The Glade 4.0

Again, your ability to make the payments implies your other expenses are significantly less than the debt you possess. If your daily living expenses were many times greater than your income (which is how the debt became unserviceable in the first place), you'd be in trouble.

This is the situation the fed is in.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I just demonstrated why this isn't the case. Income, as an aggregate as you stated earlier, does not give a satisfactory picture of actual disposable income allocations, so there is no way to be able to claim because one entity has sufficient funds to service the debt that another does with the same income to debt ratio, since you aren't considering the ratio of discretionary income to disposable income.

The Fed has no discretionary income at all, and doesn't have enough of what would be considered disposable income in this analogy to cover annual costs.

What was that comment you made to Khross about questionable understanding of household finances?

I see, you're getting a bit off topic. I'm talking about DEBT TO INCOME RATIOS. I've also made it very clear that it's not directly comparable. I'm not sure why you're going down the expense road when that's not what I'm discussing.

I can come up with a whole host of things that are different between my personal finances and the Fed's. For example, they can raise revenue. They can print money. They can do a whole lot of things I can't. But since I'm not talking about these, it doesn't matter.

So I'm comparing DEBT TO INCOME RATIOs. They are comparable, but no - not the same. Can it be simplified enough to say that the % of disposable income is the same if the ratios are the same? Of course not. But neither are any two households. I suppose you are suggesting then that no two households are comparable. That's fine - I disagree.

Yes, but that's not what I'm discussing. By extention, what you're suggesting is that you can't compare debt to income between two differnt households either, because the expenses aren't the same. Of course you can compare. You just need to be careful about the conclusions you draw.

For example, simply looking at the the Fed's debt to income ratio of over 600% led me to the conclusion that regardless of expenses, if that were my ratio, I'd be in trouble.

Actually, you can print money too. It would have just as much real value as the money the Fed prints, and is a bad idea (in the economic sense) for the exact same reasons.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

I laughed.