Insight diagram
Neoliberalism uses a deceptive narrative to declare that money the government spends into the economy in excesses of the taxes it collects creates a ‘government debt’. In fact, the money the government spends into the economy in excess of the taxes is an income, a benefit for the private sector. When the government issues bonds, the money the private sector uses to buy them via banks comes from a residual cushion of dollars that the government already spent into the economy but has not yet taxed back.  If this were not the case, if the government had taxed back all the money it spent into the economy, then the economy could not function. There would be no dollars in the economy, since the government is the sole supplier of U.S. dollars! In the doted rectangle in the graph you can see that the dollars paid to the government for bonds sits in a dollar asset account. When the government issues bonds it simply provides the public and institutions with a desirable money substitute that pays interest i.e. Treasury bonds. It is a swap of one kind of financial asset for another. To register this swap the government debits the dollar asset account and credits the bond account.  When the time comes to redeem (take back) the bonds, all the government does is revers the swap, and that’s all!  When you look at the total amount of finacial assets in the private sector,  these remain constant at $ 25 BN  after the payment of $ 5 BN taxes. This implies that  no lending of financial assets of the private sector to the government has taken place during the swap operation. The money was always there. The debt mountain is an illusion!
Insight diagram
The simulation integrates or sums (INTEG) the Nj population, with a change of Delta N in each generation, starting with an initial value of 5.
The equation for DeltaN is a version of 
Nj+1 = Nj  + mu (1- Nj / Nmax ) Nj
the maximum population is set to be one million, and the growth rate constant mu = 3.
 
Nj: is the “number of items” in our current generation.

Delta Nj: is the “change in number of items” as we go from the present generation into the next generation. This is just the number of items born minus the number of items who have died.

mu: is the growth or birth rate parameter, similar to that in the exponential growth and decay model. However, as we extend our model it will no longer be the actual growth rate, but rather just a constant that tends to control the actual growth rate without being directly proportional to it.

F(Nj) = mu(1‐Nj/Nmax): is our model for the effective “growth rate”, a rate that decreases as the number of items approaches the maximum allowed by external factors such as food supply, disease or predation. (You can think of mu as the growth or birth rate in the absence of population pressure from other items.) We write this rate as F(Nj), which is a mathematical way of saying F is affected by the number of items, i.e., “F is a function of Nj”. It combines both growth and all the various environmental constraints on growth into a single function. This is a good approach to modeling; start with something that works (exponential growth) and then modify it incrementally, while still incorporating the working model.

Nj+1 = Nj + Delta Nj : This is a mathematical way to say, “The new number of items equals the old number of items plus the change in number of items”.

Nj/Nmax: is what fraction a population has reached of the maximum "carrying capacity" allowed by the external environment. We use this fraction to change the overall growth rate of the population. In the real world, as well as in our model, it is possible for a population to be greater than the maximum population (which is usually an average of many years), at least for a short period of time. This means that we can expect fluctuations in which Nj/Nmax is greater than 1.

This equation is a form of what is known as the logistic map or equation. It is a map because it "maps'' the population in one year into the population of the next year. It is "logistic'' in the military sense of supplying a population with its needs. It a nonlinear equation because it contains a term proportional to Nj^2 and not just Nj. The logistic map equation is also an example of discrete mathematics. It is discrete because the time variable j assumes just integer values, and consequently the variables Nj+1 and Nj do not change continuously into each other, as would a function N(t). In addition to the variables Nj and j, the equation also contains the two parameters mu, the growth rate, and Nmax, the maximum population. You can think of these as "constants'' whose values are determined from external sources and remain fixed as one year of items gets mapped into the next year. However, as part of viewing the computer as a laboratory in which to experiment, and as part of the scientific process, you should vary the parameters in order to explore how the model reacts to changes in them.
Insight diagram

From Oatley 2014 p214++

Balance-of-Payments Adjustment

Even though the current and capital accounts must balance each other, there is no assurancethat the millions of international transactions that individu- als, businesses, and governments conduct every year will necessarily produce this balance. When they don’t, the country faces an imbalance of payments. A country might have a current-accountdeficit that it cannotfully finance throughcapital imports, for example, or it might have a current-accountsur- plus thatis not fully offset by capital outflows. When an imbalancearises, the country must bring its payments back into balance. The process by which a country doessois called balance-of-payments adjustment. Fixed and floating exchange-rate systems adjust imbalances indifferent ways.

In a fixed exchange-rate system, balance-of-payments adjustment occurs through changes in domestic prices. We can most readily understand this ad- justmentprocess through a simple example. Suppose there are only two coun- tries in the world—the United States and Japan—and supposefurther that they maintain a fixed exchange rate according to which $1 equals 100 yen. The United States has purchased 800 billion yen worth of goods, services, and financial assets from Japan, and Japanhas purchased $4 billion of items from the United States. Thus, the United States has a deficit, and Japan a surplus, of $4billion. 

