This study aims to examine the effects of student loan debt on the decisions of U.S. married households to invest in stocks located in non-retirement accounts. Using longitudinal datasets from the 2011 to 2017 U.S. Panel Study of Income Dynamics and a fixed effects logit model, the results show mixed findings. The presence of student debt decreases the probability that married households will own stocks, but the amount of student debt does not show a statistically significant effect. The findings suggest that the incidence of student debt raises the perception of liquidity constraints and debt burden among married households.

I will show that if the propensity to consume from savings satisfies appropriate conditions, the debt-GDP ratio will not grow infinitely large and fiscal collapse will not occur. Using a basic macroeconomic model, with an overlapping generations model in mind, we show the following results: 1) The budget deficit including interest payments on the government bonds equals an increase in the savings from a period to the next period. 2) If the savings in the first period is positive, we need budget deficit to maintain full employment under constant prices or inflation in the later periods. 3) Under an appropriate assumption about the propensity to consume from savings, the debt-GDP ratio converges to a finite value. It does not diverge to infinity. The larger the propensity to consume from savings, the smaller the budget deficit required to achieve full employment. The larger the propensity to consume from savings, the less likely it is that the debt-GDP ratio will become large.

This paper shows mainly the following results. 1) The debt to GDP ratio cannot diverge to infinity, that is, fiscal collapse is impossible. The necessary condition for this result is that the propensity to consume from the asset is positive. 2) The divergence of the debt to GDP ratio is prevented by inflation when the interest rate on government bonds is considerably higher than the real growth rate, and the inflation rate which is sufficient to prevent divergence of the debt to GDP ratio is smaller than the interest rate on government bonds. Only an inflation rate slightly greater than the difference between the interest rate on government bonds and the sum of the real growth rate and the propensity to consume from the asset is required. This inflation is not caused by policy but occurs naturally.

By an endogenous growth model with a two-period overlapping generations structure, I examine the existence of a budget deficit in an economy that endogenously grows by investments of firms. The consumers leave bequests to their descendants and hold money as a part of their savings. I use a Barro-type utility function, where people include the utility of their children in their own utility. The main results are as follows. 1) A budget deficit is necessary for full employment under constant prices. 2) Inflation is induced if the actual budget deficit is greater than the value at which full employment is achieved under constant prices. 3) If the actual budget deficit is smaller than the value which is necessary and sufficient for full employment under constant prices, a recession occurs. Therefore, a balanced budget cannot achieve full employment under constant prices. I do not assume that the budget deficit must later be made up by a budget surplus. I use a Barro-type utility function to prove the necessity (or inevitability) of a budget deficit instead of the neutrality of government debt. In the appendix of this paper, I show that if money, as well as goods, are produced by capital and labor, a budget deficit is not necessary for full employment under constant prices.