Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
yes....and dont want the federal government regulating us to death
How can you be a free marketeer and anti-free trade? Anti-free trade would require government intervention, to clamp down on free trade rather than opening up the markets for the businesses as they may choose to operate.
I was never sold on Greenspan, and his ideologies. It was part of his head in the sand thinking that leads to his above remark. And he grew out of it, accepting the mistakes he made, and flaws in his thinking.
3. 22 million jobs were added in the 1990s. And while offshoring (at my company) had picked up in the 1980s, those jobs actually returned in the 1990s. They went back (and in a big way) over last 7-8 years.
BTW, NAFTA isn't really responsible for outsourcing and job growth in China, India and the Philippines.
Two problems here. First of all, off shoring - especially of manufacturing industries - occurred primarily in the 90s and early 00s. The largest contributor was the collapse of the USSR in 1991 - without that influence in Asia and the Far East, both India and China were open to free trade. If you look at a plot of China's GDP growth, there is exponential growth beginning around 1993/1994. A similar trend is witnessed for India. The year 1996 marked the beginning of the longest trade deficit in US history; 1990, 1991, and 1995 were the only years we maintained a trade surplus in the 90s. And while that trade deficit moderated throughout the 00s, it lasted until 2007. 12 years of a negative trade balance. And of course there were 22 million jobs created in the 90s, however, nearly all were in the service sector and healthcare. Not exactly something we should be proud of.
And while NAFTA may not directly cause outsourcing beyond Mexico, goods can be imported from China, Taiwan, Thailand, etc. through Mexico, then re-exported to the US without any tariffs. If I am not mistaken Chinese companies actually own several of Mexico's ports, facilitating this practice.
Two problems here. First of all, off shoring - especially of manufacturing industries - occurred primarily in the 90s and early 00s. The largest contributor was the collapse of the USSR in 1991 - without that influence in Asia and the Far East, both India and China were open to free trade. If you look at a plot of China's GDP growth, there is exponential growth beginning around 1993/1994. A similar trend is witnessed for India.
And how is NAFTA responsible for this but not the internal policy changes in those countries (China and India)? Manufacturing outsourcing isn't something new. It has been going on for decades but yes, accelerated since the late 80s. The 2000s brought a different kind of outsourcing though... service industry.
Quote:
The year 1996 marked the beginning of the longest trade deficit in US history; 1990, 1991, and 1995 were the only years we maintained a trade surplus in the 90s. And while that trade deficit moderated throughout the 00s, it lasted until 2007. 12 years of a negative trade balance. And of course there were 22 million jobs created in the 90s, however, nearly all were in the service sector and healthcare. Not exactly something we should be proud of.
Instead of finding an excuse to dismiss and downplay 22 million jobs that were created in the 1990s, we should perhaps consider why manufacturing has been outsourced for decades and what can be done about it.
BTW, what exactly is bad about service sector and health care? They accounted for 65-70% of the GDP in 1990 and it is ~10% higher now due to shrinkage in manufacturing.
Quote:
And while NAFTA may not directly cause outsourcing beyond Mexico, goods can be imported from China, Taiwan, Thailand, etc. through Mexico, then re-exported to the US without any tariffs. If I am not mistaken Chinese companies actually own several of Mexico's ports, facilitating this practice.
Again, tell me how Obamas food stamp stimulus pays for themself, but tax cuts dont.
No one ever claimed that, bright boy. What economist did say was that if you wanted to provide some short term stimulus to the economy then one of the better ways to do that was to put money into the hands of people who would spend it instead of save it. Economists compare what they call the multiplier effect of various stimulus measures and it turns out tax cuts can provide a bit of short term stimulus but not very much ($0.03 for every $1 spent) mainly because people save those so they don't generate a lot of new economic activity in the short term. Much better is stimulus such as food stamps or unemployment insurance as in the short run those people spend it all as they're living pay check to pay check.
It's a question of determining what is the most effective way to generate a bit of short term new economic activity. Honestly, if you don't know this then you have a very poor grasp of economics and you badly need to go back to school and take some econ 100 series classes. This is very elementary stuff that some how you're managing to get completely wrong.
Agreed. The problem is lots of politicians don't want to admit this and so they've invented a myth, a myth which real economists have debunked over and over again, but a myth which many Republicans continue to claim to believe. The myth is that tax cuts increase revenue so there is no need to cut any spending or make any hard choices which might make the politician unpopular. According to supply side "voodoo economics" they can give away massive tax cuts, increase spending (all the better to buy votes), and not worry about the deficit because magically the budget will balance itself.
As you and I know, the real world doesn't work that way. There are no free lunches in economics and reducing taxes reduces revenue so to prevent an explosion in debt you have to cut spending to pay for those tax cuts. It's unpopular to cut spending though so politicians will lie and create a whole mythology just to avoid having to face this basic economic truth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
