nobody_special
New member
nobody_special said:I must strongly disagree with this. The key is not how much is consumed, but how much is produced. And we don't manufacture much in this country anymore.
Tuttle8 said:Really? What good is producing something if there isn't a consumer to buy?
That's hardly the problem in this country. As I and others have pointed out, we're spending and consuming far beyond our means.
Tuttle8 said:Although it does hurt us to not buy a domestically made product, it doesn't stop the consumer from buying ANY product. If a consumer doesn't buy any product, ALL producers are toast. Look at it this way. When I (consumer)walk into a car dealership (producer of product, loosely represented) I don't HAVE to buy a car there. However, the dealer HAS to sell to the consumer in order to keep being a producer. I'm in the drivers seat, no pun intended...NOT the dealer...
Sure, I agree, but I think you missed my point. Fundamentally, the wealth of the country is simply measured as the difference between it's production and consumption (averaged over some time period). The "service" economy doesn't count, as nothing is produced by it; and the "Information" economy is a house of cards. What really counts are physical goods, especially durable goods. And the US doesn't produce nearly as many of those as we did 20 years ago.
In short, consumption isn't a good measure of the nation's wealth (especially considering the high per capita debt). In the long term, wealth and economic health are determined by things like industrial and agricultural productivity, the trade deficit, and the government's budget deficit... and none of those look good right now.