The Cost of Carrying Debt
Low interest rates ease the pain of carrying so much debt. But in the long run, somehow, the U.S. will end up paying for it.

Sometime in 2017, the total U.S. national debt will hit $20 trillion—more than the total gross domestic product (GDP) of the country in a year. That figure is projected to keep growing over time, thanks to rising annual deficits. Debt held by the public, a measure that counts all federal securities sold to individuals, corporations, and state and local governments, plus foreign investors, currently clocks in around $14 trillion. That figure is expected to hit $23 trillion in 2026.
There are risks to carrying a debt burden this big. It increases the nation's susceptibility to a fiscal crisis if interest rates rise, and it limits the sorts of projects government can take on in a constrained fiscal environment. The greater the debt, the greater these risks become.
One of the biggest drawbacks of a high debt load is the cost of paying interest, which is currently one of the largest spending categories in the U.S. budget. At $241 billion last year, debt service—which buys the country nothing except a continuation of its debt—is effectively a program unto itself.
Although today's unusually low interest rates aren't likely to return to historic norms anytime soon, they are expected to increase over the coming years. That means that interest payments will go up too. Indeed, according to a December report by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, relying on data from the Congressional Budget Office and the Treasury, spending on interest payments will rise faster than any other program over the next decade, jumping 196 percent. In comparison, military spending, Social Security, and health care programs are expected to increase by 24, 77, and 78 percent, respectively.
That means that without policy changes, debt service payments will almost triple to $712 billion by 2026, and they will double as a share of the economy to 2.6 percent of GDP. Over the same time frame, about three-quarters of the expected increase in the budget deficit—the yearly gap between the government's spending and revenues—can be explained by the rising cost of those interest payments.
All of this depends on how interest rates change. They aren't expected to spike, but if they did, the consequences would be severe. If rates are even a single percentage point over projections, total debt will be $1.5 trillion higher over a decade.
Low interest rates ease the pain of carrying so much debt. But in the long run, somehow, the U.S. will end up paying for it.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "The Cost of Carrying Debt."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Simple, keep it low and creep it back up under Trump, it will amplify in 2018 when the Obama debt ceiling vacation expires. It will completely ruin any plan Trump had or promised.
They will raise it instead of taxing the rich.
In fact, most everything they will do will ultimately benefit the rich disproportionately. They won't stop till they own everything they want to own.
We all have it coming, kid.
??????ODo You want to get good income at home? do you not know how to start earnings on Internet? there are some popular methods to earn huge income at your home, but when people try that, they bump into a scam so I thought i must share a verified and guaranteed way for free to earn a great sum of money at home. Anyone who is interested should read the given article....??????? ?????____BIG.....EARN....MONEY..___???????-
Until the government tackles the mandatory spending programs the deficit and therefore the national debt will continue to rise. I think most politicians are happy to kick the debt issue down the road. At what point will they seriously address the national debt? Will we be like Japan and hit 200% GDP?
This is the likeliness. It will be another 8 years before we take it seriously and we will be at 150% by then and by time anything meaningful is done we will be at 200%
It is beyond idiotic because its something simple to address if addressed sooner than later! Christ people are stupid and we sane people are powerless to do shit about it.
90% tax on billionaires will more than solve the problem
Or they can stop sitting on their money, spend it, and pay the true value for work
When will the Japanese government run out of yen? Why does 200% of GDP (debt/GDP ratio) present a "problem" for a currency sovereign like Japan? Has the Japanese (govt.) ever failed to pay its bills? When will Japan fail to pay its creditors? Why would the Japanese government fail to pay its creditors? Is it because it will "run out of yen?" Why is addressing the national debt (which IS nothing more than savings deposits/DOLLARS at the Fed, or in the case of Japan, nothing more than savings deposits/yen balances at the BoJ) even necessary? Why is it necessary to worry about growing bank deposit balances? Does anyone (including YOU) ever worry about YOUR growing bank account balances? Of course not! ONLY examining ONE SIDE of the equation is akin to you asking for a loan and telling the bank you are in debt 1 million dollars-and telling them nothing more. Both you & the bank would NEVER and can never neglect to take into account your personal assets and income level....DUH...the US federal government has the power to tax and regulate every aspect of the US dollar...MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY...pass that news onto the deficit MORON who wrote this trash piece...Petey's so stupid he STILL thinks the US government can run out of money and is borrowing from the future...what a dumbass.
