Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. 2002 Trade Deficit Reaches $435.2B
Excite News ^ | 2.20.03

Posted on 02/20/2003 9:31:20 AM PST by Enemy Of The State

 

U.S. 2002 Trade Deficit Reaches $435.2B
 
Feb 20, 11:04 AM (ET)

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER

(AP) The chart tracks the Leading Economic Indicators for the past year. (AP Graphic)
Full Image

WASHINGTON (AP) - The United States recorded a $435.2 billion trade deficit for 2002, the largest imbalance in history, as the weak global economy set back American exports while imports of autos and other consumer goods were hitting all-time highs.

In other economic news, the Labor Department reported Thursday that inflation at the wholesale level shot up by 1.6 percent in January, the biggest increase in 13 years, led by a sharp 4.8 percent rise in energy costs.

Even though the surge was concentrated in energy, prices of other items such as new cars showed big advances as well and the overall increase was certain to raise concerns about whether inflation, which has been well-behaved for years, was threatening to get out of control. The government will report on January consumer prices on Friday.

In a third report, the government said that the number of newly laid off workers filing unemployment claims jumped to a seven-week high of 402,000 last week, up by 21,000 from the previous week, showing that the labor market is still struggling with an uneven economic recovery.

 

The trade report showed that even in agricultural products, normally a U.S. bulwark, Americans bought more imported wine, cheese and other foods than American farmers were able to sell abroad - resulting in only the second U.S. trade deficit in farm goods on record.

The Commerce Department reported Thursday that the deficit for all of last year was up 21.5 percent from the $358.3 billion trade gap recorded in 2001 and surpassed the old record deficit of $378.7 billion set in 2000.

By country, the United States ran up the largest trade gap with China, a deficit of $103.1 billion, marking the third straight year that the United States has recorded its largest trade deficit with that nation. It pushed the former front-runner in this category, Japan, into second place.

In addition to the record for all of 2002, the United States set a new monthly high of $44.2 billion in December, up 10.5 percent from the previous record set in November of $40.0 billion.

Opponents of President Bush's trade policies contend that the huge trade deficits represent the loss of millions of manufacturing jobs as U.S. companies have been battered by what the critics say is unfair competition from low-wage countries that stifle labor rights and have lax environmental protections.

 

(AP) The nation's unemployment rate unexpectedly dropped to 5.7 percent in January as businesses added...
Full Image
However, the administration contends that it is pursuing the correct procedure in trying to cut global trade deals that will lower high barriers in other countries in a way that boosts American exports.

American manufacturing companies have been lobbying for the Bush administration to drop its support for a strong dollar policy, arguing that an overpriced dollar has made their goods noncompetitive in foreign markets while opening them to a flood of competition from cheaper priced imports.

Treasury Secretary John Snow, who was meeting with British finance officials on Thursday on his way to a weekend meeting in Paris of America's major economic allies, insisted during his Senate confirmation hearing that the administration intends to make no change in its strong dollar policy. A strong U.S. dollar makes investments in U.S. stocks and bonds more attractive to foreigners.

For 2002, exports of goods and services fell 2.5 percent to $973 billion, marking the second consecutive annual decline, as American exporters found it increasingly difficult to sell overseas. This reflected a spreading global economic slowdown and the strong dollar.

American manufacturers were the hardest hit sector of the economy during the 2001 recession with a loss of nearly 2 million workers. While the economy began a recovery in 2002, the progress has been uneven and so far it has not resulted in a rebound in hiring.

American imports, which fell 6 percent in 2001, reflecting the U.S. recession, staged a rebound in 2002, rising by 3.8 percent to $1.41 trillion. That, however, was still below the all-time high of $1.44 trillion set in 2000.

But in individual categories, imports of autos and auto parts set a record high $203.9 billion and imports of other consumer goods, a category that includes everything from clothes to televisions and toys, also hit a record high of $307.7 billion last year.

Imports of oil totaled $103.6 billion last year, basically unchanged from the level in 2001.

After China, deficits with other countries included imbalances of $$70.1 billion with Japan; $49.8 billion with Canada and $37.2 billion with Mexico.

On the export side, manufactured goods suffered a setback but sales of American farm products managed to eke out a tiny 0.3 percent increase to $49.54 billion last year over the 2001 level.

However, imports of farm products rose a much faster 6.6 percent to $49.72 billion, representing in a deficit in farm trade of $176 million, the second such deficit in history. Farm imports topped exports in 1986 as well.



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: globalism; recession; thebusheconomy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last
To: Willie Green
It's not. Medical services are benefits

When is a service not a service? When it's a benefit. So, are benefit services better or worse than just plain services?

What if a manufactured good is a benefit, like a company car? Is that better or worse than just a regular car?

41 posted on 02/20/2003 12:48:25 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
So the government shouldn't cut my taxes because I might spend my own money on a foreign product?

They should cut taxes but they must also cut government spending especially on welfare programs ---I haven't seen any plans of that. Cutting taxes so people can buy foreign products won't help the US economy at all, it won't create a single American job. A tax cut to induce spending helps China even more and makes the trade deficit higher.

42 posted on 02/20/2003 12:49:26 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
What if a manufactured good is a benefit, like a company car?

Makes absolutely no difference if it's unaffordable.
If it's unaffordable, then it'll no longer exist.

43 posted on 02/20/2003 12:53:20 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Your share of the National Debt is $22,178.02.

What about the welfare class? Is their share the same amount? If so then you'd have to add their share in with those of the working class because the welfare class can't pay theirs.

44 posted on 02/20/2003 12:55:16 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
What about the welfare class? Is their share the same amount?

