cuts should help support the markets, but it probably won't be enough to counter the negative impact associated with the tax increases on dividends and capital gains.

????That all sounds pretty grim, but the CBO suggests that the nation would begin to rapidly adjust to the fiscal cliff, projecting that economic growth would "be brisk" in 2014 and 2015, pushing economic output back to where it projects it will be if the government doesn't head down the fiscal cliff. Unemployment would remain elevated but would fall back to 8.4% in the last quarter of 2014 and then drift down slowly to a more reasonable 5.7% by the end of 2017.

????For all the panic that the fiscal cliff has set off, it doesn't seem like the end of the world. But the short-term pain of having a double-dip recession could have a host of unintended consequences that aren't fully quantified in the CBO's projections.

????So what if nothing is done and Congress and the President just pretend that the Congressional Budget Act of 2011 never happened? They can do that by basically voting to extend implementation (indefinitely) or by just passing another law that would replace the Budget Act. Remember, it was Congress that handcuffed itself -- it still has the key to unlock the cuffs at any moment. If it does and nothing changes, then the CBO projects the economy would grow between 0.1% to 3.3% in 2013 – a wide margin, no doubt, but clearly a more desirable outcome than a 0.5% contraction associated with the fiscal cliff scenario. Unemployment would stall at around 8% through 2013 before eventually falling to around 7% by the end of 2014.

????By not going off the cliff, the CBO estimates that deficits over the next decade would rise by a total of $7.7 trillion (that's "trillion" with a "T"). That would bring the total national debt somewhere to around $24 trillion by 2023 which is equal to 90% of GDP (that's pretty high). If we go off the cliff, don't expect a clean slate, though, as the nation would still have a significant budget deficit equal to 58% of GDP in 2023 due to all the mandatory spending associated with the impeding explosion in costs emanating from Social Security and Medicare.

????This is where it becomes difficult to gauge the benefits of going over the cliff. Given that the nation would still be running a significant budget deficit, with a national debt that would probably still be around where it is today, is going over the fiscal cliff worth all the short-term pain?