ShareThis Page
Donald Boudreaux

Living within our means

| Tuesday, June 20, 2017, 9:00 p.m.
A ship-to-shore crane unloads a shipping container at the Georgia Ports Authority Garden City terminal, in Savannah, Ga. (AP Photo/Stephen B. Morton)
A ship-to-shore crane unloads a shipping container at the Georgia Ports Authority Garden City terminal, in Savannah, Ga. (AP Photo/Stephen B. Morton)

Economist Peter Morici — like many others — insists “the trade deficit means Americans are living beyond their means.” If he is correct, we would indeed have cause for concern.

We run trade deficits whenever we import more than we export — that is, buy more from foreigners than we sell to them. Superficially, we appear to live beyond our means. And indeed, Morici and others convey the impression that we are on a reckless consumption binge that spells future doom. But closer investigation reveals this to be wildly inaccurate.

More than half of our imports are raw materials and intermediate goods used by U.S. firms as production inputs. That is, most of our imports do not directly increase our consumption; instead, they increase our production. Were Uncle Sam to obstruct U.S. producers' access to these lower-priced imported inputs, their production costs would rise and they would produce less. This lowered production would truly be evidence of irresponsible behavior.

Responsible adults understand that people who really do live beyond their means subject themselves to long-term pain merely to enjoy short-term pleasure. Over time, they make themselves less productive and poorer. This impoverishment, alas, is the inevitable effect of tariffs. Because higher tariffs artificially bloat U.S. firms' production costs, these and other trade barriers make U.S. firms less productive over time. While tariffs provide short-term pleasure by protecting a handful of highly visible jobs, by undermining America's productive efficiency they also condemn the great majority of us to greater economic pain in the long run.

Still, isn't Morici correct that we're nevertheless living beyond our means when we import more than we export? No.

America offers foreigners more than just goods and services to buy. The U.S. economy, despite many imperfections, remains a vibrant, highly productive arena that also offers foreign investors and entrepreneurs an unusually rich array of promising investment opportunities.

To take advantage, foreigners need U.S. dollars. So when citizens of Germany, China, Australia and other countries want to invest in America, they cannot spend on U.S. exports all the dollars they earn when Americans import their goods and services. Foreigners accumulate dollars they invest in America by reducing their purchases of U.S. exports.

The dollars that foreigners don't spend on U.S. exports are instead invested in America, which offers a vast open market, rule of law, honest courts and secure property and contract rights — attractive and durable institutions that are major elements of what America offers to foreigners.

So when foreigners invest their dollars in America (rather than spending those dollars buying our exports), we aren't living beyond our means. Far from it. We are reaping the fruits of our relatively secure, entrepreneurial and free economy. The best part is that these foreign investments, by adding to U.S. capital stock, make our economy even more productive.

Donald J. Boudreaux is a professor of economics and Getchell Chair at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. His column appears twice monthly.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me