It's the same amount for everybody, regardless of class.

If so then you'd have to add their share in with those of the working class because the welfare class can't pay theirs.

Yep, I'm afraid so. Gonna get stuck supporting them one way or the other.
My preference, though, is to downsize government welfare and promote domestic manufacturing to provide the welfare class opportunity to earn their keep.

45 posted on 02/20/2003 1:04:16 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Southack
So I remain unconvinced of even "service" jobs as being "valueless" or manufacturing jobs always being the panacea.

If you can't "touch" the product, one really hasn't produced any wealth...I believe that was a Marxian theory. A rather narrow view of what constitutes wealth.

GDP only measures final demand of goods and services (Keynsian concept); it misses all of the intermediate stages of production. So the economy could be greatly understated.
46 posted on 02/20/2003 1:12:30 PM PST by Lee_Atwater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
They should cut taxes but they must also cut government spending especially on welfare programs

I agree completely.

Cutting taxes so people can buy foreign products won't help the US economy at all, it won't create a single American job.

You sound like Clinton, you only like it when people spend money the way you think is best. Whatever happened to freedom?

A tax cut to induce spending helps China even more and makes the trade deficit higher.

So, we should raise taxes? The amount of money spent on Chinese or any foreign good is a relatively small part of the economy (about 11% of GDP). You'd sacrifice the 89% that would be spent on U.S. goods?

A trade deficit isn't automatically bad, a trade surplus isn't automatically good.

47 posted on 02/20/2003 1:16:57 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
Would consumers being "trickled on" be more accurate?....cause that's sure what it feels like!
48 posted on 02/20/2003 1:31:28 PM PST by american spirit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
So I take it you've already looked at the 2002 trade figures and you already know where 90+% of our trade deficit lies, right? You've also seen the trend of the past 10 years and realized that our trade deficit shows the relative strength between the US economy and the rest of the world...the deficit shrinks when our economy is weak relative to the rest of the world, and grows when its the opposite. You've seen this, right?
49 posted on 02/20/2003 1:34:47 PM PST by Citizen of the Savage Nation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Publius Maximus
Those exploding American exports that free traders keep promising us have never materialized,

Actually, they have, if you bother to look at the stats. Our exports have more than doubled in the last 10 years but its not our fault our competitors can't afford more because they are socialistic and protectionist.

50 posted on 02/20/2003 1:38:11 PM PST by Citizen of the Savage Nation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Whatever happened to freedom?

I don't know ---it seems the Communists have won because our government has given them all our jobs and our entire economy. We're supporting Communist economies, freedom is gone.

51 posted on 02/20/2003 1:39:55 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
You're the one who wants to limit freedom. You work for the government, don't you?
52 posted on 02/20/2003 1:42:52 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Excellent point. Willie was peddling this stuff a few weeks ago, and was absolutely schooled by some freeper who I forget, that knew his stuff. In any case, Germany's economy, for example, is based more on production than ours, but I sure wouldn't want it. Our trade deficit is an example of the relative strength of our economy compared to the rest of the world, in fact, only a few categories, clothing, autos, oil, and electronic commodities like TV's make up $400 billion of the deficit by themselves.
53 posted on 02/20/2003 1:44:02 PM PST by Citizen of the Savage Nation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Other than some of the statistics you cite, you more or less make up everything you say about the economy as you go.
54 posted on 02/20/2003 1:44:17 PM PST by lasereye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Where is the freedom with our high taxes when we're supporting so many unemployed, displaced NAFTA workers, and a very large welfare class? Our economy won't be better until Americans are working. We're not really going to get taxes down, they may shift them around is all. Texas looks like it's headed for a state income tax.
55 posted on 02/20/2003 1:45:56 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: lasereye
you more or less make up everything you say about the economy as you go.

It appears that's more your specialty: babble some irrelevant and incoherent nonsense, then turn around and belittle those who dismiss you.
Buzz off, I'm not playing your game today.

56 posted on 02/20/2003 1:59:17 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Citizen of the Savage Nation
Don't forget Japan. Willie was probably worried about them in the 1980's. They had huge surpluses and their economy is much more manufacturing based than ours.

They've had what, 10 years of recession in the last 13 or so. They now have the largest government deficit compared to GDP of all the industrialized countries.

57 posted on 02/20/2003 2:02:08 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
So, what countries have the largest trade surplus? Are their economies better than ours? Are their citizens better off than ours?

Still waiting for your wisdom.

58 posted on 02/20/2003 2:11:34 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Right, before it was Japan, now its China who we want to emulate, because they manufacture everything. No thanks.
59 posted on 02/20/2003 2:20:36 PM PST by Citizen of the Savage Nation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
 U.S. Trade with China 
(billion dollars)
Year
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
U.S. Imports
19.0
25.7
31.5
38.8
45.5
51.5
62.6
71.2
81.8
100.1
102.3
125.1
U.S. Exports
6.3
7.4
8.8
9.3
11.7
12.0
12.9
14.2
13.1
16.3
19.2
22.0
Trade Deficit
12.7
18.3
22.7
29.5
33.8
39.5
49.7
56.9
68.7
83.8
83.1
103.1

China Says Economy Grew 8.0 Pct in 2002
'China to Replace US as the Engine for World Economy'

Fundamentally, we believe that the U.S. government needs to devote more resources and put in place new programs to build wider expertise about China and to protect our industrial base from eroding as a result of our economic relations with China.

-- C. Richard D’Amato, chairman
U.S.-China Security Review Commission
(How to improve U.S.-China relations )


60 posted on 02/20/2003 2:28:17 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson