View Full Version : Trade Deficit Running at an Annual Rate of $686 billion
Bronco_Beerslug
08-12-2005, 12:15 PM
Opponents of free trade were given more ammo today with the announcement of new record trade deficits with China.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Trade Deficit Up As Oil Imports Hit High
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer 1 hour, 53 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - America's trade deficit increased sharply in June as surging oil prices pushed the cost of petroleum imports to an all-time high. The politically sensitive deficit with China also set a record.
The Commerce Department reported that the imbalance between what America sells abroad and what it imports rose to $58.8 billion in June, an increase of 6.1 percent from the May deficit of $55.4 billion.
So far this year, the trade deficit is running at an annual rate of $686 billion, 11 percent higher than last year's record of $617.6 billion. The trade performance has presented
President Bush with a political headache as critics have charged that the soaring imbalance represents the failure of the administration's free trade policies.
The June deficit came as U.S. exports of goods and services rose by $52 million to a record of $106.8 billion, reflecting higher sales of telecommunications equipment, aircraft engines and chemical fertilizers.
Imports, however, rose a much larger $3.44 billion to also set a record at $165.7 billion, reflecting an increase in both the price and volume of petroleum shipments and higher imports of toys, clothing and other consumer goods.
Analysts predicted that the deficit will continue to worsen in coming months, reflecting in part the fact that the United States is growing faster than many other countries. They also view the dollar as still over-valued, making imports cheaper for Americans and U.S. products more expensive for foreigners.
"The U.S. economy is simply stronger than that of most of our trading partners and modest currency movements have proven insufficient to remedy the balance," said Stephen Stanley, chief economist at RBS Greenwich Capital.
More than half of the trade deterioration in June reflected America's surging foreign oil bill, which hit a record high of $19.9 billion, an increase of 9.8 percent from the May level. Analysts say that figure will rise even higher, reflecting a continued surge in global oil prices, which set a new record of $66 per barrel on Thursday.
The average price of a barrel of imported crude oil jumped to $44.40 in June, the second highest monthly average for imports on record, exceeded only by a $44.76 average in April.
America's deficit with China hit a record at $17.6 billion in June, surpassing the old mark of $16.8 billion set last October. Last year, the deficit with China hit $162 billion, the highest imbalance ever recorded with any country, but this year's imbalance is running 32 percent above the 2004 pace.
http://tinyurl.com/8t7u8
Opponents of free trade were given more ammo today with the announcement of new record trade deficits with China.
You mean the revaluation of the yuan didn't give you xenophobes the result you wanted?
China ain't the problem.
Bronco_Beerslug
08-12-2005, 01:08 PM
You mean the revaluation of the yuan didn't give you xenophobes the result you wanted?
China ain't the problem.
If you've read my views on China you'd know that I stated it would take over 140% revaluation (according to a panel of economists in a WSJ article) to get the desired results some people are calling for.
China is A problem since they are driving up world oil prices and the U.S. government refuses to move all out to renewable and alternate energy.
If you've read my views on China you'd know that I stated it would take over 140% revaluation (according to a panel of economists in a WSJ article) to get the desired results some people are calling for.
Duh. So, the pegging of the yuan to the dollar isn't the problem at all.
China is A problem since they are driving up world oil prices and the U.S. government refuses to move all out to renewable and alternate energy.
The problem isn't China's thirst for oil - the problem is our thirst for oil. Honestly, I hope China starts gobbling up the stuff in even greater amounts - it will help us get off our lazy asses and get off our addiction. Right now, it's like one heroin addict bitching at another.
Bronco_Beerslug
08-12-2005, 01:31 PM
The problem isn't China's thirst for oil - the problem is our thirst for oil. Honestly, I hope China starts gobbling up the stuff in even greater amounts - it will help us get off our lazy asses and get off our addiction. Right now, it's like one heroin addict b****ing at another.
Yes, China's growing thirst for oil is a problem, for us.
I don't think you're are going to convince the oil people that are currently running this country to move forward to renewable and alternative energy, do you?
Yes, China's growing thirst for oil is a problem, for us.
Their addiction is making the true cost of our addiction more apparent. But our addiction is our problem.
I don't think you're are going to convince the oil people that are currently running this country to move forward to renewable and alternative energy, do you?
We're the addicts, and they're the dealers. They didn't create the problem - they're exploiting it to some extent.
If we really had to pay the true costs of our addiction to oil (imported or not), then the current bitching about $2.50-$3.00/gallon gas would seem quaint. We've been living a lie, of sorts, for decades.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-12-2005, 03:18 PM
I hope China starts gobbling up the stuff in even greater amounts - it will help us get off our lazy asses and get off our addiction.
:stupid:
Is that what your magic eight ball said would happen?
Maybe you forgot what your role model Dick(less) Cheney said:
"The American way of life is non-negotiable."
The Oil Puppet in the WH will continue to help his friends sell oil to those American consumers who can afford it.
And the people who fall by the wayside because they can't afford it?
F_ck 'em!
It's all because they are inherently bad, lazy, weak, stupid - remember?
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-12-2005, 03:21 PM
Trade Deficit Running at an Annual Rate of $686 billion
Anticipated response from the O'W*GS Factor:
1) The deficit isn't that bad.
2) It's all Ted Kennedy's fault.
It's all because they are inherently bad, lazy, weak, stupid - remember?
How do you feel about smokers whining about the price of a pack of smokes?
Being a "Clinton Democrat" and all, you were right there cheering him on when he extorted hundreds of billions from the tobacco industry (the costs of which were passed on to smokers), right?
Your hypocrisy astounds.
Anticipated response from the O'W*GS Factor:
1) The deficit isn't that bad.
2) It's all Ted Kennedy's fault.
Anticipated LABF response:
1) Inane comments about W*GS.
2) It's all Bush's fault.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-12-2005, 03:34 PM
http://www.bartcop.com/deficit-805.gif
http://www.bartcop.com/deficit-805.gif
Now provide the same numbers as percentages of GDP.
Bronco_Beerslug
08-13-2005, 06:34 AM
Now provide the same numbers as percentages of GDP.
Why? Is there a reason to do so? If so, you provide them and make your point.
Play2win
08-13-2005, 01:12 PM
http://www.bartcop.com/deficit-805.gif
WOW, that really says it all...
A picture is truely worth a thousand words...
SoCalBronco
08-13-2005, 01:32 PM
WOW, that really says it all...
A picture is truely worth a thousand words...
I think its clearly Matt Leinart's fault. ;D
Rascal
08-13-2005, 02:57 PM
it looks to be tappering off
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-13-2005, 03:38 PM
Why? Is there a reason to do so? If so, you provide them and make your point.
What really makes me chuckle is O'W*GS' apparent belief that he's better informed than the CBO re: deficit figures.
Play2win
08-13-2005, 03:45 PM
I think its clearly Matt Leinart's fault. ;D
Yeah, the economy is so messed right now because Matt Leinart has always had so much talent around him. Thats why its Matt's fault, because he's always had so much talent around him. ;D
BTW, SoCal, I'm not at all going to give Leinart a free pass. I just really want to see what he's got this year, and I will be watching with a very CLOSE eye.
Or, maybe, the economy is Sean Taylor's fault. I mean, he really hasn't done anything right since his "Graduation" from Miami...
AND, at Least its not Griese's Fault anymore. Hilarious! rofl
What really makes me chuckle is O'W*GS' apparent belief that he's better informed than the CBO re: deficit figures.
Raw numbers, uncorrected for GDP changes, are nearly meaningless.
What's worse? A $50 billion deficit with a GDP of $500 billion, or a $100 billion deficit with a GDP of $5 trillion?
Your lack of number skills would lead you to conclude the 2nd case is worse - by double.
Remember, my job involves a lot of number-crunching, and I know well how numbers, incorrectly pictured, can lie.
Why? Is there a reason to do so? If so, you provide them and make your point.
Look at page 21 of
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=6060&type=1
It shows that the current budget deficit is not the all-time high that LABF's (deceptive) graph shows.
Don't you know by now that 'bartcop' is hardly a reliable source of information?
Bronco_Beerslug
08-14-2005, 06:31 AM
Look at page 21 of
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=6060&type=1
It shows that the current budget deficit is not the all-time high that LABF's (deceptive) graph shows.
Don't you know by now that 'bartcop' is hardly a reliable source of information?
And how does this make the record deficit better? What makes it not as bad as other points in our history? And by the way, those projections don't include any of Bush's "grand plans" for SS or the attack and invasion of Iraq.
.
And how does this make the record deficit better?
Because it shows that the current deficit isn't a "record" - it's quite close to what it was in 1992-1993 or so.
What makes it not as bad as other points in our history?
Because our economy is growing apace.
And by the way, those projections don't include any of Bush's "grand plans" for SS or the attack and invasion of Iraq.
Of course it doesn't. The government never follows GAAP, which it should. A graph of the government's true financial state would make you pinch a brick. For example, the tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities from SS and Medicare stretching out over the coming decades.
Bronco_Beerslug
08-14-2005, 08:33 AM
Because it shows that the current deficit isn't a "record" - it's quite close to what it was in 1992-1993 or so.
Yes it is and it doesn't even include the hundreds of billions for Bush's Iraq invasion.
Because our economy is growing apace.
Our economy is being moved to a conservative's wet dream service economy and one of perpetual indivdual debt. One that has people working at lower wages, more hours and for less personal benefits. One that boasts record numbers of Americans in poverty and without health insurance.
Of course it doesn't. The government never follows GAAP, which it should. A graph of the government's true financial state would make you pinch a brick. For example, the tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities from SS and Medicare stretching out over the coming decades.
Tens of trillions? Have any links to show how many tens of trillions?
Our economy is being moved to a conservative's wet dream service economy and one of perpetual indivdual debt. One that has people working at lower wages, more hours and for less personal benefits. One that boasts record numbers of Americans in poverty and without health insurance.
The last few years are merely the continuation of a trend that started a couple decades back. The same complaints were made by the far-left under Clinton - a big part of the reason he was derided as "GOP-lite" by "real" progressives.
Tens of trillions? Have any links to show how many tens of trillions?
http://www.ncpa.org/edo/bb/2005/20050427bb.htm
Bronco_Beerslug
08-14-2005, 10:03 AM
The last few years are merely the continuation of a trend that started a couple decades back. The same complaints were made by the far-left under Clinton - a big part of the reason he was derided as "GOP-lite" by "real" progressives.
http://www.ncpa.org/edo/bb/2005/20050427bb.htm
The last few years were a full force movement to a service economy,
evidenced by the Bush administration stating moving American jobs to other countries is good for America and trying to eliminate OT pay.
The trillions you're talking about are calculated over multiple generations. A large percentage of which Bush is responsible for (his medicare bill).
The last few years were a full force movement to a service economy, evidenced by the Bush administration stating moving American jobs to other countries is good for America
Clinton felt the same way - remember NAFTA, and his efforts toward getting it passed? And Perot's "giant sucking sound"?
Being the nativist and populist you are, how many jobs have been "lost" (in the net) to outsourcing?
and trying to eliminate OT pay.
I'm salaried, and I've not gotten one thin cent in OT pay for decades. IIRC, Bush wasn't trying to "eliminate" it, he was tightening the rules for OT pay.
The trillions you're talking about are calculated over multiple generations.
Not that many generations - and it's still an unfunded staggering sum. I'm surprised to see you so blase about such truly astronomical figures.
A large percentage of which Bush is responsible for (his medicare bill).
Exactly. I've been one of Bush's critics in that instance - a one-off pander to the geezer vote that's going to cost us plenty for decades to come.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-14-2005, 04:18 PM
Don't you know by now that 'bartcop' is hardly a reliable source of information?
http://www.bartcop.com/bc_ad28.gif
BTW, if W*GS' thought processes were not so tainted by the GOP Kool-Aid, he'd realize that (1) the graph is from the CBO - not bartcop.com, and (2) he's guilty of the typical right-wing "attack the messenger and pretend you've refuted the message" fallacy.
In any event, isn't it amazing how right-wingers like W*GS are able to simply deny inconvenient realities (like deficits) and pretend they don't exist?
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-14-2005, 05:21 PM
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/tt/2005/tt050811.gif
BTW, if W*GS' thought processes were not so tainted by the GOP Kool-Aid, he'd realize that (1) the graph is from the CBO - not bartcop.com,
The data source is the CBO. The graph itself is nowhere to be found in the CBO's publications. The URL I provided (and which BB kindfully provided a bitmap) shows exactly what I wanted - deficit as a percentage of GDP.
Don't think I haven't noticed that you didn't see fit to reply to my message a few posts back where I amply destroyed your numerically-illiterate argument.
In any event, isn't it amazing how right-wingers like W*GS are able to simply deny inconvenient realities (like deficits) and pretend they don't exist?
A lie. Show me where I said the deficit didn't exist.
