Atkingani wrote: limeyrob wrote: Have you seen The World Factbook produced by the CIA. Assuming that the stats are fairly accurate (even though some, understandably, are a bit out of date) it makes for some thought-churning reading. Hit on the bar chart icon for country comparisons. US and UK account for nearly half of the world external debt.  https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2079rank.html   Concerned by this information I went to the Wikipedia for checking the ratio debt vs GDP and I was really surprised:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt   Almost all the so-called "1st World" countries have galactic ratios while BRIC and other emergent countries apparently have reasonable debts.   It looks like that the richness of many countries is somewhat artificial and for a fast recovery of the world economy some global reassessment must be made (although I know that other variables count too).

The rich countries have to support their welfare states. That's why they are totally in debt. The developing countries would have been too but they don't have too many lenders. Most of their debt has been originated by the IMF and the likes. From time to time their debts are forgiven.

IVNORD wrote: Atkingani wrote: limeyrob wrote: Have you seen The World Factbook produced by the CIA. Assuming that the stats are fairly accurate (even though some, understandably, are a bit out of date) it makes for some thought-churning reading. Hit on the bar chart icon for country comparisons. US and UK account for nearly half of the world external debt.  https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2079rank.html   Concerned by this information I went to the Wikipedia for checking the ratio debt vs GDP and I was really surprised:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt   Almost all the so-called "1st World" countries have galactic ratios while BRIC and other emergent countries apparently have reasonable debts.   It looks like that the richness of many countries is somewhat artificial and for a fast recovery of the world economy some global reassessment must be made (although I know that other variables count too).  The rich countries have to support their welfare states. That's why they are totally in debt. The developing countries would have been too but they don't have too many lenders. Most of their debt has been originated by the IMF and the likes. From time to time their debts are forgiven.

Atkingani wrote: IVNORD wrote: Atkingani wrote: limeyrob wrote: Have you seen The World Factbook produced by the CIA. Assuming that the stats are fairly accurate (even though some, understandably, are a bit out of date) it makes for some thought-churning reading. Hit on the bar chart icon for country comparisons. US and UK account for nearly half of the world external debt.  https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2079rank.html   Concerned by this information I went to the Wikipedia for checking the ratio debt vs GDP and I was really surprised:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt   Almost all the so-called "1st World" countries have galactic ratios while BRIC and other emergent countries apparently have reasonable debts.   It looks like that the richness of many countries is somewhat artificial and for a fast recovery of the world economy some global reassessment must be made (although I know that other variables count too).  The rich countries have to support their welfare states. That's why they are totally in debt. The developing countries would have been too but they don't have too many lenders. Most of their debt has been originated by the IMF and the likes. From time to time their debts are forgiven.   As long as I can recall forgiven debts only happened for very poor countries but not for the emerging countries and specially the B-R-I-C.   Anyway, the welfare state is good in paper but needs to have some consistent foundation to work properly. Probably some nations started their welfare era too soon or based on wrong principles - believing the world economy should grow continuously or not considering the fast ageing of the population, ect. Issues to be better studied/researched since many people will lose their welfare status in the years to come.

You are correct. Poor countries like Ivory Coast.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090204/ap_on_go_co/congress_stimulus

Senate OKs $15,000 tax break for homebuyers (AP)

WASHINGTON – The Senate voted Wednesday night to give a tax break of up to $15,000 to homebuyers in hopes of revitalizing the housing industry, a victory for Republicans eager to leave their mark on a mammoth economic stimulus bill at the heart of President Barack Obama's recovery plan.

Now that is awesome - I will always applaud a Calvin & Hobbes cartoon 

Bush overpaid banks in bailout, watchdog says (AP)

Got this in an e-mail. I thought it was kind of a funny, yet sad truth.

Stimulus package explained

"Sometime this year, taxpayers will receive an Economic Stimulus
Payment.. This is a very exciting new program that I will explain using the
Q and A format:

"Q.. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?
 "A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

"Q. Where will the government get this money?
"A. From taxpayers.

"Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
 "A. No, they are borrowing it from China.  Your children are expected
to repay the Chinese.

"Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
"A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a
high-definition TV set, thus stimulating the economy.

"Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China?
"A.  Shut up."

Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the US economy by
spending your stimulus check wisely:

If you spend that money at Wal-Mart, all the money will go to China.

If you spend it on gasoline it will go to Hugo Chavez, the Arabs and
Al Queda

If you purchase a computer it will go to Taiwan.

If you purchase fruit and vegetables it will go to Mexico, Honduras,
Chile, and Guatemala.

If you buy a car it will go to Japan and Korea.

If you purchase prescription drugs it will go to India

If you purchase heroin it will go to the Taliban in Afghanistan

If you give it to a charitable cause, it will go to Nigeria.

And none of it will help the American economy.

We need to keep that money here in America. You can keep the money in
America by spending it at yard sales, going to a baseball game, or spend it
on prostitutes, beer (domestic ONLY), or  tattoos, since those are the only
businesses still in the US.

It appears that now is the time for increases in scams of all sorts. Today an article on the news highlighted a scam where if you send off £35 to this address you will get a home based job stuffing envelopes. That seems OK one might think until you read the headline of the ad which reads - earn up to £300 per day!. Needless to say that is the last that person saw of their money. Now I have nothing against home working but if you do some quick sums that equates to an income approaching £70,000 pa. For stuffing envelopes! I know that for a lot of people times are getting harder and more desperate but I reckon some people were put on this earth just to get ripped off!! If it sounds too good to be true - it usually is.

Edited by Slartibartfast - February 12 2009 at 16:57

IVNORD wrote: Atkingani wrote: IVNORD wrote: Atkingani wrote: limeyrob wrote: Have you seen The World Factbook produced by the CIA. Assuming that the stats are fairly accurate (even though some, understandably, are a bit out of date) it makes for some thought-churning reading. Hit on the bar chart icon for country comparisons. US and UK account for nearly half of the world external debt.  https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2079rank.html   Concerned by this information I went to the Wikipedia for checking the ratio debt vs GDP and I was really surprised:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt   Almost all the so-called "1st World" countries have galactic ratios while BRIC and other emergent countries apparently have reasonable debts.   It looks like that the richness of many countries is somewhat artificial and for a fast recovery of the world economy some global reassessment must be made (although I know that other variables count too).  The rich countries have to support their welfare states. That's why they are totally in debt. The developing countries would have been too but they don't have too many lenders. Most of their debt has been originated by the IMF and the likes. From time to time their debts are forgiven.   As long as I can recall forgiven debts only happened for very poor countries but not for the emerging countries and specially the B-R-I-C.   Anyway, the welfare state is good in paper but needs to have some consistent foundation to work properly. Probably some nations started their welfare era too soon or based on wrong principles - believing the world economy should grow continuously or not considering the fast ageing of the population, ect. Issues to be better studied/researched since many people will lose their welfare status in the years to come. You are correct. Poor countries like Ivory Coast.   THe inefficiency and abuse of the system played a big role in the failure of the welfare state.

I don't agree that the 'welfare state' is the big contributor to a high debt-to-GDP ratio. In fact, the US spends more on health care as a percentage of GDP now and its health care program is comparably worse than other developed countries. And the US health care system isn't as much of a 'welfare state' as those other developed countries.

Look at China, basking in surplus, but they are still a really poor country. Surplus/deficit isn't the best statistic to determine how "rich" a country is. GDP size and growth is more important. Just as it's not always good to have a balance on your credit card, it's obviously not always good to be in debt. But often, the US economy grows at a faster rate than the interest on the loans, so at those times it's not bad to be in debt.

I'm not sure about the specifics of this, but I believe America has been in debt for a lot of its history. It has traditionally been viewed as a place for smart investment that pays off, and hopefully that tradition hasn't been permanently tarnished by the recent crisis.