> There’s no magic number at which the debt load becomes a full-on crisis.
When the US loses its AAA borrowing status and countless funds are required to sell all US Bonds, you will see that statement is incorrect.
When the US loses its AAA borrowing status and countless funds are required to sell all US Bonds, you will see that statement is incorrect.
Furthermore, you presume the money would be spent on successful and profitable projects, rather than being squandered away. If only it were so easy.
To make it slightly more realistic, let’s say the Galactic Development Bank of Betelgeuse offered us that amount as a loan, along with access to their expertise and trading partners, with 1000 years to pay it off.
My actual point is that in the ratio of debt to GDP, perhaps we should use projected future GDP in the denominator, rather than current GDP. This is why a hard upper limit on debt (or even debt-to-GDP ratio) is a dubious idea. It’s all about what the government does with the money.
House reps and their staffers should sign them their name to it because seeing a government website with very biased political points is odd.
If that didn't happen a lot more than just the government's credit would unwind. That's the primary reason debt is still purchased despite the obvious fact that it will never be repaid.
/s