🚀 go-pugleaf

Aloha,
        In response to Martin and Linus, I would like to add one
note.  Linus mentions two of the three components of national
saving: personal and the government.  The latter is a notorious
deficit disaster area, even when the 50 state and numerous local
budgets (net surplus) are added in.  Everyone agrees we need some
better accounting there, but agreement ends at that point.
        Personal saving, however, is a different matter.  Until the
end of the 80s (I haven't seen more recent figures), the downturn
in personal saving was matched by an upturn in personal consumer
durable purchases.  This is the nearest thing in household production
that we have to an investment.  Supposedly the automobiles and
household gagets will ease life's burdens and make it possible to
save money that would be spent on other services if we didn't have
the gagets.  These durables are supposed to make the household more
productive and therefore yield a rate of return, not easily measured,
but analogous to that which Linus mentioned.  So, Linus is absolutely
correct to say that American consumers are borrowing to finance
consumption, but the apparent frivolity of such activities is somewhat
mitigated by the durable content of the purchases.

                Jim Marsh <barney@green.gifu-u.ac.jp>