European Union Debt by Country

https://github.com/axibase/atsd-use-cases/blob/master/DataShorts/EU_Debt/README.md#european-union-debt-by-country-2005-2016

by kghamilton89 • 9 years ago

74 51 9 years ago

github.com

marvel_boy• 9 years ago

It is impossible to pay this amount of money. For this simple reason the interest rate is zero, almost negative: European central bank is buying huge amounts of national debt. Setting an interest rate of zero is just a trick to lower debt interest payments. EU is doomed.

zdkl• 9 years ago

Wasn't the fed at zero/negative as well recently?

based2• 9 years ago

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/categories/22

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEBTN

http://www.ecb.europa.eu/stats/policy_and_exchange_rates/key...

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/...

JoiDegn• 9 years ago

Can you please explain the reasoning behind your statements better? The way they stand it seems like you say it is impossible to repay the debt because the interest rate is zero. Why would that make it harder to repay?

Finally, why do you follow that the EU is doomed?

smcl• 9 years ago

They're saying its the other way round - it's impossible to repay, so the rate is set to effectively zero.

I disagree with GP however, and don't think the EU is doomed

EliRivers• 9 years ago

Is it necessary to pay this money?

tehabe2• 9 years ago

No it isn't. If all the debt is paid in full, the only effect this would have is that the income of the economy would be lower.

The interests are low now because many states don't invest as much as they used to do. So the demand for money is low. And when the demand for something is low, the price for it goes down.

thesumofall2• 9 years ago

No. It should stay at healthy levels and grow with GDP as long as there are attractive investment opportunities at a national level (e.g., education). The challenge is to determine "healthy"

maze-le• 9 years ago

Not accumulating any debt (as a state) results in missed investments in infrastructure and other state expenses, wich may be cruicial for the economy. Investment in the energy infrastructure, payed by debt, for example benefits the whole society. Not taking this debt would be foolish since it would impair the development of your country.

Accumulating too much dept (again as a state), results in a 'trickle up' economy, where a significant proportion of taxpayers money goes directly to the banks (in the form of interest). This is foolish too, since the bulk of the population would not work for the development of society, but for the profits of banks.

> Is it necessary to pay this money?

It becomes necessary, when you reach a critical level of debt. But I also think it is in the interest of both state and economy that a reasonable proportion of debt exists, as long as it does not exceed a certain level. The big question remaining is, what is this certain level?

petters• 9 years ago

No. For example, in my country Sweden, a major part of the national debt is between the government and the central bank. Basically, the central bank created money and gave it to the government. Viewing the government and the central bank as a single entity makes that huge debt almost an accounting detail.

"Repaying" all of that would introduce a money shortage into the economy.

fulafel• 9 years ago

Typically governments borrow (= issue bonds) for long term, and gradually replace older loans with newer loans.

So yes, these loans will probably be paid, but they will mostly be replaced with new ones.

But no, there is nothing forcing the countries to repay these loans. You can't really collect from sovereign states if they miss loan payments. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_default)

merpnderp• 9 years ago

Think of it as government created inflation, ie a tax on your held currency, and it makes a lot more sense.

taw55• 9 years ago

According to the convergence criteria, yes. Those criteria pretty much ensure the inability of the Euro to function properly though [1]

Domestically, not really. Internationally, it depends on a number of factors. [2]

[1] https://www.lrb.co.uk/v14/n19/wynne-godley/maastricht-and-al...

[2] https://larspsyll.wordpress.com/2017/07/18/the-balanced-budg...

Brakenshire2• 9 years ago

EU debt is lower as a percentage of GDP than the US or Japan.

