-
-
Re: Is America on the delcine?
What bugs me on this aspect is the path your Government is taking us Mexicans and Canadians by the way of NAFTA...sigpic
Attention: Electronics Engineer Learning Economics. -
Re: Is America on the delcine?
Hey, we have to have SOMEONE to dominate.Originally posted by ocelotl View Post
Comment
-
-
Re: Is America on the delcine?
Only to the extent that America is mimicking Europe.Comment
-
Re: Is America on the delcine?
The twentieth century gave several "gifts" to the United States: World War I, World War II and communism. Each served to cripple economic comptetitors in Europe and Asia, providing a window of opportunity that the United States took advantage of.
I don't think the United States is on a permanent path of decline as much as the rest of the world is rising up to the point where the United States no longer has such an overwhelming advantage. The other parts of the world do, however, have their economic challenges - pollution and poor infrastructure in Asia, militant Islam in the Middle East (increasingly, also in Europe), and socialism in Europe.
The United States also has its share of challenges: the balance of trade and government deficits, the imploding debt bubble, indequate infrastructure, an aging population, war in the Middle East, etc. I don't believe the United States will dominate the world scene in the twenty-first century like it did in the twentieth. I would think we would see a return to the international environment of the nineteenth century, but on a larger scale with continental alliences rather than regional ones. There could be a decade or two of very rough times in the United States as a "perfect storm" of problems hit at the same time. I don't think the United States will wind up being a broken "third world" country when it's all said and done but, rather, a strong nation among many other strong nations.
- PeteComment
-
Re: Is America on the decline?
Your passport photo is very distinctive, RebePete.
As for the US, the crash now seems to be much worse than that of 1929 because now it is not just the stock market and Florida real estate that is crashing (as in '29) but now everything is crashing: stox, bonds, the dollar, real estate, the nation's security, employment, the auto industry, manufacturing, real returns on investment, confidence, the banks, the insurance industry, retail trade, retirement hopes, home equity, savings, purchasing power, construction, exports, the airline industry, the trucking industry, hi-tech, restaurant trade, tourism, on and on, and on....
Things may improve under the Demos with Obama because it is hard to imagine that things could get any worse than they are now.
And those housing sales that just turned up? Those were mortgage foreclosurers!
Isn't it funny how the U.S. Fed still doesn't call this a recession? According to the Fed, the nation's economy is still growing at 1% per year. Even the blind can see what is happening around us now, yet the Fed says no recession.Last edited by Starving Steve; July 04, 2008, 09:18 PM.Comment
-
Re: Is America on the decline?
Such melodrama, EVERYTHING is not crashing.Originally posted by Starving Steve View PostYour passport photo is very distinctive, RebePete.
As for the US, the crash now seems to be much worse than that of 1929 because now it is not just the stock market and Florida real estate that is crashing (as in '29) but now everything is crashing:
Gold and silver and oil and food are doing spectacularly well! In Fact prices on these items are so high, I might not be able to afford any of them next year.
Freaking Gloomers!;)Comment
-
Re: Is America on the decline?
first of all, this shit has just started so it's going to get much worse.Originally posted by jtabeb View Post
second, it'll be nothing like the great depression. back in those days the usa was on the gold standard... pumping up the money supply meant pumping up the gold supply. not this time. only problem is making the money worth anything... see jtabeb's comment above.
that's what rick & mishmash don't get... those guys are so stupid they think taco bell is a phone company in mexico.Comment
-
Re: Is America on the decline?
But that is exactly the point: The statistics hide the truth about what is going on beneath the surface. As food and fuel--- THE NECESSITIES OF LIFE--- go up, they cancel out the crashing of nearly the entire economy, so the Fed can then say that things are muddling through at 1% growth. After all, Iowa is booming with ethanol and so is the oil patch in Texas and Oklahoma.Originally posted by jtabeb View Post
It is a kin to saying that exports are doing well now because of the devalued dollar. After all, tonnages or book values of goods leaving U.S. ports are up. But looking beneath the surface, the devalued dollar has lead to an even worse balance of payments situation because of oil import costs. Net of everything, the nation is worse off now in its balance of payments than ever before.
The lesson then is that economics is better explained by words than by numbers, better explained by observations than by econometric models.
But now we have a "data-driven" Federal Reserve in the U.S. under Bernankee, and what that means for all of us, God only knows? If the financial calamity of the past few weeks is any indication, total chaos lies ahead.Comment
-
Re: Is America on the decline?
Originally posted by Starving Steve View PostYour passport photo is very distinctive, RebePete..
RebbePete 
Junior iTuliper
I remarked on it too Starving Steve. Rebbe Pete's vagrant's ID card mugshot, with the bags under the eyes and the unkempt hair? Looks like he was just hauled into the local Police Precinct for vagrancy after wandering the streets on a bender for the past couple of weeks. Definitely looking a little "jaundiced" there Rebbe Pete!
Comment
-
Re: Is America on the decline?
I came across this through googling GDP growth per capita: China over 10%, U.S. 1.9%, even Japan is growing more quickly than we are.
