Nostr Web Client

I'm humble enough to say that maybe it is I that is confused, but IMHO it is you who are confused.

Defecit and surplus can be used to describe the change in a debt, or the change in a fictional account. The current account between the US and China is fictional. it is an ACCOUNT. Think of that word. Account... when you account for how your car got smashed what are you doing? You are explaining it. An account is an explanation of why something was transferred from one place to another. It is just and only that -- an explanation. Accounting is all about explaining why money or goods moved... was the money that I received income, payback of a loan, a gift, a loan? The accounting may imply obligations, like I have to pay the money back to the lender.

But in global trade, nobody has to pay anybody back. They aren't loans, they are trades.

If my grandmother buys a vase off of Ali Express, after that happens, nobody has any new obligations on any books anywhere. It is just a trade. They get the USD, grandma gets her porcelain vase.

So again IMHO there is no defecit that I must pay attention to. I can look through all of that goobley gook directly at the actual assets and obligations, the only real things.

Cpt. Charisma 10mo ago

>If my grandmother buys a vase off of Ali Express, after that happens, nobody has any new obligations on any books anywhere. It is just a trade. They get the USD, grandma gets her porcelain vase.

This is the source of your misunderstanding. If you grandmother buys that vase, the seller *does not* receive dollars. They receive the local currency. You grandma and the seller are both satisfied, however, there are extra dollars sitting in the seller's country's banking system. The U.S. effectively owes that country the value of the dollars. What they do with those dollars effects exchange rates and interest rates.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Mike Dilger ☑️ 10mo ago

That is correct, and I used a simplification.

But if another customer of that bank buys oil from Saudi Arabia in dollars, those dollars are not used by China to get something from the US, they are used by China to get something from Saudi Arabia. And if the Saudis buy weapons from the US, those dollars come back into the US. And then they can go around and around again. And my point was simply that the trade defecit is not an obligation, but a summation. The dollars are an obligation. But the trade defecit can count the same dollars many times and so it can get out of whack with reality when you look at a single country like US trade defecit with China. But if you look at US trade defecit with everybody, that is useful.

Still I could be wrong. I'm not an economist.