5 ms·

>(The discouraging thing to see there is that about half the containers coming in from Asia to the US go back empty.) Depends on how you look at it. The US is

>(The discouraging thing to see there is that about half the containers coming in from Asia to the US go back empty.) Depends on how you look at it. The US is only sending pieces of paper (or electrons that represent pieces of paper) and getting back containers full of goods.

x5n1 10y ago
Sort of ridiculous that economists can't agree on whether this is a good thing or not for the economy of the country consuming the most in the world yet not contributing the same back.
- digi_owl 10y ago
  Why economics is crap, as applying accounting or modeling the flow of funds and products would present something akin to a cancer growth.
- rory096 10y ago
  Who told you economists can't agree? See this IGM economists poll (note that 'uncertains' largely pertain to specific exceptions or arguing that focus on trade balances doesn't make sense in the first place) http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_a3jxYtWKoF4vSKx http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-re...
  - x5n1 10y ago
    Seemed pretty damn mixed.
    - rory096 10y ago
      You're not reading closely, unless your claim is that disagreement between "disagree" and "strongly disagree" is meaningful. Only 5% of respondents agreed that export-increasing policies are inherently worthwhile, and in those cases (as well as most of the 23% uncertains who left comments), the given explanation was almost universally for small, emerging economies. There is no real disagreement that lowering the US trade deficit for its own sake is misguided.
lostlogin 10y ago
That's a great observation. Thanks.
asmithmd1 10y ago
I wish I could read an economic analysis of a container of iPhones landing at the port of Los Angeles. This is recorded as trade imbalance but somehow I feel Apple and US customers are getting the full benefit of low cost Chinese labor.
- taneq 10y ago
  The funny thing is, the only way to determine whether that's true or not is to add up all the pieces of paper going in either direction. And it's not until that happens that you know who's exploiting who and who's getting exploited.
  - theseatoms 10y ago
    Maybe no one's getting exploited?
- criley2 10y ago
  >I wish I could read an economic analysis of a container of iPhones landing at the port of Los Angeles. This is recorded as trade imbalance but somehow I feel Apple and US customers are getting the full benefit of low cost Chinese labor. It doesn't seem like Chinese labor plays that big of a role regardless, seeing as labor costs on a $800 device are around $2. Apple and their shareholders certainly benefit from selling $800 devices at 70% profit margins, but I would not go so far as to say that consumers also get the benefit, seeing as they are paying 70% markups.
  - Scoundreller 10y ago
    > seeing as labor costs on a $800 device are around $2. Well, the Foxconn (or whomever) assembly labor costs may be $2, but in some way, shape or form, all $800 is a labor cost to somebody, somewhere.
    - garrettgrimsley 10y ago
      Only if you subscribe to the labor theory of value.
dforrestwilson 10y ago
The US also sends software and other IP, which isn't captured in shipping data.
- mrfusion 10y ago
  And services.
  - jazzyk 10y ago
    China is very protective of its market, especially services. They have their own stuff - Baidu instead of Google, Alibaba instead of ebay/Amazon, etc. Most foreign companies are forced to pair up with local Chinese companies. The transfer of IP is "included in the price of access to the market", to put it mildly. There are significant limitations when it comes to foreign participation in Chinese stock markets. Also, China now runs 4 of the world's 5 biggest banks. http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/04/investing/worlds-biggest-banks-china/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/04/investing/worlds-biggest-ban...
    - ryanobjc 10y ago
      That article notes that Chinese and American banks count assets differently, and that JPMC "may" be the largest in a "true apples to apples comparison".
Animats 10y ago
"The US is only sending pieces of paper" Yes, but not in the way you meant. Much of the outgoing US container traffic is recycling, mostly paper and steel. Container shipping to US to China is very cheap, since there are so many empties going back.
- throwaway_xx9 10y ago
  The Chinese roll their eyes at the recycling effort. They'd rather just get empty containers they can fill with consumer goods and turn around faster.

x5n1 10y ago

Sort of ridiculous that economists can't agree on whether this is a good thing or not for the economy of the country consuming the most in the world yet not contributing the same back.

digi_owl 10y ago
Why economics is crap, as applying accounting or modeling the flow of funds and products would present something akin to a cancer growth.
rory096 10y ago
Who told you economists can't agree? See this IGM economists poll (note that 'uncertains' largely pertain to specific exceptions or arguing that focus on trade balances doesn't make sense in the first place) http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_a3jxYtWKoF4vSKx http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-re...
- x5n1 10y ago
  Seemed pretty damn mixed.
  - rory096 10y ago
    You're not reading closely, unless your claim is that disagreement between "disagree" and "strongly disagree" is meaningful. Only 5% of respondents agreed that export-increasing policies are inherently worthwhile, and in those cases (as well as most of the 23% uncertains who left comments), the given explanation was almost universally for small, emerging economies. There is no real disagreement that lowering the US trade deficit for its own sake is misguided.

lostlogin 10y ago

That's a great observation. Thanks.

asmithmd1 10y ago

I wish I could read an economic analysis of a container of iPhones landing at the port of Los Angeles. This is recorded as trade imbalance but somehow I feel Apple and US customers are getting the full benefit of low cost Chinese labor.

taneq 10y ago
The funny thing is, the only way to determine whether that's true or not is to add up all the pieces of paper going in either direction. And it's not until that happens that you know who's exploiting who and who's getting exploited.
- theseatoms 10y ago
  Maybe no one's getting exploited?
criley2 10y ago
>I wish I could read an economic analysis of a container of iPhones landing at the port of Los Angeles. This is recorded as trade imbalance but somehow I feel Apple and US customers are getting the full benefit of low cost Chinese labor. It doesn't seem like Chinese labor plays that big of a role regardless, seeing as labor costs on a $800 device are around $2. Apple and their shareholders certainly benefit from selling $800 devices at 70% profit margins, but I would not go so far as to say that consumers also get the benefit, seeing as they are paying 70% markups.
- Scoundreller 10y ago
  > seeing as labor costs on a $800 device are around $2. Well, the Foxconn (or whomever) assembly labor costs may be $2, but in some way, shape or form, all $800 is a labor cost to somebody, somewhere.
  - garrettgrimsley 10y ago
    Only if you subscribe to the labor theory of value.

dforrestwilson 10y ago

The US also sends software and other IP, which isn't captured in shipping data.

mrfusion 10y ago
And services.
- jazzyk 10y ago
  China is very protective of its market, especially services. They have their own stuff - Baidu instead of Google, Alibaba instead of ebay/Amazon, etc. Most foreign companies are forced to pair up with local Chinese companies. The transfer of IP is "included in the price of access to the market", to put it mildly. There are significant limitations when it comes to foreign participation in Chinese stock markets. Also, China now runs 4 of the world's 5 biggest banks. http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/04/investing/worlds-biggest-banks-china/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/04/investing/worlds-biggest-ban...
  - ryanobjc 10y ago
    That article notes that Chinese and American banks count assets differently, and that JPMC "may" be the largest in a "true apples to apples comparison".

Animats 10y ago

"The US is only sending pieces of paper" Yes, but not in the way you meant. Much of the outgoing US container traffic is recycling, mostly paper and steel. Container shipping to US to China is very cheap, since there are so many empties going back.

throwaway_xx9 10y ago
The Chinese roll their eyes at the recycling effort. They'd rather just get empty containers they can fill with consumer goods and turn around faster.