Advertise | Bookmark | Contact Us | E-Mail List |  | Update Page | UraniumSeek.com 

Commentary : Gold Review : Markets : News Wire : Quotes : Silver : Stocks - Main Page 

 GoldSeek.com >> News >> Story  Disclaimer 
 
Latest Headlines

GoldSeek Radio Nugget: John Embry and Chris Waltzek
By: radio.GoldSeek.com

AlphaZero for President
By: George Smith

Ira Epstein's Metals Video 12 14 2017
By: Ira Epstein

Asian Metals Market Update: December-15-2017
By: Chintan Karnani, Insignia Consultants

Gold Seeker Closing Report: Gold and Silver End Slightly Lower
By: Chris Mullen, Gold Seeker Report

Are You Ready For The Next Rally?
By: Craig Hemke

Long Term Patterns in Stocks, Gold and Crude
By: Gary Christenson

Exploration Update: Golden Arrowís Pescado Project
By: Nicholas LePan, SilverSeek.com

GoldSeek Radio Nugget: Charles Hughes Smith and Chris Waltzek
By: radio.GoldSeek.com

Strap Yourself In - We Are About To See Some Big Moves In Metals
By: Avi Gilburt

 
Search

GoldSeek Web

 
A trade deficit is never a problem


By: Steve Saville, The Speculative Investor

 -- Published: Monday, 13 February 2017 | Print  | Disqus 

Itís not just Donald Trump. Many political leaders around the world operate under the misconception that a trade deficit is a problem to be reckoned with. This misconception has been the root of countless bad policies over the centuries.

Trade, by definition, is not an adversarial situation resulting in a winner and a loser. Rather, both parties believe that they are benefiting, otherwise the trade would not take place. Most of the time, both parties do benefit. In general, one side wants a particular product more than a certain quantity of money and the other side wants the quantity of money more than the product. When the exchange takes place, both sides get the thing to which they assign the higher value at the time.

All the hand-wringing about international trade deficits is based on the ridiculous notion that the side receiving the money is the winner and the side receiving the product is the loser, but how could this be? If the side receiving the product was losing-out then it wouldnít enter into the trade. Furthermore, given that todayís money is created out of nothing, if a trade were to be viewed as a win-lose situation then surely itís the side receiving the product that should be viewed as the winner.

That being said, I donít want to confuse the argument by asserting that it makes sense to view the side receiving the product as the winner in the exchange of money for product. Both sides are winners, because both sides get what they prefer at the time of the exchange.

For example, if you shop at Wal-Mart then you run a trade deficit with Wal-Mart. Is this trade deficit a problem for you? Obviously not, otherwise you wouldnít shop there. Would it make sense for the government to step in and slap a tax on all Wal-Mart products, thus forcing you to buy less products from Wal-Mart and thereby reducing your trade deficit with that company?

Some will claim that a trade deficit is only a problem when it happens between different countries, but countries arenít entities that trade with each other. People trade with each other, and political borders donít determine what is and isnít economically beneficial. If John and Bill have been trading with each other for years to their mutual benefit within the same political region, placing a political border between them wouldnít mysteriously alter the mutually-beneficial nature of their trading.

Another point that should be understood is that a ďtrade deficitĒ for a country results in an investment surplus for that country. The reason is that the monetary surplus on the trade account doesnít disappear or get placed under a mattress, it gets invested in securities (stocks and bonds), real estate, businesses and projects. A trade deficit therefore isnít associated with a net flow of money out of the economy, it is associated with a re-routing of money within the economy. There is no good reason to expect that this re-routing will lead to a net loss of jobs. In fact, the opposite is the case.

Unfortunately, while a so-called trade deficit is not a problem, the taxes, tariffs, subsidies and other government measures that are implemented to reduce a trade deficit definitely do cause problems.

 


| Digg This Article
 -- Published: Monday, 13 February 2017 | E-Mail  | Print  | Source: GoldSeek.com

comments powered by Disqus


Regular financial market forecasts and analyses are provided at our web site. We arenít offering a free trial subscription at this time, but free samples of our work (excerpts from our regular commentaries) can be viewed here.

E-mail: Steve Saville



 



Increase Text SizeDecrease Text SizeE-mail Link of Current PagePrinter Friendly PageReturn to GoldSeek.com

 news.goldseek.com >> Story

E-mail Page  | Print  | Disclaimer 


© 1995 - 2017



GoldSeek.com Supports Kiva.org

© GoldSeek.com, Gold Seek LLC

The content on this site is protected by U.S. and international copyright laws and is the property of GoldSeek.com and/or the providers of the content under license. By "content" we mean any information, mode of expression, or other materials and services found on GoldSeek.com. This includes editorials, news, our writings, graphics, and any and all other features found on the site. Please contact us for any further information.

Live GoldSeek Visitor Map | Disclaimer

The views contained here may not represent the views of GoldSeek.com, its affiliates or advertisers. GoldSeek.com makes no representation, warranty or guarantee as to the accuracy or completeness of the information (including news, editorials, prices, statistics, analyses and the like) provided through its service. Any copying, reproduction and/or redistribution of any of the documents, data, content or materials contained on or within this website, without the express written consent of GoldSeek.com, is strictly prohibited. In no event shall GoldSeek.com or its affiliates be liable to any person for any decision made or action taken in reliance upon the information provided herein.