Quote from BlueHorseshoe:
Not to be dismissive but, it is always an error to simply accept a chart at face value. Anyone who has slapped a lot of charts togethor for presentations or publication knows how easy they are manipulate - so easy it would shock most people. "Contraryinvestor.com" doesn't define "total credit market debt," though we would hope they use the same "GDP" numbers everyone else does.
For instance, one question I would have is whether securitization by the likes of Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, Credit Card & Auto companies, have created a data distortion in that back in the 50's and 60's those debts wouldn't have fallen under contraryinvestor's definition of "total credit market debt."
This is something I want to look into more, and I'm not dismissing the notion that US debts, at least of the federal government, are at worrisome levels. Still, at this point my gut tells me the graph put togethor by 'contraryinvestor' is exagerated and sensationalist. Any good argument addresses the critics - I'm halfway through the article and there no point / counter-point ...