In everything important and strategic we are self sufficient. That doesn’t mean we need to knit socks. Better to have that done somewhere else. Read up on Near-shoring, it will help. Also, Mexico is cheaper.US / China trade.
let this sink in.
Let’s assume both countries distenagle. You think China is just going to do nothing to replace the $$. And what will American consumers think about much higher price points. And what makes you think “Mexico” can handle so much in exports…and pick up the slack per se.
.
US / Mexico
So you have a 400b deficit with Mexico and a 500b deficit with China
Mexico
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has fostered this relationship by virtue of the agreement's comprehensive, market-opening rules. It is also creating a more equitable set of trade rules as trade barriers in Mexico are reduced and eliminated. U.S.-Mexico Trade Factsustr.gov
I thought you were self sufficient?
What Is the U.S. Trade Deficit and Why Does It Matter?
The US runs a large trade deficit, and has for many years. But what is a trade deficit, and why does it matter? Let's look closer.finmasters.com
You Can’t Project Power When the World Knows You Are Weak
- Thread starter oil&gas
- Start date
If you say so, despite what stats and economics are showing you.
back to trade deficits. A good chunk, 1/3 of your “exports” are services. Not goods or materials or finished productsMaking the import of raw materials, finished materials, and goods and your deficit…in things that matter..
ustr.gov
.
back to trade deficits. A good chunk, 1/3 of your “exports” are services. Not goods or materials or finished productsMaking the import of raw materials, finished materials, and goods and your deficit…in things that matter..
Countries & Regions
The United States has trade relations with more than 75 countries around the world. The top five export markets for U.S. goods in 2013 were: Canada, $300.3 billion Mexico, $226.2 billion China, $122 billion Japan, $65.1 billion Germany, $47.4 billion At USTR, trade with countries is coordinated...
China imports the majority of its energy and food, it is also surrounded by not-very-friendly countries. The sea and ocean routes to import and export Chinese goods pass through the waters of many countries, if one of those countries wants to block Chinese trade then China is f*cked.
US imports low-end goods from China, it does not need to import food or energy. To its east and west are the oceans, north and south are long-standing allies with little to no military.
The US has not reached the apex of its power.
US imports low-end goods from China, it does not need to import food or energy. To its east and west are the oceans, north and south are long-standing allies with little to no military.
The US has not reached the apex of its power.
Yes, import socks, export legal and financial advice. All advanced economies are predominantly services, making stuff is often a commodity. Food, Energy, these are strategic.If you say so, despite what stats and economics are showing you.
back to trade deficits. A good chunk, 1/3 of your “exports” are services. Not goods or materials or finished productsMaking the import of raw materials, finished materials, and goods and your deficit…in things that matter..
.Countries & Regions
The United States has trade relations with more than 75 countries around the world. The top five export markets for U.S. goods in 2013 were: Canada, $300.3 billion Mexico, $226.2 billion China, $122 billion Japan, $65.1 billion Germany, $47.4 billion At USTR, trade with countries is coordinated...
Not sure why I try.
Let’s assume the us and China don’t trade at all.
you have lost however many billions in dollars and those people are out of work.
Walmart has lost 1 trillion worth of cheap goods. Have you looked at your poverty, lower and middle class problems? You think they can afford to “buy US”…good luck with that. With your cost of labour/production etc?????? thinking economics isn’t your forte.
And if you think you aren’t reliant on various raw materials, finished products from other countries…”don’t know what to say”…you’re a country of almost 400 million. A country that has lost manufacturing, is under pressure to go green there’s Boomers ( big losses in labour markets/who knows gdp. Huge healthcare expenses) etc and so on.
All of which, when added to or put into context with military spending, the war machine and its needs.. Raw materials, oil, etc and so on. The more here, the less there.
Let’s assume the us and China don’t trade at all.
you have lost however many billions in dollars and those people are out of work.
Walmart has lost 1 trillion worth of cheap goods. Have you looked at your poverty, lower and middle class problems? You think they can afford to “buy US”…good luck with that. With your cost of labour/production etc?????? thinking economics isn’t your forte.
And if you think you aren’t reliant on various raw materials, finished products from other countries…”don’t know what to say”…you’re a country of almost 400 million. A country that has lost manufacturing, is under pressure to go green there’s Boomers ( big losses in labour markets/who knows gdp. Huge healthcare expenses) etc and so on.
All of which, when added to or put into context with military spending, the war machine and its needs.. Raw materials, oil, etc and so on. The more here, the less there.
Last edited:
Decided maybe you should read this.
Worth the read. A balanced take on your trade imbalances from numerous economist across the spectrum. Worth noting. Comments on manufacturing, oil etc
www.cfr.org
Given various internal problems. Not the least of which is your polarization/divides, social strife. Other things mentioned like it being a handcuffed bear and the pressure to go green. Boomers There problably aren’t many options. And with the left…in 10-30 years will the “defense” budget still feed the bear? And who knows what else might change the landscape. Who saw 2008? Or Covid or…..
Worth the read. A balanced take on your trade imbalances from numerous economist across the spectrum. Worth noting. Comments on manufacturing, oil etc
The U.S. Trade Deficit: How Much Does It Matter?
President Trump has made reducing the U.S. trade deficit a priority, blaming trade deals like NAFTA, but economists disagree over how policymakers should respond.
www.cfr.org
Last edited:
Mexico is cheaper, Mexico and Canada are larger trading partners - how is this not registering.
Gaza is really the only one, that's getting on to 15 years old. Maybe North Korea, of their own choosing, though nobody knows how much goes between NK and Russia, as far as I know.
