Yep because the gift we received we have thus squandered and it is time to take it back. No worries we are not just at the bottom, we are below the stratosphere: Rank Country Amount 1 China 179,100,000,000 2 Japan 174,400,000,000 3 Germany 134,800,000,000 4 Russia 105,300,000,000 5 Saudi Arabia 103,800,000,000 6 Norway 63,330,000,000 7 Switzerland 50,440,000,000 8 Netherlands 50,170,000,000 9 Kuwait 40,750,000,000 10 Singapore 35,580,000,000 11 Venezuela 31,820,000,000 12 Sweden 28,610,000,000 13 United Arab Emirates 26,890,000,000 14 Algeria 25,800,000,000 15 Hong Kong 20,900,000,000 16 Canada 20,560,000,000 17 Malaysia 17,860,000,000 18 Libya 14,500,000,000 19 Brazil 13,500,000,000 20 Iran 13,130,000,000 21 Nigeria 12,590,000,000 22 Qatar 12,510,000,000 23 Taiwan 9,700,000,000 24 Finland 8,749,000,000 25 Iraq 8,134,000,000 26 Angola 7,700,000,000 27 Oman 7,097,000,000 28 Belgium 6,925,000,000 29 Austria 5,913,000,000 30 Argentina 5,810,000,000 31 Chile 5,063,000,000 32 Denmark 4,941,000,000 33 Philippines 4,900,000,000 34 Luxembourg 4,630,000,000 35 Trinidad and Tobago 3,259,000,000 36 Azerbaijan 2,737,000,000 37 Egypt 2,697,000,000 38 Korea, South 2,000,000,000 39 Bahrain 1,999,000,000 40 Gabon 1,807,000,000 41 Botswana 1,698,000,000 42 Yemen 1,690,000,000 43 Indonesia 1,636,000,000 44 Peru 1,515,000,000 45 Israel 1,463,000,000 46 Uzbekistan 1,410,000,000 47 Burma 1,247,000,000 48 Congo, Republic of the 1,215,000,000 49 Vietnam 1,029,000,000 50 Ecuador 727,000,000 51 Bolivia 688,000,000 52 Papua New Guinea 661,000,000 53 Namibia 572,000,000 54 Cote d’Ivoire 460,000,000 55 Cameroon 419,000,000 56 Morocco 389,000,000 57 Bangladesh 339,000,000 58 Turkmenistan 321,200,000 59 Equatorial Guinea 175,000,000 60 British Virgin Islands 134,300,000 61 Kazakhstan 133,000,000 62 Cook Islands 26,670,000 63 Palau 15,090,000 64 Tuvalu 2,323,000 65 Samoa -2,428,000 66 Tonga -4,321,000 67 Comoros -17,000,000 68 Kiribati -19,870,000 69 Swaziland -23,130,000 70 Sao Tome and Principe -24,400,000 71 Vanuatu -28,350,000 72 Micronesia, Federated States of -34,300,000 73 Anguilla -42,870,000 74 Cape Verde -44,430,000 75 Gambia, The -54,610,000 76 Burundi -57,840,000 77 Haiti -58,720,000 78 Tajikistan -73,950,000 79 Lesotho -75,440,000 80 Seychelles -78,590,000 81 Antigua and Barbuda -83,400,000 82 Guyana -84,300,000 83 Rwanda -104,100,000 84 Honduras -160,000,000 85 Zambia -165,400,000 86 Macedonia -167,000,000 87 Belize -173,400,000 88 Malawi -186,000,000 89 Ghana -219,000,000 90 Armenia -247,300,000 91 Togo -261,900,000 92 Zimbabwe -264,600,000 93 Kyrgyzstan -287,300,000 94 Paraguay -300,000,000 95 Chad -324,100,000 96 Benin -342,700,000 97 Guinea -344,000,000 98 Cambodia -369,000,000 99 Mexico -400,100,000 100 Uganda -423,000,000 101 Eritrea -440,500,000 102 Mozambique -444,400,000 103 Fiji -465,800,000 104 Panama -467,000,000 105 Madagascar -504,000,000 106 Laos -504,200,000 107 Belarus -511,800,000 108 Syria -529,000,000 109 Moldova -561,000,000 110 Uruguay -600,000,000 111 Burkina Faso -604,600,000 112 Mauritius -651,000,000 113 Albania -679,900,000 114 Georgia -735,000,000 115 Tunisia -760,000,000 116 Slovenia -789,200,000 117 Nicaragua -883,000,000 118 Senegal -895,200,000 119 Thailand -899,400,000 120 Tanzania -906,000,000 121 Malta -966,200,000 122 Jamaica -970,000,000 123 Cyprus -1,051,000,000 124 El Salvador -1,059,000,000 125 Sri Lanka -1,118,000,000 126 Kenya -1,119,000,000 127 Dominican Republic -1,124,000,000 128 Costa Rica -1,176,000,000 129 Cuba -1,218,000,000 130 Guatemala -1,533,000,000 131 Bosnia and Herzegovina -1,730,000,000 132 Estonia -1,919,000,000 133 Ukraine -1,933,000,000 134 Colombia -2,219,000,000 135 Serbia -2,451,000,000 136 Latvia -2,538,000,000 137 Lithuania -2,572,000,000 138 Jordan -2,834,000,000 139 Croatia -2,892,000,000 140 Iceland -2,932,000,000 141 Ethiopia -3,384,000,000 142 Slovakia -3,781,000,000 143 Czech Republic -4,352,000,000 144 Sudan -4,510,000,000 145 Poland -4,548,000,000 146 Bulgaria -5,100,000,000 147 Lebanon -5,339,000,000 148 Pakistan -5,486,000,000 149 New Zealand -7,944,000,000 150 Hungary -8,392,000,000 151 Ireland -9,450,000,000 152 Romania -12,450,000,000 153 South Africa -12,690,000,000 154 Portugal -16,750,000,000 155 Greece -21,370,000,000 156 Italy -23,730,000,000 157 Turkey -25,990,000,000 158 India -26,400,000,000 159 France -38,000,000,000 160 Australia -41,620,000,000 161 United Kingdom -57,680,000,000 162 Spain -98,600,000,000 163 United States -862,300,000,000 OMG That sux But there is hope: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9GkpwFY5Mw
Current bank account balance. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2187rank.html
That's a bit of scarry, just to look at it. Looks like the States contains all that are in minus together in its stats.
There is no proof that Government Spending in debt is bad for an economy, in fact it may help in the long run because the capital we spend, even if we have to borrow, on our investments will pay off in the future and we will see the returns we need. The only time money is wasted is when it is spent on things that have no economic returns (such as medicare and social security). However if you were to look at my economic plans you would see that I would out-pace spending to a degree that has never been seen on a world-wide scale to finance four mega-construction projects that would return the income threefold five years after the debt spending. Most of the time once an investment in capital is completed and the construction ends, or the work ends, you will see good returns. Eventually the debt is paid off. All this hoohaw over "LOLZ teh Nationzal Debt" is just that, a bunch of hoohaw. The only time you should be worried is when capital investments end and you don't make ANY return on them. When that happens, you are not going to have a good economy. Right now our return rates are not yet producing because we are not finished with our investments. However the elimination of the IRS and going to consumption tax would speed it along, and we would see a faster return.
Getting rid of the Federal Reserve would get rid of it as well. Borrowing for future returns that pay out in excess of the interest is a sound investment strategy. However when you create the money out of thin air thus creating inflation, you must take this this into consideration into the equation. This is not done because it is hard to put a exact dollar mark on inflation. The mere fact that debt (both governmental and personal) is growing exponentially is a good indicator that past investments are not paying themselves off with current gains. Is it an indicator of a balloon that is soon to burst? I don't know. Does anyone really? Is hyper-inflation in our immediate future? If that money was borrowed from the people than the wealth would be invested within the country and remain wealth. However since it is not borrowed from wealth from within, but created from nothing, it is only a transfer of wealth from the many to a select few. This is not a sound investment for the country only for the bankers. Changing the way we pay for this system cannot fix the system. We must eliminate what we are paying and that is the Fed. After that a sound taxation system can be devised.
The sheeeeeeeeple can relax, Bill O'Reilly has spoken many times lately on the "Oh No Reilly Factor" saying the economy is strong so everyone can relax. Notice also that the United Kingdom (the biggest US supporter of the illegal invasion of Iraq) is down in 161st place.
