document_title: Redwood National and State Parks

question_text: where are the giant redwoods located in california

text: Redwood National and State Parks

text: History[edit]

text: Modern day native groups such as the Yurok, Tolowa, Karok, Chilula, and Wiyot all have historical ties to the region, and some Native American groups still live in the park area today. Archaeological study shows they arrived in the area as far back as 3,000 years ago. An 1852 census determined that the Yurok were the most numerous, with 55 villages and an estimated population of 2,500.[9] They used the abundant redwood, which with its linear grain was easily split into planks, as a building material for boats, houses, and small villages.[10] For buildings, the planks would be erected side by side in a narrow trench, with the upper portions bound with leather strapping and held by notches cut into the supporting roof beams. Redwood boards were used to form a shallow sloping roof.[11]

text: Previous to Jedediah Smith in 1828, no other explorer of European descent is known to have thoroughly investigated the inland region away from the immediate coast. The discovery of gold along the Trinity River in 1850 led to a minor secondary rush in California. This brought miners into the area and many stayed on at the coast after failing to strike it rich. This quickly led to conflicts wherein native peoples were placed under great strain, if not forcibly removed or massacred.[12] By 1895, only one third of the Yurok in one group of villages remained; by 1919, virtually all members of the Chilula tribe had either died or been assimilated into other tribes.[13] The miners logged redwoods for building; when this minor gold rush ended, some of them turned again to logging, cutting down the giant redwood trees. Initially, over 2,000,000 acres (8,100 km2) of the California and southwestern coast of Oregon were old-growth redwood forest, but by 1910, extensive logging led conservationists and concerned citizens to begin seeking ways to preserve the remaining trees, which they saw being logged at an alarming rate.[14] In 1911, U.S. Representative John E. Raker, of California, became the first politician to introduce legislation for the creation of a redwood national park. However, no further action was taken by Congress at that time.

text: Preservation of the redwood stands in California is considered one of the most substantial conservation contributions of the Boone and Crockett Club. The Save-the-Redwoods League was founded in 1918 by Boone and Crockett Club members Madison Grant, John C. Merriam, Henry Fairfield Osborn, and future member, Frederick Russell Burnham. The initial purchases of land were made by club member Stephen Mather and William Kent. In 1921, Boone and Crockett Club member John C. Phillips donated $32,000 to purchase land and create the Raynal Bolling Memorial Grove in the Humboldt Redwoods State Park.[15] This was timely as U.S. Route 101, which would soon provide nearly unfettered access to the trees, was under construction. Using matching funds provided initially by the County of Humboldt and later by the State of California, the Save-the-Redwoods League managed to protect areas of concentrated or multiple redwood groves and a few entire forests in the 1920s. As California created a state park system, beginning in 1927, three of the preserved redwood areas became Prairie Creek Redwoods, Del Norte Coast Redwoods, and Jedediah Smith Redwoods State Parks. A fourth became Humboldt Redwoods State Park, by far the largest of the individual Redwood State Parks, but not in the Redwood National and State Park system. Because of the high demand for lumber during World War II and the construction boom that followed in the 1950s, the creation of a national park was delayed. Efforts by the Save-the-Redwoods League, the Sierra Club, and the National Geographic Society to create a national park began in the early 1960s.[16] After intense lobbying of Congress, the bill creating Redwood National Park was signed by President Lyndon Johnson on October 2, 1968. The Save-the-Redwoods League and other entities purchased over 100,000 acres (400 km2), which were added to existing state parks. In 1978, 48,000 acres (190 km2) were added to Redwood National Park in a major expansion.[16] However, only a fifth of that land was old-growth forest, the rest having been logged. This expansion protected the watershed along Redwood Creek from being adversely affected by logging operations outside the park. The federal and state parks were administratively combined in 1994.[17]

text: The United Nations designated Redwood National and State Parks a World Heritage Site on September 5, 1980. The evaluation committee noted 50 prehistoric archaeological sites, spanning 4,500 years. It also cited ongoing research in the park by Humboldt State University researchers, among others.[18] The park is part of a much larger region designated the California Coast Ranges International Biosphere Reserve on June 30, 1983.[19] The California Coast Ranges biosphere is overseen by the University of California Natural Reserve System.

text: The park has served as a filming location for numerous films. Scenes set on the forest moon Endor in Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi were filmed in the Tall Trees Redwood Grove in the northern part of Humboldt County, though the majority of filming was in private and public forests near the town of Smith River, California. Scenes for The Lost World: Jurassic Park as well as the movie Outbreak were filmed at the nearby Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park and at Patrick's Point State Park.[20]

text: Park management[edit]

text: Redwood National Park headquarters is located in Crescent City, California, with a service office located in Arcata and an operations center located in Orick, California.

text: Lack of money has precluded major improvements, however, and timber companies have replanted much of the logged area with non-native tree species. Coastline areas, including dunes and coastal prairie, have been invaded by exotic species, partly due to the suppression of forest fires until the 1980s. A fire management plan now allows controlled burning as one method to return the parkland to its original state. Since the redwoods were logged on the basis of accessibility, with inaccessible areas being cut last, large old-growth forest sections were isolated from one another, sometimes by many miles. In these cases it will be decades more before mature forest can return, regardless of the amount of money used to rehabilitate the ecosystem.[21]

text: The park has transformed a few logging roads into scenic public drives. These do not meet current safety standards, but funding to improve them is not available at present. Park structures such as visitor centers and employee housing also need updating to meet increasing demands. Park employees perform air and water quality surveys, monitor endangered and threatened species, and work closely with the California Coastal National Monument, which is managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.[22] In 2005, the parks were authorized to expand another 25,000 acres (100 km2) to include the Mill Creek watershed.[23]

text: Natural resources[edit]

text: The Redwood National and State Parks form one of the most significant protected areas of the Northern California coastal forests ecoregion.

text: Flora[edit]

text: It is estimated that old-growth redwood forest once covered close to 2,000,000 acres (8,100 km2) of coastal northern California.[24] 96% of all old-growth redwoods have been logged, and almost half (45%) of the redwoods remaining are found in Redwood National and State Parks. The parks protect 38,982 acres (157.75 km2) of old-growth forest almost equally divided between federal 19,640 acres (79.5 km2) and state 19,342 acres (78.27 km2) management.[23] Redwoods have existed along the coast of northern California for at least 20 million years and are related to tree species that existed 160 million years ago.[25]

text: The native range of coast redwood is from the northern California coast north to the southern Oregon Coast. The tree is closely related to the giant sequoia of central California, and more distantly to the dawn redwood which is indigenous to the Sichuan–Hubei region of China. Coast redwoods are the tallest trees on Earth; as of September 2006, the tallest tree in the park was Hyperion at 379.1 feet (115.5 m), followed by Helios and Icarus which were 376.3 feet (114.7 m) and 371.2 feet (113.1 m) respectively.[26]

text: Before September 2006, the tallest living specimen known was the Stratosphere Giant, outside the park in Humboldt Redwoods State Park, which was 370 feet (110 m) in 2004. For many years, one specimen simply named Tall Tree in Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park and within the RNSP was measured at 367.8 feet (112.1 m), but the top 10 feet (3.0 m) of the tree was reported to have died in the 1990s.[27] One tree that fell in 1991 was reported to be 372.04 feet (113.40 m). Only the giant sequoia has more mass. The largest redwood by volume is the 42,500 cubic foot (1,205 m³) Lost Monarch, located in Jedediah Smith Redwoods State Park. Mature Coast redwoods live an average of 500–700 years and a few are documented to be 2,000 years old, making them some of the longest-living organisms on earth.[23][28] They are highly resistant to disease, due to a thick protective bark and high tannin content. Redwoods prefer sheltered slopes, slightly inland and near water sources such as rivers and streams.

text: Redwood trees develop enormous limbs that accumulate deep organic soils and can support tree-sized trunks growing on them. This typically occurs above 150 feet (46 m). Scientists have recently discovered that plants which normally grow on the forest floor also grow in these soils, well above ground. The soil mats provide homes to invertebrates, mollusks, earthworms, and salamanders. During drought seasons, some treetops die back, but the trees do not die outright. Instead, redwoods have developed mechanisms to regrow new trunks from other limbs. These secondary trunks, called reiterations, also develop root systems in the accumulated soils at their bases. This helps transport water to the highest reaches of the trees. Coastal fog also provides up to one-third of their annual water needs.[29]

text: Another large tree commonly found in the forest is the coast Douglas-fir, which has been measured at heights of over 300 feet (91 m). Sitka spruce are plentiful along the coast and are better adapted to salty air than other species. The evergreen hardwood tanoak produces a nut similar to the acorns produced by the related genus Quercus (oak). Both tanoaks and oaks are members of the beech family. Trees such as the Pacific madrone, bigleaf maple, California laurel, and red alder are also widespread throughout the parks.[30]

text: Huckleberry, blackberry, and salmonberry are part of the forest understory and provide food for many animal species. The California rhododendron and azalea are flowering shrubs common in the park, especially in old-growth forest.[30] Plants such as the sword fern are prolific, particularly near ample water sources. In Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park, Fern Canyon is a well-known ravine 30 to 50 feet (9.1 to 15.2 m) deep, with walls completely covered in ferns.

text: Fauna[edit]

text: The ecosystems of RNSP preserve a number of rare animal species. Numerous ecosystems exist, with seacoast, river, prairie, and densely forested zones all within the park. The tidewater goby is a federally listed endangered species that live near the Pacific coastline. The bald eagle, which usually nests near a water source, is listed as a state of California endangered species. The Chinook salmon, northern spotted owl, and Steller's sea lion are a few of the other animal species that are threatened.[6][31]

text: Over 40 species of mammals have been documented, including the black bear, coyote, cougar, bobcat, beaver, river otter, black-tailed deer, and elk. Along the coastline, California sea lions, Steller sea lions and harbor seals live near the shore and on seastacks, rocky outcroppings forming small islands just off the coast. Dolphins and Pacific gray whales are occasionally seen offshore. Roosevelt elk are the most readily observed of the large mammals in the park. Successful herds, brought back from the verge of extinction in the region, are now a common site in park areas south of the Klamath River. Many smaller mammals live in the high forest canopy. Different species of bats, such as the big brown bat, and other smaller mammals including the red squirrel and northern flying squirrel spend most of their lives well above the forest floor.[29]

text: Brown pelicans and double-crested cormorants are mainly found on cliffs along the coast and on seastacks, while sandpipers and gulls inhabit the seacoast and inland areas. Inland, freshwater-dependent birds such as the common merganser, osprey, red-shouldered hawk, great blue heron, and Steller's jay are a few of the bird species that have been documented. At least 400 bird species have been documented in the forestlands.[32]

text: Reptiles and amphibians can also be found in the parks, with the northwestern ringneck snake, northern red-legged frog, Pacific giant salamander, and the rough-skinned newt most commonly seen.[31]

text: Invasive species[edit]

