Engine tech. for meeting the 54.5mpg CAFE reqs

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: Tempest

LOL. "Trade deficit" is not a problem. It is an indicator of the ability of the USA to buy things from other people. We are trading fiat digits for real products (energy). You have it exactly backwards.


Interesting attempt to spin.

If trade deficit is not a problem at all, than point me to an example of at least one country that was able to keep trade deficits for decades and not implode economically in the process. Please!

What are we seeing now are the consequences of unchecked trade deficit: USA economic collapse in a slow motion.

1. Dollar going down since 2000 and especially loosing its value against real value like gold, commodities (including food), or oil. At some point, US population will not be able to afford those hard assets for consumption.

2. Foreigners massively accumulating US dollars and bonds and aggressively buying US hard assets such as US companies and stock. The net affect is US will give away it's assets and US population will work for foreign owned companies sanding profits overseas.

These things are happening and one only has to look to see it. But, it requires being open-minded and looking outside the comfort zone.

So, it it worth to trade away the US assets and future prosperity, by buying imported trinkets and imported oil for the thirsty SUV and pickup trucks?

What would the real patriot do? You decide.

 

[friendly_jacek]

This is exactly what I said above:

Quote:
The trade deficit also represents a
transfer of wealth from the United States to the oil producers. This transfer of wealth reduces the
real discretionary incomes of U.S. consumers.


on page 18 of this pdf from our congress:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34686.pdf

The conclusions (page 19-20) are also a good read:
Quote:
Over the long run, a sustained increase in the price of energy imports could permanently alter the
composition of the nation’s merchandise trade deficit. Some of the impact of higher oil prices,
however, could be offset if some of the dollars are returned to the U.S. economy through
increased purchases of U.S. goods and services or through purchases of such other assets as
securities of U.S. businesses. Some of the return in dollars likely will come through sovereign
wealth funds (SWFs), or funds controlled and managed by foreign governments, as foreign
exchange reserves boost the dollar holdings of such funds. Such investments likely will add to
concerns about the national security implications of foreign acquisitions of U.S. firms, especially
by foreign governments, and to concerns about the growing share of outstanding U.S. Treasury
securities that are owned by foreigners.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: Tempest

I am still looking for this "global oil shortage". BP reporting oil reserves up:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/13/us-bp-world-reserves-idUSBRE85C0VB20120613


Is this the same BP that published this revealing report?

Quote:
If you own a gas guzzler, here's a public service announcement for you: Sell it soon. According to global oil giant BP, you've got maybe 18 years left before that vehicle is obsolete -- and probably a lot less than that.


http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/02/28/bp-predicts-the-future-of-cars-hint-yours-probably-isnt-part/

 

[Shannow]

Check Tempest's posts, he seems to feel that the race to the bottom is a good thing. In a finite globe, entropy is inevitable, and welcome in tempestopia.

 

[Tempest]

Quote:
If trade deficit is not a problem at all, than point me to an example of at least one country that was able to keep trade deficits for decades and not implode economically in the process. Please!

The USA. The trade deficit has been around for at least 40 years, and we had http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2006/11/real-hourly-compensation-has-increased.html

The trade deficit is effect, not cause.

Quote:
The attention and concern paid by many to the trade deficit reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the U.S. economy. Some see a deficit as a harbinger of jobs lost. That’s just not true. Since the 1970s, America’s economic performance, including job growth, has been better in years where the trade deficit has grown than in years where the deficit shrank.

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/01/12/growing-trade-deficit-good-news-for-u-s-economy/

The trade deficit is an indicator of our strong economy and ability to spend. This figure also does not include other forms of income such as foreign investment which is how the US really prospers. Which leads me to:
Quote:
Foreigners massively accumulating US dollars and bonds and aggressively buying US hard assets such as US companies and stock. The net affect is US will give away it's assets and US population will work for foreign owned companies sanding profits overseas.

This is the typical "exploitation" idea that has kept the third world...the third world. What you want is to limit foreign investment in the US, which is to say, you want to stop free money from pouring into the US.
Quote:
According to OFII’s statistics, U.S. subsidiaries of global companies employ 5.6 million Americans, support an annual payroll of $408.5 billion, invest heavily in the American manufacturing sector and account for more than 18% of all U.S. exports, or $232.4 billion.

