Trade deficits are ALWAYS detrimental to their nations’ GDPs.

[Widdekind]

US workers are swapping cheap foreign imports, for land, stocks, and bonds.

this is not really true since American dollars are declining in value whether you buy goods and services or capital

US dollars are declining in value, so it takes more dollars to buy goods & services; and to buy real-estate, stocks & bonds. And, as more and more dollars flow out of the US, for foreign goods & services; those dollars flow back into the US, for domestic real-estate, stocks & bonds. Dollars are only redeemable, on US markets. Nobody accepts dollars from the US (for their foreign goods & services), unless they plan to purchase something in the US (domestic capital assets).

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Your list of stuff adds no additional information.

but why not?? You said the middle class had declined. Perhaps what you were trying to say was that they declined despite being able to buy 100's of new technologies that improved their lives?

If the Cubans could suddenly afford all those thing would you say they too were declining?

If they suddenly started starving to death en masse would you say that was evidence that they were doing well??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

US workers are swapping cheap foreign imports, for land, stocks, and bonds.

this is not really true since American dollars are declining in value whether you buy goods and services or capital

US dollars are declining in value, so it takes more dollars to buy goods & services; and to buy real-estate, stocks & bonds. And, as more and more dollars flow out of the US, for foreign goods & services; those dollars flow back into the US, for domestic real-estate, stocks & bonds. Dollars are only redeemable, on US markets. Nobody accepts dollars from the US (for their foreign goods & services), unless they plan to purchase something in the US (domestic capital assets).

Not sure what your subject is here but you have to keep in mind that international capital flows are the result of trade but also monetary policy.

Greenspan had argued he had no control over long term rates, could not have averted crisis even if he wantred to because trade surplus dollars were flowing into US, but dollars flowed here too because of our or his loose monetary policy.

well the policy is still loose and will manifest itself in some harmful way.

 

[itfitzme]

the middle class has lost ground.

so the liberals say over and over!!!!!

Everyone doesn't purchase;

a TV's, LCD TV's, DLP-TV's, iPods, iphones, CD's and CD players, DVDs and DVD players, Blue Ray and Blue Ray players, PCs, desk top PCs, DVRs, color printers, satellite radio, Advantium ovens, HD-TV, Playstations, X-Boxes, X-box live, X-box Konnect, broadband, satellite TV, cell/camera/video phones, digital cameras, OnStar, palm corders, Blackberries, smart phones, home theaters, SUVs, big houses, more houses per capita, TiVo, 3D movies and TV's, built in wine coolers, granite counter tops, $200 sneakers, color matched front loader washing machines, matching washer dryer combinations, McMansions, 6 burner commercial ranges, Sub Zero refridgerators, more cars than drivers, a $1 billion ring tone industry, a pet industry that just doubled to $34 billion, 10's of millions lining up to buy Apple's I-tablet, Wii, Netflix boxes, jet skis, low profile tires, aluminum/titanium rims, Harley Davidson and Japanese motorcycles. $700 Billion spent Christmas 2010, $10.5 billion movies 2010, 10 million ocean crusies, 44 million taking plane flights over 2012 holiday, and have $500 billion spent on Christmas 2012.

Some people buy some of the stuff. All you have pointed out is that there is a broader selection of goods, not more goods being purchased by each quintile, any particular quintile, or every individual. Your list doesn't describe the distribution of that purchasing. I am sure, at the lower quitiles, individuals pick which few of all that suff they most want to buy.

None of them go to see every movie. Not everyone buys $200 sneakers. Few purchase both a Playstation and an X-Box. Even fewer have OnStart.

None of them spends $700 billion a piece for Christmas. Nor does each quitile spend the exact same amount for Christmas. Some spend less the the per capita average, some spend more.

A considerable amount of those purchases were made on ever increasing debt, debt that still remains, not on actual income.

You have said nothing important. In fact, nothing you've said is actually true. Half right is still wrong. I am begin a bit generous as I haven't actually counted how often you are wrong or just bs'ing. Clearly, counting is a concept that alludes you, along with proportions.