_0ffh2• 9 years ago

Also quite interesting is that total EU debt stayed ~constant 2008-2016, while in the same time frame US federal debt ~doubled.

adventured2• 9 years ago

The US solidly off-sets the difference with its ownership of the global reserve currency. Japan, which also has drastically more debt as a % than the US (and without the consistent growth or assets), doesn't quite have that benefit. When the US debases the dollar, a big part of that inflation is absorbed by the global economy (such as via commodity prices going up, or external dollar instrument holders taking some of the punch). When Japan debases the Yen, the hit is almost entirely absorbed by the people of Japan and its economy.

tyingq2• 9 years ago

Per capita would be interesting to show as well.

rodionos2• 9 years ago

Here's the gross gov't debt per capita:

https://apps.axibase.com/chartlab/e92a4f6c/2/#fullscreen

tyingq2• 9 years ago

That is more interesting, thank you. I wonder what happened in Ireland.

plaidfuji• 9 years ago

This post seems like it was meant more as a demonstration of the data viz, but to me this is just adding an overly complicated interface to a dataset that doesn't need interactivity. It's easy to show debt vs time for all countries as well as the aggregate in a single plot without drop-down menus: it's called a stacked bar plot.

rodionos2• 9 years ago

Here's the stack chart in 23 lines.

https://apps.axibase.com/chartlab/e92a4f6c

It is in fact a demo of declarative graphics at work.

Camillo• 9 years ago

Could you do the stack chart by percentage of the total?

akvadrako6• 9 years ago

This is the wrong number to look at. It's the face value of the debt, which has no practical value; consider debt at 0% interest with a long repayment plan vs payday loans due today.

International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) is the new international standard and makes much more sense; it considers only the market value of your debt, i.e. how much you could find someone to buy it for.

Here is a sample of public debt/GDP ratios from 2013. Clearly, proper accounting drastically affects the results:

http://english.capital.gr/News.asp?id=2321087

sandstrom3• 9 years ago

I agree there is a difference between long-term and short-term debt. Obviously if you don't have money and your payday loan matures (has to be paid) tomorrow that's different from a loan maturing in 30 years -- when you may or may not have money, and when inflation/deflation may have increased or decreased the absolute value of that debt.

But the graph in your link makes it look like Greece is less indebted than the Netherlands. As the article states, that's because the market value of Greek debt is low (lower than nominal value).

That's because few want to buy it, since many think Greece won't repay its debt. Yes, if Greece defaults on its loans they will go away. But it will have consequences. For example, lending money in the future may be more difficult.

More generally, if a country borrows linearly at some point no one will believe in their ability to repay, so market value will trend towards zero. With your measure the indebtedness of a country will go towards zero (along with the market value of its debt) the more it borrows.

It doesn't make sense. The debt is still there and defaulting on it will have consequences.

akvadrako6• 9 years ago

That's because few want to buy it, since many think Greece won't repay its debt.

You don't understand - what it means is I would be willing to take on Greece's debt obligations for an immediate financial compensation much less than the face value. It has nothing to do with their creditworthiness.

Also, because Greece's debt is actually lower than the Netherlands, or at least it was in 2013, I personally think lending them money would be a great investment and I'm not the only one[1]. It's just not an option for political reasons.

[1] http://www.reuters.com/article/eurozone-greece-debt-japonica...

Someone2• 9 years ago

"it considers only the market value of your debt, i.e. how much you could find someone to buy it for."

Makes some sense, but I don't see how you can find out what Greece's debt is that easily. Its debt may trade at a 18/175 fraction of its face value, but to properly asses it's value you would have to know what buying back _all_ of it would cost. That likely would be quite a bit more because, if they were to buy back half of it at that value, their debt would trade at a much higher fraction of its face value.

Also, I think the intent of this is to say that a country's debt cannot be larger than what it can pay back. Sounds reasonable, but we don't have a way to determine that number. Should Greece have to sell the Elgin marbles and the rest of the Parthenon to pay of its debt, for example?

breatheoften• 9 years ago

I'm sure Greece would at least agree that they should have the right to sell the Elgin marbles. The British Museum, on the other hand, probably wouldn't agree.

trevyn• 9 years ago

Google does this quite well: https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=ds22a34krhq5p_&...

European Union Debt by Country

Related Stories