Replies to Msg. #1239922
.
 Msg. #  Subject Posted by    Board    Date   
51494 Re: DE ... Re: MTG Files Motion to Strip Gavel from Mike Johnson
   So we could as a nation have a new phrase to describe this: we have...
micro   6TH POPE   25 Mar 2024
1:28 PM
51483 Re: DE ... Re: MTG Files Motion to Strip Gavel from Mike Johnson
   Thank you very much, DE. Your numerical results are proof enough for...
monkeytrots   6TH POPE   25 Mar 2024
2:30 AM

The above list shows replies to the following message:

Re: DE ... Re: MTG Files Motion to Strip Gavel from Mike Johnson

By: De_Composed in 6TH POPE
Mon, 25 Mar 24 1:59 AM
Msg. 51482 of 60008
(This msg. is a reply to 51455 by monkeytrots)
Jump to msg. #  

mt:

Re: “DE - Good fit. How about trying a logarithmic curve based on the 'compound interest' equation with a rate of 9%. Should also yield aprox the same shape and fit, with a 'real world' feel for the curve.”
I don't understand what would be gained by comparing a logarithmic curve to a non-logarithmic debt graph.

My graph started in 1965 when the debt was $317 billion. To get it to $34.5 trillion today, you'd use 8.3% annual compounding. But although it eventually catches up to the $34.5 trillion, such a graph doesn't produce as good of a fit for most of the 59 years as what I already posted, usually hanging well below the actual debt.

But that's nitpicking. EITHER approach will yield the same conclusion: That the country's production-growth is severely lagging its debt-growth, to the extent that it will survive only a short while more. If you want to estimate how long that while is, an ellipse remains the best approach I've seen, with the added benefit that those of us with Windows have a tool (MSPAINT) right on our computer that can display the debt and model various ellipses upon it.

I don't have a professional modeling tool. There is, no doubt, a true curve-of-best fit that would precisely pin-down what our average debt growth looks like and how many months we have left before it approaches the vertical.