[go: nahoru, domu]

Jump to content

Talk:National debt of the United States: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Questions?: Added info.
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:National debt of the United States/Archive 3) (bot
 
(143 intermediate revisions by 72 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talk header}}
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Article history
|action1=GAN
|action1date=12:51, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
|action1result=not listed
|action1oldid=291850232
|currentstatus=FGAN
|itn1date=6 August 2011
}}


{{American English}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Economics|class = B
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|
|importance = mid
{{WikiProject Economics|importance = mid}}
{{WikiProject Business|importance=mid}}
}}
{{WikiProject Politics|class=B|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Finance & Investment|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=low|American=yes |American-importance=low}}
{{WikiProject United States Public Policy|class = <!-- a class specified here overrides the automatic rating based on the numerical scores -->
|importance = High
{{WikiProject United States|importance=High|USGov=Yes|USGov-importance=Low}}
|comprehensiveness = <!-- 1-10 -->
|sourcing = <!-- 0-6 -->
|neutrality = <!-- 0-3 -->
|readability = <!-- 0-3 -->
|formatting = <!-- 0-2 -->
|illustrations = <!-- 0-2 -->
}}
{{WikiProject United States|class=B|importance=low}}
}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
Line 21: Line 22:
|counter = 3
|counter = 3
|algo = old(100d)
|algo = old(100d)
|archive = Talk:United States public debt/Archive %(counter)d
|archive = Talk:National debt of the United States/Archive %(counter)d
}}
}}
{{ArticleHistory
|action1=GAN
|action1date=12:51, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
|action1result=not listed
|action1oldid=291850232
|currentstatus=FGAN
}}



{{ITNtalk|6 August|2011}}
{{Archive box|bot=MiszaBot I|age=100|auto=yes|search=yes}}
{{Archive box|bot=MiszaBot I|age=100|auto=yes|search=yes}}

== US Public Debt vs US Private Debt ==

Something's missing here. If there's a page dedicated to "United States Public Debt", why isn't there one so titled for "United States Private debt"? If understanding the "debt ceiling" invokes this page on "United States Public Debt", why not one similarly titled and detailed called "United States PRIVATE debt"?

Understanding the economic buzz surrounding the term "debt ceiling" might be easier to grasp if there was a similarly titled page called "United States PRIVATE Debt". I know I'd like to compare and contrast the two concepts. I'd write it myself, but I don't know what I'm doing, and the person who wrote and formatted the former should also format and write the latter to better contrast the two concepts (besides, quite frankly I don't even know what balancing a checkbook means (bozo_de_niro@37.com).

== Moved text ==

This article was quite long, so I've moved some text from here to [[History of the United States public debt]], [[Political debates about the United States federal budget]], and [[Deficit reduction in the United States]]. [[User:AnomieBOT|AnomieBOT]] should be along to fix the broken refs, but I'll check up tomorrow to make sure that they get fixed. [[User:Antony-22|Antony&ndash;'''''22''''']] (<sup>[[User talk:Antony-22|talk]]</sup>⁄<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Antony-22|contribs]]</sub>) 01:50, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
THE ARTICLE DOESN'T HAVE UP TO DATE INFO. I WANT TO KNOW THE BREAKDOWN OF HOLDERS OF US DEBT IN 2011 NOT 2008. GET THE DATA UPDATED. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.63.202.17|68.63.202.17]] ([[User talk:68.63.202.17|talk]]) 22:45, 2 June 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== POV ==