Two spots but the numbers are not even close. 161 United Kingdom -57,680,000,000 163 United States.. -862,300,000,000
Be worried if we hit 2 Trillion. We'll get ourselves back up to 100 billion soon enough. Or if a Democrat is elected we'll get to see what happens when everything is controlled by their party, and then see it plunge to 10 trillion in debt.
No, there will be no hyperinflation in the near future. There are two policies that determine the money supply: Fiscal and monetary. You are looking only at the fiscal policy to come to your conclusion. The reason why we're not experiencing a severe inflation with a deficit spending is because the Fed is balancing the economy.
The monetary is a fiat debt based system. We allow the Fed to create money where there was none before. How am I ignoring that? Money is created from debt, plain and simple. The more money that is created through debt, the more inflation. The Fed is not exactly balancing the economy through a sense of generosity. They fully know that creating the ebb and flow of the so called "business cycle" creates a movement of wealth in a the banking industry. The Fed is a central bank. They are a hub of regional central banks that are a hub of individual banks. Fractional reserve system(frs)insures that money can be created through debt. Now I understand that a FRS stimulates growth, but it also stimulates thievery. If I could provide a service that I loaned out something I never had in the first place(lets say cars that I do not really give you or ever owned but still charge you a fee), I could make an incredible amount of money with zero risk. The only question is how do I get into a racket like this and who will provide me protection? Remeber the Federal Reserve Act was initially named the ALDRICH ACT. What a brilliant move to change the name I would have to say.
I guess they are 'balancing' economy by refusing to report how much money they are printing, to keep the public from converting their dollars into something that maintains it's value.
Supply of money and creation of money are different. Deficits are funded through sales of government securities, not out of thin air. There is a misconception about debt and the fractional reserve system. "The Fed is not exactly balancing the economy through a sense of generosity. They fully know that creating the ebb and flow of the so called "business cycle" creates a movement of wealth in a the banking industry. " Unfortuantely, this argument is weak because the Fed follows the government, which acts countercyclically; The Fed works against banks (and other industries) at times in order to balance the economy. Ok, now about the Fractional Reserve System. Banks can't simply create money to an infinite amount. There is an available lending capacity of the banking system which is calculated by multiplying the excess reserves by the money multiplier. The Fed controls the money supply and does not eliminate inflation on purpose. Inflation implies an expanding economy; Disinflation implies a slowed down economy; No inflation implies a stagnant economy; Deflation implies a contracting economy. This is because inflation and unemployment are inversely related (there are exceptions, refer to the 70s). A low level of inflation, which is what we have now, is healthy.
Now that is an interesting argument that the Fed (the central bank) is not a bank but an anti-bank. Inflation is caused by the creation of money. More money == the devalue of fiat money already in existence. This statement is technically correct, but incorrect in design. Lets say a bank has a fractional reserve lending level of 10%. The regional central bank for a brand new bank accepts the deposit from investors for 1,111.12. That new bank that hold no deposits or money in their vaults can now make a loan for 10,000. Money has now been created that was not there before and for the porpoise of debt. That money will now most likely be deposited into a different (or the same) bank. That bank can now lend out at a ratio of 9:1 or a new loan of 9,000. Which will be deposited making available 8,100. Now this is the illusion of a a roadblock to infinity. I guess you could make the argument of borrowing fractions of pennies and never reaching zero. However that argument is silly. The real truth is much more incredible. Lets say that this continues until there is a loan made for $1,111.12. That money is taken and invested into into a new central bank deposit for a new bank that can now start the process all over again at loaning out 10,000 from money that was never there.
The Fed took power away from individual banks which were in control of the supply of money until 1914. I know how the money multiplier functions. Otherwise, I wouldn't have mentioned it in the previous post. The above quote is what's worth mentioning. I have never heard of a "fractional reserve lending level," but I'll assume that you are talking about the reserve ratio. The Fed sets a reserve requirement to limit the banks ability to create money. My quiestion to you is: why would they do this if they wanted to work in favor of banks at all times?
Not really. Let's say the I deposit $100 in DP bank and the reserve ratio is 20%. This means that DP bank can now loan $80 of it. This money is acquired and deposited in DP bank 2. Now DP bank 2 can loan $64 of it. If this process continues indefinitely, the most money that can be created is $500 while maintaining a required reserve of $100, or 20%.