Are imports vital or without recourse? Isn't that the problem? The imports are either unique or less expensive than domestically produced goods, both of which are satisfactory reasons, and worthwhile benefits from imports. Nevertheless, they do not merit a sweeping assertion of being "vital to economic growth." Wouldn't it be preferable if all value-added were domestic?
The Cato economists don't mention that foreign borrowing compensates the deficits in trade balance. The foreign debt is now $4.5 trillion and cannot be repaid without purchasing power leaving the country or by a positive balance of trade. They seem to suggest this is not a problem, and the U.S. can sustain more of it. Apply Cato subjective thinking, which replaces objective analysis, and the American economic system will become an ordeal of continuous suffering.
The U.S. Congress, conventional economics, and conventional media have misinterpreted the deficit crisis. It's not a crisis due to government mismanagement. It's a crisis due to private mismanagement and a failure to recognize that the economic system runs on debt and needs a much-needed overhaul. Will the government and private sector heed the call to action based on thought and do what has to be done? Probably not. The wealthy will maintain their S&P subscriptions and have the first read of the additional downgrades following the great fall.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
1
1
