There's nothing magical about 100% debt:GDP ratio. Why is "we need to work for a year to pay back all we have borrowed" qualitatively different from "we need to

There's nothing magical about 100% debt:GDP ratio. Why is "we need to work for a year to pay back all we have borrowed" qualitatively different from "we need to work 2 years" or 3. Or half a year. First of all there's no need to pay it back in one year (or 2, or whatever fixed timeframe), it's very-very-very likely that if paying the debt service ever becomes a serious problem it's possible to switch it out with longer maturity bonds, and/or restructure it. “The Treasury is already extending the WAM of the debt gradually over time under the current issuance profile.” "The weighted average maturity (WAM) dropped from around 70 months just before the pandemic to less that 65 months - or just over five years - at the end of 2020 ..." https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy-yellen-bonds-idUSKBN2BF2LP https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy-yellen-bonds-... It's entirely logical to take on debt as long as it leads to positive revenue/growth. (Meaning as long as it has a positive return on investment.)