Brent P wrote:
In article . com, Leif Erikson wrote:
Brent P wrote:
In article . com, wrote:
You just stated that the number is meaningless, and in the sense that the
currancy is not related to anything real, you're correct. Any number of
games can be played with it.
The number is not meaningless. It's very meaningful if used and
compared with other relevant economic statistics, like the size of the
economy.
Comparing debt to the size of the economy is just a feel good for now
measure
No. It's the correct way to analyze the national debt. It is
accurately indicative of the ability to pay and the effect on exchange
rates.
And the USA is going to pay the debt exactly when now? Or just revolve it
and revolve it until there's just too much....
How can there be "too much" if it remains a relatively constant share
of GDP? Unlike individuals, the government doesn't die. It will
always have the ability to pay off old debt and issue new.
Like most economic illiterates, you project what you think of as
prudent personal financial behavior onto the government, but the
government doesn't resemble an individual at all.
The government is constantly spending money on capital goods - bridges,
ports, airports, military hardware, etc. - and those goods are not
going to be consumed all in one period. Thus, it doesn't make sense to
pay for them all in one period, either. People will be "consuming"
nuclear submarines and other things for many years to come; there's no
reason they shouldn't be paying for them for the duration of the goods'
service.