Grossly distorted picture
Mar 13th 2008
From The Economist print edition
If you look at GDP per head, the world is a different—and, by and large, a better—place
WHICH economy has enjoyed the best economic performance over the past five years: America's or Japan's? Most people will pick America. The popular perception is that America's vibrant economy was sprinting ahead (albeit fuelled by credit and housing bubbles that have now painfully burst), whereas Japan crawled along at a snail's pace. And it is true that America's average annual real GDP growth of 2.9% was much faster than Japan's 2.1%. However, the single best gauge of economic performance is not growth in GDP, but GDP per person, which is a rough guide to average living standards. It tells a completely different story.
GDP growth figures flatter America's relative performance, because its population is rising much faster, by 1% a year, thanks to immigration and a higher birth rate. In contrast, the number of Japanese citizens has been shrinking since 2005. Once you take account of this, Japan's GDP per head increased at an annual rate of 2.1% in the five years to 2007, slightly faster than America's 1.9% and much better than Germany's 1.4%. In other words, contrary to the popular pessimism about Japan's economy, it has actually enjoyed the biggest gain in average income among the big three rich economies. Among all the G7 economies it ranks second only to Britain (see left-hand chart).
Using growth in GDP per head rather than crude GDP growth reveals a strikingly different picture of other countries' economic health. For example, Australian politicians often boast that their economy has had one of the fastest growth rates among the major developed nations—an average of 3.3% over the past five years. But Australia has also had one of the biggest increases in population; its GDP per head has grown no faster than Japan's over this period. Likewise, Spain has been one of the euro area's star performers in terms of GDP growth, but over the past three years output per person has grown more slowly than in Germany, which like Japan, has a shrinking population.
Some emerging economies also look less impressive when growth is compared on a per-person basis. One of the supposedly booming BRIC countries, Brazil, has seen its GDP per head increase by only 2.3% per year since 2003, barely any faster than Japan's. Russia, by contrast, enjoyed annual average growth in GDP per head of 7.4% because the population is falling faster than in any other large country (by 0.5% a year). Indians love to boast that their economy's growth rate has almost caught up with China's, but its population is also expanding much faster. Over the past five years, the 10.2% average increase in China's income per head dwarfed India's 6.8% gain.
Focusing on GDP per person also affects comparisons of economic health over time. During the past five years, world GDP has grown by an average of 4.5% a year, its fastest for more than three decades, though not as fast as during the golden age of the 1960s when annual growth exceeded 5%. But the world's population is now growing at half of its pace in the 1960s, and so world income per head has increased by more over the past five years than during any other period on record (see right-hand chart above). Mankind has never had it so good.
Redefining recession
Once you accept that growth in GDP per head is the best way to measure economic performance, the standard definition of a recession—a decline in real GDP over some period (eg, two consecutive quarters or year on year)—also seems flawed. For example, zero GDP growth in Japan, where the population is declining, would still leave the average citizen better off. But in America, the average person would be worse off. A better definition of recession, surely, is a fall in average income per person. On this basis, America has been in recession since the fourth quarter of last year when its GDP rose by an annualised 0.6%, implying that real income per head fell by 0.4%.
Many Americans will shrug this off, especially those politicians who believe that the prime goal of policy is to retain their economic and military dominance over the world. They see the size of a country's GDP as the best measure of its economic clout, in which case the absolute rate of GDP growth matters more than growth in income per head. Europeans seem less bothered about global dominance—although they are sure to gloat about the fact that the weakening dollar means that the euro area could overtake America as the world's biggest economy this year.
There are several other reasons Americans can quibble over the use of GDP per head, especially with reference to Japan. Firstly, its shrinking population is also an ageing one in which the labour force will decline as a share of the population. Unless this is offset by more rapid productivity growth, this could make it harder to maintain the same growth in output per person in future and so harder to pay pension bills. Secondly, slower GDP growth makes it more difficult to reduce the ratio of existing public-sector debt to GDP, which stands at a hefty 180% in Japan. Last, but not least, investors care about GDP growth. Corporate profits depend upon the absolute rate of growth of an economy. And companies wanting to invest abroad will favour markets that are expanding more rapidly.
If GDP per head is nevertheless a superior measure of people's prosperity, why do governments not publish such figures each quarter along with their standard GDP figures? Population statistics tend to be less up-to-date than GDP figures and are generally not available on a quarterly basis. But that is a lame excuse: it should be much easier to count bodies than to put a value on diverse sorts of economic output. Not only do people have a right to know whether average living standards are rising or falling, but publishing such numbers could also benefit some countries. If Japan's government had drawn attention to the sprightlier growth in income per head in recent years, in contrast to endless reports about its “underperforming” economy, consumers may have felt cheerier and spent more—in other words, its GDP growth would have been stronger.
Note: U.S. No. 12 China No. 81
2007/2008 Report
Absolute GDP per capita--see b
01Human development index
GDP per capita (PPP US$)
Comment
For a concise, readable summary of iTulip concepts developed over the past 16 years and a vision of a challenging next decade and how to navigate it, read Eric Janszen's book "Post Catastrophe Economy".
Join the discussion of today's events with a wide range of professionals with an interest in economics and finance. Register to join our 50,000 plus member registered community from 78 countries today.
Subscribe to iTulip Select for access to the longest running, deep, accurate, and unvarnished macro economic trends analysis and forecasting available, since 1998.
- If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Working...
Tweet
Comment