4 ms·
Also no mention of "share of GDP". Basically, the article is rubbish.
by encoderer 9y ago
Also no mention of "share of GDP".
Basically, the article is rubbish.
- NTDF9 9y agoShare of GDP seems important. Why is this rubbish?
- sologoub 9y agoNot the OP, but I think the comment meant that without inflation adjustment and proper ratios, you can't draw correct conclusions. The nominal number is big, but 2008 number is today's dollars would have been $14.17 trillion, or 11.3% higher than the current debt reported.
- ericd 9y agohttp://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/households-debt-to-gdp http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/households-deb... Switch the graph to 10 year. We're significantly lower on the household side, not so on the government side. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt-to-gdp http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-deb...