| >But really, international economics is just mostly made up, and if enough people go along with it then it's as real as real can be. What is not made up is that if you need to import things from other countries, then you need to export things from your country in proportional value, or else the country as a whole loses purchasing power (i.e. gets poorer). In this case, if Canada is increasing its money supply, then the purchasing power of the currency will go down unless it correspondingly increases demand for its currency (usually by increased demand for its goods and services, including land or businesses in Canada). |
| |
| ▲ | llm_nerd 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | >What is not made up is that if you need to import things from other countries, then you need to export things from your country in proportional value, or else the country as a whole loses purchasing power (i.e. gets poorer). So the US is the world's poorest nation, by far, right? Country has a two trillion dollar+ deficit, a one trillion dollar trade deficit, absolutely no end in sight of spiralling to bankruptcy (it's only getting worse), and lets the money printer go brrrr. Most of international economics are made up, and often are nonsensical. There is no master book of records that dictates cause and effect (there simply isn't, so at best we get "but if you do this...that maybe will happen...or maybe it won't", but mostly it's people looking around and trying to figure out what other people will go along with. | | |
| ▲ | lotsofpulp 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | >So the US is the world's poorest nation, by far, right? Considering the USD still has decent purchasing power, no? The demand for US goods and services relative to other nations' might have dropped from its peak, but still considerably higher than other nations. >There is no master book of records that dictates cause and effect There is for simple stuff, like supply and demand. There is no way of getting around that executing a successful peaceful trade requires both parties to have something that the other wants. On a nation state level, debt denominated in a nation's currency is more like a claim on the future productivity of a nation (since any nation can always print money or edit a digital database to satisfy its debts). When you buy a US Treasury, you are betting that at some point in the future, the US is going to be be selling things worth having. You are not worried that your loan to the US will default, because it is trivial for the US government to repay you in USD. Your risk is that when it gets paid back, what will you be able to buy with it? | | |
| ▲ | llm_nerd 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | >Considering the USD still has decent purchasing power, no? You understand I was applying your logic, right? The US has the worst trade deficit on the planet, by a long shot. It buys far, far more than it sells. Its primary role on the planet is money printer. >When you buy a US Treasury, you are betting that at some point in the future, the US is going to be be selling things worth having. Again, this almost sounds sophomoric. When you buy US treasuries, you are betting that the US will still be printing money when it matures, or when you unload it earlier. It is not based on sound rational logic -- if so the country with the $40 trillion dollar debt and $2 trillion dollar deficit with the massive trade deficit -- would be already bankrupt. I feel like I'm arguing with someone who is arguing rational economics when someone points out how farcical a stock like TSLA is. All of the hot air in the world doesn't change the fact that it relies upon a shared delusion, and everyone is playing a bit of a game of chicken. | | |
| ▲ | lotsofpulp 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | >You understand I was applying your logic, right? I am not sure what logic you are referring to. My first reply was to point out that no matter what economics are "made up", when push comes to shove, there has to be delivery of real goods and services for the charade to continue. "Enough" people won't go along with someone that doesn't result in them getting what they want, and no one wants a currency if they don't think it will get them what they want. My second post is responding to the claim that America is the poorest country, to which it obviously isn't, since it can still buy almost whatever it wants. Regardless of the technical details, someone who can buy something is richer than someone who cannot buy something. Maybe that is due to a shared delusion, and maybe everyone is playing a bit of chicken. Obviously, that will only be revealed in the future, but in general, that's what all sovereign nations' debt is, a "delusion" (or assumption) that the fruit of the nation's productivity will be worth having in the future. |
|
|
|
|
