Posted on 05/11/2005 5:39:05 AM PDT by RWR8189
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. trade deficit narrowed unexpectedly to $55.0 billion in March in the largest monthly drop in over three years, as exports rose to a new record and clothing and other imports from China declined, a U.S. government report showed on Wednesday.
The 9.2 percent plunge in the deficit defied Wall Street forecasts. Analysts had expected high oil prices and a flood of clothing from China to push the monthly trade gap to around $61.5 billion, which would have been a new record.
The sharp pullback in imports offered further evidence that the economy hit a soft patch early in the year, but more recent reports have shown renewed strength.
Imports of clothing, textiles and related goods from China fell 21.2 percent during March after a 9.8 percent increase in February. But imports of those products in the first three months of the year are 54 percent higher than last year, as the result of a surge in January when quota restrictions on textile imports expired.
Total imports from China declined 4.4 percent to $16.2 billion in March. That helped cut overall imports by 2.5 percent to $157.2 billion - the largest monthly drop since December 2001, the same as the trade gap.
Although imports from other major trading partners such as Canada, Mexico and the European Union rose during March, the overall tally declined as China and smaller trading partners shipped fewer consumer goods, autos and auto parts, capital goods and industrial supplies to the United States
March oil imports were the second highest on record and average prices for imported crude jumped $4.29 per barrel during the month - the largest increase in nearly 15 years.
U.S. exports, led by increased shipments of capital goods and food, feeds and beverages, hit a record $102.2 billion. U.S. exports to Canada and the European Union set record highs.
As a sidenote, CA food is grown and harvested by Mexicans. So are the Christmas trees sold each year, the cotton grown in the US, ANY food crop in the US actually.
We just returned to central Oregon and I swear we're in Mexico...
U.S. exports, led by increased shipments of capital goods and food, feeds and beverages, hit a record $102.2 billion. U.S. exports to Canada and the European Union set record highs.
There are none so blind as those who would not see.
They are finally buying food? Wow, what an advanced economy we have.
Everyone knows that. The question is why are we borrowing money to have people supply our demands rather than doing it ourselves like we used to?The accounts DO balance. Whatever they're not buying in goods and services (simply because it wouldn't presumably benefit them to by them) above what we're purchasing from them, goes to the purchase of our assets.
You are selling off your assets to buy goods you no longer produce. That sounds more like someone trying to shore up their finances after losing their source of income.It just so happens that they prefer our debt...and this in turn drives down our domestic interest rates which fuels expansion on consumption.
Let's be honest, you just made that up.If the shoe was on the other foot, there would be benefits there, too. The bottom line is that in the aggregate, we're trading with one another because we're all benefiting somehow (in the aggregate). There's no coercion, it's all voluntary (at least on our end).
No one said anything about coercion, except you just now. It's pretty clear how our trade partners are benefitting, but how are we? Really, if this is such a great idea, you shouldn't be getting so flustered trying to show that.What is there such a fucking problem understanding this concept?
Why are surplus and deficit the only choices. If I threw in a 3rd choice - balanced trade - would you still choose deficits? ~ sixmil
Still no answer. Classic political move - make your position centrist then the opposition is extremist.So, let's recap: 1) You cannot make other countries buy your goods and services; especially if they have no use for them or there utility functions are not being satisfied by what they'd be spending.
Never said you could. But note that it is your side that is talking about forcing China to unpeg its currency.2) Trade balance (or in-balances) are a misnomer. Trade is always balanced when the relevant account are weighed on the double entry accounting style balance sheet.
Like I said, trade deficits only matter when they are improving, otherwise they are meaningless, ie I win.3) Are you interested in the book or not?
No, I have read the adult version of Ricardo. I did score in the top .5% on the GRE, if that means anything. Maybe standardized testing is another issue you have a winner take all position on.
So, what were they holding out for?
Ponder this - we know that a month or so back, economists were saying the record imbalance was due to surging oil prices. Oil stayed expensive long enough that demand actually dropped recently. So, could this improvement simply be the flip side to that?
led by increased shipments of capital goods and food, feeds and beverages
So if we sell them food it's bad? If we buy food is that bad too?