Since 2003, consumption has fallen.

So, no, in the past 15 years the middle class hasn't been able to purchase all those inventions. In the past ten years, or so, they have been purchasing less and less of them.

This is why Ed lacks the IQ to grasp even basic counting and actual real data. This is why Ed is to slow to grasp things that require counting and data, like economics.

 

[Widdekind]

Nobody wants USD for wall-paper. Nobody takes USD, unless they intend to spend them. And USD are only redeemable, on US markets, for either US products (goods & services), or US assets (land, buildings, businesses). If foreigners are selling their imported goods & services to US consumers (for dollars); then those foreigners are buying US assets (with those dollars). Otherwise, they would be giving goods to US consumers for free, for all USD are worth, in Asia (say).

In technical terms, a trade deficit (in goods & services) implies a capital surplus (in real-estate, stocks & bonds). US consumers can "buy cheap at Walmart", because other US citizens are selling off land, buildings, & businesses.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So, no, in the past 15 years the middle class hasn't been able to purchase all those inventions. They have been purchasing less and less of them.

less Iphones? Ipods??? Ipads?? since 1970 when your charts begin???
less flat screens at 4 times the price of previous TVs??

less $45k/ per year college educations?

In 2011, U.S. airlines carried 16% more traffic than in 2000 while using 2.3 billion fewer ... In 2011, US airlines flew at 241.2 billion revenue passenger miles in ...

See why we are 100% sure a liberal will be slow??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Nobody wants USD for wall-paper. Nobody takes USD, unless they intend to spend them. And USD are only redeemable, on US markets, for either US products (goods & services), or US assets (land, buildings, businesses). If foreigners are selling their imported goods & services to US consumers (for dollars); then those foreigners are buying US assets (with those dollars). Otherwise, they would be giving goods to US consumers for free, for all USD are worth, in Asia (say).

In technical terms, a trade deficit (in goods & services) implies a capital surplus (in real-estate, stocks & bonds). US consumers can "buy cheap at Walmart", because other US citizens are selling off land, buildings, & businesses.

and your point is??????

 

[Widdekind]

Nobody wants USD for wall-paper. Nobody takes USD, unless they intend to spend them. And USD are only redeemable, on US markets, for either US products (goods & services), or US assets (land, buildings, businesses). If foreigners are selling their imported goods & services to US consumers (for dollars); then those foreigners are buying US assets (with those dollars). Otherwise, they would be giving goods to US consumers for free, for all USD are worth, in Asia (say).

In technical terms, a trade deficit (in goods & services) implies a capital surplus (in real-estate, stocks & bonds). US consumers can "buy cheap at Walmart", because other US citizens are selling off land, buildings, & businesses.

and your point is??????

Nobody wants USD for wall-paper. Nobody takes USD, unless they intend to spend them. And USD are only redeemable, on US markets, for either US products (goods & services), or US assets (land, buildings, businesses). If foreigners are selling their imported goods & services to US consumers (for dollars); then those foreigners are buying US assets (with those dollars). Otherwise, they would be giving goods to US consumers for free, for all USD are worth, in Asia (say).

In technical terms, a trade deficit (in goods & services) implies a capital surplus (in real-estate, stocks & bonds). US consumers can "buy cheap at Walmart", because other US citizens are selling off land, buildings, & businesses.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Nobody wants USD for wall-paper. Nobody takes USD, unless they intend to spend them. And USD are only redeemable, on US markets, for either US products (goods & services), or US assets (land, buildings, businesses). If foreigners are selling their imported goods & services to US consumers (for dollars); then those foreigners are buying US assets (with those dollars). Otherwise, they would be giving goods to US consumers for free, for all USD are worth, in Asia (say).

In technical terms, a trade deficit (in goods & services) implies a capital surplus (in real-estate, stocks & bonds). US consumers can "buy cheap at Walmart", because other US citizens are selling off land, buildings, & businesses.

and your point is??????

