Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

When you care enough to employ the very best...

2»

Comments

  • Not, and never, 'only help'. No one thinks that. I suppose it might have been oversold in the past. But the benefits to all, worldwide, are 20-1, never 20-0.

    I will see if I can find my brother's MOOC for you to watch, if available. Your understanding is about as unsupple as it gets, including 'massive deficits' and conceptions about skills and technologies.
  • The link below has some interesting charts figures, including the 40-year cumulative bi-lateral US/China trade tally:

    http://macroblog.typepad.com/macroblog/2016/10/cumulative-us-trade-deficits-resulting-in-net-profits-for-the-us-and-net-losses-for-china.html

    $10 TRILLION cumulative trade-deficit over 40 years.

    Yeah, OK we disagree -- and that is OK -- I DO consider that figure to represent massive deficits, not 'massive deficits' -- IOW, the air-quote marks (' ') are unneeded.

    Much of those surpluses generated by China are in US Treasuries. So in return for the US allowing the massive trade-deficits to persist, US taxpayers, in the form of coupon payments on the Treasurys held by China, are permitted to pay our strategic competitor hard-money (USD) which subsidizes the Chinese military.

    Brilliant!
  • You do not understand quotation marks either. (Repeating something you wrote, not something the writer would ever say, which is what is understood without quotes.)

    Can't tell if you read past the $10T point in the Atlanta Fed text, but no matter.
Sign In or Register to comment.