Geezus, son - you can't help but lie. What character flaw (of many, no doubt) do you have that makes you tell utter falsehoods in the vain hope they help your cause?
Rascal
08-14-2005, 10:37 PM
I haven't kept up to date with it, but what exactly is wrong with Bush's medicare bill? The fact that both Wigs and Slug agree it is crap is curious to say the least (as I respect both their differing opinions unlike somebody else around here).
I haven't kept up to date with it, but what exactly is wrong with Bush's medicare bill?
Bush's prescription drug benefit is an open-ended entitlement. It's original costs were deliberately understated, and it's effect on Medicare costs will be staggering. But, seeing as how geezers vote, and almost every elected official panders to geezers, we younger folks always get stuck with their bills.
Bronco_Beerslug
08-15-2005, 06:11 AM
I haven't kept up to date with it, but what exactly is wrong with Bush's medicare bill? The fact that both Wigs and Slug agree it is crap is curious to say the least (as I respect both their differing opinions unlike somebody else around here).
My original medicare thread is no longer on the server but here is another one.
http://72.22.74.110/BB/showthread.php?t=11477&highlight=medicare
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-16-2005, 09:33 PM
We're number one! Under Bush, the U.S. sets new records
Americans have always taken pride in breaking records - the longest bridge, the tallest building, a record harvest - and now we're at it again as records fall at a feverish pace.
Take the trade deficits. Under Bush's leadership, the U.S. sets record trade deficits almost quarterly and we're on track to have another record-breaking year. The trade gap, which set a new quarterly record of $195 billion in June, is on pace to top $780 billion for the year. This is a sharp increase over last year's record $617 billion, which represented a 24 percent increase over the previous year.
This is only one of the many records to topple under Bush and, while the records aren't all official - they aren't tracked by Guinness World Records - many of them reveal the colossal effect Bush is having on the country.
Record trade deficits push the U.S. to borrow a record $2.1 billion each day to keep our economy afloat. After setting a record for the longest job slump since the depression in his first term, Bush is now presiding over a decline in labor participation, which fell to its lowest level since 1988. Over 500,000 people, 20 percent higher than a year ago, have simply given up looking for a job.
Colorado4Life
08-18-2005, 11:06 AM
When Pat Buchanan ran for president in 1996 the main cry from the workers was "Save our Jobs" Funny how nothing seems to have changed about this horrible situation.
Rigs11
08-18-2005, 08:33 PM
http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/CHARTA.gif
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-19-2005, 04:19 AM
Bye bye Miss American Pie: Our nation's 'brand' is damaged goods
http://hartfordadvocate.com/gbase/News/content?oid=oid:122737
We have, as American consumers, been led to believe that people in the front offices of corporations were smart enough not to lead their enterprises, Enron and Tyco notwithstanding, onto the rocks of fiscal disaster. Corporations have a million little schemes and mind-games, perfected on Madison Avenue and at ethics-free business schools around the country, for brainwashing the herd into continuing to consume their products. There are a zillion little awards and a zillion do-gooder charities on which they can get their name prominently placed near the top of the benefactors' list that would connote "good corporate citizenship."
Nonetheless, the brainiacs in the front offices, and their political consultants, have proven themselves to be dumber than the posts Bush is pounding into the dirt at his fake Texas ranch during his "working vacation." For the past four years (yes, it has been four years since the world united behind us on 9/11/01), the CEOs and stockholders have sat with their thumbs up their asses while George W. Bush has broken the cardinal rule of business success: you don't **** on your brand.
That's because behind every good American product is, tacitly or overtly, the American flag. And, as Bush and his tin-eared, bully boy cronies (Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Negroponte and Bolton, in particular) have trashed the nation's good name around the world, they have also trashed, by extension, America's products. Madison Avenue may be able to brainwash a captive American audience -- numbed by the seamless propaganda of a corporate-owned telecommunications industry -- but the rest of the world is giving our products their middle finger. And we are sinking, sinking, sinking economically, diplomatically and politically as a result.
http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/CHARTA.gif
We saw that already, and I showed that it's deceptive. Absolute deficit figures (it doesn't look like they've been corrected to constant dollars) aren't as illuminating as relative deficit values - relative to GDP. Like I've said, would you rather have $100,000 assets and $5,000 in debt, or $10,000 in assets and $1,000 in debt? If you say the first instance is 5x worse than the second, you're wrong.