Comments on: American Economy As A Family http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/ Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time. Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:27:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Adam Selene http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3445 Adam Selene Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:15:06 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3445 The question is who is the "spoiled child"? Hint, it's not China and it's not the American citizen. The question is who is the “spoiled child”? Hint, it’s not China and it’s not the American citizen.

]]> By: Larry Stanley http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3441 Larry Stanley Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:03:05 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3441 <em>If we had a trade deficit with China, and they were using their excess dollars to invest in American business, we’d be in good shape. We can use that investment to make more jobs here than what we outsource to “over there”. Unfortunately, we’ve got a spoiled child spending our money, giving us back nothing useful for it, and sucking up the money we need to build our economy. </em> This is the most accurate and pointed analysis I have seen. There may be a level playing field in open trade and open borders. But there will always be a team who plays to win, and one just dressing out. If we had a trade deficit with China, and they were using their excess dollars to invest in American business, we’d be in good shape. We can use that investment to make more jobs here than what we outsource to “over there”. Unfortunately, we’ve got a spoiled child spending our money, giving us back nothing useful for it, and sucking up the money we need to build our economy.

This is the most accurate and pointed analysis I have seen. There may be a level playing field in open trade and open borders. But there will always be a team who plays to win, and one just dressing out.

]]> By: Edutheria » Blog Archive » Trade deficits and government spending http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3138 Edutheria » Blog Archive » Trade deficits and government spending Mon, 13 Nov 2006 23:13:41 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3138 [...] Brad Warbiany of The Liberty Papers makes the sound assertion that trade deficits are not bad in and of themselves. But our particular trade deficit with China is supporting excessive U.S. government spending. A trade deficit isn’t a bad thing, if China were spending its money investing in US equities/etc, that could be fueling economic growth. Instead they’re investing their money in T-bills, fueling government spending that is little more than a sink-hole, affecting economic growth little (if at all). Then, when the bill comes due, the government will have to take money out of the economy (further damaging economic growth) to finance their burden. [...] [...] Brad Warbiany of The Liberty Papers makes the sound assertion that trade deficits are not bad in and of themselves. But our particular trade deficit with China is supporting excessive U.S. government spending. A trade deficit isn’t a bad thing, if China were spending its money investing in US equities/etc, that could be fueling economic growth. Instead they’re investing their money in T-bills, fueling government spending that is little more than a sink-hole, affecting economic growth little (if at all). Then, when the bill comes due, the government will have to take money out of the economy (further damaging economic growth) to finance their burden. [...]

]]> By: Brad Warbiany http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3119 Brad Warbiany Mon, 13 Nov 2006 02:15:55 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3119 John, I used China because the original post was related to imports/exports. In my opinion, the key is more that hundreds of billions of dollars of foreign and domestic dollars are going to fund government spending that will do little to stimulate the economy, when it could be going into the free market where it might accelerate economic growth. It's probably better public policy to pay for our spending with foreign investment than it is with American tax dollars (as is argued in the Coyote Blog link, as it's more likely that excess American dollars will stay here than go elsewhere, and it's likely foreign surpluses will come here). But I think it hurts us to be running these deficits anyway. Every dollar invested in T-bills, whether invested by China or by Grandma, doesn't do as good to stimulate the economy as that dollar invested in the free market. John,

I used China because the original post was related to imports/exports.

In my opinion, the key is more that hundreds of billions of dollars of foreign and domestic dollars are going to fund government spending that will do little to stimulate the economy, when it could be going into the free market where it might accelerate economic growth.

It’s probably better public policy to pay for our spending with foreign investment than it is with American tax dollars (as is argued in the Coyote Blog link, as it’s more likely that excess American dollars will stay here than go elsewhere, and it’s likely foreign surpluses will come here). But I think it hurts us to be running these deficits anyway. Every dollar invested in T-bills, whether invested by China or by Grandma, doesn’t do as good to stimulate the economy as that dollar invested in the free market.

]]> By: John http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3118 John Mon, 13 Nov 2006 02:06:14 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3118 Brad, One niggle with your post. "The credit card is public debt, and China is the bank/credit card company." China's portion of our total national debt is about 4%. China owns about 7% of publicly held debt. Why is China the bank in your analogy? It isn't the largest holder of treasury securities. Americans are (55%). It isn't even the largest foreign holder of treasury securities. Brad,
One niggle with your post.

“The credit card is public debt, and China is the bank/credit card company.”

China’s portion of our total national debt is about 4%. China owns about 7% of publicly held debt.

Why is China the bank in your analogy? It isn’t the largest holder of treasury securities. Americans are (55%). It isn’t even the largest foreign holder of treasury securities.

]]> By: Phil http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3117 Phil Mon, 13 Nov 2006 01:27:36 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3117 America is becoming a consumerist economy at so many levels. The percentage of jobs created to support consumption networks is outbalancing jobs to produce stuff from raw stuff, and increasingly so. This is the hollowing often claimed, and Wal-Mart is the largest indicator of that. The job figures taken together from the opposing categories of consumption vs production, may even be at a wash, allowing the current situation to mask the underlying problem. What happens when the rug is pulled from under the current situation and THINGS become too expensive? That could happen if the Chinese/MNC's build alternative markets and then feel free to downgrade America's debtors on a whim. The question is how fast all that could develop. America is becoming a consumerist economy at so many levels. The percentage of jobs created to support consumption networks is outbalancing jobs to produce stuff from raw stuff, and increasingly so. This is the hollowing often claimed, and Wal-Mart is the largest indicator of that. The job figures taken together from the opposing categories of consumption vs production, may even be at a wash, allowing the current situation to mask the underlying problem. What happens when the rug is pulled from under the current situation and THINGS become too expensive? That could happen if the Chinese/MNC’s build alternative markets and then feel free to downgrade America’s debtors on a whim. The question is how fast all that could develop.

]]> By: Brad Warbiany http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3116 Brad Warbiany Mon, 13 Nov 2006 01:04:30 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3116 <em>Should we bring back slave labor to compete with the salves in China? Would that not be fair trade by your definition?</em> There's a big difference between low-wage workers and slaves. If you care about the "slaves" in China, you would support trade, because it's the best way to increase their standard of living. But as to the point, we <strong>shouldn't compete with them</strong>. We should let them build cheap products, freeing up Americans for more productive tasks. This isn't a zero-sum game. <em>Should we turn a blind eye to Mexico and China violating all environmental standards and sticking us with the clean up bill?</em> Because if we don't trade with them, they'll reform their ways? Again, trading with them is the best way to improve their standard of living, which is the most realistic way to get them to start paying attention to these environmental standards. <em>Should have no laws at all to protect intellectual property rights? If so why would any Company ever do any research and development?</em> Does that mean we shouldn't engage in any trade with them at all? Or does it mean that you need to take special precautions when trading with someone who might try to steal your ideas? As for the incentive to produce, has that stopped the open-source movement? <em>Do you think we have a free trade deal today with China today and why?</em> No, it's not completely free. And I think we should do what we can to engage them and improve the situation. I just think that protectionism hurts us more than it hurts them. It's better for us to keep with the status quo of a semi-free trade than it is to break off our trading relationship, hoping to force them into compliance. <em>Why would you call a protectionist one who enforces laws? You sound like the open border supports of cheap unregulated illegal immigration.</em> Yeah, I'm a pretty open-border guy. I like the Bush idea of a guest worker program, because I think the more people we have in this country working, the better. I'm not a complete open-border guy for security reasons, but I don't see a problem with letting far greater numbers in than our official immigration policy allows. And yes, I completely support breaking laws, if they're stupid laws. For example, when we have to get information for social events to the members of our neighborhood (my wife is the social director), I put those fliers directly into their mailboxes, despite the fact that I'm breaking federal law. I enjoy it. It's a nice added thrill. And believe me, if anyone tried to enforce that law, I'd have more scathing words than calling them protectionist, despite the fact that protectionism of an inefficient government monopoly is exactly what they'd be engaging in. <em>I have a few more questions, if you have any answers to my questions. My bet is change the topic and subject, if you answer at all.</em> I've got a question... What's with the attitude? Should we bring back slave labor to compete with the salves in China? Would that not be fair trade by your definition?

There’s a big difference between low-wage workers and slaves. If you care about the “slaves” in China, you would support trade, because it’s the best way to increase their standard of living. But as to the point, we shouldn’t compete with them. We should let them build cheap products, freeing up Americans for more productive tasks. This isn’t a zero-sum game.

Should we turn a blind eye to Mexico and China violating all environmental standards and sticking us with the clean up bill?

Because if we don’t trade with them, they’ll reform their ways? Again, trading with them is the best way to improve their standard of living, which is the most realistic way to get them to start paying attention to these environmental standards.

Should have no laws at all to protect intellectual property rights? If so why would any Company ever do any research and development?

Does that mean we shouldn’t engage in any trade with them at all? Or does it mean that you need to take special precautions when trading with someone who might try to steal your ideas?

As for the incentive to produce, has that stopped the open-source movement?

Do you think we have a free trade deal today with China today and why?

No, it’s not completely free. And I think we should do what we can to engage them and improve the situation. I just think that protectionism hurts us more than it hurts them. It’s better for us to keep with the status quo of a semi-free trade than it is to break off our trading relationship, hoping to force them into compliance.

Why would you call a protectionist one who enforces laws? You sound like the open border supports of cheap unregulated illegal immigration.

Yeah, I’m a pretty open-border guy. I like the Bush idea of a guest worker program, because I think the more people we have in this country working, the better. I’m not a complete open-border guy for security reasons, but I don’t see a problem with letting far greater numbers in than our official immigration policy allows.

And yes, I completely support breaking laws, if they’re stupid laws. For example, when we have to get information for social events to the members of our neighborhood (my wife is the social director), I put those fliers directly into their mailboxes, despite the fact that I’m breaking federal law. I enjoy it. It’s a nice added thrill. And believe me, if anyone tried to enforce that law, I’d have more scathing words than calling them protectionist, despite the fact that protectionism of an inefficient government monopoly is exactly what they’d be engaging in.

I have a few more questions, if you have any answers to my questions. My bet is change the topic and subject, if you answer at all.

I’ve got a question… What’s with the attitude?

]]> By: John Konop http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3112 John Konop Sun, 12 Nov 2006 22:33:37 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/11/12/american-economy-as-a-family/#comment-3112 Should we bring back slave labor to compete with the salves in China? Would that not be fair trade by your definition? Should we turn a blind eye to Mexico and China violating all environmental standards and sticking us with the clean up bill? Should have no laws at all to protect intellectual property rights? If so why would any Company ever do any research and development? Do you think we have a free trade deal today with China today and why? Why would you call a protectionist one who enforces laws? You sound like the open border supports of cheap unregulated illegal immigration. I have a few more questions, if you have any answers to my questions. My bet is change the topic and subject, if you answer at all. Should we bring back slave labor to compete with the salves in China? Would that not be fair trade by your definition?

Should we turn a blind eye to Mexico and China violating all environmental standards and sticking us with the clean up bill?

Should have no laws at all to protect intellectual property rights? If so why would any Company ever do any research and development?

Do you think we have a free trade deal today with China today and why?

Why would you call a protectionist one who enforces laws? You sound like the open border supports of cheap unregulated illegal immigration.

I have a few more questions, if you have any answers to my questions. My bet is change the topic and subject, if you answer at all.

]]>