Professional Documents
Culture Documents
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9kqzq6NNw1qedj2ho1_400.jpg http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/06/article-2198703-14BE41B1000005DC131_634x425.jpg In an amazing display of patriotism, the Republicans claim to have built the entire $16T national debt during their recently concluded nominating convention! (DNC joke!)
The national debt was $71.060 million on Jan 1, 1790 and $75.463 million on Jan 1, 1791. It crossed the $100 million mark in 1815-1816. It was NOT allowed to double to $200 million or quadruple to $400 million. Instead, it was gradually paid off and the national debt was down to $33,733.05 on Jan 1, 1835 and briefly $0 around Jan 8, 1835. Yes, zero! The debt crossed the $100 billion mark in 1942-43 (WWII). It doubled by 1944 and quadrupled, crossing $400 billion mark, in 1971-1972. The USA entered the era of the trillion dollar national debt in 1981, when Reagan was President (ten-fold increase in just 40 years!) The national debt quadrupled, from $1T in 1981 to $4T in 1992, when the senior George Bush was President. It has now quadrupled a second time, crossing the $16T mark on August 31, 2012 under President Obama. The first quadrupling (in the trillion dollar era) was accomplished in just under three Presidential terms. The second quadrupling has taken 4.9 terms (two Clinton, two Bush, and the partial Obama term).
Page 1 of 32
1. Summary
The rate of growth of the national debt D as a function of time t, given by the slope h = dD/dt of the D-t graph is just as important as the absolute debt level D. Unfortunately, very little attention seems to have been devoted (at least in popular discussions of this topic) to the precise determination of the debt growth rate, dD/dt, and its fundamental implications. For example, the national debt has increased by $5.363 trillion in a period of just 1319 days, less than one Presidential term (1461 days), under President Obama. It has just crossed the $16 T mark (T = trillion) on August 31, 2012. The debt increased by only $4.899 T during the two full terms of the Bush presidency. The reason for the rapid rise in the debt in the Obama years is shown here to be due to the higher rate of growth of the debt, dD/dt, towards the end of the Bush presidency ($4585 million per day) which matches very closely with the calculated initial debt growth rate for the Obama term ($4698 million per day). This explains why the debt has increased so rapidly under Obama. (It has actually slowed down to a lower rate of about $3550 million per day since Dec 31, 2010!) The debt growth rate accelerated significantly during the Bush presidency, from an initial rate of $1096 million per day, to a final rate of $4585 million per day. The deviation from the initial lower rate coincides with the start of the Iraq war and the final rapid increase in the rate coincides with the initial steps taken to arrest the total financial meltdown of 2008. Going a step further, it is shown here that the initial debt growth rate, during the Clinton presidency, was about $906 million per day, which is remarkably close to the initial growth rate for the Bush presidency. In fact, a lower initial rate of $940 million per day can be deduced for the Bush presidency (by including more data points), making the initial rates virtually identical for the Clinton and the Bush presidencies. In other words, the D-t graph appears to be a set of parallels with intervening periods of a deceleration (slowing down, Clinton and Obama terms), or an acceleration (Bush), of the debt growth.
Page 2 of 32
With the recent slowing the debt growth rate, the economy may actually be headed towards a new parallel to the initial Clinton and Bush growth lines, which should be established in the coming quarters. These empirical observations (mostly) and conjectures (a few) also lead us to the far-reaching idea of an economic work function, akin to the work function conceived by Einstein to explain the photoelectric effect.
Table of Contents
No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Topic Summary Introduction Debt growth rate and speed of a moving vehicle Bush presidency: Initial and final debt growth rates Clinton presidency: Initial and final debt growth rates Brief Discussion: Economic Work Function Appendix I: Growth of the national debt during Clinton era Appendix II: Annual Debt data from Carter to Obama Appendix III : Bibliography of Related Articles Page No. 1 5 6 7 10 14 17 18 22
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Page 4 of 32
2. Introduction
The national debt has grown by more than $5 trillion since President Obama took office on Jan 20, 2009, see Table 1, and has crossed the $16 trillion mark on Friday August 31, 2012, over the Labor Day weekend. Indeed, the debt added during the Obama years (D, the delta D, in the last column of Table 1) already exceeds the total debt added during the two full terms of President George W Bush. Why has the debt grown so rapidly in the Obama years?