text: Currently, there are over 200 exotic species known to live in Redwood National and State Parks. Of these thirty have been identified as invasive species, ten of these are considered threats to local species and ecosystems. Exotic species currently account for about a quarter of the total flora in the parks. Only about one percent of plant growth in old-growth areas are of exotic species, while areas such as the Bald Hills prairies have a relative cover of fifty to seventy-five percent exotic.[33] The type of foreign vegetation also varies, with plants such as the English Ivy (Hedera helix), Spotted Knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), and the Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum). The spotted knapweed and poison hemlock are both under consideration for addition to a high priority watch list maintained by the park system.[34]

text: Geology[edit]

text: The northern coastal region of California, which includes RNSP and the adjacent offshore area, is the most seismically active in the U.S.[35] Frequent minor earthquakes in the park and offshore under the Pacific Ocean have resulted in shifting river channels, landslides, and erosion of seaside cliffs. The North American, Pacific, and Gorda Plates are tectonic plates that all meet at the Mendocino Triple Junction, only 100 miles (160 km) southwest of the parks. During the 1990s, more than nine magnitude 6.0 earthquakes occurred along this fault zone resulting in 1 death and major financial loss, and there is always potential for a major earthquake.[36] The park ensures that visitors are aware of the potential for a major earthquake through the use of pamphlets and information posted throughout the parks. The threat of a tsunami is of particular concern, and visitors to the seacoast are told to seek higher ground immediately after any significant earthquake.[35]

text: Both coastline and the Coast Ranges can be found within park boundaries. The majority of the rocks in the parks are part of the Franciscan Assemblage, uplifted from the ocean floor millions of years ago. These sedimentary rocks are primarily sandstone, siltstone, shale, and chert, with lesser amounts of metamorphic rocks such as greenstone. For the most part, these rocks are easily eroded, and can be viewed along the seacoast and where rivers and streams have cut small gorges. Formed during the Cretaceous Period, they are highly deformed from uplift and folding processes. In some areas, river systems have created fluvial deposits of sand, mud, and gravel, which are transported into the park from upstream. Redwood Creek follows the Grogan Fault; along the west bank of the creek, schist and other metamorphic rocks can be found, while sedimentary rocks of the Franciscan Assemblage are located on the east bank.[18]

text: Climate[edit]

text:
[show]Climate data for Redwood National and State Parks (Jedediah Smith Redwoods State Park; Del Norte County)

Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Year

Record high °F (°C)
75
(24)
80
(27)
81
(27)
86
(30)
91
(33)
98
(37)
89
(32)
93
(34)
95
(35)
90
(32)
78
(26)
72
(22)
98
(37)

Average high °F (°C)
53.4
(11.9)
55.0
(12.8)
56.0
(13.3)
56.9
(13.8)
60.7
(15.9)
63.4
(17.4)
65.0
(18.3)
65.1
(18.4)
65.2
(18.4)
62.6
(17)
56.6
(13.7)
52.7
(11.5)
59.4
(15.2)

Average low °F (°C)
35.8
(2.1)
36.5
(2.5)
38.1
(3.4)
39.9
(4.4)
44.0
(6.7)
47.6
(8.7)
50.4
(10.2)
50.8
(10.4)
47.4
(8.6)
42.9
(6.1)
38.8
(3.8)
35.5
(1.9)
42.3
(5.7)

Record low °F (°C)
18
(−8)
19
(−7)
24
(−4)
27
(−3)
24
(−4)
33
(1)
34
(1)
36
(2)
24
(−4)
28
(−2)
22
(−6)
16
(−9)
16
(−9)

Average precipitation inches (mm)
12.18
(309.4)
10.65
(270.5)
10.31
(261.9)
6.27
(159.3)
3.94
(100.1)
2.00
(50.8)
0.37
(9.4)
0.53
(13.5)
1.21
(30.7)
5.00
(127)
11.42
(290.1)
15.72
(399.3)
79.6
(2,021.8)

Average snowfall inches (cm)
0.4
(1)
0.4
(1)
0.1
(0.3)
0.0
(0)
0.0
(0)
0.0
(0)
0.0
(0)
0.0
(0)
0.0
(0)
0.0
(0)
0.0
(0)
0.1
(0.3)
1.1
(2.8)

Average precipitation days (≥ 0.01 in)
17.6
15.7
17.1
14.0
9.0
5.3
1.9
2.0
3.8
7.7
16.3
17.4
127.8

Source #1: NOAA (normals, 1981–2010)[37]

Source #2: Western Regional Climate Center (records and snowfall 1948–2006)[38]

text: The Redwood National and State Parks have an oceanic temperate rainforest climate, with cool-summer Mediterranean characteristics. Weather in RNSP is greatly influenced by the Pacific Ocean. Coastal temperatures generally range between 40 and 60 degrees Fahrenheit (4–15 °C) all year round, while further from the coast summers are hotter and drier, and winters are colder.[39] Redwoods mostly grow a mile or two (1.5–3 km) from the coast, and never more than 50 miles (80 km) from it. In this temperate but humid coastal zone, the trees receive moisture from both heavy winter rains and persistent summer fog. The presence and consistency of the summer fog is actually more important to overall health of the trees than heavy precipitation. This fact is born out in annual precipitation totals, which range between 25 and 122 inches (64 and 310 cm) annually, with healthy redwood forests throughout the areas of less precipitation because excessive needs for water are mitigated by the ever-present summer fog and the cooler temperatures it ensures. Snow is uncommon even on peaks above 1,500 feet (460 m), further exemplifying the mild, temperate nature of this northern latitude;[40] however, light snow mixed with rain is common during the winter months.

text: Fire management[edit]

text: Wildfires are a natural part of most terrestrial ecosystems. In many ways nature has adapted to fire, and the absence of fire can often be disadvantageous.[41] Wildfire eliminates dead and decayed plant and tree matter, enriching the soil and ensuring that healthier trees have less competition for limited nutrients. Prescribed fire is currently part of the fire management plan and helps to eliminate exotic species of plants and allows a more fertile and natural ecosystem. Fire is also used to protect prairie grasslands and to keep out forest encroachment, ensuring sufficient rangeland for elk and deer. The oak forest regions also benefit from controlled burns, as Douglas fir would otherwise eventually take over and decrease biodiversity. The use of fire in old-growth redwood zones reduces dead and decaying material, and lessens the mortality of larger redwoods by eliminating competing vegetation. In the park, a fire management plan monitors all fires, weather patterns and the fuel load (dead and decaying plant material). This fuel load is removed from areas near structures and where fire poses high risk to the public, and controlled burns are used elsewhere.[42] The National Interagency Fire Center provides additional firefighters and equipment in the event of a large fire.

text: Recreation[edit]

text: The DeMartin Redwood Youth Hostel, a low-amenities shared lodging facility (near Klamath), has now closed. There are no hotels or motels within the parks boundaries. However, nearby towns such as Klamath, Requa, and Orick provide small hotels and inns, with extensive lodging options available in the regional trading centers of Crescent City on the northern end of the park and Arcata and Eureka located to the south. The park is about 260 miles (420 km) north of San Francisco, and 300 miles (480 km) south of Portland, Oregon; U.S. Route 101 passes through it from north to south. The Smith River National Recreation Area, part of the Six Rivers National Forest, is adjacent to the north end of RNSP.

text: While the state parks have front country campsites that can be driven to, the federal sections of the park do not, and hiking is the only way to reach back country campsites. These are at Mill Creek campground in Del Norte Coast Redwoods State Park and Jedediah Smith campground in Jedediah Smith Redwoods State Park, which together have 251 campsites; the Elk Prairie campground in Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park which has 75; and the Gold Bluffs Beach campground which has 25 campsites. Other nearby state parks have additional front country camping.[43]

text: Back country camping is by permit only and is only allowed in designated sites, except on gravel bars along Redwood Creek. Access to the back country is highly regulated to prevent overuse while permitting as many groups as possible to explore the forest. Camping in the back country is therefore limited to five consecutive nights, and 15 nights in any one year. Proper food storage to minimize encounters with bears is strongly enforced, and hikers and backpackers are required to take out any trash they generate.[44]

text: Almost 200 miles (320 km) of hiking trails exist in the parks, but during the rainy season some temporary footbridges are removed, as they would be destroyed by high streams. Throughout the year, trails are often wet and hikers need to be well prepared for rainy weather and consult information centers for updates on trail conditions.[44]

text: Horseback riding and mountain biking are popular but are only allowed on certain trails. Kayaking is popular along the seacoast and in the various rivers and streams. Kayakers and canoeists frequently travel the Smith River, which is the longest undammed river remaining in California. Fishing for salmon and steelhead, a highly prized anadromous form of rainbow trout over 16 inches (41 cm), is best in the Smith and Klamath rivers. A California sport fishing license is required to fish any of the rivers and streams.[45] Hunting is not permitted anywhere in the parks, but is allowed in nearby National Forests.

text: The park has three visitor centers, where guided nature walks and general information are available, along with two additional information points.[46] Each campground offers campfire talks during the summer months as well as guided tours.[43] The parks have many picnic areas, which are all easily accessed by vehicle.


question_text: who has made the most premier league appearances

root

text: Since the Premier League's formation at the start of the 1992–93 season, 12 players have managed to accrue 500 or more appearances in the Premier League.

tag: p

text: The first player to reach the milestone was midfielder Gary Speed, in representation of Leeds United, Everton, Newcastle United and Bolton Wanderers; his 500th match was Bolton's 4–0 win over West Ham United on 9 December 2006.[1] Speed held the record for most appearances until 14 February 2009, when goalkeeper David James played his 536th match, for Portsmouth against his former team Manchester City.[2] James ended with 572 appearances, a record which was broken by Ryan Giggs on 14 May 2011, having played all of his matches for Manchester United.[3] On 25 September 2017, Gareth Barry broke Giggs' record by playing his 633rd match, West Bromwich Albion's 2–0 loss at Arsenal.[4] At the time of breaking the record, Barry ranked 8th in English top division appearances since the Second World War, trailing Giggs in 6th (672 total top division appearances) and six other players.[5][6]

text: The only player from outside the United Kingdom to play 500 Premier League games is Australia goalkeeper Mark Schwarzer, for Middlesbrough, Fulham, Chelsea and Leicester City.[7]

text: Players[edit]

text: Bold denotes players still playing in the Premier League. Correct as of 20 January 2018 (UTC)[8]

text:
List of Premier League players with 500 or more appearances

Rank
Player
Premier League Club(s)
Appearances

1
 Barry, GarethGareth Barry
Aston Villa, Manchester City, Everton, West Bromwich Albion
649

2
 Giggs, RyanRyan Giggs
Manchester United
632

3
 Lampard, FrankFrank Lampard
West Ham United, Chelsea, Manchester City
609

4
 James, DavidDavid James
Liverpool, Aston Villa, West Ham United, Manchester City, Portsmouth
572

5
 Speed, GaryGary Speed
Leeds United, Everton, Newcastle United, Bolton Wanderers
535

6
 Heskey, EmileEmile Heskey
Leicester City, Liverpool, Birmingham City, Wigan Athletic, Aston Villa
516

7
 Schwarzer, MarkMark Schwarzer
Middlesbrough, Fulham, Chelsea, Leicester City
514

8
 Carragher, JamieJamie Carragher
Liverpool
508

9
 Neville, PhilPhil Neville
Manchester United, Everton
505

10
 Gerrard, StevenSteven Gerrard
Liverpool
504

10
 Ferdinand, RioRio Ferdinand
West Ham United, Leeds United, Manchester United, Queens Park Rangers
504

12
 Campbell, SolSol Campbell
Tottenham Hotspur, Arsenal, Portsmouth, Newcastle United
503

tag: table


document_title: List of Chief Ministers of West Bengal

question_text: who was the first chief minister of west bengal

text: List of Chief Ministers of West Bengal

text: Colour key for parties[edit]

text:
All-India Muslim League
  All India Trinamool Congress
  Bangla Congress
  Communist Party of India (Marxist)
  Independent
  Indian National Congress
  Krishak Praja Party
  N/A (President's rule)

text: Prime Minister of Bengal[edit]

text:
No
Name
Took office[2]
Left office
Duration
Election
Party

1
A. K. Fazlul Huq[a]
1 April 1937
1 December 1941
5 years, 351 days
1937
Krishak Praja Party

12 December 1941
29 March 1943

2
Khawaja Nazimuddin
29 April 1943
31 March 1945
2 years, 2 days
All-India Muslim League

3
H. S. Suhrawardy
23 April 1946
14 August 1947
1 year, 113 days
1946

text: Chief Ministers of West Bengal[edit]

text:
No[b]
Name
Took office[4][5]
Left office
Duration
Assembly[6]
(election)
Party[7]
(alliance)

