Growth rate are blue for real growth rate, green for nominal.  Government pays the ten year rate, what does Blanchard thinks:

Since 1980, interest rates on U.S. government bonds have steadily decreased. They are now lower than the nominal growth rate, and according to current forecasts, this is expected to remain the case for the foreseeable future. 10-year U.S. nominal rates hover around 3%, while forecasts of nominal growth are around 4% (2% real growth, 2% inflation).

Well Fred has the ten year higher than real of nominal growth for 15 years since 1980.  That is a long period of the most recent past and invalidates Blanchard's assumption.

Since the crash the ten year and real growth have tracked.  Why have we reached equilibrium on this?  Because government cannot really grow anymore without a large spike in interest charges, we have picked all the low hanging fruit from government sending growth.  Any new growth just goes into bailouts of past programs. We are not building infrastructure for a very good reason, the payments to the bureaucratic class, including pensions, overwhelm and  effect of spending, and we re cutting back.  Hopefully, we will get better at this government shut down thing and get some liquidity back into the government budget,