Comments on: Total US Debt As A Percentage Of GDP

By: Ross

Ross — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 16:06:50 +0000

well said!

By: DL

DL — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 12:57:14 +0000

Could you please provide the source for the graph before 1976 (after this date the data is given by the FED Z1report). Many thanks in advance
DL

By: The Delivery Guy

The Delivery Guy — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:21:27 +0000

@ Trader- Or the fallacy of sucking the productive economy dry to fund huge benefits for government workers. My brother is a doctor and his taxes are obscene, my father is a retired mid-level federal employee and his retirement benefits are Obscene. At current interest rates I would need $5.3 Million invested to match his pension. There are too many government employees getting to large of benefits, the private sector cannot mathematically support it.

Also wealth is not finite, it is created, the fact you can’t comprehend that on the left is why talking to you is impossible. If I as a private sector citizen am wealthy its because I created productive activity that created value. Since you lefties are mostly in the government you only understand getting benefits from taking from others.

Productive activity good.
Entitlements bad.

End of the lesson.

By: Ben

Ben — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 13:39:05 +0000

Hey Michael,
I know there are some sources listed under the graph, but I wasn’t able to find any information on the actual data included nor what explicitly encompasses ALL U.S. debt. Do you know where I could find that information?

By: SMIA1948

SMIA1948 — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 14:08:02 +0000

This chart is meaningless without a corresponding chart of *assets* as a a percent of GDP. Even then, you would have to be very careful to put both charts on an “apples to apples” basis. For example, if I take out a mortgage to buy a house, the house is an asset to me and the mortgage is a liability. However, to the bank, the mortgage is an *asset*, which they can borrow against from (say) another bank. Then this second bank could do the same against the asset that the loan to the first bank represents to them. Simply adding up the “debts” in the system tells you nothing.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 02:51:01 +0000

Paul Krugmsn gave us the mentality that the government can never spend enough and you can always have your cake and eat it too.

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:32:34 +0000

The FALLACY in this chart, without CONTEXT, is that the GDP CAN GO DOWN, or collapse, which of course sends the RATIO soaring!!
Just read Paul Krugman if you really want to understand!

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:01:14 +0000

Chart looks a little fishy to me. How did we pay down so much debt during WWII and Korea?

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 00:36:28 +0000

So the traveler lucked out by getting his money back. Actually this could work for a secluded community on Gilligan’s Island. All the participants are trading their services, EVERYONE is producing VALUE and trading it!

Now what happens when Gilligan borrows money from a naive individual over in east bum forest, on the other side of the word? Instead of offering his service he now sits around all day eating hotdogs that he bought from the butcher and does not trade any products or services of value in return.

What happens when the Chines figure out that they have been working long hard hours and financing Americans high standard of living and will never be paid back?

The scary part is the GDP rate at which government officials have assumed. What people don’t talk about is WHEN GDP declines at an alarming rate this graph will be so off the charts no one can comprehend the Economic Tsunami…

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:56:32 +0000

The chart that I posted includes all forms of debt (government, business and consumer), so that it why those two charts will look vastly different.

Michael