I don’t know why, in these stupid acronymes US and England are never mentioned.

Yes, the debt explosion is the problem. No. Not the federal debt.

That’s correct. And if we continue to insist that public debt is evil and
must be reduced, the inevitable consequence of this draining of financial
equity will be to introduce deflationary bias that will constrain output
and employment growth and keep unemployment and underemployment at
unnecessarily high levels. It will clearly also force the non-government sector to
rely on increasing debt to sustain consumption, which is precisely the
opposite of what we want today.

Well, no. Presuming the taxpayer and the private citizen are related, the private debt burdens him as well. Private debt is an order of magnitude above the public debt over the past ten years, even with Bushonomics. While the shift has occurred in the short run as an emergency measure, we have yet to see it in anything near the same scale.

Yes, the debt explosion is the problem. No. Not the federal debt.

“A growing aggregate is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of outside of a permanent niche. An aggregate will continue to exist up until the time that its components discover that they can form an even more perfect union. From that moment on, reverse-entropy always selects those catalyst forms which deliver the highest resource throughput from the environment, with the result that every aggregate will finally change in response to unpredictable environmental conditions” Mother Nature

“Only in emerging markets can you reasonably argue that current P/E levels are not cheap relative to the long term average.”

I would think that a conclusion of growth in equities globally only holds together as long as the Emerging Markets bubble holds, no? As soon as that bursts, Coca Cola revenue in Emerging markets might look a lot less rosy…