tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post2740230076315793812..comments2024-03-12T22:19:32.339-04:00Comments on The New Arthurian Economics: "I wish there could have been less [controversy]"The Arthurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16501331051089400601noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post-8637123476805294812015-09-06T17:04:12.908-04:002015-09-06T17:04:12.908-04:00A big thanks back at you, netbacker. The trend lin...A big thanks back at you, netbacker. The trend line on your graph makes an impressive statement. Oh, and I do love that <i>Bart at the blackboard</i> background image.<br />The Arthurianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16501331051089400601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post-33172852998148022882015-09-06T14:34:02.244-04:002015-09-06T14:34:02.244-04:00I believe I got the idea for the graph from your b...I believe I got the idea for the graph from your blog a few years ago. So a big thanks to you. :)netbackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00216448466948034808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post-79934968404736283612015-09-06T14:27:06.838-04:002015-09-06T14:27:06.838-04:00I have been using Graph #5 for a few years to expl...I have been using Graph #5 for a few years to explain Private Debt *IS* the problem. <br />https://twitter.com/netbacker/status/635101727608311809netbackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00216448466948034808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post-64798347397689771212015-09-06T12:56:55.924-04:002015-09-06T12:56:55.924-04:00Jim, there was a "near-recession" in 196...Jim, there was a "near-recession" in 1966 or '67 that is probably related to the wiggle on the graph at that time. Maybe that near-recession means 1966-68 is NOT an exception to your rule?<br />The Arthurianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16501331051089400601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post-40289375268768412522015-09-06T12:48:00.317-04:002015-09-06T12:48:00.317-04:00Thanks, Gee. Hey, I remember that graph from a whi...Thanks, Gee. Hey, I remember that graph from a while back.<br /><br />Jim, agreed! Rising private debt in the "golden age" (pre-1974) and in the "goldilocks" years (latter 1990s).<br /><br />Of course, the trouble with rising private debt is that it eventually gets to a high level and starts to interfere with growth. That's one reason I say we should use accelerated repayment of debt to fight inflation, rather than jacking up interest rates.<br /><br />Pick a level of private debt that is conducive to growth, and use that level as a target level. Adjust repayment incentives to reach that target, with the Fed fine-tuning things with small rate adjustments if needed.<br />The Arthurianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16501331051089400601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post-70695007178092221242015-09-06T10:55:27.092-04:002015-09-06T10:55:27.092-04:00Good post. I've long been a fan of looking at ...Good post. I've long been a fan of <a href="http://i.imgur.com/8Q8V336.png" rel="nofollow">looking at debt:debt ratios</a> as a basis for judging financial health/stability.geerussellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10631984593634015839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post-9947134476003246562015-09-06T09:41:50.719-04:002015-09-06T09:41:50.719-04:00What I see in graph #6 is that whenever the ratio ...What I see in graph #6 is that whenever the ratio of private debt to all debt is going up it corresponds to a period of what is generally regarded as good economic times. <br />And when the ratio is going down those are periods generally regarded as bad economic times. <br /><br />One possible exception is 1966-1968<br /><br />https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=1LSljimnoreply@blogger.com