Once you subtract US Debt liabilities, citizens end up with -88826 per person though.
Please be careful citing these figures.
The US's current debt load by percentage would have been a national outrage at any time in the last 100 years and we really have no idea how this game will play out. I would not trivialize it. 135% is a staggering and unprecedented for a major international power and the list of countries who have faced issues with smaller debt loads in the past is long.
That’s why Japan didn’t suffer any of the theoretical downsides and neither will the US.
Yet. This argument can be viewed like smoking.
I think the real question becomes what happens when the lender decides not to lend more because they realize they're never getting paid, or the call the loans and now they want what? Our businesses, our land, our children, our sovereignty?
Also as money saturates a system, it gets used on less and less productive things. We'll see the results of spending a dollar (long run) to get a nickel (today).
Here's one reason you cant. The whole argument around mmt is based on our reserve currency status. Ie if you are Zimbabwe mmt doesn't work. But if you were to increase debt buy that much (ie increase money supply drastically) that's essentially economic warfare on our trading partners who rely on dollars. So the more we print the less attractive the dollar is as a reserve currency. But remember that first part? Inflation will kick in more rapidly the further we push people toward adopting other trade currencies and dollar demand drops.
NOBODY who studies economic policy, not even any MMTer I've heard of advocates for a 1000% ratio because they understand it would break the international trade system. They simply think we can print a lot further than we have
There is no rule that that money has to be deposited or will be deposited. Huge amounts of it end up in financial instruments including things like leveraged derivatives that no one would say are anything like a deposit.
The OP seems to have a perfectly reasonable understanding of how government debt works and it is absolutely reasonable to hold the assets of a thing up against it's liabilities to ascertain standing.
For many governments that issue currency, particularly the US government, that is how it works. Not exactly the machinery, but close enough. To a first approximation, "debt" is just part of the money supply.
For you, it is not. It is a debt. Because: you are not a government. You do not issue currency. You are not immortal.
Cheers.
If creating debt == savings we would not limit ourselves to merely 135% because there is no downside to savings.
The US is not immortal at least it is certainly not guaranteed to be.
And as much as it hides the uglier realities of having to think through the mechanics of actually running a government, the assumption that the US has an unlimited capacity to monetize debt, even given it's current (and deteriorating) defacto reserve currency status, has never been a meaningful framework for thinking about monetary policy
A condescending cheers back to you.