I am now beginning to understand the totality of recorded US debt, also known as "Credit Market Debt" and as "public and private debt".
Several previous posts ( here.and here) have briefly discussed various components of this $52 trillion US debt. This post focuses on the "US federal government debt" component of the $52 trillion, and its connection with "sovereign debt", and budget deficits. It is also the first in a number of posts to begin relating, in some detail, US debt and US borrowing, to US consumption (GDP), US GDP growth, and US federal government budgets, and to compare those entities with similar entities in other parts of the world.
Figure 1 starts the ball rolling by breaking down the $52 trillion debt into its components, and their recent history, as reported by the Federal Flow of Funds report published March 2010.
Figure 1 US Public and Private Debt (Total Debt) by Component
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
US Credit Market Debt Analysis -- 1
In earlier posts I suggested that the industrial world has entered a period where consistently exceeding a real GDP CAGR of about 2% will be very difficult.
The reasons for this malaise in the industrial world, I believe, are threefold:
- The GDP growth rate has been slowing for several decades and that trend is now approaching 2% CAGR.
- A very heavy current debt burden in almost all industrial countries which hinders future GDP growth
- The increasing difficulty (costs) of acquiring the natural resources on which our industrial civilization depends
Fig 1 below says that US citizens ended calendar 2009 owing about $52 trillion to each other and to foreigners. What does that mean?
Figure 1 US Credit Market Debt by Sector
----------------
----------------
Labels:
Debt,
Federal Budget,
Financial Crisis,
Fundamentals,
GDP
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Notes on Debt Fueled GDP Growth
I am now convinced that the level of US debt -- see my post here -- will make it impossible for us (Americans) to rapidly attain a consistent real GDP CAGR greater than about 2%, without massive government funding, and if "everything goes right".
This post is a quick summary, with pictures, of some the data that convinces me. Later posts will elaborate.
Figure 1. Total US Debt and Real GDP Annual Growth Rates with 4 year moving averages.
---------------
This post is a quick summary, with pictures, of some the data that convinces me. Later posts will elaborate.
Figure 1. Total US Debt and Real GDP Annual Growth Rates with 4 year moving averages.
---------------
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
US Consumption Growth and US Debt -- Magnitudes and Relationships
In an earlier posting, I said that the main US consumption growth inhibitors would probably be American debt, and the rising price of natural resources, particularly oil.
Figure 1. World Real Average Compound Annual Growth Rates (CAGR) for Population, GDP/Capita and GDP. History from deLong and US Census Bureau, Projection from ERS, USDA. History is based on "1990 International Dollar", projection is based on Real $2005.
-----
This post is my first in a planned series in which I take a detailed look at the debt situation in America and the world. This first post looks at total US debt and compares it with US GDP growth over long time periods.
Figure 1. World Real Average Compound Annual Growth Rates (CAGR) for Population, GDP/Capita and GDP. History from deLong and US Census Bureau, Projection from ERS, USDA. History is based on "1990 International Dollar", projection is based on Real $2005.
-----
Labels:
Financial Crisis,
Fundamentals,
GDP,
GDP/Capita,
Growth,
Peak Oil
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Consumption Growth Inhibitors
Chart1. Copied from US Budget (Obama Budget) FY2011 published Jan 2010 |
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Heinberg -- Life After Growth
Heinberg is one of the early "no growth" and "peak oil" evangelists. I have posted his article below to give us all a sense of the thinking of one of the very influential early "no growth" thinkers.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
More On US Debt and US GDP Growth
A Floyd Norris piece in the NY Times fits neatly into the recent posts on debt.
Off the Charts - Ratio of Troubled Loans Means Banks Aren’t Out of the Woods - NYTimes.com: "February 27, 2010
By FLOYD NORRIS
Off the Charts - Ratio of Troubled Loans Means Banks Aren’t Out of the Woods - NYTimes.com: "February 27, 2010
By FLOYD NORRIS
" MORE than $1 in every $10 that American banks have outstanding in loans is lent to a troubled borrower, a ratio far higher than previously seen in the quarter-century that such numbers have been compiled.