Premier of West Bengal

1
Prafulla Chandra Ghosh
15 August 1947
22 January 1948
160 days
Not yet created
Indian National Congress

2
Bidhan Chandra Roy
23 January 1948
25 January 1950
2 years, 2 days

Chief Minister of West Bengal

(2)
Bidhan Chandra Roy
Bowbazar
26 January 1950
30 March 1952
12 years, 156 days
(total: 14 years, 158 days)
Not yet created
Indian National Congress

31 March 1952
5 April 1957
First Assembly (1952–57)
(January 1952 election)

6 April 1957
2 April 1962
Second Assembly (1957–62)
(March 1957 election)

3 April 1962
1 July 1962
Third Assembly (1962–67)
(February 1962 election)

3
Prafulla Chandra Sen[c]
Arambagh East
1 July 1962
28 February 1967
4 years, 242 days

4
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee
Tamluk
1 March 1967
21 November 1967
265 days
Fourth Assembly (1967–68)
(February 1967 election)
Bangla Congress
(United Front)

(1)
Prafulla Chandra Ghosh
Jhargram
21 November 1967
19 February 1968
90 days
(total: 250 days)
Independent
(Progressive Democratic Front)

–
Vacant[d]
(President's rule)
20 February 1968
25 February 1969
1 year, 5 days
Dissolved
N/A

(4)
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee
Tamluk
25 February 1969
30 July 1970
1 year, 155 days
Fifth Assembly (1969–70)
(February 1969 election)
Bangla Congress
(United Front)

–
Vacant[d]
(President's rule)
30 July 1970
2 March 1971
215 days
Dissolved
N/A

(4)
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee
Tamluk
2 April 1971
25 June 1971
84 days
(total: 2 years, 139 days)
Sixth Assembly (1971)
(March 1971 election)
Indian National Congress

–
Vacant[d]
(President's rule)
25 June 1971
19 March 1972
268 days
Dissolved
N/A

5
Siddhartha Shankar Ray
Malda
20 March 1972
30 April 1977
5 years, 41 days
Seventh Assembly (1972–77)
(March 1972 election)
Indian National Congress

–
Vacant[d]
(President's rule)
30 April 1977
20 June 1977
51 days
Dissolved
N/A

6
Jyoti Basu
Satgacchia
21 June 1977
23 May 1982
23 years, 137 days
Eighth Assembly (1977–82)
(June 1977 election)
Communist Party of India (Marxist)
(Left Front)

24 May 1982
29 March 1987
Ninth Assembly (1982–87)
(May 1982 election)

30 March 1987
18 June 1991
Tenth Assembly (1987–91)
(March 1987 election)

19 June 1991
15 May 1996
Eleventh Assembly (1991–96)
(May 1991 election)

16 May 1996
5 November 2000
Twelfth Assembly (1996–2001)
(May 1996 election)

7
Buddhadeb Bhattacharya
Jadavpur
6 November 2000
14 May 2001
10 years, 188 days

15 May 2001
17 May 2006
Thirteenth Assembly (2001–06)
(May 2001 election)

18 May 2006
13 May 2011
Fourteenth Assembly (2006–11)
(April–May 2006 election)

8
Mamata Banerjee
Bhabanipur
20 May 2011
25 May 2016
6 years, 342 days
Fifteenth Assembly (2011–16)
(April–May 2011 election)
All India Trinamool Congress

27 May 2016
Incumbent
Sixteenth Assembly (2016–21)
(April–May 2016 election)


document_title: List of psychological research methods

question_text: two main types of research methods used in psychology

text: List of psychological research methods

text:
Psychology

Outline
History
Subfields

Basic types

Abnormal
Behavioral genetics
Biological
Cognitive
Comparative
Cross-cultural
Cultural
Differential
Developmental
Evolutionary
Experimental
Mathematical
Neuropsychology
Personality
Positive
Quantitative
Social

Applied psychology

Applied behavior analysis
Clinical
Community
Consumer
Counseling
Critical
Educational
Environmental
Ergonomics
Forensic
Health
Humanistic
Industrial and organizational
Interpretive
Legal
Medical
Military
Music
Occupational health
Political
Religion
School
Sport
Traffic

Lists

Disciplines
Organizations
Psychologists
Psychotherapies
Publications
Research methods
Theories
Timeline
Topics

 Psychology portal

v
t
e

text: A wide range of research methods are used in psychology. These methods vary by the sources of information that are drawn on, how that information is sampled, and the types of instruments that are used in data collection. Methods also vary by whether they collect qualitative data, quantitative data or both.

text: Qualitative psychological research is where the research findings are not arrived at by statistical or other quantitative procedures. Quantitative psychological research is where the research findings result from mathematical modeling and statistical estimation or statistical inference. Since qualitative information can be handled as such statistically, the distinction relates to method, rather than the topic studied.

text: There are three main types of psychological research:

text:
Correlational research
Descriptive research
Experimental research

tag: ul

text: The following are common research designs and data collection methods:

text:
Archival research
Case study
Computer simulation (modeling)
Content analysis
Event sampling methodology, also referred to as experience sampling methodology (ESM), diary study, or ecological momentary assessment (EMA)
Experiment, often with separate treatment and control groups (see scientific control and design of experiments). See Experimental psychology for many details.
Field experiment
Interview, can be structured or unstructured.
Meta-analysis
Neuroimaging and other psychophysiological methods
Observational study, can be naturalistic (see natural experiment), participant or controlled.
Quasi-experiment
Self-report inventory
Survey, often with a random sample (see survey sampling)
Twin study

text: Research designs vary according to the period(s) of time over which data are collected:

text:
Retrospective cohort study: Subjects are chosen, then data are collected on their past experiences.
Prospective cohort study: Subjects are recruited prior to the proposed independent effects being administered or occurring.
Cross-sectional study, in which a population are sampled on all proposed measures at one point in time.
Longitudinal study: Subjects are studied at multiple time points: May address the cohort effect and indicate causal directions of effects.

text: Research in psychology has been conducted with both animals and human subjects:

text:
Animal study
Human subject research


document_title: What We Do in the Shadows

question_text: who plays peter in what we do in the shadows

text: What We Do in the Shadows

text: Plot[edit]

text: A documentary crew follows four vampire roommates — Viago, Vladislav, Deacon, and Petyr — who share a flat in the Wellington suburb of Te Aro. Although Viago, Vladislav, and Deacon are all several centuries old, they have retained normal human appearances, but the 8,000-year-old Petyr resembles Count Orlok and acts more savagely than the younger vampires. Each night, Viago, Vladislav, and Deacon prowl the streets of Wellington searching for people to kill, but they must stay in the flat during the day to avoid sunlight — which is lethal to vampires — and as such have not adapted to 21st-century life. Deacon has a human servant (familiar), Jackie, who runs errands for the vampires, but she is frustrated that Deacon will not turn her into a vampire as he has promised. Jackie leads her ex-boyfriend Nick to the vampire's flat so they can drink his blood; he escapes before they can kill him, but as he leaves the flat, Petyr attacks him and later turns Nick into a vampire.

text: Two months later the vampires accept Nick into their group and also bond with his human friend Stu, a computer programmer who shows them how to use modern technology such as YouTube (to watch sunrises) and cameras (so they can see themselves). Viago in particular is able to find Katherine, his love from many years past, now an old woman in a rest home in Wellington. Despite being able to get his new friends into more popular bars and clubs, Nick struggles to adapt to life as a vampire and carelessly reveals his secret to strangers he meets. One of these strangers, a vampire hunter, breaks into the flat during the day and kills Petyr by exposing him to sunlight. The vampires are furious when they discover Nick has indirectly caused Petyr's death, and banish him from the flat.

text: Some time later, the vampires receive an invitation to a masquerade ball, where they meet other undead and supernatural beings such as zombies and witches, as well as Vladislav's ex-girlfriend Pauline, whom he nicknamed "The Beast" due to their hard break-up. Nick, Stu and Jackie also attend. To Deacon's annoyance, Nick has turned Jackie into a vampire. When Pauline realizes that Stu and the camera-crew are human, the other guests try to kill them and Vladislav fights Pauline's new boyfriend. Stu saves Vladislav by impaling Pauline's boyfriend on a stick. The vampires manage to escape the ball with Stu and the film-crew, but encounter a group of werewolves who are about to transform in a forest. Stu and one of the cameramen are caught and attacked by the werewolves. Assuming Stu is dead, the vampires grieve for him.

text: A while later, Stu (having been turned into a werewolf himself) reappears, and eventually reconciles the werewolves with the vampires, who allow them to stay in their flat with them. Nick also resurfaces and is accepted back into the home. Viago reconnects with Katherine, turning her into a vampire and ensuring they can be together forever.

text: Scenes during the credits reveal that Vladislav has gotten back together with Pauline and Jackie has made her husband her new familiar. A post-credits scene shows Deacon attempting to hypnotize the audience to forget the events of the film.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Taika Waititi as Viago, aged 379 – the uptight leader of the household.
Jemaine Clement as Vladislav, aged 862 – a former tyrant with extreme powers.
Jonathan Brugh as Deacon, aged 183 – the "young rebel" of the group who is fond of knitting, erotic dancing, and "being cool."
Ben Fransham as Petyr, aged 8,000 – a Nosferatu-like vampire who lives on the bottom floor of the flat in a stone coffin and generally keeps to himself.[7][8]
Jackie Van Beek as Jackie – a human and Deacon's familiar who cleans up after the vampires and connects them with potential victims.
Cori Gonzalez-Macuer as Nick – an intended victim who is turned into a vampire by Petyr.
Stu Rutherford as Stu – Nick's best friend who introduces the vampires to modern technology.
Rhys Darby as Anton – the leader of a local pack of werewolves.
Ethel Robinson as Katherine – the love of Viago's life.
Elena Stejko as Pauline – Vladislav's ex-girlfriend whom he calls "The Beast."
Karen O'Leary as Officer O'Leary – an officer who gets called to the vampires' house.
Mike Minogue as Officer Minogue – an officer who gets called to the vampires' house.