Start Date
Jan 20, 2009-June 30, 2010 Barrack Obama Barrack Obama Dec 31, 2010 to August 30, 2012
Note: The calculations and graph that support the above are described in the text below. The high debt growth rate towards the end of the Bush presidency matches the high growth rate at the beginning of the Obama term. The debt growth rate has slowed down to a lower level since then and is now about $3350 million per day. The Clinton era also experienced a brief period (Sep 30, 1999 to Dec 31, 2000) of NEGATIVE debt growth (negative $310 million per day). The future position of a vehicle depends not only on its current location but also on the speed (or velocity, v) with which the vehicle is moving. The speed v = x/t, or more correctly the instantaneous speed, is the rate of change of distance with time. If the vehicle is moving at 30 mph it will cover twice the distance as a vehicle moving at 15 mph, in the same time interval t. If it is moving at 60 mph,
Page 6 of 32
it will cover two times the distance covered when it is traveling at 30 mph, and four times the distance when it was traveling at 15 mph. Likewise, the future debt level D depends on the instantaneous rate at which the debt is growing at any point in time, i.e., on the numerical value of h = dD/dt.
continued into the beginning of the Obama term and has actually fallen since then, to about $ 3350 million per year, see more detailed discussion here and here.
7.00
6/30/2003
A
6.50
12/31/2002
6.00
5.50
designation for the initial rate of growth of the debt. Perhaps we should call it the local rate as opposed to the overall rate for the entire duration of the presidency, or a presidential term (16 quarters).
13.00
B
12.50
12.00 11.50
12/31/2008
11.00 10.50 10.00 9.50
9.00
8.50 8.00 2000
3/31/2008
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
National Convention, on Tuesday night, Sep 4, 2012). As we will see shortly, the budget surplus reveals itself as an actual decrease in the national debt, or a negative debt growth rate.
9/29/1995
4.60 4.40
6/30/1994
4.20
1/20/1993
4.00 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
For the Clinton presidency, the initial debt growth rate was determined as described earlier for the Obama and Bush presidencies by considering the data for the period Jan 20, 1993 to June 30, 1994, see Figure 3. A remarkably linear trend is observed with the best-fit line having a slope h = dD/dt = 0.000906 trillion per day, or $906 million per day. The overall evolution of the debt during the two Clinton terms is illustrated graphically in Figure 4.
7.00
6.50
6.00
5.50
4.50
4.00
The dashed red line with the negative slope is the overall change between Sep 30, 1999 and Dec 31, 2000. The red square represents the final data point, the national debt on the last day of the Clinton presidency. The debt increased slightly between Election Day 2000 and Inauguration Day, Jan 20, 2001.
5.80
9/30/1999
5.78 5.76 5.74 5.72 5.70
12/31/2000
5.64 2400
2500
2600
2700
2800
2900
3000
presidency, much of the data for the Bush years falls below the extrapolation based on this initial debt growth rate for the Clinton era. The crossover occurred between September and December 2007. On Sep 28, 2007, the debt D had just crossed the $9T mark and was equal to $9.008 trillion. The projection based on Line A is slightly higher, being $9.047 trillion. On Dec 31, 2007, the debt D was $9.229T and the projected value was slightly lower, being $9.132 T.
18.00 16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Clinton
Bush
Obama
The debt growth rate accelerated significantly and started rising above the Clinton Base Line A, only after the total financial meltdown experienced in 2008. As discussed earlier, the debt growth rare dD/dt increased to $4585 million per day (slope of the line joining March 31, 2008 and Dec 31, 2008 data points) as the Bush presidency came to an end. An even higher growth rate dD/dt = $6560 million per day is deduced if we consider the June 30, 2008 and Dec 31, 2008. The lasting effects of this huge acceleration in the debt growth rate in 2008 are still being felt, although the debt growth rate has indeed slowed down to about $3550 million per day, since March 2011.