Nobody wants USD for wall-paper. Nobody takes USD, unless they intend to spend them. And USD are only redeemable, on US markets, for either US products (goods & services), or US assets (land, buildings, businesses). If foreigners are selling their imported goods & services to US consumers (for dollars); then those foreigners are buying US assets (with those dollars). Otherwise, they would be giving goods to US consumers for free, for all USD are worth, in Asia (say).

In technical terms, a trade deficit (in goods & services) implies a capital surplus (in real-estate, stocks & bonds). US consumers can "buy cheap at Walmart", because other US citizens are selling off land, buildings, & businesses.

that is 100% right out of Friedman. Are you a libertarian about everything??

 

[itfitzme]

So, no, in the past 15 years the middle class hasn't been able to purchase all those inventions. They have been purchasing less and less of them.

less Iphones? Ipods??? Ipads?? since 1970 when your charts begin???
less flat screens at 4 times the price of previous TVs??

less $45k/ per year college educations?

In 2011, U.S. airlines carried 16% more traffic than in 2000 while using 2.3 billion fewer ... In 2011, US airlines flew at 241.2 billion revenue passenger miles in ...

See why we are 100% sure a liberal will be slow??

"since 1970 when your charts begin???"

Well, clearly, we were purchasing too much in 2003. Good thing our consumption has fallen off to pre-2003 levels.

Moron

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Well, clearly, we were purchasing too much in 2003. Good thing our consumption has fallen off to pre-2003 levels.

Moron

"In 2011, U.S. airlines carried 16% more traffic than in 2000 while using 2.3 billion fewer ... In 2011, US airlines flew at 241.2 billion revenue passenger miles in "...

yep, pretty soon we'll be closing the airports because Republican policies have been screwing the middle class just like the Marxists say.

you don't get very far being a perceptual geek but a conceptual moron do you??

 

[Widdekind]

and your point is??????

Nobody wants USD for wall-paper. Nobody takes USD, unless they intend to spend them. And USD are only redeemable, on US markets, for either US products (goods & services), or US assets (land, buildings, businesses). If foreigners are selling their imported goods & services to US consumers (for dollars); then those foreigners are buying US assets (with those dollars). Otherwise, they would be giving goods to US consumers for free, for all USD are worth, in Asia (say).

In technical terms, a trade deficit (in goods & services) implies a capital surplus (in real-estate, stocks & bonds). US consumers can "buy cheap at Walmart", because other US citizens are selling off land, buildings, & businesses.

that is 100% right out of Friedman. Are you a libertarian about everything??

wherever possible -- "complaining" to Government ought-and-should be a last resort.

Economically, imports are financed, either by exports, or by selling off assets:

In 2004 ... the United States ran a current account deficit [trade deficit] of $668 billion. This deficit meant the United States imported more goods and services than it exported. The counterpart to the U.S. current account deficit was a U.S. capital account surplus. This surplus meant that foreign investors purchased more U.S. assets than U.S. investors purchased in foreign assets... a country’s current [trade] and capital account balances must offset one another. Therefore, the U.S. current account deficit was matched by a capital account surplus of $668 billion

http://econweb.rutgers.edu/rchang/ch6-erp06.pdf

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

the middle class has lost ground.

so the liberals say over and over!!!!!

Everyone doesn't purchase;

a TV's, LCD TV's, DLP-TV's, iPods, iphones, CD's and CD players, DVDs and DVD players, Blue Ray and Blue Ray players, PCs, desk top PCs, DVRs, color printers, satellite radio, Advantium ovens, HD-TV, Playstations, X-Boxes, X-box live, X-box Konnect, broadband, satellite TV, cell/camera/video phones, digital cameras, OnStar, palm corders, Blackberries, smart phones, home theaters, SUVs, big houses, more houses per capita, TiVo, 3D movies and TV's, built in wine coolers, granite counter tops, $200 sneakers, color matched front loader washing machines, matching washer dryer combinations, McMansions, 6 burner commercial ranges, Sub Zero refridgerators, more cars than drivers, a $1 billion ring tone industry, a pet industry that just doubled to $34 billion, 10's of millions lining up to buy Apple's I-tablet, Wii, Netflix boxes, jet skis, low profile tires, aluminum/titanium rims, Harley Davidson and Japanese motorcycles. $700 Billion spent Christmas 2010, $10.5 billion movies 2010, 10 million ocean crusies, 44 million taking plane flights over 2012 holiday, and have $500 billion spent on Christmas 2012.

