This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Great American Debt Flow
By EconMatters
The public debt of the United States has increased by over $500 billion each year since fiscal year (FY) 2003, and as of September, 2011, the gross debt was about $14.7 trillion, of which closed to $10 trillion was held by the public and about $4.6 trillion was intragovernmental holdings (e.g. Social Security, Medicare, etc. which some believe should not be included as part of the national debt). The gross debt is about 98% of the U.S. GDP in 2011, and debt held by the public at 67% of GDP.
The U.S. is hardly the lone ranger on this great quest of debt accumulation. According to the IMF Fiscal Monitor published in April 2011, general government gross debt-to-GDP ratios are rising substantially in most advanced economies over the period of 2010 to 2015. IMF now projects that ratio would reach 107.3% by 2016 for the advanced economies, vs. 30.1% for the emerging countries. Moreover, deficits in the United States, along with Japan, are expected to increase by at least 3% of GDP between 2007 and 2016.
However, the high debt level and the recent sovereign credit downgrade (albeit controversial) so far has not affected the U.S. borrowing rate benefiting primarily from the Euro Zone sovereign debt crisis. The U.S. bond yields are still at record low levels, which has befuddled PIMCO the Bond King. Treasuries have returned 9.8% this year, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch Indexes as reported by Bloomberg. Ten-year notes have returned 18%, while 30-year bonds have returned 36%.
This anomaly in the bond market also temporarily blunted the urgency of an in-house debt cleaning. Government is no different from an ordinary household in that when in serious debt trouble, you cut spending while trying to expand revenue stream. But the Federal Reserve said on Sept. 21 that it would buy longer-term debt to lower borrowing costs and downgraded the economic outlook, while some experts see the U.S. is already in a double dip recession.
And as protests and strikes in Europe would attest that austerity measures, high unemployment rate, and diminishing household income tend to form a volatile mix. From that perspective, the infographic is a scary reminder that America is at a treacherous debt crossroad, and most signs seem to suggest that things could get even more difficult from here on out.
Created by: MBA Online
© EconMatters All Rights Reserved | Facebook | Twitter | Post Alert | Kindle
»
- EconMatters's blog
- 13867 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
And let's find out if it's cheaper to pay direct and cut out the USgov middlemen.
no shit
i'll write the check today for my fair share, if .gov promises to never talk to me again
no more debt, spending, infrastructure,'benefits','entitlements' in my name ever again.period.
they can have the money, but then they need to fuck off down the road
Fuck that. .Gov has 6 figures of mine in my special SS 'account'. I'll pay off my debt and I want the rest straight from Ft. Knox, in gold. Oh look, is that a umicorn? What's this? Skittles? Weeee! /sarc off But like you say, tell Sam to fuck off unless he wants to tax consumption to pay fordefense...
you dont even have a government to collect it......we will just wait you out, until you all go bankrupt
WE DO NOW! :)
I'll take payments through paypal.
ZH has 2 million readers...
100 bucks each...
minus paypal fees...
= ENOUGH FOR ME! :)
i did not sign up for these debts, the politicians did...make them pay the bill, not me.
I've just had a dark thought: every penny the USA lent Britain in WW2, America made us pay back. Every single powdered egg packet was paid for. Every bullet and parachute. I think it was all paid off by the year 2000. Funny how no-one in the USA complained that was unfair, that 'joe public' in Britain hadn't done anything wrong and shouldn't be saddled with debt.
So I want my freaking money. [Imagine a really fierce, grim emoticon here.]
Come and get it, you warmongering limey fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck.
How warmongering, drinking-straw-dick? It's a non-sequitur. There's no connection. I suggest you stick to what Americans are best at, milking your dinosaurs and riding herds of 50ft Oprah Winfrey to work.
Your grim emoticon has swayed me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeP6CpUnfc0
Ah, but through the dark miracle of majoritarian democracy... you did sign up for these debts. It works like this:
Did you vote for the winning party? Then you can hardly complain about what they're doing - you helped get them into power. Shut up and pay 'your' taxes.
Did you vote for the losing party? Then you expected everyone else to have to obey a government you would have elected. Therefore, you approve of the system. Shut up and pay 'your' taxes.
Did you refuse to vote? Then you did nothing to change the system, so you can't complain about what the system does in your name. Shut up and pay 'your' taxes.
Clever, huh? Of course, by this reasoning... as our government is just doing the will of the people, then terrorists are justified killing civilians, because civilians are the government. For some reason this is not an angle discussed much in the MSM when covering terrorism.
BJim:
They have said "One man's Terrorist is another man's "Feeedom Fighter."
That requires discrimination in one's opinion and point of view.
"Discrimination" has been dehumanized in certain venues and discussions. Yet, in all real business (excepting e.g.: Solara, and the geeenie nonsense) it is the basis of sound and well-challenged judgement).
But, ... well ... shooters are charged with exacting exercise of "discrimination" with respect to their targets. It separates them.
- Ned
A U.S. citizen is:
an imported statutory person.
an alien in the state of legal residence.
a shareholder in the Federal corporation, and liable for the debts of the corporation.
a voluntary agent of the corporation, through receiving wages or operating under license, in commerce.
property of the Federal corporation, by and through the legal trust that is U.S. citizenship.
It's in Black's Law Dictionary.
You could look it up.
http://georgesblogforum.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/blacks-law-dictionary-o...
this has always been my arguement, that in a democracy no one is inocent, but i have never seen it written down before
All are guilty, but some are guiltier than others.
That's because when you see it written down, you realise just how absurd it is.
You can always emigrate to Mexico. Good luck!
Canada might be better... or Australia, or New Zealand...
h, and here is the oldest and most miserable one-DJIA and correspondingly, economy forecast made in Feb6, 2011:
http://saposjoint.net/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=2626&start=0#p30485
Whole 2012 AND 2013 will be a recession in the USA (and many other places)-that was clear long ago. Greece starts it -fine, does not change the overall picture.
So Obama stands no chance to be reelected. Third party will have a good chance since both other screwed it up totally
You forget that no matter what theBamster does or doesn't do, (just like Clinton and hillary Rodman) 42% of the VOTERS in this country, will vote for him again, even if he kills one of their family.
The partisans in this country are dogmatic about their candidate, it simply becomes a matter of attracting another 11% for theBamster and Viola! he's in again.
He will get the votes to squeak by next year, even if the country is in a Depression, another 9/11 or worse event happens, or if---- by some really wondrous miracle---the economy begins a return to normalcy.
It's in the bag, and if Intrade has a bet going yet, I'm taking the other side of all bets that theBamster will lose.
Not that it matters since the country is ungovernable for the benefit of a very tiny 1%.
ivars,
Third party will have a good chance since both other screwed it up totally
Not the way it works here,the two parties have set up so many hurdles and roadblocks, it's almopst impossible to start a 3rd party,much less get them set up in time to vote.
It's a rigged game.
and, well, purported "third party" actually has worked against its "intended outcome" c.f.
- Wallace in '68, results in Nixon
- H in '92, resluts [sic] in Clinton,
- Nader in FLA in '00, steals just enough that even the NYT can't hang "voter fraud" on W,
- Kerry "Can I get me a huntin' liscence heah?" in OH--pissing off enough AMCITS to kill his bid for the state.
- Ned
{OK, I made up the last one, but u get the picture.}