famous photoelectric law, in 1905. Further discussion of this point may be found in the articles discussing the financial performance of Microsoft, Google, the new General Motors and Kia Motor Company. Einsteins photoelectric law is a simple linear law K = E W = hf W = h(f f0) which is exactly similar to the linear law y = hx + c = h(x x0) relating revenues x and profit y for a company and now the national debt D and time t. As discussed in several articles cited, this linear profits-revenues law is a consequence of the classical breakeven analysis for the profitability of a company. The nonzero intercept c, often observed in the analysis of financial data, and now the national debt data as well, is analogous to Einsteins work function W from physics. Very briefly, when light shines on the surface of a metal, electrons are ejected which can be collected and made to flow in an external circuit. Modern photocells, used in a variety of applications, work on this principle. The photons that strike the metal surface have the energy E = hf where h is a universal constant called the Planck constant and f is the frequency (of light, which also have a wave characteristic). Some of this energy E must be given up to do the work needed to overcome the forces that bind the electron to the metal. Einstein calls this the work function W, which is a characteristic property of the metal. Hence, the maximum (kinetic) energy of the electron K = E W. The graph of K versus f is thus a series of parallels with an intercept c = - W, the negative of the work function. As the frequency f increases above the cut-off value of f0, the kinetic energy of the electron K also increases, following the linear K-f law. However, if there is a fundamental change in the characteristic of the metal upon which the photons strike, the work function W changes and the photoelectric data (K, f values) shifts to a parallel line with the same slope h but with a different intercept c = - W, which may be higher or lower depending on the nature of the metal with which the photons are interacting. We see exactly the same kind of movement along parallels when we study the financial data for good companies like Microsoft and Google which have set the modern standard of excellence for financial performance. Interestingly, the new GM also reveals the same behavior. The financial world is governed by the
Page 15 of 32
universal law P = R C where profits P is exactly analogous to the energy K of the electron, the revenues R is exactly analogous to the energy of the photon E and the costs C are exactly similar to the work that must be done to produce the electron. Not all of the revenues R will appear as profits P. Some of the revenue must be given up, in the form of costs C, just as the energy W must be given up in the photon-electron interaction problem. More generally, the nonzero intercept c can be thought of as a generalized work function whenever we observe a simple linear law when analyzing the behavior of a complex system. And so, it appears that we may be witnessing, or getting at least a glimpse, of exactly a similar type of behavior with the national debt data. A more complete study of ALL of the national debt will, no doubt, reveal further insights into this suggestion. More importantly, future observations will be even more meaningful. We already know that the debt growth rate has slowed down significantly during the Obama term to date. Perhaps, the data is moving towards a new parallel, with a lower (or more negative) value of the intercept in the simple law, D = ht + c, relating debt D and time t. In summary, the reader is urged to consider the graph in Figure 4, which shows the initial slope is, quite amazingly, almost exactly the same for both Clinton and Bush. It is this striking feature of the D-t graph that has prompted the discussion here about the economic work function, i.e., the name that can be given to the nonzero intercept in all linear laws, y = hx + c. This nonzero intercept can be thought of as the analog of the work function in Einstein's photoelectric law. Also, important are the findings as presented in Figures 6, 7 and 8, with the last two being relegated to Appendix II. Going beyond partisan rhetoric, these graphs show that the huge acceleration of the debt growth rate, as the Bush presidency came to an end, has now been stopped. However, like a relay runner, President Obama was also stuck with the high debt growth rate handed to him, which is clearly primarily the result of the financial meltdown. The analysis in Figure 6 to 8 implies that the effect of the financial meltdown was even more important than the effect of the Bush wars: the Iraq war, the Afghan war, and the war on terrorism.
Page 16 of 32
7. Appendix I
US National Debt during the Clinton terms
Date
1/20/1993 3/31/1993 6/30/1993 9/30/1993 12/31/1993 3/31/1994 6/30/1994 9/30/1994 12/31/1994 3/31/1995 6/30/1995 9/29/1995 12/29/1995 3/29/1996 6/28/1996 9/30/1996 12/30/1996 3/31/1997 6/30/1997 9/30/1997 12/30/1997 3/31/1998 6/30/1998 9/30/1998 12/31/1998 3/31/1999 6/30/1999 9/30/1999 12/31/1999 3/31/2000 6/30/2000 9/29/2000 12/31/2000 1/20/2001
Debt, D $, trillions
4.188 4.226 4.352 4.411 4.536 4.576 4.646 4.693 4.800 4.864 4.951 4.974 4.989 5.118 5.161 5.225 5.271 5.381 5.376 5.413 5.502 5.542 5.548 5.526 5.614 5.652 5.639 5.656 5.776 5.773 5.686 5.674 5.662 5.728
Source: Bureau of Public Debt. A similar tabulation of the debt data for the Bush and the Obama years is provided in Refs. [1-3] cited earlier.