Some people buy some of the stuff. All you have pointed out is that there is a broader selection of goods, not more goods being purchased by each quintile, any particular quintile, or every individual. Your list doesn't describe the distribution of that purchasing. I am sure, at the lower quitiles, individuals pick which few of all that suff they most want to buy.

None of them go to see every movie. Not everyone buys $200 sneakers. Few purchase both a Playstation and an X-Box. Even fewer have OnStart.

None of them spends $700 billion a piece for Christmas. Nor does each quitile spend the exact same amount for Christmas. Some spend less the the per capita average, some spend more.

A considerable amount of those purchases were made on ever increasing debt, debt that still remains, not on actual income.

You have said nothing important. In fact, nothing you've said is actually true. Half right is still wrong. I am begin a bit generous as I haven't actually counted how often you are wrong or just bs'ing. Clearly, counting is a concept that alludes you, along with proportions.

Since 2003, consumption has fallen.

So, no, in the past 15 years the middle class hasn't been able to purchase all those inventions. In the past ten years, or so, they have been purchasing less and less of them.

This is why Ed lacks the IQ to grasp even basic counting and actual real data. This is why Ed is to slow to grasp things that require counting and data, like economics.

Since 2003, consumption has fallen.

You might need a different chart to show that's the case.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Since 2003, consumption has fallen.

"NPD DisplaySearch says that 3D should see a whopping 90 percent increase this year, for a total of 46 million units. The report does expect North America to be the leading 3D shipment region by 2014, with 3D becoming a standard feature on screen sizes above 40 inches"


"In 2011, U.S. airlines carried 16% more traffic than in 2000 while using 2.3 billion fewer ... In 2011, US airlines flew at 241.2 billion revenue passenger miles in




"Nearly 110 million people in the U.S. owned smartphones during the three months ending in May, up 5 percent versus February. Google Android ranked as the top smartphone platform with 50.9 percent market share (up 0.8 percentage points). Five years after the release of the first iPhone, Apple’s share of the smartphone market reached 31.9 percent in May"

 

[expat_panama]

...I do not “have to prove” anything to my own satisfaction. My conclusions are based upon my own experiences, observations and conversations...

That's great, and if it does the job then more power to you!

Many of us prefer working with a reality that others can see, one that ends up affecting everyone. That means going to the trouble of making sure what we perceive is something actually happening and not just something we imagine. Granted we don't really have to do all the extra bother, but it sure works a lot better when it comes to earning a living.

 

[itfitzme]

Well, clearly, we were purchasing too much in 2003. Good thing our consumption has fallen off to pre-2003 levels.

Moron

"In 2011, U.S. airlines carried 16% more traffic than in 2000 while using 2.3 billion fewer ... In 2011, US airlines flew at 241.2 billion revenue passenger miles in "...

yep, pretty soon we'll be closing the airports because Republican policies have been screwing the middle class just like the Marxists say.

you don't get very far being a perceptual geek but a conceptual moron do you??

Meaningless hyperbole using a point industry.

Come back when you've passed a couple of economics courses, like econ 101 and 102.

Why so afraid to tell us what your IQ is?

 

[itfitzme]

Nobody wants USD for wall-paper. Nobody takes USD, unless they intend to spend them. And USD are only redeemable, on US markets, for either US products (goods & services), or US assets (land, buildings, businesses). If foreigners are selling their imported goods & services to US consumers (for dollars); then those foreigners are buying US assets (with those dollars). Otherwise, they would be giving goods to US consumers for free, for all USD are worth, in Asia (say).

In technical terms, a trade deficit (in goods & services) implies a capital surplus (in real-estate, stocks & bonds). US consumers can "buy cheap at Walmart", because other US citizens are selling off land, buildings, & businesses.

and your point is??????

