Example collocations logo

Trillion in sentence

2031 examples of Trillion in a sentence

The large tax cut enacted at the end of 2017 will expand the US federal budget deficit by $1.5 trillion over the next decade, pushing domestic saving even lower – an outcome that will lead to even wider trade deficits.
In 2012, American “prime” money-market funds, which buy bank and corporate debt, were worth nearly $1.5 trillion.
All money-market funds then became suspect, and many investors fled – withdrawing one-third of a trillion dollars in a single week.
Indeed, a CBO rule of thumb equates a sustained one-percentage-point shortfall in real GDP growth with budget deficits that are roughly $3 trillion larger over a ten-year period.
In January, Laurence Fink, the chief executive of the $6 trillion investment firm BlackRock, told business leaders that if they wanted his continued support, they must do more than generate profits; they must also serve a “social purpose” by making “a positive contribution to society.”
The dollar’s value then remained relatively stable during more than three years of quantitative easing – and actually rose during 2013, when the Fed’s asset purchases reached a high of more than $1 trillion.
If the other 53 emerging economies we looked at matched the productivity growth of their 18 high-performing peers, the global economy would be $11 trillion richer by 2030 – the equivalent of adding another China.
China's $10 trillion economy is bigger than those of France, Germany, and Italy combined.
And it motivates the new China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which aims to fill the region’s supposed $8 trillion infrastructure gap.
The Fed has bought more than $1 trillion of mortgages, the value of which will fall when the economy recovers – which is precisely why no one in the private sector wants to buy them.
Even we, as opponents of the war, were staggered by what we found, with conservative to moderate estimates ranging from slightly less than a trillion dollars to more than $2 trillion.
One cannot help but wonder: were there alternative ways of spending a fraction of the war’s $1-$2 trillion in costs that would have better strengthened security, boosted prosperity, and promoted democracy?
During 2009-2014, developing countries collectively received a net capital inflow of $2.2 trillion, partly owing to quantitative easing in advanced economies, which pushed interest rates there to near zero.
China, for example, used nearly $500 billion of its reserves in 2015 to fight capital outflows and prevent the renminbi’s sharp depreciation; but it still has more than $3 trillion in reserves.
The “Remain” campaign focused on the economic benefits of staying in the European Union and the costs of leaving, some of which fell due immediately after the results were announced: the British pound plummeted and stock markets wiped out a couple of trillion dollars of wealth.
Moreover, despite some concerns about capital outflows, China's consolidated net foreign-asset position, which stands at $1.7 trillion (17.6% of GDP), remains sufficient to sustain China through this tough transition.
To grasp how risky, consider this: US households now own $21 trillion of equities, so a 35% decline in equity prices to their historic average would involve a loss of more than $7.5 trillion.
If we recast these benefits as annual installments, a realistic Doha outcome could increase global income by more than $3 trillion every year throughout this century.
And about $2.5 trillion annually would go to today’s developing countries every year, or $500 a year on average for each individual in the third world, almost half of whom now survive on less than $2 a day.
India’s $2 trillion GDP is only a fifth of China’s $10 trillion, and a ninth of America’s $17.5 trillion (measured at market exchange rates).
The associated resolution fund will possess only €55 billion ($76.6 billion) of its own capital, whereas European bank liabilities are on the order of €1 trillion.
The report, which was requested by G-20 leaders at their summit in Seoul last November, found that between 2002 and 2007, the shadow banking system increased by $33 trillion, more than doubling in asset size from $27 trillion to $60 trillion.
This is 8.5 times higher than the total US current-account deficit of $3.9 trillion during the same period.
The shadow banking system is estimated at roughly 25-30% of the global financial system ($250 trillion, excluding derivatives) and at half of total global banking assets.
That, together with large-scale quantitative easing, has injected a massive $32 trillion into the global economy over the last nine years.
Not all Americans are enthused about President Bush's rapid conversion of trillion dollar surpluses into deficits, nor does a majority embrace his proposals to privatize America's social security system, which has done so much to eliminate poverty among America's elderly.
Of course, developed-country institutional investors do manage a lot of the world’s investable cash – almost $95 trillion in 2011, according to the OECD.
And a growing number of investors care about climate change, with 26% of asset managers (accounting for more than $12 trillion of assets under management) reporting that it factors into their investment decisions.
But investors are reluctant to finance long-term projects, let alone cover the incremental costs of green initiatives, which are projected to add at least another 14% to a $100 trillion climate bill by 2030.
The Fed increased its securities holdings from less than $1 trillion in 2007 to more than $4 trillion today.
BackNext