But yes, seiges are hard, occupations harder.
China may have the next biggest forces but they haven't been tested lately, except on their own people. Russia just showed they can't do anything. India/Pakistan could war it up a bit but doubt they could take it much further.
But I agree, with Russia looking foolish there really isn't one that could challenge to take over the big empire.
It almost happened in the US and is getting close to happening in a few other countries now. If you can get 40% of the US riled up enough to fight you can't discount anyone else going down that path.
I've never heard of the SIOP.
The US for military drones, but not for use of small drones we're seeing in Ukraine. Those are all coming from China and bits from the US, aren't they?
It was the US official nuclear deterrence policy from the 60s until roughly the turn of the new millennium. The S stood for "single"; as in there is only one response no matter who attacks. Missiles were kept trained on every target of every potential adversary 24/7, and if anyone ever launched, the US would just hit everybody. If you let one live, they could hit you and you would powerless to respond, so if you were going to hit anyone, you had to hit everyone.
But if you hit everyone, everyone is also going to hit you. But no one has the ability to destroy ever square inch of soil, so there would be survivors and those survivors would have different needs. Specialized workers or people in luxury industries would be retrained into critical trades, mostly infrastructure. Plumbers, welders, that kind of thing. This retaining, given things like building codes would be secondary to just getting a roof over people's heads, would be quick. 5 years max. Then 20 years to rebuild the infrastructure using these workers. Then more years to train people into (some) of the more specialized trades that will resume quickly afterwards. It was all mapped out. And when other countries' plans were examined, they found none could rebuild as quickly. The US seemed to be in a bit of a goldilocks zone of population density and resources for rebuilding after nuclear holocaust. So much so that some advisors even suggested a first strike might be the best course of action if it ever looked like US hegemony wouldn't hold.
Ukraine is using a mix of both. And just because the US imports a lot of consumer goods doesn't mean it has to. Plenty of large defense contractors have manufacturing in the US still and could ramp up if needed. Most importantly, their air supremacy abilities means they could destroy any manufacturing out there.
“barring all out war”…
Given the US military, it’s pretty obvious they still have some manufacturing
Raw materials.
With a country of “400m” today. And working on the assumption of no trade at all. How fast would they burn their whatever resources they have. Which might include lithium, and far more.
Realistically, let’s play in a world where the US decides get all protectionist. And no one is going to care about raping the environment…….inside the US…Do we think the rest of the world, is just going to play nice. Aside from likely ruining what’s left of their middle class. Personally, I’d love to see Alberta turn the taps off today. It’s would near ruin them as dominoes begin.
Fresh water.
luckily for them we are right next door, and luckily we are oh so nice to an ungrateful neighbor and we are already exporting to them…I’ve always wondered how that’s going to play out in years to come. Occasionally have wondered about that following the nuclear option too. Also keep in mind the more agriculture…the more water…
But we are talking about the US power. All empires, in history have failed. Every single one. We could also look at the UK, which back in the day fought for the seas. For the most part won, and was the dominant player projecting power…
Which also needed a lot from everyone else. One big advantage they had back in the day. Was a world to go get what they needed. In fact, we might also remember how and why the US came to be…You all think they are the exception..
…Scales are different, that’s about it. And they all need $ and economies. Never mind, the rot, that is presently within the US today….Why did the Roman Empire eventually fall apart.
Last edited:
That and heavy taxes, particularly to pay for um, what at the time was their war machine. not unlike the British Empire. And then farms/farmers/peasants leaving/revolting.
but unlike those days, there isn’t a world to constantly expand, go get what’s needed. Only a guess, purely a guess but beside the internal “rot”, might explain why the US empire doesn’t look to be as long lasting.
on water.
look at lake mead over the past few decades. Lots of places in the world and US running out.
True, there is aquaculture (still needs water. As does everything else) today, but I’m not sure that can replace. “Who knows”. Water could also be the new gold/oil somewhere down the road. Sure would suck to poison the well as they used to in the day and go nuclear..
Without the USA the bad actors run rampant.
Trump sat out Asia and Hong Kong's unique status got squashed, the Chinese start declaring all sorts of places theirs, etc. Even the Filipinos realized that but quick when they tried to buddy up w China.
USA at one point realized soft power (eg peace corps) was essential to its status, something Russia and China do not know nor care to exercise. Immigrants do not flood to either of those places.
This faded in the Trump years but coming back around.
Trump sat out Asia and Hong Kong's unique status got squashed, the Chinese start declaring all sorts of places theirs, etc. Even the Filipinos realized that but quick when they tried to buddy up w China.
USA at one point realized soft power (eg peace corps) was essential to its status, something Russia and China do not know nor care to exercise. Immigrants do not flood to either of those places.
This faded in the Trump years but coming back around.
True, China would probably have taken Taiwan already without US pressure.
But then again, the US is a bad actor quite often as well, with Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria for example.
How many years do you have to look at different answers? The factors affecting changes in power are pretty complex and will often only superficially resemble the conditions of other declines of power. I've seen different research blaming everything from over-reliance on slavery to an economy based on militarism to climate change to corruption.
As I said earlier in the thread, if the US wasn't screwing with other countries, someone else would (they already are) and the US is closer to my world view than China or Russia.
Find anyone that has said it’s presently weak. From what I’ve been reading, its whether or not they can/will retain their dominance in years to come.
lol, Napoleon complex. I’m guessing the irony of that “insult” might be lost.
lol, Napoleon complex. I’m guessing the irony of that “insult” might be lost.
