SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 12 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
Global debt levels rose to more than 325 percent of the world's gross domestic product last year as government debt rose sharply, a report from the Institute for International Finance showed on Wednesday.
The IIF's report found that global debt had risen more than $11 trillion in the first nine months of 2016 to more than $217 trillion. The report also found that general government debt accounted for nearly half of the total increase.
Emerging market debt rose substantially, as government bond and syndicated loan issuance in 2016 grew to almost three times its 2015 level.
Source: Reuters
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Global Debt Hits 325% Of World GDP, Rises To Record $217 Trillion
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 56 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
If one studies too zealously, one easily loses his pants.
-- A. Einstein.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Justin Case on Friday January 06 2017, @12:08PM
Perhaps some of the debt is owed to you.
For example, if you live in the USA, when you get really old you may be able to collect Social Security of $100,000 plus or minus during your retirement years.
Or are they not counting future empty promises in the above "debt" -- in which case things are even worse?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 06 2017, @01:01PM
Future Social Security obligations are not counted in the debt, no. This is why the government is a whole lot more bankrupt than they are letting on. Any corporation that used the accounting rules that the US Government uses would be forced into bankruptcy immediately. AFAIK, most or all world governments use similar accounting fictions.
However, they may still owe some of the money to, as you put it, you. Treasury notes and bonds are considered one of the safest investments, at least, you know, until the Social Security bill comes due and the whole thing falls apart. And they are widely held by individual investors, probably even more widely held than mutual funds or individual stocks, as they're considered suitable "widows and orphans" investments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 06 2017, @06:09PM
Future Social Security obligations are not counted in the debt, no. This is why the government is a whole lot more bankrupt than they are letting on.
Dear lizard, you do know that we, humans, tend to die a few (dozen) years into retirement, don't you?
Because it sounds as if you think that currently retired people will keep getting money forever and ever after and that it will keep growing exponentially with upcoming retirements.
Granted the soon-to-be "papy boom" may (not necessarily though) create a bump but, worse case scenario, this will be for a few decades. They will all die eventually.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 06 2017, @06:39PM
Of course, but new people age into the system faster than old people die out of it,and the difference is growing. Not only are birthrates falling, but people live longer, spending more time taking money out of the system, and starting work later (due to longer education), spending less time paying into the system. Since what you get out is proportional to what you put in, even if the education increases income (which is also not working quite as well as it used to), it doesn't actually make the system more solvent.
Entitlement spending (including not just Social Security but also things like Medicare) is now the majority of federal spending. If not fixed, and fixed soon, within my lifetime it will be most of the GDP. People worry about global warming, but we won't have time to die from that, financial collapse is a much more imminent threat (and I mean real collapse, it will make that business about the housing market look like leaving your wallet in your other pants)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday January 07 2017, @02:03AM
Because it sounds as if you think that currently retired people will keep getting money forever and ever after and that it will keep growing exponentially with upcoming retirements.
They'll keep getting money till they die. That's long enough to cause massive problems at the current rate of empty promise.
Granted the soon-to-be "papy boom" may (not necessarily though) create a bump but, worse case scenario, this will be for a few decades. They will all die eventually.
It's long enough. IMHO, we'll have a different system in place by then.