NationStates Jolt Archive

Hmm, how many years has Bush been President? I love when people tell me how great the economy is and just say" eh, never mind the national debt or trade debt because we can just 'charge it' for later." Guess what boys and girls, eventually later comes. My father, the avowed racist would call it "****** rich" as if that wasn't suppose to instill bigotry in his children's minds. Luckily we turned away from that, but let me go on. When will this Cassandra economic policy end and turn back to what I, as a Republican value as fiscal conservatism? For the love of God man, drunken sailors on shore leave have more restraint then this guy. But don't worry, by the time we realize how F'd we are he'll be long gone and the short-sighted sheeple will blame it on the guy who's in power then. Poor bastard. Thoughts?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070213/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/economy

Meh. So goes the globalized economy.

http://www.diosa.net/art-net/bush_deficit.gif

Of course, that's another type of deficit, but meh.

We've had a trade deficit almost every year since the late 1970's, and we've had one every single year since 1983 (with the exception of 1991). And the trade deficit has hit a new record every year since 1991, so it's hardly a new trend.

Not that that's a bad thing, either; by purchasing less expensive goods and services from overseas, we've been capable of increasing our overall living standards and expanding access to goods and services that might have been prohibitively expensive were they made in the US. People benefit immensely on all sides from the low-cost manufacturing in China, and that economic development is starting to come back to us as China begins to invest abroad.

Even so, the 600% rise in oil prices plays a big role in that deficit, so it's more of a passive increase rather than any specific reason. Of course, given the contribution oil makes to our economy I don't think it's money wasted (although I'd prefer us to use non-oil sources for any number of reasons).

We've had a trade deficit almost every year since the late 1970's, and we've had one every single year since 1983 (with the exception of 1991). And the trade deficit has hit a new record every year since 1991, so it's hardly a new trend.

Not that that's a bad thing, either; by purchasing less expensive goods and services from overseas, we've been capable of increasing our overall living standards and expanding access to goods and services that might have been prohibitively expensive were they made in the US. People benefit immensely on all sides from the low-cost manufacturing in China, and that economic development is starting to come back to us as China begins to invest abroad.

Even so, the 600% rise in oil prices plays a big role in that deficit, so it's more of a passive increase rather than any specific reason. Of course, given the contribution oil makes to our economy I don't think it's money wasted (although I'd prefer us to use non-oil sources for any number of reasons).

So explain the record 6 years in a row being a good thing? Oil prices only were high for Bush? And the overall deficit is not a good thing and that keep going up time and time again. Any way you cut it it amounts to more debt for America. Cha ching, put it on the Macy's account.

So explain the record 6 years in a row being a good thing? Oil prices only were high for Bush? And the overall deficit is not a good thing and that keep going up time and time again. Any way you cut it it amounts to more debt for America. Cha ching, put it on the Macy's account.

and no, it wasn't a new record every year

So explain the record 6 years in a row being a good thing? Oil prices only were high for Bush? And the overall deficit is not a good thing and that keep going up time and time again. Any way you cut it it amounts to more debt for America. Cha ching, put it on the Macy's account.

Oil prices starting rising in 1999. Before that, they were at their lowest levels since the Great Depression and had fallen since the Gulf War.

You can take on as much debt as you can afford to pay, and quite frankly American consumers are more than capable of managing the debt they have currently. Bankruptcies are falling, debt-to-income is falling, and real incomes are rising. The consumer is in excellent shape, as a matter of fact.

The trade deficit is not a good thing or a bad thing. People simply buy more products from overseas; it's nothing more than average Americans deciding that products produced in China, Europe, Japan or anywhere else in the world are a better deal than ones produced in the US. In a competitive market, if you want someone to buy your products, you have to offer them at competitive prices. Otherwise, you're not going to sell them. And don't forget that the United States has also had record export growth as well, which means our companies and our industries have been doing quite well over the same period.

The budget deficit is a problem, however, and it can have a negative effect on our economy. That's the responsibility of the government to fix, not ours.

and no, it wasn't a new record every year

The biggest problem is that this trade deficit turns into "real debt." The trade deficit would be fine as long as it didn't affect the budgetary spending and "real" debt which is 8.7 trillion and rising. http://www.federalbudget.com/

Oil prices starting rising in 1999. Before that, they were at their lowest levels since the Great Depression and had fallen since the Gulf War.

You can take on as much debt as you can afford to pay, and quite frankly American consumers are more than capable of managing the debt they have currently. Bankruptcies are falling, debt-to-income is falling, and real incomes are rising. The consumer is in excellent shape, as a matter of fact.

The trade deficit is not a good thing or a bad thing. People simply buy more products from overseas; it's nothing more than average Americans deciding that products produced in China, Europe, Japan or anywhere else in the world are a better deal than ones produced in the US. In a competitive market, if you want someone to buy your products, you have to offer them at competitive prices. Otherwise, you're not going to sell them. And don't forget that the United States has also had record export growth as well, which means our companies and our industries have been doing quite well over the same period.

The budget deficit is a problem, however, and it can have a negative effect on our economy. That's the responsibility of the government to fix, not ours.

I agree, but the government is doing none of these things. If we want to get this done we must elect fiscal conservatives of either party. Not reckless ideologues like we have now.

Oil prices starting rising in 1999. Before that, they were at their lowest levels since the Great Depression and had fallen since the Gulf War.

You can take on as much debt as you can afford to pay, and quite frankly American consumers are more than capable of managing the debt they have currently. Bankruptcies are falling, debt-to-income is falling, and real incomes are rising. The consumer is in excellent shape, as a matter of fact.

The trade deficit is not a good thing or a bad thing. People simply buy more products from overseas; it's nothing more than average Americans deciding that products produced in China, Europe, Japan or anywhere else in the world are a better deal than ones produced in the US. In a competitive market, if you want someone to buy your products, you have to offer them at competitive prices. Otherwise, you're not going to sell them. And don't forget that the United States has also had record export growth as well, which means our companies and our industries have been doing quite well over the same period.

The budget deficit is a problem, however, and it can have a negative effect on our economy. That's the responsibility of the government to fix, not ours.

Really, why are bankruptcies and foreclosures at all time highs if we're doing so well? Why are the number of families who are homeless going up? Why did "personal savings" go to an all-time low in 2006? I like rosy, but this is too much.

The trade deficit is not a bad thing. The only way America wouldn't have a trade deficit is if our economy collapsed to the point that Americans wouldn't be able to afford imported goods.

Really, why are bankruptcies and foreclosures at all time highs if we're doing so well? Why are the number of families who are homeless going up? Why did "personal savings" go to an all-time low in 2006? I like rosy, but this is too much.

Because people are fucking idiots when it comes to saving money and managing credit.

The economy is doing well. Unemployment and other indicators back that statement up.

It is a fact that most of our trade deficit is importing energy. The rest is consumer goods. America is doing quite well still. We are over 20% of the World's GDP.

http://www.diosa.net/art-net/bush_deficit.gif

Of course, that's another type of deficit, but meh.

And thus by trying to equate the 2 VERY different deficits, you have just shown you know absolutely nothing about the 2.

I agree, but the government is doing none of these things. If we want to get this done we must elect fiscal conservatives of either party. Not reckless ideologues like we have now.

Being fiscally conservative has nothing to do with trade deficits. Trade deficits exist because we import energy and consumers like to buy foreign goods. Buying items like Toyotas add to the trade deficit. I'm not criticizing people who buy foreign goods. I'm merely pointing out that the trade deficit is in the end created by consumers rather than the government.

The biggest problem is that this trade deficit turns into "real debt." The trade deficit would be fine as long as it didn't affect the budgetary spending and "real" debt which is 8.7 trillion and rising. http://www.federalbudget.com/

Trade deficits don't impact real debt at all. Budget deficits yes, but not trade deficits.

Trade deficits just mean we imported x more than we exported. That's primarily the case because of consumers and oil prices.

The budget deficit is a problem, however, and it can have a negative effect on our economy. That's the responsibility of the government to fix, not ours.
Yeah and your dollar doesn't quite look right these days either:

http://www.willthomas.net/images/deception-dollar1.gif

:eek:

http://www.diosa.net/art-net/bush_deficit.gif

Of course, that's another type of deficit, but meh.

And thus by trying to equate the 2 VERY different deficits, you have just shown you know absolutely nothing about the 2.
I don't see any attempt by Rhaomi to "equate" the two decificts at all, which makes you the one being disengenuous. :p

The trade deficit is a favorite tool of the protectionist fear-monger because they can point to really high numbers. Unfortunately there are enough ignorant people in the world that using trade deficit actually works to cow people into a protectionist policy.

The only people who benefit from protectionist policies are those few domestic producers that are loosing out because they are not competitive and protecting them comes at the cost of everyone else. Do you really want to drastically cut the standard of living for everyone in the country so some obsolete and mismanaged factory in Iowa can sell a few more widgets?

We enjoy the high standard of living that we do precisely because of these imports. People buy imports because they are cheaper and better than domestic products and thus allow them better utility. Most of the American economy relies on being able to import cheap goods from overseas – and that includes factories needing raw inputs.

Cut the imports and you hamstring the US economy.

Trade deficits do not hurt us one little bit.

BTW – last I checked the US was still the largest exporter in the world.

