John Galt, this may (or may not) be of interest to you.
Respectfully, Supposn
//////////////////////////
Transcript of a post within another group.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/politics ... emedy.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by whogo
Source, for that pure BS?
Excerpted from:
http://www.infoplease.com/cig/economics ... -good.htmlInternational Finance: Trade Deficits: Bad or Good?
” But what about the effect on GDP? Shouldn't Americans worry when net
exports are negative and GDP is smaller than it otherwise would be?
Most mainstream economists believe that because the current account deficit is offset by foreign investment in the United States, the [trade deficit’s] effect on GDP is negligible”.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
WhoGo, it’s inconsequential if the sources for investments into the USA are from USA or foreign sources. When USA’s economy is up, we attract commercial investment, when the economies down we attract less commercial investment into the USA.
The volume of investments into USA is not dependent upon our trade balance.
I question that trade deficit’s effect upon GDP is “negligible” but that’s for discussion in another post.
Those contending that trade deficits are not detrimental to their nation’s jobs and wage-rates point out that unemployment rates have risen when trade deficits were decreasing and unemployment rates decreased when trade deficits were increasing.
Surprise! Unemployment increases when sales volumes of general goods in USA market places are down. Unemployment decreases when USA market places sales are generally increasing.
They got the correct statistical facts but arrived at an illogical conclusion.
Regardless of the economies condition, (if the GDP is rising, falling, or just languishes), trade deficits are ALWAYS drag upon their nation’s jobs, wage-rates and production.
Respectfully, Supposn