text: Production[edit]

text: This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (June 2016)

text: The film is based on a 2006 short film of the same name by Waititi and Clement. The new film was shot in Wellington in September 2012, and is Waititi's first feature since Boy.[5][6]

text: Stu Rutherford, an IT technician in real life, was initially told he would only have a bit part in the film so he would act more natural when filming his parts. He did not realize his role was so important until the film's premiere. Stu had a cameo appearance in the original short film.[9]

text: Waititi revealed that there was so much footage filmed that three cuts were made: one focused primarily on jokes, one focused on story, and the final cut, a mix of the two.[citation needed]

text: According to Waititi their favourite vampire films were The Lost Boys, Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula and Interview with the Vampire[10]. All those movies are heavily quoted or referenced in the film, along with many other horror movie classics.

text: Music[edit]

text: The score for the film was composed by Plan 9.[11] The film's opening credits feature the song "You're Dead" by Norma Tanega, after Clement and Waititi were introduced to the song by film editor Tom Eagles.[12][13] The film's trailer and ending feature the song "Lastochka" by the Russian rock band Leningrad.

text: Release[edit]

text: The film was released in a limited release on February 13, 2015 in New York City and Los Angeles, followed by a screening in San Francisco, Irvine, Philadelphia, Boston, Seattle, and Washington, D.C.[14] The film received a regional release in the U.S. in March 2015, by Unison Films, The Orchard, and Paramount Pictures in association with Funny or Die and Paladin Pictures.[15]

text: Critical response[edit]

text: What We Do in the Shadows received critical acclaim and has a "Certified Fresh" score of 96% on Rotten Tomatoes based on 161 reviews with an average rating of 7.8 out of 10. It is rated #68 on the website's list of Top 100 comedies of all time. The critical consensus states: "Smarter, fresher, and funnier than a modern vampire movie has any right to be, What We Do in the Shadows is bloody good fun."[16] The film also has a score of 76 out of 100 on Metacritic, based on 33 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews.[17]

text: Fearnet called the film "a great vampire comedy".[18] Film School Rejects wrote a predominantly positive review, commenting that some of the film's broader moments fell flat but compared it favorably to similar mockumentaries such as Best in Show.[19] The film was warmly received by UK newspapers, with The Guardian's film critic Peter Bradshaw describing it as "the best comedy of the year",[20] while The Telegraph's Tim Robey found it "desperately funny".[8] Film International, in a positive review, commended the film for noting, with a double of Count Orlok locked in the vampires' basement, that the true vampire film tradition is repressed by the current craze.[21] Variety was more critical, writing that "Some genre fans who prefer the silly to the satiric may bite, but the anemic pic isn't remotely weird or witty enough for cult immortality."[11]

text: Box office[edit]

text: What We Do in the Shadows grossed US $2 million[22] in New Zealand and $3.4 million in the US.[citation needed]

text: Home media[edit]

text: What We Do in the Shadows was released on DVD and Blu-ray on November 26, 2014 by Weltkino Filmverleih.[citation needed]

text: Sequel and spin-off series[edit]

text: A sequel to the film, which will focus on the werewolves depicted in What We Do in the Shadows, is currently in development. Originally rumoured to be titled What We Do in the Moonlight, the working title was later announced as We're Wolves.[23][24]

text: In September 2016, it was revealed that Waititi and Clement are planning a procedural comedy series based on the cops, Karen and Mike, who had minor roles in the film, titled Wellington Paranormal (previously titled Paranormal Event Response Unit).[25] The series is being funded by NZ On Air by granting Waititi and Clement $1 million to produce six 30-minute episodes for the series, which will air on New Zealand channel TVNZ 2[26][27] in mid-2018.[25]

text: An American version of the film is being planned, to be developed as a television series. A pilot has been ordered by FX. The pilot will feature Kayvan Novak, Matt Berry, Natasia Demetriou, and Harvey Guillen; and executive produced by Scott Rudin, Paul Simms, Garrett Basch, and Eli Bush.[28]


document_title: Republic Day (India)

question_text: who was the chief guest of india on independence day 2017

text: Republic Day (India)

text: History of Republic Day[edit]

text: India achieved independence from British raj on 15 August 1947 following the Indian independence movement noted for largely peaceful non-violent resistance and civil disobedience led by Mahatma Gandhi. The independence came through the Indian Independence Act 1947 (10 & 11 Geo 6 c 30), an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that partitioned British India into the two new independent Dominions of the British Commonwealth (later Commonwealth of Nations).[2] India obtained its independence on 15 August 1947 as a constitutional monarchy with George VI as head of state and the Earl Mountbatten as governor-general. The country, though, did not yet have a permanent constitution; instead its laws were based on the modified colonial Government of India Act 1935. On 28 August 1947, the Drafting Committee was appointed to draft a permanent constitution, with Dr B R Ambedkar as chairman. While India's Independence Day celebrates its freedom from British Rule, the Republic Day celebrates the coming into force of its constitution. A draft constitution was prepared by the committee and submitted to the Assembly on 4 November 1947.[3] The Assembly met, in sessions open to public, for 166 days, spread over a period of two years, 11 months and 18 days before adopting the Constitution. After many deliberations and some modifications, the 308 members of the Assembly signed two hand-written copies of the document (one each in Hindi and English) on 24 January 1950. Two days later, it came into effect throughout the whole nation.

text: Celebrations[edit]

text: The main Republic Day celebration is held in the national capital, New Delhi, at the Rajpath before the President of India. On this day, ceremonious parades take place at the Rajpath, which are performed as a tribute to India; its unity in diversity and rich cultural heritage.

text: In 2016, on the occasion of the 67th Republic Day, the Protocol Department of the Government of Maharashtra held its first parade on the lines of the Delhi Republic Day parade along the entire stretch of Marine Drive in Mumbai.

text: Delhi Republic Day parade[edit]

text: Delhi Republic Day parade is held in the capital, New Delhi. Commencing from the gates of the Rashtrapati Bhavan (the President's residence), Raisina Hill on Rajpath past the India Gate, this event is the main attraction of India's Republic Day Celebrations lasting three days. The parade showcases India's Defence Capability, Cultural and Social Heritage.

text: Nine to twelve different regiments of the Indian Army in addition to the Navy, and Air Force with their bands march past in all their finery and official decorations. The President of India who is the Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Armed Forces, takes the salute. Twelve contingents of various para-military forces of India and other civil forces also take part in this parade.[4]

text: Beating Retreat[edit]

text: The Beating Retreat ceremony is held after officially denoting the end of Republic Day festivities. It is conducted on the evening of 29 January, the third day after the Republic Day. It is performed by the bands of the three wings of the military, the Indian Army, Indian Navy and Indian Air Force. The venue is Raisina Hill and an adjacent square, Vijay Chowk, flanked by the North and South block of the Rashtrapati Bhavan (President's Palace) towards the end of Rajpath.

text: The Chief Guest of the function is the President of India who arrives escorted by the (PBG), a cavalry unit. When the President arrives, the PBG commander asks the unit to give the National Salute, which is followed by the playing of the Indian National Anthem, Jana Gana Mana, by the Army. The Army develops the ceremony of display by the massed bands in which Military Bands, Pipe and Drum Bands, Buglers and Trumpeters from various Army Regiments besides bands from the Navy and Air Force take part which play popular tunes like Abide With Me, Mahatma Gandhi's favourite hymn, and Saare Jahan Se Achcha at the end.[5][6][7]

text: Gallery[edit]

text:
Buildings on Raisina Hill including Rashtrapati Bhavan, lit up during Republic Day 2008.

Surya Kiran Aerobatics Team displaying tricolor.

Border Security Force personnel on Republic Day.

text: Republic Day parade chief guest[edit]

text: Since 1950, India has been hosting head of state or government of another country as the state guest of honour for Republic Day celebrations in New Delhi. During 1950–1954, Republic Day celebrations were organised at different venues (like Irwin Stadium, Kingsway, Red Fort and Ramlila Grounds). It was only starting 1955 when the parade in its present form was organised at Rajpath.[8] The guest country is chosen after a deliberation of strategic, economic and political interests. During 1950s–1970s, a number of NAM and Eastern Bloc countries were hosted by India. In 1968 and 1974, India played host to two countries on the same Republic Day.

text:
Year
Guest name
Country
Note

1950
President Sukarno[9]
 Indonesia

1951
King Tribhuvan Bir Bikram Shah[10]
   Nepal

1952

1953

1954
King Jigme Dorji Wangchuck[11]
 Bhutan

1955
Governor General Malik Ghulam Muhammad[12]
 Pakistan
First guest for parade at Rajpath [13]

1956
Chancellor of the Exchequer R. A. Butler
 United Kingdom
Note[1]
Two guests[14]

Chief Justice Kōtarō Tanaka
 Japan

1957
Minister of Defence Georgy Zhukov [15]
 Soviet Union

1958
Marshall Ye Jianying[16]
 China

1959
Duke of Edinburgh Prince Philip [17][18][19]
 United Kingdom
2nd invitation

1960
Chairman Kliment Voroshilov[20]
 Soviet Union
2nd invitation

1961
Queen Elizabeth II[21]
 United Kingdom
3rd invitation, Note[2]

1962
Prime Minister Viggo Kampmann[22]
 Denmark
Note[3]

1963
King Norodom Sihanouk[23]
 Cambodia

1964
Chief of Defence Staff Lord Louis Mountbatten [24]
 United Kingdom
4th invitation, Note[4]

1965
Food and Agriculture Minister Rana Abdul Hamid
 Pakistan
2nd invitation

1966
No invitation
No invitation
Note[5]

1967
King Mohammed Zahir Shah [25]
 Afghanistan
Note[6]

1968
Chairman Alexei Kosygin
 Soviet Union
3rd invitation
Two guests[26]

President Josip Broz Tito
 Yugoslavia

1969
Prime Minister Todor Zhivkov[27]
 Bulgaria

1970
King of the Belgians Baudouin[28][29]
 Belgium
Note[7]

1971
President Julius Nyerere[30]
 Tanzania

1972
Prime Minister Seewoosagur Ramgoolam [31]
 Mauritius

1973
President Mobutu Sese Seko[32]
 Zaire

1974
President Josip Broz Tito
 Yugoslavia
2nd invitation
Two guests [33]

Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike
 Sri Lanka

1975
President Kenneth Kaunda[34]
 Zambia

1976
Prime Minister Jacques Chirac[35]
 France

1977
First Secretary Edward Gierek[36]
 Poland

1978
President Patrick Hillery[37]
 Ireland

1979
Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser[38]
 Australia

1980
President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing
 France
2nd invitation

1981
President Jose Lopez Portillo[39]
 Mexico

1982
King Juan Carlos I[40]
 Spain

1983
President Shehu Shagari[41]
 Nigeria

1984
King Jigme Singye Wangchuck[42]
 Bhutan
2nd invitation

1985
President Raúl Alfonsín[43]
 Argentina

1986
Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou[44]
 Greece

1987
President Alan Garcia[45]
 Peru

1988
President J. R. Jayewardene[46]
 Sri Lanka
2nd invitation

1989
General Secretary Nguyen Van Linh[47]
 Vietnam

1990
Prime Minister Anerood Jugnauth[48]
 Mauritius
2nd invitation

1991
President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom[49]
 Maldives

1992
President Mário Soares[49]
 Portugal

1993
Prime Minister John Major[49]
 United Kingdom
5th invitation

1994
Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong[49]
 Singapore

1995
President Nelson Mandela[50]
 South Africa

1996
President Fernando Henrique Cardoso[49]
 Brazil

1997
Prime Minister Basdeo Panday[49]
 Trinidad and Tobago

1998
President Jacques Chirac[49]
 France
3rd invitation

1999
King Birendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev[49]
   Nepal
2nd invitation

2000
President Olusegun Obasanjo[49]
 Nigeria
2nd invitation

2001
President Abdelaziz Bouteflika[49]
 Algeria

2002
President Cassam Uteem[49]
 Mauritius
3rd invitation

2003
President Mohammed Khatami[49]
 Iran

2004
President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva [49]
 Brazil
2nd invitation

2005
King Jigme Singye Wangchuck[49]
 Bhutan
3rd invitation

2006
King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz al-Saud[49]
 Saudi Arabia

2007
President Vladimir Putin[49]
 Russia
4th invitation

2008
President Nicolas Sarkozy[49]
 France
4th invitation

2009
President Nursultan Nazarbayev[49]
 Kazakhstan

2010
President Lee Myung Bak[51]
 South Korea

2011
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono[52][53]
 Indonesia
2nd invitation

