And your opinion would be correct if with that deindustrialization came with saving on the back end. It did not. Japan is far better of then the US because it does have a high savings rate which does offset its trade imbalance. But ever since the deindsutrialization of the US started people consume on debt and don't save thus the huge trade imbalance. There is no viable way for the US to shift to a high savings rate without some form of capital destruction and a GDP decline. Making it very unlikely the "short term" as you called it, imbalances will ever go back to balanced.
I am rambling ( as you put it) that production is key.......not consumer spending....and the US has outsourced most of its manufacturing! So I see no hope for any real recovery for the US.....unless of course the dollar collapses and manufacturing jobs come back....and if tarriffs come back to make it uneconomic to import things half way across the globe!
By ignoring productivity changes, you deliberately misrepresented the facts. Its a classic tactic and a basic requirement when giving the 'demographic timebomb' hullabaloo.
Sorry, but this is drivel. That deindustrialisation typically occurs in mature economies is not opinion. Its fact. Using that fact to ignore the real issue- a savings imbalance- only shows a disregard for economic analysis. Shame to see you falling foul of such erroneous effort.
I am not ignoring it. I am telling you productivity is not constant. This is an absolute fact. While productivity has gone up in the last 30 years it doesn't mean it will for the next 30 years. So any economic models based on the last 30 years are just as pie in the sky as you say Austrian Economics is.
It's not drivel but the truth of how Northern Economies have screwed up their economies over the last few decades. I am not saying deindustrialistation doesn't occur, It's part of the Free Market system, but that while this deindustrialistation is occurring personal and national debts are exploding to keep a consumer economy viable. You think I am ignoring the savings imbalance, I am not. I am telling you this savings imbalance is not a "short term issue" but a structural issue in Government spending in the short and long term. As Government spending rates explode everywhere in the Northern Economies over the next 30 years but tax revenues do not. This is why Germany wants the EU to be more of a Nazi about budget deficits in the EU. It's why liberals on both sides of the Atlantic talk of raising taxes, but for some reason forget to cut spending. It's why those on the right speak of cutting spending but not having tax increases. There is a structural problem in Government spending and Personal spending which harms savings rates. The personal spending can't be dealt without out a Government solution first. Now if you are gonna argue this isn't reality don't bother posting because you can't see out of your own window without missing it.
The two are quite distinct. To suges otherwise is to show no understanding of the deindustrialisaton process or how the savings imbalance (specific to the US) was created. This is nonsensical. a savings imbalance cannot be, by definition, a short term issue Other countries do not have savings imbalances. They do not have long term trade deficits You're not offering any coherent argument. You're throwing together quite independent issues and assuming you're get away wit it. You won't
Its outstripped longevity, making your original comment a crass misrepresentation. There's no debate in that