To ALL the inflationista clowns out there: "... the US federal government has the power to tax and regulate every aspect of the US dollar..." Which absolutely includes the ability to prevent "too much inflation."
Why do you imagine that interest rates aren't likely to return to historic norms anytime soon? What / who sets interest rates? As price inflation picks up real rates will go up regardless of whether or not the Fed increases the rates over which it has control. US Treasury yields will have to move up and the value of the Fed's balance sheet will go down, as the yields on their bonds are lower than on the new ones being sold by The Treasury. I believe rates will move higher that historic norms. I don't know when it will happen, but it'll be soon and it will be fast.
"somehow, the U.S. will end up paying for it."
Well, no. We won't. We can't possibly create new wealth fast enough to ever pay this off, or even continue servicing it for much longer. Somehow, the US will end up effectively defaulting.
But Trump is an outsider. He will fix this while draining the swamp. He promised.
As interest rates climb I will patiently await Paul Krugman's call to pay off the debt. For years he's been saying that we should incur more debt while rates are low, so it only makes sense that he'll reverse course as rates do the same.
It is spending:
As a % of GDP
President Years Spending (% of GDP)
Truman 1949-1952 16.9
Eisenhower 1953-1960 17.9
Kennedy/Johnson 1961-1968 18.3
Nixon/Ford 1969-1976 19.7
Carter 1977-1980 20.8
Reagan/Bush 1981-1992 22.9
Clinton 1992-2000 21.1
Bush 2001-2008 21.3
Obama 2009-2016 23.7
just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here....... Clik This Link inYour Browser ??O FAST JOB FAST CASH
Depends on how you quantify "severe"
Reagan did not inherit a recession. Carter's lasted from Jan to Jul 1980. Reagan's own recession lasted from Jul 81 to Nov 82.
Obama's started under W and lasted a little longer fro Nov 2007 to June 2009.
Unemployment (peak) for both was around 10.5%, Reagan's a little higher. The GDP drop though was far greater for Obama (about 5%), Reagan's about 3%.
It is true that inflation was far worse under Reagan.
just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here....... Clik This Link inYour Browser ??O FAST JOB FAST CASH
We all have it coming
The debt level is now reaching levels where the FRB cannot allow interest rates to rise significantly due to interest costs eating a greater percentage of tax revenue. It is not unrealistic to assume that unless the debt situation trend is changed, the US could follow the path of Japan longer term. This would mean lower GDP growth and more government fiscal and monetary intervention. Failure to manage our fiscal and monetary affairs for years is a pox on both the established political parties.
We carry debt so the rich can be richer without working.
my Aunty Isabella got an awesome six month old BMW 6 Series Gran Coupe Sedan only from part-time off a computer... Look At This?????O FREE JOB VISIT FREE
Removing authoritarian government is a proper goal. But today's free-marketers are also authoritarian. A REAL free market solution would TRANSITION back to market RESULTS. IMO for pc and IMO for windows 10
Increased interest rates are an economic STIMULUS, as more US dollars are pumped into the economy, which grows GDP. GDP = federal spending + non-federal spending + net exports Peter, just STOP being a deficit moron.
Cooing has 9 units available for sale in joulz in 6th October. See prices, amenities, and maps of new and resale homes by Inertia Egypt.
Many libertarians are surprisingly authoritarian. They'll never admit it, while building their walls and banning the Muslims.
that's not what he said.
Nothing like Dan and Hihn talking about libertarianism.
Kafkaesque.
LOL
Libertarian, meet authoritarian libertarian.
"Walls don't restrict anyones rights to my knowledge. They only restrict the movement of people across our border in the places we don't want them crossing at."
To start with, it involves a lot of eminent domain seizures in order to build. Then you have a bunch of people with government walls/fences/whatever running through their property, and have problems getting to half their land (and since we're talking about property along the Rio Grande, it's often land that's been in the family for generations).
So before we even get to the philosophical issues, there's some pretty simple reasons to oppose it.
Free markets are supposed to crash...because interveining would be wrong