--cut here---

*According to a retrospective [[Brookings Institute]] study published in 1998 by the Nuclear Weapons Cost Study Committee (formed in 1993 by the [[W. Alton Jones Foundation]]), the total expenditure for [[Nuclear weapons of the United States|U.S. nuclear weapons]] from 1940 to 1998 was $5.5&nbsp;trillion in 1996 Dollars.<ref name=audit>{{cite book |title=Atomic audit: the costs and consequences of U.S. nuclear weapons since 1940 |last=Schwartz |first=Stephen I. |coauthors= Bruce G. Blair, The Brookings Institution; Thomas S. Blanton and William Burr, the National Security Archive; Steven M. Kosiak, Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments; Arjun Makhijani, Institute for Energy and Environmental Research; Robert S. Norris, Natural Resources Defense Council; Kevin O'Neill, Institute for Science and International Security; John E. Pike, Federation of American Scientists; William J. Weida, Global Resource Action Center for the Environment. |year=1998 |publisher=Brookings Institution Press |isbn=978-0815777748 |pages=3,12,105,107,461,546,551 |url= }}</ref> The total public debt at the end of fiscal year 1998 was $5,478,189&nbsp;million in 1998 Dollars<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/ |title=Historical Budget Tables |publisher=Whitehouse.gov |date=May 13, 2011 |accessdate=May 18, 2011}}</ref> or $5.3&nbsp;trillion in 1996 dollars. The ''entire public debt'' in 1998 was therefore equivalent to the funds spent on the research, development, and deployment of U.S. nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons-related programs during the [[Cold War]].<ref name=audit /><ref>"The peak U.S. inventory was around 35,000 nuclear weapons. The United States spent more than $5.5&nbsp;trillion on the nuclear arms race, an amount equal to its national debt in 1998...." {{Cite book
| last = Graham, Jr.
| first = Thomas
| title = Disarmament sketches: three decades of arms control and international law
| publisher=University of Washington Press
| year = 2002
| location = USA
| page = 35
| url =
| id =
| isbn = 978-0295982120}}</ref><ref>"...the total figure will likely be equal to the $5&nbsp;trillion national debt. In short, one quarter to one third of all military spending since World War II has been devoted to nuclear weapons and their infrastructure..." page 33, {{Cite journal
| last = Schwartz
| first = Steven I.
| coauthors = Nuclear Weapons Cost Study Committee
| title = Four Trillion Dollars and Counting
| journal=Bulletin of Atomic Scientists
| volume = 51
| issue = 6
| pages = 32–53
| publisher=Educational Foundation for Nuclear Science, Inc.
| date = November 1995
| url = http://books.google.com/books?id=DQwAAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA33&dq=national%20debt%20attributed%20to%20nuclear%20weapons&pg=PA33#v=onepage&q=national%20debt%20attributed%20to%20nuclear%20weapons&f=false
| issn = 0096-3402
| id =
}}</ref>

{{Reflist}}
-- cut here --

I cut this because it seems to be making a point, and not one that is neutral. One could just as well argue that "all the expenditure on the cold war including nuclear weapons, ever, does not make 6 months national deficit in 2012." ''[[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Rich Farmbrough|Farmbrough]]'', <small>21:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC).</small><br />

:Is the source reliable? I'd say yes, so I'd say the sourced claims stay. The equivalence can be removed though. [[User:O18|0<sup>18</sup>]] ([[User talk:O18|talk]]) 18:23, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

== federal debt vs. public debt ==

In many countries public debt refers to the total debt of federal government, states and local government debt together. That is then taken versus the GDP. Somehow the statistics in the case of USA differs in that way that it consists only of federal debt? For example: It is not clear from the article if the debt of California is part of the official 62%, or is it 100%? It is very confusing. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/140.123.114.133|140.123.114.133]] ([[User talk:140.123.114.133|talk]]) 06:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

This is just federal debt. State debt is separate. "Debt held by the public" is about 70% GDP; "Intragovernmental debt" is owed to specific program recipients such as for Social Security. The debt held by the public plus intragovernmental debt is about 100% GDP.[[User:Farcaster|Farcaster]] ([[User talk:Farcaster|talk]]) 18:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)


== Carmen & Rogoff debt-to-GDP threshold at 90 % is gross debt NOT public debt ==
== Carmen & Rogoff debt-to-GDP threshold at 90 % is gross debt NOT public debt ==
Line 128: Line 64:
_______________________________________
_______________________________________


== Wrong numbers in foreign/domestic debt ratio ==
== Update needed? ==

This article from gao.gov: http://gao.gov/assets/650/649848.pdf , states that about 5 % of the debt is from foreign investors, on Page 18.
But the wikipedia article says around 40%. The sources to this page are from the banks of the lending countries, and I would say that the US have more credible numbers, than China and Taiwan.

It's best to make that amount a cross reference. It is too hard for Wikipedians to update changing numbers in multiple places.
40% is about right in 2013.

== Introduction Text ==

Hey, I do not know a better word, but in the first paragraph right on the start of the article (paragraph? really? dictionary is stupid or?!) at the end there is written:

''On June 30, 2015, debt held by the public was $13.08 trillion or about 74% of the previous 12 months of GDP.''

