Posted on 03/23/2016 5:55:46 AM PDT by expat_panama
Its a presidential election year so the quadrennially-maligned U.S. trade deficit is taking its lumps. Donald Trump says the trade deficit means the United States is losing at trade, and its losing because U.S. trade negotiators arent smart enough. Bernie Sanders believes the trade deficit deprives the economy of production and good jobs. Meanwhile, some of the economics commentariat argue that trade deficits are bad because they represent a burden on future generations a debt that must be repaid.
Trump and Sanders are both wrong... ...the debt argument is being used to wrap trade skepticism in a moral sheen it doesnt deserve...
...central point is that trade has to be in balance because, in his example, the Germans arent willing to exchange the cars they produce for pieces of paper (dollars) indefinitely. Eventually, Americans will have to accept the return of those dollars for real output and that, ultimately, running a trade deficit is just an intertemporal shifting of the burden of production and the reward of consumption....
...a trade deficit does represent a loan, but that loan doesnt always have to be paid back...
...Let me assure you that Americans, who part with hard-earned dollars for every transaction, dont think theyre getting stuff for free. But heres why Smith is wrong on the broader question. Theres a clearer, more instructive way to conceptualize the issue. The United States runs a trade deficit with the rest of the world because Americans spend more dollars on foreign-produced goods and services than foreigners spend on U.S.-produced goods and services. The dollar value of U.S. imports exceeds the dollar value of U.S. exports, so our trade account is negative. Its in deficit. Thats straightforward.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
US employment is not going up.
That is a total, complete fabrication.
Big time.
The public increasingly does not believe that ANY deficit is a debt to repay.
Look at the stock market.
The article is technically correct; tbe trade deficit is not a “debt to repay.” It is, however, an exportation to or an appropriation of or national wealth by other nations. All those dollars going overseas come back and buy our land and all of the assets on it.
Try to make a movie in Hollywood critical of Saudi Arabia or China. Not gonna happen. Guess who owns and finances the studios.
You don't believe the employment numbers, however you chose to accept those made up fabricated trade deficit numbers. They all come from the same people, why the one one and not the other?
To simplify it fr the free traitors - the dollars that go in trade then get loaned back to the USA or spent on other countries (China is buying up African natural resources for example). The dollars spent that goes to say a China that do get returned to the USA that do not buy American goods and services is loaned to the USA by ourchases if treasury bonds. That adds insult to injury that the money spent on Chinese goods is then loaned back to the USA adding to our budget defecit. And we need to borrow because the tax base declines - any new jobs add are low paying service jobs.
the trade deficit is definitely not a loan
the trade deficit is not sovereign
the trade deficit doesn’t matter
BTW, with China, the money is infact coming back in the purchase of stocks and real estate by Chicap investors.
Look at the stock market
That's true, it's like when I sell my Sony stock to a Canadian at a huge profit and then I use the Canadian dollars to buy Canadian gasoline. That's a trade deficit and I really don't see what's wrong there.
Amen!!!
I can remember a few decades back how angry some were that "The Japanese were buying up America. They even owned The Rockefeller Center!" Well, guess what. The Rockefeller Center is still here.
Then it was the South Koreans, the Indonesians, and now the Chinese. And yet,.....The Rockefeller Center is still here. No matter how high the tariffs Trump places on the Chinese, the buggy whip factories will still be closed.
Exactly, it's like in my post #9
The thing is, China is buying American companies.
American companies however, cannot buy Chinese companies.
Not a good deal, for America.
Whoa --all the land and all the assets in the U.S. have all left!!!
We know that's not true. We know it's like what I said in post 9 about swapping Sony stock for gasoline in Canada.
In real estate a good point to note is when the top of the market is reached is when the foreigners are buying.
The dollar right now seems to be peaking or just past its peak. This dollar supports our debt. When it goes past any point of equilibrium with other money, the US will have no choice but to raise the interest rates to “support” the dollar. When that happens it will be game over.
Future American generations will see a serf-like existence. Forced to pay back huge loans their entire lives without the ownership of any productive assets.
A lot of people have been saying that on the FR for quite a while, and in the mean time the rest of us have say, bought BIDU at $140 six weeks ago and are now selling it at $190. Yeah, I know folks here can say that my paying my money to own the company and having others want to pay big money to buy it from me --that's not really really really "owning" the company.
Whatever.
The largest IPO (Initial Public Offering) in the history of the New York Stock Exchange was a Chicap company called Alibaba Holding
Alibaba is first of all at the root an ebay and Thomas Register for business to business transactions. Alibaba has also many big irons in the internet fire.
there are very active Chicap stock exchanges and the largest IPO in history of the NYSE was a Chicap company
Better check your facts
“just what is the rest of the world doing with all those dollars?”
You mean besides China financing their military buildup?
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.