A 歳入不足を補うために発行した国債などの借金総額が債務残高です。一方、純債務残高は、債務残高から政府の現預金や有価証券などの金融資産を差し引いたものです。国際通貨基金（IMF）によると、2023年の債務残高対GDP比は240％で、172カ国・地域中で最悪。純債務残高では136％に下がるものの、84カ国・地域中で最下位です。どちらの指標でも状況は同じです。
A 債務から差し引く金融資産に年金積立金などを含めるためです。運用規模が世界最大級の年金積立金管理運用独立行政法人（GPIF）の資産を差し引けば、見かけの債務は減ります。ただ、現実的に年金資産を借金返済に使うことは難しく、財政健全化指標として不適切との見方もあります。
Q ほかに注意点はありますか。
A 第一生命経済研究所の星野卓也氏によると、純債務残高は時価と簿価のどちらで評価するかでも変わります。例えば時価では、円安になれば海外に保有する資産額が膨らみ、純債務残高は改善します。星野氏は「純債務と言っても定義はいろいろ。定義はしっかりした方がいい」と指摘します。数字が独り歩きしない冷静な議論が必要です。
A 24日の所信表明演説で、高市氏は戦略的な財政出動を起点とした好循環を目指すと強調しました。ただ、日本は1990年代以降、少子高齢化に伴う社会保障費の増大や、度重なる経済危機への対応などで借金が増大。歯止めをかけるべく、政府は財政健全化目標を掲げてきました。
Q 高市氏の財政健全化の考え方は。
A 所信表明では「政府債務残高の対国内総生産（GDP）比を引き下げていく」と、従来の政府の考えを踏襲しました。国の経済規模に対する借金の割合を示す「債務残高対GDP比」は財政の健全性を示す国際的な指標です。ただ、高市氏は自民党総裁選で「純債務残高」の対GDP比を重視し、こちらを引き下げると訴えました。
◆数字が独り歩きしない冷静な議論が必要
Q 債務残高と純債務残高は違うのですか。
A 歳入不足を補うために発行した国債などの借金総額が債務残高です。一方、純債務残高は、債務残高から政府の現預金や有価証券などの金融資産を差し引いたものです。国際通貨基金（IMF）によると、2023年の債務残高対GDP比は240％で、172カ国・地域中で最悪。純債務残高では136％に下がるものの、84カ国・地域中で最下位です。どちらの指標でも状況は同じです。
A 債務から差し引く金融資産に年金積立金などを含めるためです。運用規模が世界最大級の年金積立金管理運用独立行政法人（GPIF）の資産を差し引けば、見かけの債務は減ります。ただ、現実的に年金資産を借金返済に使うことは難しく、財政健全化指標として不適切との見方もあります。
Q ほかに注意点はありますか。
A 第一生命経済研究所の星野卓也氏によると、純債務残高は時価と簿価のどちらで評価するかでも変わります。例えば時価では、円安になれば海外に保有する資産額が膨らみ、純債務残高は改善します。星野氏は「純債務と言っても定義はいろいろ。定義はしっかりした方がいい」と指摘します。数字が独り歩きしない冷静な議論が必要です。
Amazon | Modern Macroeconomics: Its Origins, Development And Current State | Snowdon, Brian, Vane, Howard R. | Economics
'Snowdon and Vane's book is extremely welcome. Indeed the authors examine, compare, and evaluate the evolution of the major rival stories comprising contemporary macroeconomic thought, but they also trace the development and interaction of key events and ideas as they occurred in the last century. Interviews with leading economists, one or two at the end of each chapter, also greatly help to shed light on this complexity. . . In sum, this is a book which is very difficult to put down.' -- Alessio Moneta, Journal of the History of Economic Thought
'It is not difficult to understand why this volume commands high praise from macroeconomic theorists, practitioners and teachers. It contains many interesting features that make it an excellent companion for both students and teachers of tertiary level macroeconomics. . . The authors present the material in a way that conveys to readers that macroeconomics is a "living science", continually developing and still open to debate, controversy and competing policy prescriptions. In this respect it is a book that ought to be required reading for all teachers of the subject. It is also a valuable source of background reading for professional economists involved with economic policy making.' -- Economic Outlook and Business Review
'. . . a wonderful history of macroeconomic thought from Keynes to the present, with an outstanding bibliography. It should be useful to undergraduates and graduate students as well as professional economists. Highly recommended.' -- Steven Pressman, Choice
'Brian Snowdon and Howard Vane are well-known for their astute understanding of the main macroeconomic schools of thought and their skilled use of interviews with major figures. Here, they deploy a depth of scholarship in explaining the different schools and their key points of departure from one another. This book will be particularly useful to students looking for a clear, non-technical explanation of the main approaches to macroeconomics.' -- Patrick Minford, Cardiff University, UK
Brian Snowdon, Senior Teaching Fellow, Department of Economics and Finance, Durham University, UK and Howard R. Vane, Emeritus Professor of Economics, Liverpool Business School, Liverpool John Moores University, UK
Reading Modern Macroeconomics now and I highly recommend it if you want a complete summary of the theoretical designs and policy implication of the biggest ideas in macro. Very simple and very clean, got to thank @mean_field_zane for recommending pic.x.com/w9TY4CsSkF
Kalecki presents the income side; Godley presents the financing side. Once placed within a stock–flow consistent (SFC) framework, the equivalence becomes exact. pic.x.com/dcnOutARdZ
Kalecki = Godley: The Unified Income–Financing Identity
A central result of this paper is that Kalecki's profit identity and Godley's sectoral balances identity are not separate theoretical constructions but two expressions of the same underlying mechanism, viewed from different pic.x.com/PHd0y3t644
Although Kalecki, Godley, and Minsky are often presented as founders of three separate heterodox traditions-distributional macroeconomics, stock-flow accounting, and financial instability—their frameworks are in fact logically complementary and become fully integrated when expressed through the KYSID system. Each theorist provides one essential piece of a single macro-financial identity:
1. Kalecki explains how income is distributed and how prices are formed,
2. Godley explains how spending is financed and how balance sheets evolve,
3. Minsky explains how credit cycles destabilize the system.
Once these parts are assembled, the result is a single, unified macroeconomic engine, with profits, credit, income distribution, and inflation forming one coherent dynamic system.