This is the "public debt", but we are in the National Debt article, this sentence is very... confusing for persons who have no idea what is public and what is national debt. The public debt at the Date was I would say already far over 18 trillion dollar and over 100% of the GDP. Right now we have national debt to GDP ratio according to the US Debt Clock: 103.9855% GDP debt (means whole US economy, everything what is produced, done, consumed and so on in a whole year would not be enough to pay off the debt, if the state would "shutdown", no lights, no electricity on the street, nothing, if every cent would go to debt for a whole year... If the US would be a European Country with the common problems of South-Eastern European States (Most of these are today seperated states which were created after the Balkan War, which the younger people, okay I'm young too, lets say people under 20 years old can not remember anything of any news reports or so about the Balkan War and the European and US intervention (back than the World was okay, China became oil net importer in 1993, Soviet Union just had fallen down after it carried the whole almost puppet-states, with the East-German being the best (I talked to my mother, born in Poland, and I have some family still living in today very west Poland, meaning less than 100 kilometers air distance to the German Border (which is unguarded since January or May 2004, I think May 2004, "clicks", is it military or do you really can say it to a civilian?!) problem: there is no direct route to the Border, since the border is the "Odra" (river) you have to drive north, away from us (air distance) and than in the former "Frankfurt (an der Oder)" (Frankfurt (on the Odra) to seperate from the 10-times larger city of Frankfurt in West-Germany with the highest financial buildings and I think there is the main German stock, like the NYMEX in New York, DAX it is called...

anyway I think the US CAN do it and handle it somehow without an deflation, which often occurs before the real inflation begins, and with a very large inflation ("Hyperinflation"), in this case the debt would be away without doing anything further, but it will not happen to the us dollar, the Zimbabwe-Dollar had numbers which I can not translate (since 1 billion in English is 1 "Milliarde" in German for example), it was something with 15 or 16 numbers, first two where 92 and I think followed by 12 or 14 zeros... this was the rate in PER CENT (!). It was the heaviest Inflation known or in "newer history", would be the easiest way for the US Goverment, but it would also make the rich people poor.

See here I found it:

''During the height of inflation from 2008 to 2009, it was difficult to measure Zimbabwe's hyperinflation because the government of Zimbabwe stopped filing official inflation statistics. However, Zimbabwe's peak month of inflation is estimated at 79.6 billion percent in mid-November 2008.''

''In 2009, Zimbabwe stopped printing its currency, with currencies from other countries being used
Over the course of the five-year span of hyperinflation, the inflation rate fluctuated greatly. At one point, the US Ambassador to Zimbabwe predicted that it would reach 1.5 million percent. In June 2008 the annual rate of price growth was 11.2 million percent. The worst of the inflation occurred in 2008, leading to the abandonment of the currency.'' '''The peak month of hyperinflation occurred in mid-November 2008 with a rate estimated at 79,600,000,000% per month. This resulted in US$1 becoming equivalent to the staggering sum of $Z2,621,984,228,675,650,147,435,579,309,984,228'''


== "COVID-19 pandemic and 2021 spendings" sub-heading ==
Some of the information/graphs in this article are 3-4 years old, it seems like it could use an update.
[[User:Blm|Blm]] ([[User talk:Blm|talk]]) 15:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


Other than the spelling error ('spendings' instead of 'spending,' maybe non-native English or bot submission?), the article referenced as evidence has been updated & also doesn't support the statements present (references May report not included in article released in April and updated in June, numerical totals of expected spending are different). This isn't adding anything meaningful & doesn't promote any embellishment like a stub would. This sub-heading should be removed or reworked as a symbolic link to a separate wiki entry specifically covering the 2020 & 2021 pandemic related spending by the U.S.A.
== Questions? ==
I'm not certain how to ask questions regarding the content in this thread. But I question the estimate of the Bush Tax Cuts causing a $3B budget variance, when according to Fact-Checker @ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/revisiting-the-cost-of-the-bush-tax-cuts/2011/05/09/AFxTFtbG_blog.html the 10 year cost of the tax cuts was $1.3 trillion. If we are counting the Obama extension of these cuts, which takes the Total to $2.8 trillion, then shouldn't the extension be known as the Obama tax cuts, since they occurred during his administration? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.57.18.85|71.57.18.85]] ([[User talk:71.57.18.85|talk]]) 12:35, 9 July 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== Chart out of date ==
:Good question. The most relevant citation is from the CBO below. CBO estimated the causes of an $11.7 trillion "swing" for the worse in our debt position from 2001 projections to 2011 actual. They estimate the Bush tax cuts (EGTRRA and JGTRRA) at $1.5 trillion in reduced revenue from 2001-2011. EGTRRA is the single largest line item in the causes. All legislative revenue actions (including extension of the Bush tax cuts in 2010, stimulus, payroll tax cuts, etc.) added up to $2.8 trillion. The slow economy resulted in another $3.3 trillion in revenue losses, for a total revenue impact of $6.1 trillion. Increased outlays were $5.7 trillion. So according to CBO, our "revenue problem" was bigger than our "spending problem" in terms of this swing. [http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/06-07-ChangesSince2001Baseline.pdf CBO-Changes in Baseline Projections Since January 2001] [[User:Farcaster|Farcaster]] ([[User talk:Farcaster|talk]]) 17:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