Saturday, February 27, 2010
More on the EU, Greek Debt and Bail Outs
See my background piece here for further info on US investment banks, consumption growth, the EU and Greece. EU growth and return to BAU is an essential element in our USG assumption of a return to BAU for the world, and therefore a return to BAU for America. I am convinced we Americans will soon be having the same discussions about "bailing out" some of our own states -- Michigan? California? New York?.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Investment Banks, Debt and Consumption Growth -- Greek and EU Example
The past and present practices of the American banking system and the consequent debt picture in the industrial world are among the many impediments to future consumption growth.
The little introduction below is necessary as a lead in to my first blog (of probably many blogs) on the connection of the US investment banks to the past and future consumption growth of the US and the rest of the world.
The little introduction below is necessary as a lead in to my first blog (of probably many blogs) on the connection of the US investment banks to the past and future consumption growth of the US and the rest of the world.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Rebalancing World Consumption -- China and the US
Yesterday Professor Simon Johnson made a presentation to the US House of Representatives on US Debt to China. Johnson is one of the economists I read regularly, and with whom I usually agree. For those who have the time I recommend you read his blog referenced above. If not, here is a summary (italicised below) with my own comments.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Growth, Financial Crises and Opportunities
It is clear that every American politician and every American economist agrees that America was recently in a "credit crisis", and that the only solution to the US "credit/debt" problem, exacerbated by US Government (USG) intervention to solve the "credit crisis", is to grow our consumption faster than our government expenditure.
Friday, February 19, 2010
US Government Budget Assumptions and International Consensus re Consumption Growth Rates
This post summarizes, in pictures, the consumption growth forecasts for America and the world, which underlie the US Government (USG) FY 2011 Budget published in January 2010. The growth assumptions are almost identical with those of the IMF, the World Bank and other international economic agencies.
Friday, February 5, 2010
Obama FY2011 US Government Budget -- First look
President Obama submitted his US FY 2011 Budget last week. This post is a first quick look at the numbers and their import. The assumptions and numbers in this annual budget exercise are the most important determinants of world growth and world peace. Why do I say that?
Monday, February 1, 2010
Actual and Forecast Consumption Growth Rate -- GDP History and Projection
This is the third in a series of three postings -- first an introduction to the blog, second a quick review of historical anthropological consumption growth, and then the current post which connects prehistoric consumption to current consumption and projections of future consumption and consumption growth.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Human Consumption Then and Now
The first post here tells you what I am trying to understand and record in this blog.
The current post is the first of probably a very large number of short essays and pictures about our human demands, and the growth of those demands, on world resources.
The current post is the first of probably a very large number of short essays and pictures about our human demands, and the growth of those demands, on world resources.
Labels:
Fundamentals,
GDP,
GDP/Capita,
Growth,
History,
Population,
Prehistory
Monday, January 25, 2010
An Introduction
My audience is the "Grandparent's Camp Kids" now in, or soon to be in, college.
It is you, you singers and musicians, you economists and anthropologists and paleontologists and "yet to decide what you want to be high schoolers", I have in mind as I blog.
I want us to think out loud, as it were, about the consequences of the improvement in the standard of living of the "average" world citizen during the last couple of centuries. I want us to ponder the consequences, positive and negative, of the growth in our income which has permitted us to live the life of luxury we do. I want us to think deeply about our future growth and its probable effects.
Grow. Increase and Multiply. Subdue the earth. Never have we been more successful in following those directives from the God of Abraham. Never has the human race grown faster in numbers and in consumption (income) than we have in the last half of the 20th century. Nature lies prostrate before us. Americans are the apotheosis of that success. We bestride the earth like a colossus. We live in the land of milk and honey.
We live in the most exciting, the most challenging, the most dangerous, and the most promising of times in human history. It is fitting we should now hold a mirror to our world and reflect on our future trajectory.
How should we conduct ourselves? Should we plan to continue our exponential growth? Do we want to? Is it possible? What are the consequences? Are we near the limits of our increasingly fragile world?