This payments imbalance creates an imbalance between the supply of and the demandfor the dollar and yen in the foreign exchange market. American residents need 800 billion yen to pay for their imports from Japan. They can acquirethis 800 billion yen by selling $8 billion. Japanese residents need only $4 billion to pay for their imports from the United States. They can acquire the $4 billion by selling 400billion yen. Thus, Americanresidentsareselling $4 billion more than Japanese residents want to buy, and the dollar depreci- ates againstthe yen.

Because the exchangerateis fixed, the United States and Japan must prevent this depreciation. Thus, both governmentsintervenein the foreign exchange market, buying dollars in exchange for yen. Intervention has two consequences.First, it eliminates the imbalance in the foreign exchange mar- ket as the governments provide the 400billion yen that American residents need in exchange forthe $4 billion that Japanese residents do not want. With the supply of each currency equalto the demandin the foreign exchange mar- ket, the fixed exchangerate is sustained. Second, intervention changes each country’s money supply. The American moneysupply falls by $4 billion, and Japan’s moneysupplyincreases by 400billion yen. 

The change in the money supplies alters prices in both countries. The reduc- tion of the U.S. money supply causes Americanpricesto fall. The expansion of the money supply in Japan causes Japanese prices to rise. As American prices fall and Japanese prices rise, American goods becomerelatively less expensive than Japanese goods. Consequently, American and Japaneseresidents shift their purchases away from Japanese products and toward American goods. American imports (and hence Japanese exports) fall, and American exports (and hence Japanese imports) rise. As American imports (and Japanese exports) fall and American exports (and Japanese imports) rise, the payments imbalanceis elimi- nated. Adjustment underfixed exchange rates thus occurs through changesin the relative price of American and Japanese goods brought about by the changes in moneysupplies caused by intervention in the foreign exchange market.

In floating exchange-rate systems, balance-of-payments adjustment oc- curs through exchange-rate movements. Let’s go back to our U.S.—Japan sce- nario, keeping everything the same, exceptthis time allowing the currencies to float rather than requiring the governments to maintain a fixed exchangerate. Again,the $4 billion payments imbalance generates an imbalancein the for- eign exchange market: Americansare selling more dollars than Japanese resi- dents want to buy. Consequently, the dollar begins to depreciate against the yen. Because the currencies are floating, however, neither governmentinter- venesin the foreign exchange market. Instead, the dollar depreciates until the marketclears. In essence, as Americans seek the yen they need, they are forced to accept fewer yen for each dollar. Eventually, however, they will acquire all of the yen they need, but will have paid more than $4 billion for them.

The dollar’s depreciation lowers the price in yen of American goods and services in the Japanese market andraises the price in dollars of Japanese goodsandservices in the American market. A 10 percent devaluation of the dollar against the yen, for example, reduces the price that Japanese residents pay for American goods by 10 percentandraises the price that Americans pay for Japanese goods by 10 percent. By making American products cheaper and Japanese goods more expensive, depreciation causes American imports from Japan to fall and American exports to Japan to rise. As American exports expand and importsfall, the payments imbalanceis corrected.

In both systems, therefore, a balance-of-payments adjustment occurs as prices fall in the country with the deficit and rise in the country with the surplus. Consumers in both countries respond to these price changes by purchasing fewer of the now-more-expensive goods in the country with the surplus and more of the now-cheaper goodsin the country with the deficit. These shifts in consumption alter imports and exports in both countries, mov- ing each of their payments back into balance. The mechanism that causes these price changes is different in each system, however. In fixed exchange- rate systems, the exchange rate remains stable and price changes are achieved by changing the moneysupplyin orderto alter prices inside the country. In floating exchange-rate systems, internal prices remain stable, while the change in relative prices is brought about through exchange-rate movements.

Contrasting the balance of payments adjustment process under fixed and floating exchangerates highlights the trade off that governments face between

exchangerate stability and domestic price stability: Governments can have a stable fixed exchangerate or they can stabilize domestic prices, but they cannotachieve both goals simultaneously. If a government wants to maintain a fixed exchangerate, it must accept the occasional deflation and inflation caused by balance-of-payments adjustment. If a governmentis unwilling to accept such price movements,it cannot maintain a fixed exchangerate. This trade-off has been the central factor driving the international monetary system toward floating exchange rates during the last 100 years. We turn now to examine howthis trade-off first led governmentsto create innovativeinter- national monetary arrangements following World WarII and then caused the system to collapse into a floating exchange-rate system in the early 1970s.