Stato lives! And his name is...


#1

Aidan Kane:
irisheconomy.ie/index.php/20 … ance-data/

Mr. Kane includes an excellent spreadsheet with his post. In particular page 2 covers all expenditure for last year (totalling 75+ bn euro, er, 50+% of GNP…).


#2

And now for the quibble, or rather, not a quibble, but something I don’t understand:

To sheet 1 of Mr. Kane’s spreadsheet, I added national debt figures from the NTMA ( ntma.ie/NationalDebt/historicalData1.php ) (column 2 below), worked out how much it increased by (column 3 below), and then compared it with the calculated surplus (column 1 below) to get a discrepancy (column 4… below…). Anyway, negative figures indicate where the national debt increased by less than expected, positive by more.

I was a little surprised at the difference. I realise that deficit doesn’t immediately translate to increased debt, and that surplus doesn’t immediately translate to a reduction in debt, but still, there must be something missing? Or have my beady ole maths let me down again?!

[code] Deficit/Surplus Change in Discrepancy
Net borrowing/lending National Debt National Debt
1995 -1,090 38,358
1996 -62 37,980 -378 -316.08
1997 982 38,966 986 1,967.79
1998 1,782 37,510 -1,456 325.87
1999 2,360 39,851 2,341 4,700.93
2000 5,020 36,511 -3,340 1,680.08
2001 1,116 36,183 -328 788.05
2002 -388 36,361 178 -210.29
2003 584 37,611 1,250 1,834.32
2004 2,086 37,846 235 2,321.32
2005 2,654 38,182 336 2,990.36
2006 5,220 35,917 -2,265 2,954.90
2007 87 37,559 1,642 1,728.60
2008 -13,118 50,398 12,839 -278.54
2009 -22,778 75,152 24,754 1,976.27

Cumulative discrepancy: 22,463.5731[/code]