2012
Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra[54]
 Thailand

2013
King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck[55]
 Bhutan
4th invitation

2014
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe[56]
 Japan
2nd invitation

2015
President Barack Obama[57]
 United States

2016
President François Hollande
 France
5th invitation[58]

2017
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan[59]
 United Arab Emirates

2018
Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah
 Brunei

Ten guests (Heads of ASEAN states)[60]

Prime Minister Hun Sen
 Cambodia
2nd invitation

President Joko Widodo
 Indonesia
3rd invitation

Prime Minister Thongloun Sisoulith
 Laos

Prime Minister Najib Razak
 Malaysia

President Htin Kyaw
 Myanmar

President Rodrigo Roa Duterte
 Philippines

President Halimah Yacob
 Singapore
2nd invitation

Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha
 Thailand
2nd invitation

Prime Minister Nguyễn Xuân Phúc
 Vietnam
2nd invitation

text: Notes[edit]


document_title: National debt of the United States

question_text: how much is the united states in debt to china

question_tokens: how much is the united states in debt to china

text: National debt of the United States

text: History[edit]

text: The United States government has continuously had a fluctuating public debt since its formation in 1789, except for about a year during 1835–1836. To allow comparisons over the years, public debt is often expressed as a ratio to gross domestic product (GDP).

text: The United States public debt as a percentage of GDP reached its highest level during Harry Truman's first presidential term, during and after World War II. Public debt as a percentage of GDP fell rapidly in the post-World War II period, and reached a low in 1974 under Richard Nixon. Debt as a share of GDP has consistently increased since then, except during the presidencies of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Public debt rose during the 1980s, as Ronald Reagan cut tax rates and increased military spending. It fell during the 1990s, due to decreased military spending, increased taxes and the 1990s boom. Public debt rose sharply in the wake of the 2007–2008 financial crisis and the resulting significant tax revenue declines and spending increases.[10]

text: Valuation and measurement[edit]

text: Public and government accounts[edit]

text: On January 26, 2016, debt held by the public was $13.62 trillion or about 75% of the previous 12 months of GDP.[5][6][7][8] Intragovernmental holdings stood at $5.34 trillion, giving a combined total gross national debt of $18.96 trillion or about 104% of the previous 12 months of GDP.[7]

text: The national debt can also be classified into marketable or non-marketable securities. Most of the marketable securities are Treasury notes, bills, and bonds held by investors and governments globally. The non-marketable securities are mainly the "government account series" owed to certain government trust funds such as the Social Security Trust Fund, which represented $2.74 trillion in 2011.[11]

text: The non-marketable securities represent amounts owed to program beneficiaries. For example, in the case of the Social Security Trust Fund, the payroll taxes dedicated to Social Security were credited to the Trust Fund upon receipt, but spent for other purposes. If the government continues to run deficits in other parts of the budget, the government will have to issue debt held by the public to fund the Social Security Trust Fund, in effect exchanging one type of debt for the other.[12] Other large intragovernmental holders include the Federal Housing Administration, the Federal Savings and Loan Corporation's Resolution Fund and the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund (Medicare).[citation needed]

text: Accounting treatment[edit]

text: Only debt held by the public is reported as a liability on the consolidated financial statements of the United States government. Debt held by government accounts is an asset to those accounts but a liability to the Treasury; they offset each other in the consolidated financial statements.[13]

text: Government receipts and expenditures are normally presented on a cash rather than an accrual basis, although the accrual basis may provide more information on the longer-term implications of the government's annual operations.[14] The United States public debt is often expressed as a ratio of public debt to gross domestic product (GDP). The ratio of debt to GDP may decrease as a result of a government surplus as well as due to growth of GDP and inflation.[citation needed]

text: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac obligations excluded[edit]

text: Under normal accounting rules, fully owned companies would be consolidated into the books of the owner, but the large size of Fannie and Freddie has made the U.S. government reluctant to incorporate Freddie and Fannie into its own books. When Freddie and Fannie required bail-outs, White House Budget Director Jim Nussle, on September 12, 2008, initially indicated their budget plans would not incorporate the GSE debt into the budget because of the temporary nature of the conservator intervention.[15] As the intervention has dragged out, pundits have started to further question this accounting treatment, noting that changes in August 2012 "makes them even more permanent wards of the state and turns the government's preferred stock into a permanent, perpetual kind of security".[16]

text: The government controls the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which would normally criticize inconsistent accounting practices, but it does not oversee its own government's accounting practices or the standards set by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board. The on- or off-balance sheet obligations of those two independent GSEs was just over $5 trillion at the time the conservatorship was put in place, consisting mainly of mortgage payment guarantees and agency bonds.[17] The confusing independent but government-controlled status of the GSEs has resulted in investors of the legacy common shares and preferred shares launching various activist campaigns in 2014.[18]

text: Guaranteed obligations excluded[edit]

text: U.S. federal government guarantees are not included in the public debt total, until such time as there is a call on the guarantees. For example, the U.S. federal government in late-2008 guaranteed large amounts of obligations of mutual funds, banks, and corporations under several programs designed to deal with the problems arising from the late-2000s financial crisis. The guarantee program lapsed at the end of 2012 when Congress declined to extend the scheme. The funding of direct investments made in response to the crisis, such as those made under the Troubled Assets Relief Program, are included in the debt.

text: Unfunded obligations excluded[edit]

text: The U.S. government is obligated under current law to make mandatory payments for programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) projects that payouts for these programs will significantly exceed tax revenues over the next 75 years. The Medicare Part A (hospital insurance) payouts already exceed program tax revenues, and social security payouts exceeded payroll taxes in fiscal 2010. These deficits require funding from other tax sources or borrowing.[19] The present value of these deficits or unfunded obligations is an estimated $45.8 trillion. This is the amount that would have had to be set aside in 2009 in order to pay for the unfunded obligations which, under current law, will have to be raised by the government in the future. Approximately $7.7 trillion relates to Social Security, while $38.2 trillion relates to Medicare and Medicaid. In other words, health care programs will require nearly five times more funding than Social Security. Adding this to the national debt and other federal obligations would bring total obligations to nearly $62 trillion.[20] However, these unfunded obligations are not counted in the national debt, as shown in monthly Treasury reports of the national debt.[21]

text: Measuring debt burden[edit]

text: GDP is a measure of the total size and output of the economy. One measure of the debt burden is its size relative to GDP, called the "debt-to-GDP ratio." Mathematically, this is the debt divided by the GDP amount. The Congressional Budget Office includes historical budget and debt tables along with its annual "Budget and Economic Outlook." Debt held by the public as a percentage of GDP rose from 34.7% GDP in 2000 to 40.5% in 2008 and 67.7% in 2011.[22]

text: Mathematically, the ratio can decrease even while debt grows, if the rate of increase in GDP (which also takes account of inflation) is higher than the rate of increase of debt. Conversely, the debt to GDP ratio can increase even while debt is being reduced, if the decline in GDP is sufficient.

text: According to the CIA World Factbook, during 2015, the U.S. debt to GDP ratio of 73.6% was the 39th highest in the world. This was measured using "debt held by the public."[23] However, $1 trillion in additional borrowing since the end of FY 2015 has raised the ratio to 76.2% as of April 2016 [See Appendix#National debt for selected years]. Also, this number excludes state and local debt. According to the OECD, general government gross debt (federal, state, and local) in the United States in the fourth quarter of 2015 was $22.5 trillion (125% of GDP); subtracting out $5.25 trillion for intergovernmental federal debt to count only federal "debt held by the public" gives 96% of GDP.[24]

text: The ratio is higher if the total national debt is used, by adding the "intragovernmental debt" to the "debt held by the public." For example, on April 29, 2016, debt held by the public was approximately $13.84 trillion or about 76% of GDP. Intra-governmental holdings stood at $5.35 trillion, giving a combined total public debt of $19.19 trillion. U.S. GDP for the previous 12 months was approximately $18.15 trillion, for a total debt to GDP ratio of approximately 106%.[25]

text: Calculating the annual change in debt[edit]

text: Conceptually, an annual deficit (or surplus) should represent the change in the national debt, with a deficit adding to the national debt and a surplus reducing it. However, there is complexity in the budgetary computations that can make the deficit figure commonly reported in the media (the "total deficit") considerably different from the annual increase in the debt. The major categories of differences are the treatment of the Social Security program, Treasury borrowing, and supplemental appropriations outside the budget process.[26]

text: Social Security payroll taxes and benefit payments, along with the net balance of the U.S. Postal Service, are considered "off-budget", while most other expenditure and receipt categories are considered "on-budget". The total federal deficit is the sum of the on-budget deficit (or surplus) and the off-budget deficit (or surplus). Since FY1960, the federal government has run on-budget deficits except for FY1999 and FY2000, and total federal deficits except in FY1969 and FY1998–FY2001.[27]

text: For example, in January 2009 the CBO reported that for fiscal year 2008 (FY2008) the "on-budget deficit" was $638 billion, offset by an "off-budget surplus" (mainly due to Social Security revenue in excess of payouts) of $183 billion, for a "total deficit" of $455 billion. This latter figure was the one commonly reported in the media. However, an additional $313 billion was required for "the Treasury actions aimed at stabilizing the financial markets," an unusually high amount due to the Subprime mortgage crisis. This meant that the "debt held by the public" increased by $768 billion ($455B + $313B = $768B). The "off-budget surplus" was borrowed and spent (as is typically the case), increasing the "intra-governmental debt" by $183 billion. So the total increase in the "National debt" in FY2008 was $768B +$183B = $951 billion.[26] The Treasury Department reported an increase in the National Debt of $1,017B for FY2008.[28] The $66 billion difference is likely due to "supplemental appropriations" for the War on Terror, some of which were outside the budget process entirely until President Obama began including most of them in his FY2010 budget.[29]