High wages is garlic for you. When you are in flag waving mode, you'll post something like what you did which really only shows stagnant wages recently in what you guys are calling a boom. On another thread you will be telling us that everyone but doctors and lawyers make too much money, so they should get hack and slashed by offshoring and legal/illegal immigration. And of course we shouldn't forget how you guys line up behind Greenspan warning that high wages are inflationary. Seriously, talk out of one side of your mouth at a time, please.
Well, I thought we were getting out of agriculture and buggy whip industries so that we could export high tech goods to the world. Did you hear that we just recently became net importers of food? Do you have any idea what you guys are setting us up for? I was worried about manufacturing, and now we are becoming dependent on the rest of the world for food! It seems like you guys are going to get your way until we've driven over the cliff and it is obvious to even the casual observer.
Being net importers of food is bad? But you just said:
They are finally buying food? Wow, what an advanced economy we have.
44 posted on 05/12/2005 9:26:15 PM CDT by sixmil (In Free Trade We Trust)
Make up your mind. Importing food = bad. Exporting food = bad.
What an effin' joke. On this thread, I have learned that other countries wait for our dollar to drop, that I am in favor of low(er) wages, and that we are net importers of food. From China, no doubt. Sold at Wal-Mart. [hoot]
Of the 300 million people in this country, how many do you suppose are in the labor force? Do you really believe that Americans would want to drop their high-paying service jobs and take up the lower-paying manufacturing ones so that more of the stuff we consumed would be made in the U.S.? That would be a painful and unwise transition. Mr. Hand (Fast Times At Ridgemont High) was convinced that everyone was on dope; maybe he was right!
You are selling off your assets to buy goods you no longer produce. That sounds more like someone trying to shore up their finances after losing their source of income.
And that's always been the struggle between savers and spenders - forgoing current consumption in order to consume more in the future; and vice versa.
Let's be honest, you just made that up.
No, I did not! Foreign central bankers are fueling our economic expansion. If (when?) we become the savers and they the consumers (running surpluses), we'll be fueling their expansions.
It's pretty clear how our trade partners are benefiting, but how are we? Really, if this is such a great idea, you shouldn't be getting so flustered trying to show that.
Living standards (this is the broken record thing again!) Look at how much aggregate wealth is held by Americans and how much is held by the rest of the world, even when repayment of debt (to foreign accounts. Not U.S liabilities to its own people in entitlement programs) is factored in. Our total annual GDP is what percentage of the worlds GDP? (17% I think) And we do it with what proportion of the world's population? (5%) Do pessimists ever see this stuff or does it not mean much?
Still no answer.
I'd prefer to maintain a deficit that stayed at some reasonable percentage of our GDP. However, nothing is ever static and will come back full circle. Times are better during deficit though! Would you like to see the evidence of that as well?
Never said you could. But note that it is your side that is talking about forcing China to unpeg its currency.
It would be nice if China would float but there are disadvantages for them to do it...of course there's many disadvantages to them pegging (stuff that no one discusses) too! Remember, TANSTAAFL.
Like I said, trade deficits only matter when they are improving, otherwise they are meaningless, ie I win.
Depends on how you look at it. There's benefits to being in deficit and surplus. I'll ping you on a post letter when I can find it. Make sure you comment on it.
No, I have read the adult version of Ricardo...
And you gleaned nothing? What was it that you read?
Service jobs pay more than manufacturing??
You're going to have to try a lot harder than that to catch me in some sort of logical contradiction. It's certainly possible, but you're really going to have to try a lot harder.
On the whole, I believe so, yes! Do I have evidence for my assertion? No I don't. Do you have evidence that manufacturing, on the whole, pays more? Was there anything else in that post of mine that you dispute?
it's just won mont, dont git two ecited.
What percent of 12 trillion is 55 billion?
(answer: .46%)
Not all Western European countries have economies that suck. Luxembourg has a exellent economy. Norways economy mis exellent to with a trade surplus of about 40% and a budget surplus that is around 15-20%. In additon Norway has no debt, but money saved up for future generations. Belgium, Ireland, Iceland are doing good too.
It cant be that low. Who works for less than $15 dollars an hour. I know nobody that earns less than $10 dollars an hour
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.