In this new century perhaps we will find a new challenge. Perhaps, to continue as a successful species, we will need to replace our apparent need for consumption, competition, and growth, with a less aggressive focus on community and cooperation.
But "touchy feely" stuff is not what this blog is about. I want to examine hard, data to help us determine the probable consequences if we continue on our current growth trajectory, and the alternatives open to us if we determine we cannot. No one can be certain about the future, but sound science, logical thinking and appropriate policies can reduce the likelihood of us stumbling into dead ends, or perishing in a holocaust of our own making.
I want to meditate on the growth of human consumption and waste, and the burden we have already placed on our finite world. I want to quantify what our, understandably vague, political leaders are telling us about their growth plans for our future.
To understand the future we must know something about how we got to where we are. I want to start by examining our past consumption, and cogitate on its effects on our history, and how it has shaped the world in which we now live. But how do we measure "consumption"?
GDP is the only universally accepted, routinely reported, reasonably uniform, closely analysed and frequently forecast measure of human "income", and therefore "consumption". To repeat, GDP is the measure of our "income", or our "consumption" or our "demands", our "standard of living", whatever you want to call it -- all measured in "money". GDP/Year is the amount we consume in one year.
Population is the second universally accepted measure. Although the world's population is not counted and reported as frequently as GDP, nevertheless population is counted frequently enough, and population trends change sufficiently slowly that we can be reasonably confident of the accuracy of population counts in the recent past and the population numbers forecast for the near future -- say about three or four decades out.
GDP per capita (GDP/Population) provides us with a measure of the world's "average individual" consumption, and provides us with a metric to compare the "average individual" consumption across centuries, and across geographical regions.
Every world leader espouses the concept of "growing our way out of the current financial crisis". All the bank bailouts and all the fiscal stimulants injected into the economy depend on future GDP growth to succeed. Maximizing GDP growth is the holy grail of all politicians now in office. I want to look at the detailed macroeconomics of this GDP growth, and the mathematics of slowing growth.
I want to ruminate on how we relate our consumption, denominated in money, to our consumption of the most critical natural resources necessary for our survival. In addition to the Greek elements of "earth, air, fire and water", on which we clearly depend, it may turn out that this slippery man made thing we call "money" is one of the "resources" we require for continuing GDP growth. We shall see.
Unfortunately, the natural resources on which we depend have no routinely measured and universally accepted metrics for their current, past or future rate of consumption, nor for their current quantity "available". We operate on the belief that as the price of a scarce resource rises, we will find an equivalent or better and cheaper alternative. As you well know from your high school and college text books, our economic system rests on the paradigm that the natural resources critical to our welfare are limited only by price, and therefore only by human ingenuity.
This belief system has worked well for the last couple of hundred years, but there are a few voices pointing to disturbing data which threaten this creed. The metrics for proving or disproving these discordant ideas are not yet established. The measures of our survival are only now slowly and painfully being derived, usually at the derision of the world's main stream economists, and the obstructionist tactics of the world's most powerful legislative body, the US Congress.
I want to understand the limitations of nature's resources and man's money.
Although GDP is a 20th centruy concept, world and regional GDP's of previous centuries and geographical regions have been deduced by economic historians. The granddaddy of all these economists is Professor Angus Maddison now retired. I'll use his work and the work of various other experts like Professor Bradford de Long of UC Berkeley, as appropriate, in this area.
I think best in pictures, and I detest statements which cannot be backed up with data. I expect this blog to be littered with charts and graphs!
It is you, you singers and musicians, you economists and anthropologists and paleontologists and "yet to decide what you want to be high schoolers", I have in mind as I blog.
I want us to think out loud, as it were, about the consequences of the improvement in the standard of living of the "average" world citizen during the last couple of centuries. I want us to ponder the consequences, positive and negative, of the growth in our income which has permitted us to live the life of luxury we do. I want us to think deeply about our future growth and its probable effects.
Grow. Increase and Multiply. Subdue the earth. Never have we been more successful in following those directives from the God of Abraham. Never has the human race grown faster in numbers and in consumption (income) than we have in the last half of the 20th century. Nature lies prostrate before us. Americans are the apotheosis of that success. We bestride the earth like a colossus. We live in the land of milk and honey.