text: In other words, spending the "off budget" Social Security surplus adds to the total national debt (by increasing the intragovernmental debt) while the "off-budget" surplus reduces the "total" deficit reported in the media. Certain spending called "supplemental appropriations" is outside the budget process entirely but adds to the national debt. Funding for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars was accounted for this way prior to the Obama administration.[29] Certain stimulus measures and earmarks were also outside the budget process. The federal government publishes the total debt owed (public and intragovernmental holdings) monthly.[30]

text: Reduction[edit]

text: Negative real interest rates[edit]

text: Since 2010, the U.S. Treasury has been obtaining negative real interest rates on government debt, meaning the inflation rate is greater than the interest rate paid on the debt.[31] Such low rates, outpaced by the inflation rate, occur when the market believes that there are no alternatives with sufficiently low risk, or when popular institutional investments such as insurance companies, pensions, or bond, money market, and balanced mutual funds are required or choose to invest sufficiently large sums in Treasury securities to hedge against risk.[32][33]

text: Economist Lawrence Summers has stated that at such low interest rates, government borrowing actually saves taxpayer money and improves creditworthiness.[34]

text: In the late 1940s through the early 1970s, the US and UK both reduced their debt burden by about 30% to 40% of GDP per decade by taking advantage of negative real interest rates, but there is no guarantee that government debt rates will continue to stay so low.[32][35] Between 1946 and 1974, the US debt-to-GDP ratio fell from 121% to 32% even though there were surpluses in only eight of those years which were much smaller than the deficits.[36]

text: Raising reserve requirements and full reserve banking[edit]

text: The two economists, Jaromir Benes and Michael Kumhof, working for the International Monetary Fund, published a working paper called The Chicago Plan Revisited suggesting that the debt could be eliminated by raising bank reserve requirements and converting from fractional reserve banking to full reserve banking.[37][38] Economists at the Paris School of Economics have commented on the plan, stating that it is already the status quo for coinage currency,[39] and a Norges Bank economist has examined the proposal in the context of considering the finance industry as part of the real economy.[40] A Centre for Economic Policy Research paper agrees with the conclusion that, "no real liability is created by new fiat money creation, and therefore public debt does not rise as a result".[41]

text: Debt ceiling[edit]

text: The debt ceiling is a legislative mechanism to limit the amount of national debt that can be issued by the Treasury. In effect, it will restrain the Treasury from paying for expenditures after the limit has been reached, even if the expenditures have already been approved (in the budget) and have been appropriated. If this situation were to occur, it is unclear whether Treasury would be able to prioritize payments on debt to avoid a default on its debt obligations, but it would have to default on some of its non-debt obligations.

text: Debt holdings[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Because a large variety of people own the notes, bills, and bonds in the "public" portion of the debt, Treasury also publishes information that groups the types of holders by general categories to portray who owns United States debt. In this data set, some of the public portion is moved and combined with the total government portion, because this amount is owned by the Federal Reserve as part of United States monetary policy. (See Federal Reserve System.)

text: As is apparent from the chart, a little less than half of the total national debt is owed to the "Federal Reserve and intragovernmental holdings". The foreign and international holders of the debt are also put together from the notes, bills, and bonds sections. To the right is a chart for the data as of June 2008:

text: Foreign holdings[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: As of September 2014, foreigners owned $6.06 trillion of U.S. debt, or approximately 47% of the debt held by the public of $12.8 trillion and 34% of the total debt of $17.8 trillion.[42] The largest holders were China, Japan, Belgium, the Caribbean banking centers, and oil exporters.[44]

text: The share held by foreign governments has grown over time, rising from 13% of the public debt in 1988[45] to 25% in 2007.[46]

text: As of September 2014 the largest single holder of U.S. government debt was China, with 21% of all foreign-held U.S. Treasury securities (10% of total U.S. public debt).[47] China's holdings of government debt, as a percentage of all foreign-held government debt are up significantly since 2000 (when China held just 6 percent of all foreign-held U.S. Treasury securities).[48]

text: This exposure to potential financial or political risk should foreign banks stop buying Treasury securities or start selling them heavily was addressed in a June 2008 report issued by the Bank of International Settlements, which stated, "Foreign investors in U.S. dollar assets have seen big losses measured in dollars, and still bigger ones measured in their own currency. While unlikely, indeed highly improbable for public sector investors, a sudden rush for the exits cannot be ruled out completely."[49]

text: On May 20, 2007, Kuwait discontinued pegging its currency exclusively to the dollar, preferring to use the dollar in a basket of currencies.[citation needed] Syria made a similar announcement on June 4, 2007.[50] In September 2009 China, India and Russia said they were interested in buying International Monetary Fund gold to diversify their dollar-denominated securities.[51] However, in July 2010 China's State Administration of Foreign Exchange "ruled out the option of dumping its vast holdings of US Treasury securities" and said gold "cannot become a main channel for investing our foreign exchange reserves" because the market for gold is too small and prices are too volatile.[citation needed]

text: According to Paul Krugman, "It's true that foreigners now hold large claims on the United States, including a fair amount of government debt. But every dollar's worth of foreign claims on America is matched by 89 cents' worth of U.S. claims on foreigners. And because foreigners tend to put their U.S. investments into safe, low-yield assets, America actually earns more from its assets abroad than it pays to foreign investors. If your image is of a nation that's already deep in hock to the Chinese, you've been misinformed. Nor are we heading rapidly in that direction."[52]

text: Forecasting[edit]

text: CBO short-term outlook[edit]

text: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported in its February 2014 Budget and Economic Outlook (which covers the 2014–2024 period) that deficits were projected to return to approximately the historical average relative to the size of the economy (GDP) by 2014. The CBO estimated that under current law, the deficit would total $514 billion in fiscal year 2014 or 3.0% GDP. Deficits would then slowly begin rising again through 2024 due primarily to the pressures of an aging population and rising healthcare costs per person. The debt to GDP ratio would remain stable for much of the decade then begin rising again toward the end of the 10-year forecast window, from 74% in 2014 to 79% in 2024.[53]

text: CBO long-term outlook[edit]

text: The CBO reports its Long-Term Budget Outlook annually, providing at least two scenarios for spending, revenue, deficits, and debt. The 2014 Outlook mainly covers the 25-year period through 2039. The "extended baseline scenario" assumes that the laws currently on the books will be implemented, for the most part. The CBO reported in July 2014 that under this scenario:

text: If current laws remained generally unchanged in the future, federal debt held by the public would decline slightly relative to GDP over the next few years. After that, however, growing budget deficits would push debt back to and above its current high level. Twenty-five years from now, in 2039, federal debt held by the public would exceed 100 percent of GDP. Moreover, debt would be on an upward path relative to the size of the economy, a trend that could not be sustained indefinitely. By 2039, the deficit would equal 6.5 percent of GDP, larger than in any year between 1947 and 2008, and federal debt held by the public would reach 106 percent of GDP, more than in any year except 1946—even without factoring in the economic effects of growing debt.[54]

text: The "extended alternative fiscal scenario" assumes the continuation of present trends, which result in a more unfavorable debt position and adverse economic consequences relative to the baseline scenario. The CBO reported in July 2014 that under this scenario:

text: [C]ertain policies that are now in place but are scheduled to change under current law are assumed to continue, and some provisions of current law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period are assumed to be modified. Under that scenario, deficits excluding interest payments would be about $2 trillion larger over the first decade than those under the baseline; subsequently, such deficits would be larger than those under the extended baseline by rapidly increasing amounts, doubling as a percentage of GDP in less than 10 years. CBO projects that real GNP in 2039 would be about 5 percent lower under the extended alternative fiscal scenario than under the extended baseline with economic feedback, and that interest rates would be about three-quarters of a percentage point higher. Reflecting the budgetary effects of those economic developments, federal debt would rise to 183 percent of GDP in 2039.[54]

text: Over the long-term, the CBO projects that interest expense and mandatory spending categories (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security) will continue to grow relative to GDP, while discretionary categories (e.g., Defense and other Cabinet Departments) continue to fall relative to GDP. Debt is projected to continue rising relative to GDP under the above two scenarios, although the CBO did also offer other scenarios that involved austerity measures that would bring the debt to GDP ratio down.[54]

text: The CBO estimated under the baseline scenario that the U.S. debt held by the public would increase approximately $8.5 trillion between the end of 2014 and 2024. Under a $2 trillion deficit reduction scenario during that first decade, federal debt held by the public in 2039 would stand at 75 percent of GDP, only slightly above the value of 72 percent at the end of 2013. Under a $4 trillion deficit reduction scenario for that decade, federal debt held by the public would fall to 42 percent of GDP in 2039. By comparison, such debt was 35 percent of GDP in 2007 and has averaged 39 percent of GDP during the past 40 years.[54]

text: The CBO reported in September 2011: "The nation cannot continue to sustain the spending programs and policies of the past with the tax revenues it has been accustomed to paying. Citizens will either have to pay more for their government, accept less in government services and benefits, or both."[55]

text: Risks and debates[edit]

text: CBO risk factors[edit]

text: The CBO reported several types of risk factors related to rising debt levels in a July 2010 publication:

text:
A growing portion of savings would go towards purchases of government debt, rather than investments in productive capital goods such as factories and computers, leading to lower output and incomes than would otherwise occur;
If higher marginal tax rates were used to pay rising interest costs, savings would be reduced and work would be discouraged;
Rising interest costs would force reductions in government programs;
Restrictions to the ability of policymakers to use fiscal policy to respond to economic challenges; and
An increased risk of a sudden fiscal crisis, in which investors demand higher interest rates.[56]

text: Concerns over Chinese holdings of U.S. debt[edit]

text: Many American and other economic analysts have expressed concerns on account of the People's Republic of China's "extensive" holdings of United States government debt,[57][58] as part of their reserves.

