Skip to main content

Understanding $16 Trillion of Debt

I don't understand how much $16 trillion ($16T*) of debt is.  So, to help myself, I break it down to terms I can understand.

  • There are about 254,000,000 registered vehicles in this country (2009 data).  Big number this is.  But dividing number into $16T would give a valuation of about $69,000 for each of them.  This is somewhat higher than the average cost of automobiles on the road. Another way to put it is to say the US national debt could replace the entire US fleet of automobiles with, for example, brand new fully equipped Lexus ES460's.  Nice cars.  Make mine pearl white.
  • The total of state budgets in 2010 was about $666B.  Dividing into $16T gives about 24.  This means the $16T national debt could completely cover all state budgets for about 24 years.
  • The total annual foreign aide budget of the US is reckoned to be about $54B.  Dividing this into $16T gives about 296, meaning that the national debt of the US could cover all foreign aid for almost three centuries.
  • The population of the United States is currently estimated at 312,780,968. Dividing this into $16T gives the current encumbrance to each citizen of about $51,000.
  • In 2008,  64.3 billion gallons of gasoline were consumed in this country.  It is surely higher now.  At $3.50 per gallon this implies a total cost to the US consumer of about $225B.  Dividing into the $16T yields about 71, implying the US national debt could pay for all gasoline consumed in the USA for the next 71 years - assuming of course annual consumption remains constant.
  • In the month of October 2012, the monthly cost of home food for a family of four (liberal plan from the USDA) was about $1100, making the annual cost to be about $13,200.  Multiplying this by the possible numbers of families of four (total population divided by four), the total annual home food costs to all citizens are roughly $1T.  Dividing this into $16T implies, in round terms, that the the US national debt could pay all home food costs for the next 15+ years.   If we all ate with the USDA thrifty plan, the $16T US national debt could pay all home food costs in the United States for the next 29 years.
That was fun.  So, $16T is a really big amount.  I still don't understand it much beyond that. 

* T = trillion, B = billion

There is a foundational lesson in all this.  The number 16T in dollars or any other measure is fundamentally beyond the comprehension of most of us, like me.  And I work with big numbers all the time. What is not taught in the schools these days, what is not in the formal curriculum anywhere,what is fully unknown to almost everyone, is just what these really big number mean.  That is within their personal context.  Sure, it is easy to say that the speed of light (180K mps) translates into 180K(mps) x 60(s/m) x (60(m/h) x 24(h/d) x 365(d/y) = 5,865,696,000,000 miles.  (~6 trillion miles) Who really knows what this means - in a visceral sense?  Not I.

Getting  back to the $16T above we caution two principle groups (going a bit political here - sorry).  I contend that neither side really understands anything about the magnitude of $16T.

1. The Republicans: No one really understand how much money this is.  Do you?  Don't compare with the GDP.  This is like making a comparison of a quantity people don't understand with a quantity people don't understand.  It you wish to make a point, explain to folks how much money this is.  Do it in terms they understand.  My goodness, don't explain in analogy to Greece.  Most people don't know where Greece is, much less care about Greek circumstances.  Greece is not a trump card.
2. The Democrats:  Be cautious about borrowing more money.  Understand the magnitude of what is already encumbered. Understand this amount in terms you understand. Understand the profound effort required for the pay-back.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view