Yes, that is right, the gutting of US manufacturing occurred decades ago, long before Trump became President. And yes... "experts" in the USA were responsible and guided the whole gutting of American manufacturing. It was done so that the *rate* of profit of shareholders could steadily increase.
Did you just provide a link to the US Central Bank? Anyone listening to the Federal Reserve (per religious faith) while simultaneously accusing Trump of being a con-artist loses credibility. The Fed--with its branches across the country, including the one in Minneapolis--is a con-artist organization with its QE injections (digital money created out of the thin air--not even printed money).These are quite misleading constructions. What actually happened? Nothing simple enough for Trump to understand or fix with a big scrawly signature on a piece of paper.
Cheap labour in the southern states and Mexico; cheap material coming in from China and Korea; deregulation; a couple of wide-spread economic slumps; automation; shifting markets; less demand for the product; poor competitive position. Here is one analysis you might find useful _https://www.minneapolisfed.org/research ... -rust-belt .
More profit could be made elsewhere, so the corporations and their investors took their money elsewhere. http://www.jiesworld.com/international_ ... _china.htm
No "experts" run that show; governments can do no more than levy taxes and raise impediments to the movement of capital - and not all that much of the latter anymore: all the big venture capitalists diversify globally.
I'm not a Democrat or Republican. Other con organizations controlled by bankers and corporations that build weapons to sell to the US military and foreign countries and NGOs. If one is going to criticize Trump why not criticize the fact he like Obama--and it would be like this with Hillary too--are not going to reduce the United States massive Debt-to-GDP ratio.
Okay, I remember in a past economic course a professor reminded the class that a country's "National Income" is essentially equal to its GDP. So, going with that, lets consider as a thought experiment a countries National Income (= to its GDP) is analogous to a couple's combined annual income. In personal finance it would be considered financially irresponsible if a couple's debt exceeded their combined annual income. For example, if combined they brought in an income of $120,000 but their debt was $140,000.
QE by the Federal Reserve (the Central Bank of the USA) is not going to reduce the massive Debt-to-GDP ratio the USA finds itself in years after year (before Trump ever got elected). What QE will do is devalue the US dollar and act as a temporary heroin fix for the US economic system addicted to "cheap money." Neither Democrat nor Republican career politician is honest with voters, US citizens, and telling them this is unsustainable and an OD (overdose) will eventually result. Because that would make them unpopular among American voters. Two things keep the addicted American economic system going right now: debt and QE's (Quantitative Ease).
In terms of personal financial responsibility, assets that will generate a *constant flow of income,* are ideally what you use to finance your personal debt obligations (not taking out more loans, or magically creating money out of thin air). If we were to make that analogous to Government spending it would be the Government nationalizing an asset (say the oil industry), which would produce a constant flow of cash, and using that asset to fund its personal debt obligations to American citizens (entitlement programs: e.g., welfare to single mothers, universal health care, social security retirement payments). But Americans would call that socialism and the word "socialism" to Americans is equivalent to a curse in Voodoo. So, instead, Republicans want to fund non-stop wars with debt and QE, and Democrats want to fund expanded entitlements, bring in illegals and give them entitlements, all with debt and QE.
And together they claim Donald Trump alone has and will further hurt Americans. And they explain it with BS emotive arguments.
The current US Debt-to-GDP ratio according to Wikipedia last time I looked exceeds 100% of the US GDP (= to its National Income).
In contrast Wikipedia places Russia's Debt-to-GDP ratio at less than 18% of its GDP.
Russia has both universal health care and universal dental care. And they fund it--at least in part--with a nationalized asset: their oil or natural gas industry.
That was not why US manufacturing fled across the boarder.The main thing, of course, is that business changes all the time; every industry has boom and bust periods and a life cycle. Like cotton-gins and corset-making, like blacksmithy and and coal-mining, there comes a time when the industry has simply run its course. Every time an industry declines and is replaced by a more modern one, there is net loss of employment, because increased technology needs decreased manpower.
The USA was in a trade war for years, we just didn't know it down here on the ground as the average Joe and Jane, and American politicians sold (like treason) the American workers in manufacturing out. Period. Now Donald Trump--irrespective if he will be successful or not--is hitting the field of battle like Vince Lombardi and rallying a "hit back" strategy on the playing field. The Fed and its QE can't do that--not sustainably with out eventually the US dollar bubble bursting and the American economic system overdosing.