We live in the most exciting, the most challenging, the most dangerous, and the most promising of times in human history. It is fitting we should now hold a mirror to our world and reflect on our future trajectory.
How should we conduct ourselves? Should we plan to continue our exponential growth? Do we want to? Is it possible? What are the consequences? Are we near the limits of our increasingly fragile world?
In this new century perhaps we will find a new challenge. Perhaps, to continue as a successful species, we will need to replace our apparent need for consumption, competition, and growth, with a less aggressive focus on community and cooperation.
But "touchy feely" stuff is not what this blog is about. I want to examine hard, data to help us determine the probable consequences if we continue on our current growth trajectory, and the alternatives open to us if we determine we cannot. No one can be certain about the future, but sound science, logical thinking and appropriate policies can reduce the likelihood of us stumbling into dead ends, or perishing in a holocaust of our own making.
I want to meditate on the growth of human consumption and waste, and the burden we have already placed on our finite world. I want to quantify what our, understandably vague, political leaders are telling us about their growth plans for our future.
To understand the future we must know something about how we got to where we are. I want to start by examining our past consumption, and cogitate on its effects on our history, and how it has shaped the world in which we now live. But how do we measure "consumption"?
GDP is the only universally accepted, routinely reported, reasonably uniform, closely analysed and frequently forecast measure of human "income", and therefore "consumption". To repeat, GDP is the measure of our "income", or our "consumption" or our "demands", our "standard of living", whatever you want to call it -- all measured in "money". GDP/Year is the amount we consume in one year.
Population is the second universally accepted measure. Although the world's population is not counted and reported as frequently as GDP, nevertheless population is counted frequently enough, and population trends change sufficiently slowly that we can be reasonably confident of the accuracy of population counts in the recent past and the population numbers forecast for the near future -- say about three or four decades out.
GDP per capita (GDP/Population) provides us with a measure of the world's "average individual" consumption, and provides us with a metric to compare the "average individual" consumption across centuries, and across geographical regions.
Every world leader espouses the concept of "growing our way out of the current financial crisis". All the bank bailouts and all the fiscal stimulants injected into the economy depend on future GDP growth to succeed. Maximizing GDP growth is the holy grail of all politicians now in office. I want to look at the detailed macroeconomics of this GDP growth, and the mathematics of slowing growth.
I want to ruminate on how we relate our consumption, denominated in money, to our consumption of the most critical natural resources necessary for our survival. In addition to the Greek elements of "earth, air, fire and water", on which we clearly depend, it may turn out that this slippery man made thing we call "money" is one of the "resources" we require for continuing GDP growth. We shall see.
Unfortunately, the natural resources on which we depend have no routinely measured and universally accepted metrics for their current, past or future rate of consumption, nor for their current quantity "available". We operate on the belief that as the price of a scarce resource rises, we will find an equivalent or better and cheaper alternative. As you well know from your high school and college text books, our economic system rests on the paradigm that the natural resources critical to our welfare are limited only by price, and therefore only by human ingenuity.
This belief system has worked well for the last couple of hundred years, but there are a few voices pointing to disturbing data which threaten this creed. The metrics for proving or disproving these discordant ideas are not yet established. The measures of our survival are only now slowly and painfully being derived, usually at the derision of the world's main stream economists, and the obstructionist tactics of the world's most powerful legislative body, the US Congress.
I want to understand the limitations of nature's resources and man's money.
Although GDP is a 20th centruy concept, world and regional GDP's of previous centuries and geographical regions have been deduced by economic historians. The granddaddy of all these economists is Professor Angus Maddison now retired. I'll use his work and the work of various other experts like Professor Bradford de Long of UC Berkeley, as appropriate, in this area.
I think best in pictures, and I detest statements which cannot be backed up with data. I expect this blog to be littered with charts and graphs!
Labels:
Fundamentals,
GDP,
GDP/Capita,
Introduction,
Population
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)