The chart, here, [[National debt of the United States#/media/File:U.S. Federal Net Interest as Pct GDP.png]], is about 10 years old and may be easily misunderstood to be current. Recommend deletion. [[User:D wigglesworth|D wigglesworth]] ([[User talk:D wigglesworth|talk]]) 03:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
::CBO also estimated that extending the Bush tax cuts from 2011-2020 would add about $3.3 trillion to the debt, about $2.65 trillion in foregone tax revenue plus another $0.66 trillion for interest and debt service costs. See table 1.7 on page 24 of this: [http://www.cbo.gov/publication/21670 CBO-Budget and Economic Outlook] [[User:Farcaster|Farcaster]] ([[User talk:Farcaster|talk]]) 17:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


It can be found in this section, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_of_the_United_States#Interest_and_debt_service_costs <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:D wigglesworth|D wigglesworth]] ([[User talk:D wigglesworth#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/D wigglesworth|contribs]]) 03:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::Just adding info here that the report says on page 26 that if the laws were extended just for married taxpayers with income below $250,000 and single taxpayers with income below $200,000—as the President has proposed—the total added would be about $2 trillion (I think that is vs. $2.65 trillion -- rounded up to 2.7 there). Also, a better url for this is http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/117xx/doc11705/08-18-update.pdf [[User:Wtmitchell|Wtmitchell]] [[User talk:Wtmitchell|(talk)]] <small>(earlier ''Boracay Bill'')</small> 02:32, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:01, 21 April 2024

Former good article nomineeNational debt of the United States was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 24, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
In the newsA news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on August 6, 2011.

Carmen & Rogoff debt-to-GDP threshold at 90 % is gross debt NOT public debt[edit]

I emailed Carmen Reinhart about this question specifically and asked which one it is that they meant. She replied that it is gross debt, not public debt(or net debt).

Our exchange:

Hello,

I just wonder about the 90 % threshold of public debt which usually induces a GDP growth slowdown.

In the latest working paper from April this is defined as 'public debt'. Correct me if I am wrong, but the net public debt is around 68 % for the U.S.(and forecasted to rise to about mid-70s within a year or two and then stabilize).

However, America's gross debt is now over 100 %.

Which measure should be used? And can gross debt be used too for this? The term used in the working paper from April was 'public debt' - not net public debt.

I would be very happy if there was some kind of clarification on this as googling have not made me wiser!

_______________________________________________________________________________

Yes it is gross debt, which for the US is above the 90% threshold. This is the longest time series beginning in 1790. It is central (federal government), so it does not include state debt and government sponsored enterprises, which now include the two mortgage giants best Carmen

Carmen M. Reinhart Dennis Weatherstone Senior Fellow Peterson Institute for International Economics 1750 Massachussetts Avenue, NW Washington DC 20036-1903 tel. 202-454-1325 fax. 202-659-3225 creinhart@piie.com http://terpconnect.umd.edu/~creinhar/ www.carmenreinhart.com

_______________________________________

Wrong numbers in foreign/domestic debt ratio[edit]

This article from gao.gov: http://gao.gov/assets/650/649848.pdf , states that about 5 % of the debt is from foreign investors, on Page 18. But the wikipedia article says around 40%. The sources to this page are from the banks of the lending countries, and I would say that the US have more credible numbers, than China and Taiwan.