Page 17 of 32
8. Appendix II
Annual National Debt from Carter to Obama
Debt, D $, trillions Clinton 1993 4.411 1976 0.620 1994 4.693 Ford 1977 0.699 1995 4.974 Carter 1978 0.772 1996 5.225 1979 0.827 1997 5.413 1980 0.908 1998 5.526 1999 5.656 Reagan 1981 0.998 2000 5.674 1982 1.142 1983 1.377 Bush-II 2001 5.807 1984 1.572 2002 6.228 1985 1.823 2003 6.783 1986 2.125 2004 7.379 1987 2.350 2005 7.933 1988 2.602 2006 8.507 1989 2.857 Bush-I 2007 9.008 1990 3.233 2008 10.025 1991 3.665 Obama 2009 11.910 2010 13.561 1992 4.065 2011 14.790 8/31/2012 16.016 Source: Bureau of Public Debt. Daily debt values (from which the quarterly data were deduced) are only available through 1993. Annual data are available from 1790 to present. The above debt figures are for fiscal year ending Sep 30 of each year. Hence, Ford was still President in 1976, on the date corresponding to the debt figure here. The $1 T mark was crossed in 1981, when Reagan was President. The debt figure crossed the $4T mark in 1992 (President Bush-I), the $9T mark in 2007 and $10T mark in 2008 (President Bush-II). It has now crossed the $16T mark under President Obama, on August 31, 2012. President Year Debt, D $, trillions President Year
Page 18 of 32
8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 1976
Approx. 50% increase in Debt $4T to $6T Clinton Quadrupling of debt $1T to $4T Reagan-Bush I
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
Page 19 of 32
for the Clinton presidency, which started in 1993, overlapping the period 1985 to 1995 used to arrive at the slope here.
20.00 18.00 16.00 14.00 12.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020
now describes the data. The equation of the line joining the 2007 and 2011 data is D = 1.4455t 2892. The slope h = dD/dt equals $1.44T per year or $0.004058 trillion per day, or $4058 million per day, is again seen to be in agreement with the high rate of h = dD/dt = $4585 million per day deduced as the final rate for the Bush-II presidency. The best-fit line through these five points has the equation D = 1.51 t 3021.7 with a linear regression coefficient r2 = 0.9921. The slope h = D/dt = $1.51T per year is again in agreement with the slope $1.4455T per year deduced using only two data points.
1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 1936
1944
1952
1960
1968
1976
1984
1992
Page 21 of 32
265
260 255 250 1944
1948
1952
1956
1960
1964
Page 22 of 32
50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 1896 1904 1912 1920 1928 1936 1944 1952
D = -0.977t + 1901.3
D = 2.907t - 5597
Page 23 of 32
We can learn from the historical trends described here in Figures 6 to 11 (see also Ref.[4] listed in the beginning of this article) and not get paralyzed by the mindboggling trillions that are now being repeatedly thrown at us. Billions were mindboggling numbers too, in an earlier era. The debt will eventually be paid off, as the US has done repeatedly in its history. The national debt has always increased when the US was faced with a crisis. In most cases, based on history, it appears that the rise in the debt can always be associated with wars the US got engaged in: first the Revolutionary war debt, then war of 1812, then the Civil war, then the WWII, the Cold war, the Vietnam war, and more recently the war on terrorism and the Iraq and Afghan wars. The only exception to this war-debt rise scenario is the rapid rise in the debt that we observe following the financial meltdown in 2008, towards the end of the Bush presidency. Even the Bush wars, thanks to the reduction in the debt growth rate of the Clinton era, did not lead to the acceleration we see following the self-inflicted wounds of the financial sector in 2008. The debt levels were lower than the extrapolated values (based on the initial Clinton debt growth line, see Figure 6) up until the financial crisis of 2008. JOBS, Jobs, Plenty of jobs, is what we need today to regain our lost prosperity. I sincerely hope everyone will reflect on this before heading for the polls on, or before (in some cases, absentee ballots, I mean), November 6, 2012.
