> I think what the negative aggregate savings rate means is that upper
> income households are coasting on their stock gains, and not saving
> out of current income, and middle and lower income households are
> borrowing more. Since the domestic economy isn't generating the
> savings to fund these excesses, the difference is borrowed from
> abroad. Again, this doesn't have the ring of a long-term strategy
> about it, but again again, who's going to call an end to it and how
> is the $64 billion question.
Isn't it the 450 billion$$$ question?