I didn't really understand that whole part of the analysis, since the event being described is highly inflationary, which should make repaying debts easier rather than more difficult. Perhaps I missed something, though.

Ok thanks: he's talking about the [internal or state liabilities](https://californiapolicycenter.org/california-state-and-local-liabilities-total-1-6-trillion/), that are separate from the federal debt. In that sense, the debt load is only ½ of CA GDP (federal liabilities load is 128% of the US GDP). So I don't see why it's that significant?

sancristrader

I don't think that's what the author's saying. That part is about the individual states being in debt and potentially needing to be bailed out by the federal government. I don't know if it's true that CA has half a trillion dollars in state debt obligations, but that's the claim.

Undisciplined

econ

Can America Survive Global De-Dollarization?

Can one explain to me why he is saying that CA is the biggest contributor to the federal debt, to the tune of 0.5T? The standard progressive argument is that CA is the biggest federal budget contributor, while the red states are the recipients. There seems to be a contradiction?