Page 24 of 32
Page 25 of 32
6. http://www.scribd.com/doc/95329905/Planck-s-Blackbody-Radiation-LawRederived-for-more-General-Case Generalization of Plancks law, Published May 30, 2012. 7. http://www.scribd.com/doc/94325593/The-Future-of-Facebook-I Facebook and Google data are compared here. Published May 21, 2012. 8. http://www.scribd.com/doc/94103265/The-FaceBook-Future Published May 19, 2012 (the day after IPO launch on Friday May 18, 2012). 9. http://www.scribd.com/doc/95728457/What-is-Entropy Discussion of the meaning of entropy (using example given by Boltzmann in 1877, later also used by Planck to develop quantum physics in 1900). The example here shows the concepts of entropy S and energy U (and the derivative T = dU/dS) can be extended beyond physics with energy = money, or any property of interest. Published June 3, 2012. 10.The Future of Southwest Airlines, Completed June 14, 2012 (to be published). http://www.scribd.com/doc/102835946/The-Future-for-SouthwestAirlines-The-Unknown-Story-of-Rising-Costs-and-the-Maximum-Point-onProfits-Revenues-Curve Published August 14, 2012. 11.The Air Tran Story: An Important Link to the Future of Southwest Airlines, Completed June 27, 2012 (to be published). http://www.scribd.com/doc/102832984/The-Air-Tran-Story-The-Merger-andMaximum-Point-on-Profits-Revenues-Graph Published August 14, 2012.
12.Annies Inc. A Single-Product Company Analyzed using a New Methodology, http://www.scribd.com/doc/98652561/Annie-s-Inc-A-SingleProduct-Company-Analyzed-Using-a-New-Methodology Published June 29, 2012 13.Google Inc. A Lovable One-Trick Pony Another Single-product Company Analyzed using the New Methodology. http://www.scribd.com/doc/98825141/Google-A-Lovable-One-Trick-PonyAnother-Single-Product-Company-Analyzed-Using-the-New-Methodology, Published July 1, 2012.
Page 26 of 32
14.GT Advanced Technologies, Inc. Analysis of Recent Financial Data, Completed on July 4, 2012. (To be published). 15.Disappearing Brands: Research in Motion Limited. An Interesting type of Maximum Point on the Profits-Revenues Graph http://www.scribd.com/doc/99181402/Research-in-Motion-RIM-Limited-WillDisappear-in-2013 Published July 5, 2012. 16.Kia Motor Company: A Disappearing Brand http://www.scribd.com/doc/99333764/Kia-Motor-Company-A-DisppearingBrand, Published July 6, 2012. 17.The Perfect Apple-II: Taking A Second Bite: A Simple Methodology for Revenues Predictions (Completed July 8, 2012, To be Published) http://www.scribd.com/doc/101503988/The-Perfect-Apple-II, Published July 30, 2012. 18.http://www.scribd.com/doc/101062823/A-Fresh-Look-at-Microsoft-After-itsHistoric-Quarterly-Loss Microsoft after the quarterly loss, Published July 25, 2012. 19.http://www.scribd.com/doc/101518117/A-Second-Look-at-Microsoft-After-theHistoric-Quarterly-Loss , Published July 30, 2012. 20.http://www.scribd.com/doc/103265909/A-Brief-Analysis-of-Groupon-s-ProfitsRevenues-Data Published August 19, 2012. 21.http://www.scribd.com/doc/103027366/Groupon-Analysis-of-ProfitsRevenues-Data-and-its-Business-Model Published August 16, 2012. More detailed analysis including discussion of the idea of a work function. 22.http://www.scribd.com/doc/103369016/Analysis-of-Zynga-s-Profits-RevenuesData-Maximum-point-on-the-profits-revenues-curve Published August 20, 2012. General Motors Financial Data 23.http://www.scribd.com/doc/103600274/The-New-GM-A-Brief-Analysis-of-theProfits-Revenues-Data-through-1Q2011, Published May 9, 2011 and again on August 22, 2012, Discussion of the new GM data from 1Q2010 to 1Q2011. 24.http://www.scribd.com/doc/103607023/Why-Can-t-General-Motors-be-morelike-Microsoft-The-new-GM-may-just-be Published August 22, 2012.
