Replies

PS - the reason that chart is so misleading is that it tracks debt against GDP without the correlation that such ratios will decline significantly along with an economic recovery, exactly as it did after the great depression, which the chart presenter was so fondly trying to establish guilt by association with.

History doesn't jive with your observations. Why didn't the ratio of debt to GDP decline significantly after the '81 recession? From '85-'90 debt outgrew the economy, and the same thing happened again roughly 95-00. Do you think debt/earnings ratio can keep climbing without imperilling the ability to make current/future purchases? Please explain, I'm curious. If a someone is making $50,000/yr and servicing $150,000 of debt, do you think that negatively impacts his ability to make additional purchases today and tomorrow? Lower interest rates will increase the amount of debt he can service, but you do realize there is a limit, right? What happens when someone takes on more debt than they can service? They default. Many people are going to learn that what they always considered their savings were really someone else's debt, and when the defaults start rolling, well, we've played that game before...

It depends on what kinds of debt you're speaking of, another reason why the chart is misleading because it couches everything together. But, even still, so what? Debt typically rises along with wealth and, correspondingly, income & GDP. The only time that wasn't true, and the graph inadvertently shows it, is during periods of economic stagnation or decline. Do you really wish the economy would perform like it would during the years of depression? After all, that's when the graph depicts the kinds of behavior you sanction. The graph is also scaled such that the there are areas that level off which you need to pay attention to. As to the questions ...

"Do you think debt/earnings ratio can keep climbing without imperilling the ability to make current/future purchases? Please explain, I'm curious.

As long as earnings increase, yes. this is basic. do you really not understand that?

If a someone is making $50,000/yr and servicing $150,000 of debt, do you think that negatively impacts his ability to make additional purchases today and tomorrow?

obviously it depends on other factors like the rate of interest and other fixed costs incurred by the borrower. Without such the question is unanswerable.

Lower interest rates will increase the amount of debt he can service, but you do realize there is a limit, right?

there is certainly a limit but it's not the one you bears keep hyping - I personally don't mind if somebody has to pay out the same out of money to borrow more money at a lower rate. It's the same principle (pun intended) as you folks get in such a tizzy about that people have been getting lower rate mortgages that allow them to buy bigger, more expensive houses for the same bottom line as they could previously buy smaller, cheaper houses at higher rates. I like people getting more bang for less bucks!

What happens when someone takes on more debt than they can service? They default.

some do, some have, some always will. duh. this has happened since near the dawn of earth and yet the earth still turns.

Many people are going to learn that what they always considered their savings were really someone else's debt

this is beyond hyperbole and not applicable to myself.

and when the defaults start rolling, well, we've played that game before...

I'll leave it to you, I've never played that game before as I'm not that stupid. But thanks for the admission as the rest of your fearmongering all makes sense now ;)