4 ms·

> If we lose the lead in the things we export, what else do we have to sell the world? The US is a massive importer and exporter but as a percentage of the US

> If we lose the lead in the things we export, what else do we have to sell the world? The US is a massive importer and exporter but as a percentage of the US economy it’s relatively small compared to export lead economies like China, Japan, Europe etc. It’s not that being globally competitive isn’t an issue, it’s just not an immediate existential issue for America. Especially as we continue to have the biggest most productive contiguous agricultural region in the world with the cheapest transport and no major security concerns; close to the cheapest oil and nat gas which has lead to the cheapest global production of many industrial inputs. Combined with the global baby bust leading to record rapidly aging population means that the US is on top for some time.

vasco 5y ago
> most productive Biggest sure, but the most productive is in the Netherlands. And y'all produce huge useless quantities of corn that are killing your population.
Dah00n 5y ago
>it’s just not an immediate existential issue for America That both depends on how immediate "immediate" is and how the US will react. When CPU/GPUs have nothing made or designed in the US in them any more and the Google/Microsoft/Facebook/Amazons of the world are all non-US and the US is no longer in the top of military and GDP then the US will no longer be in a position to lead anyone anywhere. It might not become a existential problem for the US economy -who knows- but it will most definitely crush any belief in The American Dream or that the US is some kind of world leader. Without a way to steer technology or force other nations to do what it wants by power, in my opinion, the US will go the route of ancient Rome by trying to hold on to what is lost. So maybe not an immediate existential issue but likely an existential threat to the Union nonetheless.
- elcritch 5y ago
  The United Kingdom post-WWII would be a much better comparison, since well it's more recent and the UK and USA share more history, culture, and context. I tend to side with the viewpoint that the lessening role of international leadership by the USA is more due to our internal infighting and lack of resolve as a few recent Economist articles suggested. That also fits with the UK's shift in status as an international power post WWII as well. However, even with that type of shift, leadership in tech industries and other fields won't disappear from the US that quickly if at all.
- nyokodo 5y ago
  > That both depends on how immediate "immediate" is and how the US will react. Broadly speaking if countries are able to feed their population, keep the lights on, and protect their borders, regardless of access to global markets then they have relatively few existential worries. The USA is one of a few in this category. > but it will most definitely crush any belief in The American Dream or that the US is some kind of world leader. The US is currently re-industrializing as globalism is crumbling, so the long term forecast for the American dream is bright. Globalism is crumbling greatly due to the bipartisan sentiment in the USA being not wanting to police, “lead,” the world any longer. The global population will crash in the coming decades, secessionist movements will rise up in many countries, famine, and resource wars will ensue, and the graphs of global development will go south very quickly. All except in the USA and a relatively few other countries which will feel pain but be able to recover relatively easily. The USA has been artificially propping up vast regions of the globe by making global shipping the safest it has ever been in history; that is ending and no one is going to like the result.
baybal2 5y ago
Repeating what I said above, what is a bigger news here is that US continues to be so uncompetitive despite having such enormous advantages. US is the second biggest manufacturing nation after China, but only on paper because of funny accounting, and statistical standards of America economists.
- nyokodo 5y ago
  > funny accounting, and statistical standards of America economists. China beats the US in funny accounting by orders of magnitude!! China’s economy is a massive works program so a large chunk of their manufacturing ends up being trash essentially as there’s no requirement to produce products that people want.

vasco 5y ago

> most productive Biggest sure, but the most productive is in the Netherlands. And y'all produce huge useless quantities of corn that are killing your population.

Dah00n 5y ago

>it’s just not an immediate existential issue for America That both depends on how immediate "immediate" is and how the US will react. When CPU/GPUs have nothing made or designed in the US in them any more and the Google/Microsoft/Facebook/Amazons of the world are all non-US and the US is no longer in the top of military and GDP then the US will no longer be in a position to lead anyone anywhere. It might not become a existential problem for the US economy -who knows- but it will most definitely crush any belief in The American Dream or that the US is some kind of world leader. Without a way to steer technology or force other nations to do what it wants by power, in my opinion, the US will go the route of ancient Rome by trying to hold on to what is lost. So maybe not an immediate existential issue but likely an existential threat to the Union nonetheless.

elcritch 5y ago
The United Kingdom post-WWII would be a much better comparison, since well it's more recent and the UK and USA share more history, culture, and context. I tend to side with the viewpoint that the lessening role of international leadership by the USA is more due to our internal infighting and lack of resolve as a few recent Economist articles suggested. That also fits with the UK's shift in status as an international power post WWII as well. However, even with that type of shift, leadership in tech industries and other fields won't disappear from the US that quickly if at all.
nyokodo 5y ago
> That both depends on how immediate "immediate" is and how the US will react. Broadly speaking if countries are able to feed their population, keep the lights on, and protect their borders, regardless of access to global markets then they have relatively few existential worries. The USA is one of a few in this category. > but it will most definitely crush any belief in The American Dream or that the US is some kind of world leader. The US is currently re-industrializing as globalism is crumbling, so the long term forecast for the American dream is bright. Globalism is crumbling greatly due to the bipartisan sentiment in the USA being not wanting to police, “lead,” the world any longer. The global population will crash in the coming decades, secessionist movements will rise up in many countries, famine, and resource wars will ensue, and the graphs of global development will go south very quickly. All except in the USA and a relatively few other countries which will feel pain but be able to recover relatively easily. The USA has been artificially propping up vast regions of the globe by making global shipping the safest it has ever been in history; that is ending and no one is going to like the result.

baybal2 5y ago

Repeating what I said above, what is a bigger news here is that US continues to be so uncompetitive despite having such enormous advantages. US is the second biggest manufacturing nation after China, but only on paper because of funny accounting, and statistical standards of America economists.

nyokodo 5y ago
> funny accounting, and statistical standards of America economists. China beats the US in funny accounting by orders of magnitude!! China’s economy is a massive works program so a large chunk of their manufacturing ends up being trash essentially as there’s no requirement to produce products that people want.