Nobody wants USD for wall-paper. Nobody takes USD, unless they intend to spend them. And USD are only redeemable, on US markets, for either US products (goods & services), or US assets (land, buildings, businesses). If foreigners are selling their imported goods & services to US consumers (for dollars); then those foreigners are buying US assets (with those dollars). Otherwise, they would be giving goods to US consumers for free, for all USD are worth, in Asia (say).

In technical terms, a trade deficit (in goods & services) implies a capital surplus (in real-estate, stocks & bonds). US consumers can "buy cheap at Walmart", because other US citizens are selling off land, buildings, & businesses.

And a reasonable point it is.

The only other options, that you haven't mentioned, is that it just sits on account at the Fed, doing nothing. That, though, isn't what is appears to normally do. At the very least, it appears to go into purchases of t-bills.

With that, I think we've captured the entire set of possibilities.

The monetarists are unconcerned as the money must be spent in the US currency zone. You make and interesting point of how that money is spent.

On the other hand, there is a line of thought that the US and other advanced economies have sacrificed their standard of living in order for second level economies, like India and China, to advance theirs.

Now, we get the more interesting question of how is all that net trade deficit distributed between t-bills, real-estate, and other investments. What percentage of the total net trade deficit has gone into financing the national debt and what percentage of the national debt has been financed by foreign investments in t-bills?

Is there anything wrong with foreign investors investing in US growth?

Does it make any sense that non-citizens can own real property in the US? What exactly is the point of citizenship, really then?

 

[itfitzme]

Since 2003, consumption has fallen.

So, no, in the past 15 years the middle class hasn't been able to purchase all those inventions. In the past ten years, or so, they have been purchasing less and less of them..

Since 2003, consumption has fallen.

You might need a different chart to show that's the case.

Yeah, that one doesn't really do the trick.

i was going with this one.

% GDP is a good proxy for real dollars per capita. GDP increases with population so it takes that out. And $/$ gets rid of the nominal dollar issue.

The fact that employment and the labor force has trended down since about 2000 is the underlying issue. Not only has real income declined, but even more so, employment has declined as well. It suggests there was a serious change in about 2000.

So far as I can tell, the major fundamental change is apparent in gasoline prices which went from flat to trending upward in about 2000.

 

[itfitzme]

Since 2003, consumption has fallen.

"NPD DisplaySearch says that 3D should see a whopping 90 percent increase this year, for a total of 46 million units. The report does expect North America to be the leading 3D shipment region by 2014, with 3D becoming a standard feature on screen sizes above 40 inches"

"In 2011, U.S. airlines carried 16% more traffic than in 2000 while using 2.3 billion fewer ... In 2011, US airlines flew at 241.2 billion revenue passenger miles in

"Nearly 110 million people in the U.S. owned smartphones during the three months ending in May, up 5 percent versus February. Google Android ranked as the top smartphone platform with 50.9 percent market share (up 0.8 percentage points). Five years after the release of the first iPhone, Apple’s share of the smartphone market reached 31.9 percent in May"

Keep going. After you've listed all tens of thousands of products on the US market, included both quantity and price indexes, you will have duplicated the GDP.

Come back when you're done and we can discuss macro-economics instead of micro-economics.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Since 2003, consumption has fallen.

So, no, in the past 15 years the middle class hasn't been able to purchase all those inventions. In the past ten years, or so, they have been purchasing less and less of them..

Since 2003, consumption has fallen.

You might need a different chart to show that's the case.

Yeah, that one doesn't really do the trick.

i was going with this one.

% GDP is a good proxy for real dollars per capita. GDP increases with population so it takes that out. And $/$ gets rid of the nominal dollar issue.

The fact that employment and the labor force has trended down since about 2000 is the underlying issue. Not only has real income declined, but even more so, employment has declined as well. It suggests there was a serious change in about 2000.

So far as I can tell, the major fundamental change is apparent in gasoline prices which went from flat to trending upward in about 2000.

Do you have a source for those numbers?
I've always heard consumption was at least 70% of GDP.