It's best to make that amount a cross reference. It is too hard for Wikipedians to update changing numbers in multiple places. 40% is about right in 2013.

Introduction Text[edit]

Hey, I do not know a better word, but in the first paragraph right on the start of the article (paragraph? really? dictionary is stupid or?!) at the end there is written:

On June 30, 2015, debt held by the public was $13.08 trillion or about 74% of the previous 12 months of GDP.

This is the "public debt", but we are in the National Debt article, this sentence is very... confusing for persons who have no idea what is public and what is national debt. The public debt at the Date was I would say already far over 18 trillion dollar and over 100% of the GDP. Right now we have national debt to GDP ratio according to the US Debt Clock: 103.9855% GDP debt (means whole US economy, everything what is produced, done, consumed and so on in a whole year would not be enough to pay off the debt, if the state would "shutdown", no lights, no electricity on the street, nothing, if every cent would go to debt for a whole year... If the US would be a European Country with the common problems of South-Eastern European States (Most of these are today seperated states which were created after the Balkan War, which the younger people, okay I'm young too, lets say people under 20 years old can not remember anything of any news reports or so about the Balkan War and the European and US intervention (back than the World was okay, China became oil net importer in 1993, Soviet Union just had fallen down after it carried the whole almost puppet-states, with the East-German being the best (I talked to my mother, born in Poland, and I have some family still living in today very west Poland, meaning less than 100 kilometers air distance to the German Border (which is unguarded since January or May 2004, I think May 2004, "clicks", is it military or do you really can say it to a civilian?!) problem: there is no direct route to the Border, since the border is the "Odra" (river) you have to drive north, away from us (air distance) and than in the former "Frankfurt (an der Oder)" (Frankfurt (on the Odra) to seperate from the 10-times larger city of Frankfurt in West-Germany with the highest financial buildings and I think there is the main German stock, like the NYMEX in New York, DAX it is called...

anyway I think the US CAN do it and handle it somehow without an deflation, which often occurs before the real inflation begins, and with a very large inflation ("Hyperinflation"), in this case the debt would be away without doing anything further, but it will not happen to the us dollar, the Zimbabwe-Dollar had numbers which I can not translate (since 1 billion in English is 1 "Milliarde" in German for example), it was something with 15 or 16 numbers, first two where 92 and I think followed by 12 or 14 zeros... this was the rate in PER CENT (!). It was the heaviest Inflation known or in "newer history", would be the easiest way for the US Goverment, but it would also make the rich people poor.

See here I found it:

During the height of inflation from 2008 to 2009, it was difficult to measure Zimbabwe's hyperinflation because the government of Zimbabwe stopped filing official inflation statistics. However, Zimbabwe's peak month of inflation is estimated at 79.6 billion percent in mid-November 2008.

In 2009, Zimbabwe stopped printing its currency, with currencies from other countries being used Over the course of the five-year span of hyperinflation, the inflation rate fluctuated greatly. At one point, the US Ambassador to Zimbabwe predicted that it would reach 1.5 million percent. In June 2008 the annual rate of price growth was 11.2 million percent. The worst of the inflation occurred in 2008, leading to the abandonment of the currency. The peak month of hyperinflation occurred in mid-November 2008 with a rate estimated at 79,600,000,000% per month. This resulted in US$1 becoming equivalent to the staggering sum of $Z2,621,984,228,675,650,147,435,579,309,984,228

"COVID-19 pandemic and 2021 spendings" sub-heading[edit]

Other than the spelling error ('spendings' instead of 'spending,' maybe non-native English or bot submission?), the article referenced as evidence has been updated & also doesn't support the statements present (references May report not included in article released in April and updated in June, numerical totals of expected spending are different). This isn't adding anything meaningful & doesn't promote any embellishment like a stub would. This sub-heading should be removed or reworked as a symbolic link to a separate wiki entry specifically covering the 2020 & 2021 pandemic related spending by the U.S.A.

Chart out of date[edit]

The chart, here, National debt of the United States#/media/File:U.S. Federal Net Interest as Pct GDP.png, is about 10 years old and may be easily misunderstood to be current. Recommend deletion. D wigglesworth (talk) 03:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It can be found in this section, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_of_the_United_States#Interest_and_debt_service_costs — Preceding unsigned comment added by D wigglesworth (talkcontribs) 03:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]