Part III of the series
Point I - Historical debt as a % of GDP ( yearly data since 1929 )
Click here to get a larger visual
Debt as a % of GDP has been on the increase - especially when the Republicans are ruling
Point II - External Debt as a % of GDP (Quarterly data since 1995)
Click here to get a larger visual
- External Debt ( foreign) as a % of GDP has been on a strong increase since 2001.
- Currently it stands at 17 % of the GDP ( from 10% in Sept 2001 )
Point II - External Debt as a % of Total debt ( Quarterly data since 1995)
Click here to get a larger visual
- External debt as a % of Total debt has been on a strong increase since 2001.
- Currently External Debt forms 25.60% of Total debt ( from a 17.30% in Sept 2001)
Also see ( will give further indications of the fiscal policies of Republicans versus Democrats )
- USA - Fiscal situation as a percentage of GDP, under the recent four Presidencies ( since 1980 )
- USA - Relationship between Fiscal Deficit and Savings rate ( since 1981 )
- USA - Relationship between GDP and Savings rate ( Quarterly data since 1985 )
- USA - Manner in which the Deficit has been financed since 1995 ( Savings viz external debt)
according to the constitution, the congress controls the purse-strings. your bringing in presidential party-affiliations suggests an incorrect causal connection.
Michael :
Does it mean that the US President is not able to exert influence on the way Govt monies are spent? In India also, technically the budgets are passed by the entire Parliament and then approved by the President; but the Prime Minister (being the head of Govt) will be able to exert influence on the overall direction and quantum of the public spend if he wants to….
KRG / Michael
Its interesting to see how the shift happens almost immediatly when the Presidents from one party is replaced by one from the other party .
Is their a viable explanation to that ?
My view - Its the Presidential macro policies that do have a impact ultimately on economics.
Im just looking at the result ( and in every case it looks like the Presdient from the Republican party - 3 out of 3 ) - causes deterioration in the fiscal situation.
The analysis is too simplistic:It reduces a complex problem into a referendum over which party controlled the presidency. For example, President Clinton policies which cut deficits had much stronger support among Republicans than Democrats. The graph would have much more useful if the analysis would have focused on the impact actual policies on public debt rather than political affiliation.
In my opinion one of the biggest factors in runaway deficits is increased military spending. Reagan escalated the Cold War, bringing about the collapse of the Soviet Union.During the Clinton years there was global war of either a cold or hot nature. Now we have a “War on Terror” which is increasing spending on military and homeland security.
Dallas
I agree the analysis does not cover the entire situation. ( if you have some specifics - we will post the same - you have our email id)
The article is part of a series - with the intention to cover the impact of monetary policies on the entire system
The issue that how polices changed under various presidencies was a by product.
The series displays how the recent growth in in GDP was financed by lowered savings ( due to lowered interest rates). The other side of the lowered interest rates is higher consumption by consumers ( through consumer debt).
In the past this was not such a large problem . However in recent times - this has caused the US deficit to be financed more out of foreign debt - rather than out of owned funds.
This is a qualitative difference - which should be of concern.
Again the series questions the quality of GDP growth post 2002.
I get it! The President spends the money, not the Congress. I was wondering.
Hi…interesting analysis, though I am refraining from any judgment for the moment. However, I would really like to know your sources for this data.
Keep up the good work.
Hello Unanimously
Appreciate your comments
1) Sources for Debt are www.fms.treas.gov ( US Treasury - a US Govt site)
2) GDP - http://www.bea.gov/ ( again a US govt site)
Are there any chart that compares USA GIP with total debt ?
Information will be appreciated.
agluz@aol.com
Hi,
Great work on the page. I would love to use your graph, with the proper acknowledgements - if allright with you…
I cannot find the debt data on the treasury site, though - do you have a more specific path?
How about a graph vs. congressional control? The president can’t spend a penny without congressional approval. Reagan had a democrat controlled congress. Tip O’neil (speaker of the house) promised $2 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax cuts. The spending cuts never happened (wow, a democrat that lies?), hence the growth in %. Clinton had a republican controlled congress starting in the middle of his 8 years…hmm maybe that is why the graph turns down right in the middle of his term?? They ALL spend too much so let’s not point fingers without all the correct information.
You must be aware of the present condition. The gross domestic product (GDP) of US has been abbreviated at a 6.2% annual pace in the fourth quarter of 2008. Last month the US government estimated the drop in fourth quarter GDP at 3.8%. Friday’s 2.4% point revision was almost five times as large as the average adjustment. Very sad indeed.
This analysis is not scientific and clearly partisan. There are so many factors you have not taken into account. Budget comes from Congress not a political party! Many policies take years for the affect to impact the economy. Funny how you do not label Democrat and Republican prior to 1995. You need to analyze the policies not the party stupid. You could interpret this graph however you want…one could say, “well if the prospects for the future of the economy look good then we borrow more…when the dems are killing the prospects of the future economy people borrow less because there is less confidence in future returns and less risk is desired.