text: The National Defense Authorization Act of the fiscal year 2012 included a provision requiring the Secretary of Defense to conduct a "national security risk assessment of U.S. federal debt held by China." The Department issued its report in July 2012, stating that "attempting to use U.S. Treasury securities as a coercive tool would have limited effect and likely would do more harm to China than to the United States. As the threat is not credible and the effect would be limited even if carried out, it does not offer China deterrence options, whether in the diplomatic, military, or economic realms, and this would remain true both in peacetime and in scenarios of crisis or war."[59]

text: The 112th United States Congress introduced legislation whose aim was the assessment of the implications of China's ownership of U.S. debt.[59] The 2013 Report claimed that "[a] potentially serious short-term problem would emerge if China decided to suddenly reduce their liquid U.S. financial assets significantly" [emphasis in the original text], noting, also, that Federal Reserve System Chairman Ben Bernanke had, in 2007, stated that "because foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury securities represent only a small part of total U.S. credit market debt outstanding, U.S. credit markets should be able to absorb without great difficulty any shift of foreign allocations."[59]

text: A significant number of economists and analysts dismiss any and all concerns over foreign holdings of United States government debt denominated in U.S. dollars, including China's holdings.[60][61][62][63]

text: Sustainability[edit]

text: According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the United States is on a "fiscally unsustainable" path because of projected future increases in Medicare and Social Security spending.[19]

text: Risks to economic growth[edit]

text: Debt levels may affect economic growth rates. In 2010, economists Kenneth Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart reported that among the 20 developed countries studied, average annual GDP growth was 3–4% when debt was relatively moderate or low (i.e. under 60% of GDP), but it dips to just 1.6% when debt was high (i.e., above 90% of GDP).[64] In April 2013, the conclusions of Rogoff and Reinhart's study came into question when a coding error in their original paper was discovered by Herndon, Ash and Pollin of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.[65][66] Herndon, Ash and Pollin found that after correcting for errors and unorthodox methods used, there was no evidence that debt above a specific threshold reduces growth.[67] Reinhart and Rogoff maintain that after correcting for errors, a negative relationship between high debt and growth remains.[68] However, other economists, including Paul Krugman, have argued that it is low growth which causes national debt to increase, rather than the other way around.[69][70][71]

text: Commenting on fiscal sustainability, former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke stated in April 2010 that "Neither experience nor economic theory clearly indicates the threshold at which government debt begins to endanger prosperity and economic stability. But given the significant costs and risks associated with a rapidly rising federal debt, our nation should soon put in place a credible plan for reducing deficits to sustainable levels over time."[72]

text: Interest and debt service costs[edit]

text: Despite rising debt levels, interest costs have remained at approximately 2008 levels (around $450 billion in total) due to lower than long-term interest rates paid on government debt in recent years.[73] However, interest rates may return to higher historical levels.[74]

text: The cost of servicing the U.S. national debt can be measured in various ways. The CBO analyzes net interest as a percentage of GDP, with a higher percentage indicating a higher interest payment burden. During 2015, this was 1.3% GDP, close to the record low 1.2% of the 1966–1968 era. The average from 1966 to 2015 was 2.0% of GDP.[75] However, the CBO estimated in 2016 that the interest amounts and % GDP will increase significantly over the following decade as both interest rates and debt levels rise: "Interest payments on that debt represent a large and rapidly growing expense of the federal government. CBO's baseline shows net interest payments more than tripling under current law, climbing from $231 billion in 2014, or 1.3 percent of GDP, to $799 billion in 2024, or 3.0 percent of GDP—the highest ratio since 1996."[76]

text: Definition of public debt[edit]

text: Economists also debate the definition of public debt. Krugman argued in May 2010 that the debt held by the public is the right measure to use, while Reinhart has testified to the President's Fiscal Reform Commission that gross debt is the appropriate measure.[69] The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) cited research by several economists supporting the use of the lower debt held by the public figure as a more accurate measure of the debt burden, disagreeing with these Commission members.[77]

text: There is debate regarding the economic nature of the intragovernmental debt, which was approximately $4.6 trillion in February 2011.[78] For example, the CBPP argues: that "large increases in [debt held by the public] can also push up interest rates and increase the amount of future interest payments the federal government must make to lenders outside of the United States, which reduces Americans' income. By contrast, intragovernmental debt (the other component of the gross debt) has no such effects because it is simply money the federal government owes (and pays interest on) to itself."[77]

text: However, if the U.S. government continues to run "on budget" deficits as projected by the CBO and OMB for the foreseeable future, it will have to issue marketable Treasury bills and bonds (i.e., debt held by the public) to pay for the projected shortfall in the Social Security program. This will result in "debt held by the public" replacing "intragovernmental debt".[79][80]

text: Intergenerational equity[edit]

text: One debate about the national debt relates to intergenerational equity. For example, if one generation is receiving the benefit of government programs or employment enabled by deficit spending and debt accumulation, to what extent does the resulting higher debt impose risks and costs on future generations? There are several factors to consider:

text:
For every dollar of debt held by the public, there is a government obligation (generally marketable Treasury securities) counted as an asset by investors. Future generations benefit to the extent these assets are passed on to them.[81]
As of 2010, approximately 72% of the financial assets were held by the wealthiest 5% of the population.[82] This presents a wealth and income distribution question, as only a fraction of the people in future generations will receive principal or interest from investments related to the debt incurred today.
To the extent the U.S. debt is owed to foreign investors (approximately half the "debt held by the public" during 2012), principal and interest are not directly received by U.S. heirs.[81]
Higher debt levels imply higher interest payments, which create costs for future taxpayers (e.g., higher taxes, lower government benefits, higher inflation, or increased risk of fiscal crisis).[56]
To the extent the borrowed funds are invested today to improve the long-term productivity of the economy and its workers, such as via useful infrastructure projects or education, future generations may benefit.[83]
For every dollar of intragovernmental debt, there is an obligation to specific program recipients, generally non-marketable securities such as those held in the Social Security Trust Fund. Adjustments that reduce future deficits in these programs may also apply costs to future generations, via higher taxes or lower program spending.[citation needed]

text: Krugman wrote in March 2013 that by neglecting public investment and failing to create jobs, we are doing far more harm to future generations than merely passing along debt: "Fiscal policy is, indeed, a moral issue, and we should be ashamed of what we're doing to the next generation's economic prospects. But our sin involves investing too little, not borrowing too much." Young workers face high unemployment and studies have shown their income may lag throughout their careers as a result. Teacher jobs have been cut, which could affect the quality of education and competitiveness of younger Americans.[84]

text: Credit default[edit]

text: The US has never fully defaulted.[85][86]

text: In April 1979, however, the United States may have technically defaulted on $122 million in Treasury bills, which was less than 1% of U.S. debt. The Treasury Department characterized it as a delay rather than as a default, but it did have consequences for short-term interest rates, which jumped 0.6%.[87] Others view it as a temporary, partial default.[88][89][90]

text: Appendix[edit]

text: National debt for selected years[edit]

text:
Fiscal year
Total debt
[91][92][93]
Total debt
as % of GDP
Public debt
Public debt
as % of GDP
GDP
($ billions)[94]

1910
 2.65/-
8.1%
2.65
8.1%
est. 32.8

1920
25.95/-
29.2%
25.95
29.2%
est. 88.6

1927
[95] 18.51/-
19.2%
18.51
19.2%
est. 96.5

1930
16.19/-
16.6%
16.19
16.6%
est. 97.4

1940
42.97/50.70
43.8–51.6%
42.77
43.6%
-/98.2

1950
257.3/256.9
92.0%
219.0
78.4%
279.0

1960
286.3/290.5
53.6–54.2%
236.8
44.3%
535.1

1970
370.9/380.9
35.4–36.4%
283.2
27.0%
1,049

1980
907.7/909.0
32.4–32.6%
711.9
25.5%
2,796

1990
3,233/3,206
54.2–54.6%
2,400
40.8%
5,915

2000
a15,659
a55.8%
a3,450
33.9%
10,150

2001
a25,792
a54.8%
a3,350
31.6%
10,550

2002
a36,213
a57.1%
a3,550
32.7%
10,900

2003
a6,783
a 59.9%
a3,900
34.6%
11,350

2004
a7,379
a 61.0%
a4,300
35.6%
12,100

2005
a47,918
a 61.4%
a4,600
35.7%
12,900

2006
a58,493
a 62.1%
a4,850
35.4%
13,700

2007
a68,993
a 62.8%
a5,050
35.3%
14,300

2008
a710,011
a 67.9%
a5,800
39.4%
14,750

2009
a811,898
a 82.5%
a7,550
52.4%
14,400

2010
a913,551
a 91.6%
a9,000
61.0%
14,800

2011
a1014,781
a 96.1%
a10,150
65.8%
15,400

2012
a1116,059
a100.2%
a11,250
70.3%
16,050

2013
a1216,732
a101.3%
a12,000
72.6%
16,500

2014
a1317,810
a103.4%
a12,800
74.2%
17,200

2015
a1418,138
a101.3/101.8%
a13,100
73.3%
17,900

2016 (Oct. '15 –
Jul. '16 only)
~19,428
~106.1%
~13,998
~76.5%

text: On June 25, 2014, the BEA announced: "[On July 30, 2014, i]n addition to the regular revision of estimates for the most recent 3 years and for the first quarter of 2014, GDP and select components will be revised back to the first quarter of 1999.

text: Fiscal years 1940–2009 GDP figures were derived from February 2011 Office of Management and Budget figures which contained revisions of prior year figures due to significant changes from prior GDP measurements. Fiscal years 1950–2010 GDP measurements were derived from December 2010 Bureau of Economic Analysis figures which also tend to be subject to revision, especially more recent years. Afterwards the OMB figures were revised back to 2004 and the BEA figures (in a revision dated July 31, 2013) were revised back to 1947.

text: Regarding estimates recorded in the GDP column (the last column) marked with a "~" symbol, absolute differences from advance (one month after) BEA reports of GDP percent change to current findings (as of November 2013) found in revisions are stated to be 1.3% ± 2.0% or a 95% probability of being within the range of 0.0–3.3%, assuming the differences to occur according to standard deviations from the average absolute difference of 1.3%. E.g. with an advance report of a $400 billion increase of a $10 trillion GDP, for example, one could be 95% confident that the range in which the exact GDP dollar amount lies would be 0.0 to 3.3% different than 4.0% (400 ÷ 10,000) or within the range of $0 to $330 billion different than the hypothetical $400 billion (a range of $70–730 billion). Two months after, with a revised value, the range of potential difference from the stated estimate shrinks, and three months after with another revised value the range shrinks again.

text: Fiscal years 1940–1970 begin July 1 of the previous year (for example, Fiscal Year 1940 begins July 1, 1939 and ends June 30, 1940); fiscal years 1980–2010 begin October 1 of the previous year. Intragovernmental debts before the Social Security Act are presumed to equal zero.

text: 1909–1930 calendar year GDP estimates are from MeasuringWorth.com[96] Fiscal Year estimates are derived from simple linear interpolation.

text: (a1) Audited figure was "about $5,659 billion."[97]

text: (a2) Audited figure was "about $5,792 billion."[98]

text: (a3) Audited figure was "about $6,213 billion."[98]

text: (a) Audited figure was said to be "about" the stated figure.[99]

text: (a4) Audited figure was "about $7,918 billion."[100]

text: (a5) Audited figure was "about $8,493 billion."[100]

text: (a6) Audited figure was "about $8,993 billion."[101]

text: (a7) Audited figure was "about $10,011 billion."[101]

text: (a8) Audited figure was "about $11,898 billion."[102]

text: (a9) Audited figure was "about $13,551 billion."[103]

text: (a10) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Public debt figure as $14,781 billion.[104]

text: (a11) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Public debt figure as $16,059 billion.[104]

text: (a12) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $16,732 billion.[105]

text: (a13) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $17,810 billion.[6]

text: (a14) GAO affirmed Bureau of the Fiscal Service's figure as $18,138 billion.[106]

text: Interest paid[edit]

text:
Fiscal
Year
Historical
debt outstanding,
$billions, US[107]
Interest paid
$billions, US[108]
Interest rate

