Graph #1: The Growth of Total Debt

Graph #2: The Growth of Spending Money

"The underlying reality of low growth", Neil Irwin says, "will haunt whoever wins the White House in November". I don't think so. I expect vigor, no matter who wins the White House in November.I think it would be pretty ironic if Hillary Clinton gets elected. Because what I'm looking at amounts to vigor starting about a year into the first term of the next U.S. President. If Hillary is elected, we will be hearing stories that it takes a Clinton to create economic vigor. But Bill Clinton had no more to do with the good economy of the 1990s than Hillary does with the good economy of 2018-2024.It would be more accurate to say that the changes which created the good years of the latter 1990s happened mostly during the Reagan and H.W. Bush years; and that the changes which will create the good years to come happened mostly during the Obama years.For the record, the vigor of the 1990s was made possible by a big drop in debt growth (1985-1991) combined with a big increase in spending money (1990-1994). The debt-per-dollar ratio shows this as a decline (1990-1994). That decline was followed by unusually rapid increase (1995-2000). This increase was the source of the funds that made vigorous growth possible in the latter 1990s.The changes are indicated in red on the graphs below:You can see the same effects in the graph of household debt service.The stage has already been set for the vigor that will be attributed to our next President.