Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (140754)	7/17/2004 2:50:06 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

The numbers are more recent. The last year mentioned in the text is 2002, but I do not know the precise provenance. I have not found anything to cure the discrepancy. I accept the 60% figure, since it does not affect the main point. I believe you have confused interest repayment as a percentage of domestic spending with its overall proportion in the budget, but I am not sure. A pie chart I found for fiscal year 2005 had it at 8%. Anyway, I do not want to make this into a long digression. The main point is that the growth in debt is only important in relationship to GDP growth, and if GDP growth is greater in the long run, there is no problem. Indeed, we have carried far more relative debt (over 100% of GDP) and still had a flourishing economy. Second, the percentage of interest payments figuring in the budget is the best way to assess the fiscal impact of debt. We are neither in danger of defaulting, nor of having deficits be driven by the need to pay interest alone, even supposing the 19%.