2014
17,824
430.8
2.42%

2013
16,738
415.7
2.48%

2012
16,066
359.8
2.24%

2011
14,790
454.4
3.07%

2010
13,562
414.0
3.05%

2009
11,910
383.1
3.22%

2008
10,025
451.2
4.50%

2007
9,008
430.0
4.77%

2006
8,507
405.9
4.77%

2005
7,933
352.4
4.44%

2004
7,379
321.6
4.36%

2003
6,783
318.1
4.69%

2002
6,228
332.5
5.34%

2001
5,807
359.5
6.19%

2000
5,674
362.0
6.38%

1999
5,656
353.5
6.25%

1998
5,526
363.8
6.58%

1997
5,413
355.8
6.57%

1996
5,225
344.0
6.58%

1995
4,974
332.4
6.68%

1994
4,693
296.3
6.31%

1993
4,411
292.5
6.63%

1992
4,065
292.4
7.19%

1991
3,665
286.0
7.80%

text: Foreign holders of US Treasury securities[edit]

text: The following is a list of the top foreign holders (over $150 billion) of US Treasury securities as listed by the US Treasury (revised by August 2017 survey):[109]

text:
Leading foreign holders of US Treasury securities as of August 2017

Country
Billions of dollars (est.)
Ratio of owned US debt
to 2016 GDP (est.)[110][111]
Percent change since
August 2016

 China
1,200.5
6%
+ 1%

 Japan
1,101.7
22%
− 4%

 Ireland
307.2
105%
+15%

 Brazil
273.6
15%
+ 7%

 Cayman Islands
260.0
n/a
− 2%

  Switzerland
248.3
38%
+ 4%

 United Kingdom
225.4
9%
+10%

 Luxembourg
213.4
359%
− 3%

 Hong Kong
197.3
62%
+ 3%

 Taiwan
180.4
34%
– 5%

Others
2,061.9
n/a
+ 1%

Grand total
6,269.7
n/a
+ 1%

text: Statistics[edit]

text:
U.S. official gold reserves as of 31 July 2014[update] total 261.5 million troy ounces with a book value of approximately $11.04 billion.[112]
Foreign exchange reserves $140 billion as of September 2014[update].[113]

United States balance of trade (1980–2014), with negative numbers denoting a trade deficit

The national debt equates to $59,143 per person U.S. population, or $159,759 per member of the U.S. working taxpayers, as of March 2016.[114]
In 2008, $242 billion was spent on interest payments servicing the debt, out of a total tax revenue of $2.5 trillion, or 9.6%. Including non-cash interest accrued primarily for Social Security, interest was $454 billion or 18% of tax revenue.[101]
Total U.S. household debt, including mortgage loan and consumer debt, was $11.4 trillion in 2005. By comparison, total U.S. household assets, including real estate, equipment, and financial instruments such as mutual funds, was $62.5 trillion in 2005.[115]
Total U.S Consumer Credit Card revolving credit was $931.0 billion in April 2009.[116]
The U.S. balance of trade deficit in goods and services was $725.8 billion in 2005.[117]
According to the U.S. Department of Treasury Preliminary 2014 Annual Report on U.S. Holdings of Foreign Securities, the United States valued its foreign treasury securities portfolio at $2.7 trillion. The largest debtors are Canada, the United Kingdom, Cayman Islands, and Australia, whom account for $1.2 trillion of sovereign debt owed to residents of the U.S.[118]
The entire public debt in 1998 was attributable to the cost of research, development, and deployment of U.S. nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons-related programs during the Cold War.[119][120][121]

text: A 1998 Brookings Institution study published by the Nuclear Weapons Cost Study Committee (formed in 1993 by the W. Alton Jones Foundation), calculated that total expenditures for U.S. nuclear weapons from 1940 to 1998 was $5.5 trillion in 1996 Dollars.[119] The total public debt at the end of fiscal year 1998 was $5,478,189,000,000 in 1998 Dollars[122] or $5.3 trillion in 1996 Dollars.

text: International debt comparisons[edit]

text: This section needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (January 2015)

text:
Gross debt as percentage of GDP

Entity
2007
2010
2011

United States
62%
92%
102%

European Union
59%
80%
83%

Austria
62%
78%
72%

France
64%
82%
86%

Germany
65%
82%
81%

Sweden
40%
39%
38%

Finland
35%
48%
49%

Greece
104%
123%
165%

Romania
13%
31%
33%

Bulgaria
17%
16%
16%

Czech Republic
28%
38%
41%

Italy
112%
119%
120%

Netherlands
52%
77%
65%

Poland
51%
55%
56%

Spain
42%
68%
68%

United Kingdom
47%
80%
86%

Japan
167%
197%
204%

Russia
9%
12%
10%

Asia 1
37%
40%
41%

South America and Mexico 2
41%
37%
35%

text: Sources: Eurostat,[123] International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook (emerging market economies); Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Economic Outlook (advanced economies)[124]

text: 1China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand

text: 2Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Mexico

text: Recent additions to the public debt of the United States[edit]

text:
Recent additions to U.S. public debt[7][91][92][94]

Fiscal year (begins
Oct. 1 of year prior
to stated year)
GDP
$Billions
New debt
for
fiscal year
$Billions
New debt
as
% of GDP
Total debt
$Billions
Total debt
as % of GDP
(Debt to GDP
ratio)

1994
$7,200
$281–292
3.9–4.1%
~$4,650
64.6–65.2%

1995
7,600
277–281
3.7%
~4,950
64.8–65.6%

1996
8,000
251–260
3.1–3.3%
~5,200
65.0–65.4%

1997
8,500
188
2.2%
~5,400
63.2–63.8%

1998
8,950
109–113
1.2–1.3%
~5,500
61.2–61.8%

1999
9,500
127–130
1.3–1.4%
5,656
59.3%

2000
10,150
18
0.2%
5,674
55.8%

2001
$10,550
$  133
1.3%
$5,792
54.8%

2002
10,900
421
3.9%
6,213
57.1%

2003
11,350
570
5.0%
6,783
59.9%

2004
12,100
596
4.9%
7,379
61.0%

2005
12,900
539
4.2%
7,918
61.4%

2006
13,700
575
4.2%
8,493
62.1%

2007
14,300
500
3.5%
8,993
62.8%

2008
14,750
1,018
6.9%
10,011
67.9%

2009
$14,400
$1,887
13.1%
$11,898
82.5%

2010
14,800
1,653
11.2%
13,551
91.6%

2011[125]
15,400
1,230
8.0%
14,781
96.1%

2012
16,050
1,278
8.0%
16,059
100.2%

2013
16,500
673
4.1%
16,732
101.3%

2014
17,200
1,078
6.3%
17,810
103.4%

2015
17,900
328
1.8%
18,138
101.3%

2016 (Oct. '15 –
Jul. '16 only)

~1,290
~7.0%
~19,428
~106.1%

text: On July 29, 2016 the BEA released a revision to 2013–2016 GDP figures. The figures for this table were corrected the next week with changes to figures in those fiscal years.

text: On July 30, 2015 the BEA released a revision to 2012–2015 GDP figures. The figures for this table were corrected on that day with changes to FY 2013 and 2014, but not 2015 as FY 2015 is updated within a week with the release of debt totals for July 31, 2015.

text: On June 25, 2014 the BEA announced a 15-year revision of GDP figures would take place on July 31, 2014. The figures for this table were corrected after that date with changes to FY 2000, 2003, 2008, 2012, 2013 and 2014. The more precise FY 1999–2014 debt figures are derived from Treasury audit results. The variations in the 1990s and FY 2015 figures are due to double-sourced or relatively preliminary GDP figures respectively. A comprehensive revision GDP revision dated July 31, 2013 was described on the Bureau of Economic Analysis website. In November 2013 the total debt and yearly debt as a percentage of GDP columns of this table were changed to reflect those revised GDP figures.

text: Historical debt ceiling levels[edit]

text:
[show]Table of historical debt ceiling levels[126]

Date
Debt Ceiling
(billions of dollars)
Change in Debt Ceiling
(billions of dollars)
Statute

June 25, 1940
49[127]

February 19, 1941
65
+16

March 28, 1942
125
+60

April 11, 1943
210
+85

June 9, 1944
260
+50

April 3, 1945
300
+40

June 26, 1946
275
−25

August 28, 1954
281
+6

July 9, 1956
275
−6

February 26, 1958
280
+5

September 2, 1958
288
+8

June 30, 1959
295
+7

June 30, 1960
293
−2

June 30, 1961
298[128]
+5

July 1, 1962
308
+10

March 31, 1963
305
−3

June 25, 1963
300
−5

June 30, 1963
307
+7

August 31, 1963
309
+2

November 26, 1963
315
+6

June 29, 1964
324
+9

June 24, 1965
328
+4

June 24, 1966
330
+2

March 2, 1967
336
+6

June 30, 1967
358
+22

June 1, 1968
365
+7

April 7, 1969
377
+12

June 30, 1970
395
+18

March 17, 1971
430
+35

March 15, 1972
450[129]
+20

October 27, 1972
465
+15

June 30, 1974
495
+30

February 19, 1975
577
+82

November 14, 1975
595
+18

March 15, 1976
627
+32

June 30, 1976
636
+9

September 30, 1976
682
+46

April 1, 1977
700
+18

October 4, 1977
752
+52

August 3, 1978
798
+46

April 2, 1979
830
+32

September 29, 1979
879[130]
+49

June 28, 1980
925
+46

December 19, 1980
935
+10

February 7, 1981
985
+50

September 30, 1981
1,079
+94

June 28, 1982
1,143
+64

September 30, 1982
1,290
+147

May 26, 1983
1,389
+99
Pub.L. 98–34

November 21, 1983
1,490
+101
Pub.L. 98–161

May 25, 1984
1,520
+30

June 6, 1984
1,573
+53
Pub.L. 98–342

October 13, 1984
1,823
+250
Pub.L. 98–475

November 14, 1985
1,904
+81

December 12, 1985
2,079
+175
Pub.L. 99–177

August 21, 1986
2,111
+32
Pub.L. 99–384

October 21, 1986
2,300
+189

May 15, 1987
2,320[131]
+20

August 10, 1987
2,352
+32

September 29, 1987
2,800
+448
Pub.L. 100–119

August 7, 1989
2,870
+70

November 8, 1989
3,123
+253
Pub.L. 101–140

August 9, 1990
3,195
+72

October 28, 1990
3,230
+35

November 5, 1990
4,145
+915
Pub.L. 101–508

April 6, 1993
4,370
+225

August 10, 1993
4,900
+530
Pub.L. 103–66

March 29, 1996
5,500
+600
Pub.L. 104–121

August 5, 1997
5,950
+450
Pub.L. 105–33

June 11, 2002
6,400[132]
+450
Pub.L. 107–199

May 27, 2003
7,384
+984
Pub.L. 108–24

November 16, 2004
8,184[132]
+800
Pub.L. 108–415

March 20, 2006
8,965[133]
+781
Pub.L. 109–182

September 29, 2007
9,815
+850
Pub.L. 110–91

June 5, 2008
10,615
+800
Pub.L. 110–289

October 3, 2008
11,315[134]
+700
Pub.L. 110–343

February 17, 2009
12,104[135]
+789
Pub.L. 111–5

December 24, 2009
12,394
+290
Pub.L. 111–123

February 12, 2010
14,294
+1,900
Pub.L. 111–139

January 30, 2012
16,394
+2,100

May 19, 2013
16,700
+306