Page 27 of 32
25.http://www.scribd.com/doc/103938349/GM-Before-the-Bankruptcy-MaximumPoint-on-Profits-Revenue-Graph GM Before the Bankruptcy: Maximum point on the profits-revenues graph, Published August 25, 2012. ****************************************************************** The Unemployment Problem: Evidence for a Universal value of h in the unemployment law. 26.http://www.scribd.com/doc/100984613/Further-Empirical-Evidence-for-theUniversal-Constant-h-and-the-Economic-Work-Function-Analysis-ofHistorical-Unemployment-data-for-Japan-1953-2011 Single universal value of h for US, Canada and Japan in the unemployment law y = hx + c, Published July 24, 2012. 27.http://www.scribd.com/doc/100939758/An-Economy-Under-StressPreliminary-Analysis-of-Historical-Unemployment-Data-for-Japan, Published July 24, 2012. 28.http://www.scribd.com/doc/100910302/Further-Evidence-for-a-UniversalConstant-h-and-the-Economic-Work-Function-Analysis-of-US-1941-2011-andCanadian-1976-2011-Unemployment-Data Published July 24, 2012. 29.http://www.scribd.com/doc/100720086/A-Second-Look-at-Australian-2012Unemployment-Data, Published July 22, 2012. 30.http://www.scribd.com/doc/100500017/A-First-Look-at-AustralianUnemployment-Statistics-A-New-Methodology-for-Analyzing-UnemploymentData , Published July 19, 2012. 31.http://www.scribd.com/doc/99857981/The-Highest-US-Unemployment-RatesObama-years-compared-with-historic-highs-in-Unemployment-levels , Published July 12, 2012. 32.http://www.scribd.com/doc/99647215/The-US-Unemployment-Rate-Whathappened-in-the-Obama-years , Published July 10, 2012. **************************************************************** Traffic-fatality and Teen pregnancy problem 33.http://www.scribd.com/doc/101982715/Does-Speed-Kill-Forgotten-USHighway-Deaths-in-1950s-and-1960s Published August 4, 2012. 34.http://www.scribd.com/doc/101983375/Effect-of-Speed-Limits-on-FatalitiesTexas-Proofing-of-Vehciles Published August 4, 2012.
Page 28 of 32
35.http://www.scribd.com/doc/101828233/The-US-Teenage-Pregnancy-Rates-1 Published August 2, 2012. 36.http://www.scribd.com/doc/102384514/A-Second-Look-at-the-US-TeenagePregnancy-Rates-Evidence-for-a-Predominant-Natural-Law Published August 8, 2012. Government and National Debt 37.http://www.scribd.com/doc/104663110/The-United-States-Postal-Service-ATest-Case-to-Understand-the-US-Government-Inefficiencies-and-Budget-CutsAhead United States Postal Service: A Test case for government inefficiencies, Published Sep 2, 2012. 38.http://www.scribd.com/doc/104833993/Are-You-Better-Off-Than-You-WereFour-Years-Ago Published Sep 4, 2012. Briefly highlights the slowing down the debt growth rate as we cross the $16 T mark. The national debt could have been as high as $19.5T on August 30, 2012 if the high rate at the end of the Bush presidency had continued. 39.http://www.scribd.com/doc/104803209/The-Rate-of-Growth-of-the-NationalDebt-The-Obama-versus-the-Bush-years Published Sep 3, 2012. The importance of the debt growth rate h = dD/dt, as opposed to the debt level D, is emphasized. The significance of the debt growth rate does not seem to have been recognized, at least in the popular discussion.
40.http://www.scribd.com/doc/104677653/The-US-National-Debt-Brief-HistoryGood-News-The-Rate-of-Growth-of-the-Debt-is-Slowing-Down , Published Sep 1, 2012. Brief summary of the historical debt data starting with President George Washington with attention being drawn to the recent slowing down of the debt growth rate. The importance of the debt growth rate, as opposed to debt levels, does not seem to have been recognized, at least in the popular discussion. 41.http://www.scribd.com/doc/104659108/The-US-National-Debt-and-the-LongTerm, first published on June 17, 2011, and republished Sep 1, 2012. 42.http://www.scribd.com/doc/104659448/The-US-National-Debt-RetirementProgram, first published on June 23, 2011, before the debt default crisis which led to lowering of the US rating, republished Sep 1, 2012.
Page 29 of 32
43.http://www.scribd.com/doc/104662291/A-Radical-Proposal-to-PermanentlyReduce-the-Unemployment-Rate, first published on October 13, 2011, republished Sep 1, 2012. 44.http://www.scribd.com/doc/104661297/Is-Taxing-the-Rich-an-Option-forBudget-Deficit-Reduction, first published on July 3, 2011, republished Sep 1, 2012.
Page 30 of 32
Planck, referred to here as the generalized power-exponential law, might actually have many applications far beyond blackbody radiation studies where it was first conceived. Einsteins photoelectric law is a simple linear law, as we see here, and was deduced from Plancks non-linear law for describing blackbody radiation. It appears that financial and economic systems can be modeled using a similar approach. Finance, business, economics and management sciences now essentially seem to operate like astronomy and physics before the advent of Kepler and Newton.
Page 32 of 32