You can take on as much debt as you can afford to pay, and quite frankly American consumers are more than capable of managing the debt they have currently. Bankruptcies are falling, debt-to-income is falling, and real incomes are rising. The consumer is in excellent shape, as a matter of fact.
Ya think so???

U.S. Corporate Bankruptcies to Rise 17% in 2007, According to Global Insight Forecast (http://www.globalinsight.com/About/PressRelease/PressRelease7691.htm)

Greatest Pressure is on Energy, Real Estate, Mining, and Metals

US Housing Crash Continues (http://patrick.net/housing/crash.html)

.........

I don't see any attempt by Rhaomi to "equate" the two decificts at all, which makes you the one being disengenuous. :p
What he said. :)

US Housing Crash Continues (http://patrick.net/housing/crash.html)

.........

Of course housing is falling, the market was overinflated for nearly a decade. This is called a market correction. You would know about them if you studied economics.

\

U.S. Corporate Bankruptcies to Rise 17% in 2007, According to Global Insight Forecast (http://www.globalinsight.com/About/PressRelease/PressRelease7691.htm)

Do you know why? There were more companies being founded during the past few years due to the improvement of the economy. However, not all of them are going to do well and they will go under as their credit expires. It's a natural phenomenon of the business cycle.

A rising bankruptcy rate can be a very good sign in an expansion because it shows more companies are entering the marketplace, which means more investment and growth, and new competitors entering the market.

Greatest Pressure is on Energy, Real Estate, Mining, and Metals

Those sectors have been the most profitable during this expansion, and so more people started companies to try and take advantage of the boom. Not all of them are going to succeed, and now that prices in those sectors are correcting, the speculative excess which was behind those companies is also draining.

Those that had sustainable business models and a plan will survive, and those that don't will die...it's been that way since people have been starting companies.

US Housing Crash Continues (http://patrick.net/housing/crash.html)

The crash has had a marginal effect on the economy. Job growth, wage and income growth, GDP growth, and consumer confidence have all strengthened in the past quarter despite the slowdown in housing.

The correction has bottomed out, and it's going to remain where it is or uptrend from here. The "crash" is over for the most part.

Yeah and your dollar doesn't quite look right these days either:


A weaker dollar is better for US companies because it means our products are more competitive overseas and the nominal value of their assets will increase.

The depreciation of the dollar has outpaced inflation, which means companies selling overseas are making more money here because prices haven't risen as fast as the nominal value of their overseas assets.

Remember, we've been having double-digit export growth over the past few years.

As long as were on this topic, a small article caught my eye in the USA TODAY and it had me greatly confused


Deficit dips 57% from same time last year

Record tax collections reduced the federal deficit by more than half during the first four months of the fiscal year compared with the same period a year ago, the Treasury Department reported Monday. The four-month deficit for the budget year that began Oct. 1 totaled $42.2 billion, down 57.2% from the same period in fiscal 2006. Revenues were up 9.7%, climbing to $834.1 billion, a record for the period from October through January. Government spending was up only 2.1%, but set a record for the period at $876.3 billion.

The government ran a surplus in January, spending $222.4 billion while collecting $260.6 billion.

The Congressional Budget Office expects the full-year deficit will be about $200 billion, down from $247.7 billion in fiscal 2006. That was the lowest in four years.

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070213/a_capcol13.art.htm


Im reading this wrong, no?

As long as were on this topic, a small article caught my eye in the USA TODAY and it had me greatly confused

No, it's correct. The deficit is shrinking remarkably, and it is actually ahead of schedule. If things continue on their present pace (as they likely will), we will be able to balance the budget soon. If the tax cuts are repealed or the war in Iraq ends early, it will be even sooner.

No, it's correct. The deficit is shrinking remarkably, and it is actually ahead of schedule. If things continue on their present pace (as they likely will), we will be able to balance the budget soon. If the tax cuts are repealed or the war in Iraq ends early, it will be even sooner.

If the tax cuts are repealed, revenues will fall in the long run as the economy contracts as a result.

There is a reason revenues are up with lower taxes and that is that more taxable profit is made by companies and people have more taxable income as a result of the economic growth resulting from the cuts.

The problem with the trade deficit is that it is financed by the debt of the US government. We buy more goods than we sell to the Chinese/whatever, so they have to make up for it in some way. The problem, of course, is when the government debt becomes too out of control (which it will, what with all the social programs rushing to insolvency that no politician will eliminate). There will be a surplus of dollars, and they will become undesirable due to their lessened scarcity, thus unleashing the ravages of devaluation of the currency to coincide with the sudden jump in interest rates that the drying up of credit will create. This will cause a stagflationary economic collapse of giant proportions, and it is in these times that men like Hitler or Mussolini gain power. So we will see the last vestiges of liberalism stripped away in the United States to be replaced by some demagogue wielding the "will of the people."