“At a time when America is still trying to dig out of recession, creating jobs has never been more important,” said Nancy McLernon, President & CEO of the Organization for International Investment. “Global companies insource millions of good paying jobs each year—and pay workers 33 percent higher than all U.S. companies.”

http://www.staffingtalk.com/foreign-companies-insource-american-workers/
This is the economic activity you want to stop so as to prevent "exploitation". We need foreign investment as it brings in free money/resources to our economy, and not someone else's. Your view of economics is one of a zero sum game, and it is not. It is also about more than money. Access to real goods is true wealth, not digitized money.

 

[Tempest]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/02/28/bp-predicts-the-future-of-cars-hint-yours-probably-isnt-part/

No where in that report does it say anything about running out of oil. As they said in the link I provided, governments limiting supply is the largest hurdle to providing oil supplies.

Where is this global oil shortage?

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
If trade deficit is not a problem at all, than point me to an example of at least one country that was able to keep trade deficits for decades and not implode economically in the process. Please!

The USA. The trade deficit has been around for at least 40 years, and we had http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2006/11/real-hourly-compensation-has-increased.html

The trade deficit is effect, not cause.

Quote:
The attention and concern paid by many to the trade deficit reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the U.S. economy. Some see a deficit as a harbinger of jobs lost. That’s just not true. Since the 1970s, America’s economic performance, including job growth, has been better in years where the trade deficit has grown than in years where the deficit shrank.

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/01/12/growing-trade-deficit-good-news-for-u-s-economy/

The trade deficit is an indicator of our strong economy and ability to spend. This figure also does not include other forms of income such as foreign investment which is how the US really prospers. Which leads me to:
Quote:
Foreigners massively accumulating US dollars and bonds and aggressively buying US hard assets such as US companies and stock. The net affect is US will give away it's assets and US population will work for foreign owned companies sanding profits overseas.

This is the typical "exploitation" idea that has kept the third world...the third world. What you want is to limit foreign investment in the US, which is to say, you want to stop free money from pouring into the US.
Quote:
According to OFII’s statistics, U.S. subsidiaries of global companies employ 5.6 million Americans, support an annual payroll of $408.5 billion, invest heavily in the American manufacturing sector and account for more than 18% of all U.S. exports, or $232.4 billion.

“At a time when America is still trying to dig out of recession, creating jobs has never been more important,” said Nancy McLernon, President & CEO of the Organization for International Investment. “Global companies insource millions of good paying jobs each year—and pay workers 33 percent higher than all U.S. companies.”

http://www.staffingtalk.com/foreign-companies-insource-american-workers/
This is the economic activity you want to stop so as to prevent "exploitation". We need foreign investment as it brings in free money/resources to our economy, and not someone else's. Your view of economics is one of a zero sum game, and it is not. It is also about more than money. Access to real goods is true wealth, not digitized money.



I was hoping for a historical account. Now is not exactly history. But, that unprecedented 40+ years of trade deficit experiment in USA is quickly winding down. The 2 recessions since 2000 (and the upcoming one too) are proofs that you cannot do it forever without unintended consequences.

USA was a very rich and powerful country at the wake of 2 world wars. It took many years to squander that huge wealth (wars are the perfect way to do so and USA foolishly fought several too many wars since 1945), but the process is greatly accelerating right now with massive money printing.

As for the economic miracle since 1970, for which Regan got all the undeserved credit, it was an artifact of falling commodity prices, falling interest rates, and demographic forces. The same demographic forces will depress US economy for many years to come.

I'm not going to respond to the economic psedoscientific speak you posted as that was produced by the same economists that led us to this sore situation exposing how they really don't know how real world economy works.

Oh wait, I will respond to one claim, the record high hourly wages in USA. Lets omit it's dated 2006, just before the last Great Recession. Those figures are based on CPI adjustment. It's a common knowledge that government cheats on CPI calculation. The real inflation is much much higher and here is the real wage number:

 

[Tempest]

Quote:
I was hoping for a historical account. Now is not exactly history. But, that unprecedented 40+ years of trade deficit experiment in USA is quickly winding down. The 2 recessions since 2000 (and the upcoming one too) are proofs that you cannot do it forever without unintended consequences.

What did the trade deficit have to do with either recession?
Quote:
Oh wait, I will respond to one claim, the record high hourly wages in USA.

I posted total compensation. Anything that is based solely on wages is incomplete and therefore inaccurate.

 

[Kestas]

Enough... and way too far off the original topic.