What can the U.S> do to stop the over-dependence on outsourcing?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] ........ And if a country didn't devalue their currency their exports would be less............So, by devaluing their currency they increased their exports.

No...if everyone devalues at the same time nothing changes. It's called a currency war.

I really have to explain this? Say manipulating currency increases exports by 5%.......... Every other country manipulates currency as well and will reduce your exports by 5%...... Now if you do not manipulate your currency your exports will fall by 5%........ Conclusion....by manipulating your currency you increase your exports.

No..if every country is devaluing their currency 5% and you follow....the status quo doesn't change. Nothing was solved except a currency war which often results in a trade war including protections, tariffs, etc.
#52 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]No...if everyone devalues at the same time nothing changes. It's called a currency war.KC_Hokie
I really have to explain this? Say manipulating currency increases exports by 5%.......... Every other country manipulates currency as well and will reduce your exports by 5%...... Now if you do not manipulate your currency your exports will fall by 5%........ Conclusion....by manipulating your currency you increase your exports.

No..if every country is devaluing their currency 5% and you follow....the status quo doesn't change. Nothing was solved except a currency war which often results in a trade war including protections, tariffs, etc.

I don't remember this in my economics class.
#53 Posted by Mafiree (3704 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]No...if everyone devalues at the same time nothing changes. It's called a currency war.KC_Hokie
I really have to explain this? Say manipulating currency increases exports by 5%.......... Every other country manipulates currency as well and will reduce your exports by 5%...... Now if you do not manipulate your currency your exports will fall by 5%........ Conclusion....by manipulating your currency you increase your exports.

No..if every country is devaluing their currency 5% and you follow....the status quo doesn't change. Nothing was solved except a currency war which often results in a trade war including protections, tariffs, etc.

Wow.......... Without currency manipulation your exports fall. So, what does currency manipulation do............
#54 Posted by dave123321 (34358 posts) -
Kc, thoughts on general tariffs?
#55 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] I really have to explain this? Say manipulating currency increases exports by 5%.......... Every other country manipulates currency as well and will reduce your exports by 5%...... Now if you do not manipulate your currency your exports will fall by 5%........ Conclusion....by manipulating your currency you increase your exports.

No..if every country is devaluing their currency 5% and you follow....the status quo doesn't change. Nothing was solved except a currency war which often results in a trade war including protections, tariffs, etc.

Wow.......... Without currency manipulation your exports fall. So, what does currency manipulation do............

My point is if everyone drops the same percentage the status quo doesn't change. A country's wealth or purchasing power doesn't change. So nothing gets solved.
#56 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
Kc, thoughts on general tariffs?dave123321
Terrible idea. Trade wars historically often resulted in real ones with bullets.
#57 Posted by Mafiree (3704 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]No..if every country is devaluing their currency 5% and you follow....the status quo doesn't change. Nothing was solved except a currency war which often results in a trade war including protections, tariffs, etc.KC_Hokie
Wow.......... Without currency manipulation your exports fall. So, what does currency manipulation do............

My point is if everyone drops the same percentage the status quo doesn't change. A country's wealth or purchasing power doesn't change. So nothing gets solved.

"Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it." Well........That was your quote.....
#58 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] Wow.......... Without currency manipulation your exports fall. So, what does currency manipulation do............Mafiree
My point is if everyone drops the same percentage the status quo doesn't change. A country's wealth or purchasing power doesn't change. So nothing gets solved.

"Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it." Well........That was your quote.....

Yea. Just like I said every reserve currency in the world is attempting the same thing in terms of currency devaluing. So nothing will get solved by copying that devaluation.

#59 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]My point is if everyone drops the same percentage the status quo doesn't change. A country's wealth or purchasing power doesn't change. So nothing gets solved.KC_Hokie
"Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it." Well........That was your quote.....

Yea. Just like I said every reserve currency in the world is attempting the same thing in terms of currency devaluing. So nothing will get solved by copying that devaluing.

FFS except if everyone else but the us does it guess what the outcome is
#60 Posted by Mafiree (3704 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]My point is if everyone drops the same percentage the status quo doesn't change. A country's wealth or purchasing power doesn't change. So nothing gets solved.KC_Hokie
"Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it." Well........That was your quote.....

Yea. Just like I said every reserve currency in the world is attempting the same thing in terms of currency devaluing. So nothing will get solved by copying that devaluing.

And by doing so they are increasing their exports relative to no action. So it "is" working........
#61 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] "Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it." Well........That was your quote..... EmpCom
Yea. Just like I said every reserve currency in the world is attempting the same thing in terms of currency devaluing. So nothing will get solved by copying that devaluing.

FFS except if everyone else but the us does it guess what the outcome is

Purchasing power goes up if we keep our currency steady.
#62 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] "Every country is devaluing their currency right now except Switzerland trying to increase exports. It's not working since everyone is doing it." Well........That was your quote.....

Yea. Just like I said every reserve currency in the world is attempting the same thing in terms of currency devaluing. So nothing will get solved by copying that devaluing.

And by doing so they are increasing their exports relative to no action. So it "is" working........

The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work.
#63 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Yea. Just like I said every reserve currency in the world is attempting the same thing in terms of currency devaluing. So nothing will get solved by copying that devaluing. KC_Hokie
And by doing so they are increasing their exports relative to no action. So it "is" working........

The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work.

Ok, so what WOULD work?
#64 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] And by doing so they are increasing their exports relative to no action. So it "is" working........Canon-Gatorade
The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work.

Ok, so what WOULD work?

Do you ever do anything but ask ?
#65 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] And by doing so they are increasing their exports relative to no action. So it "is" working........Canon-Gatorade
The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work.

Ok, so what WOULD work?

The world is more competitive than it's ever been. So in order to be more competitive we need less government (fewer taxes, size of government, regulations, as percentage of economy).Get a higher percentage of our economy being non-government. Government as a percent of GDP is 10% higher than it was in the 90s.

#66 Posted by GOGOGOGURT (4470 posts) -

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work. KC_Hokie

Ok, so what WOULD work?

The world is more competitive than it's ever been. So in order to be more competitive we need less government (fewer taxes, size of government, regulations, as percentage of economy).Get a higher percentage of our economy being non-government. Government as a percent of GDP is 10% higher than it was in the 90s.

 

This is absolutely true. 

 

But we should've had this all the time, not just now because it's competitive.  And it's not about competitiveness as much as success and a blooming economy.

 

But you are right about less government.

#67 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"]Ok, so what WOULD work?GOGOGOGURT

The world is more competitive than it's ever been. So in order to be more competitive we need less government (fewer taxes, size of government, regulations, as percentage of economy).Get a higher percentage of our economy being non-government. Government as a percent of GDP is 10% higher than it was in the 90s.

 

This is absolutely true. 

 

But we should've had this all the time, not just now because it's competitive.  And it's not about competitiveness as much as success and a blooming economy.

 

But you are right about less government.

Problem is Obama doesn't understand the concept of less government and less spending. Competition to him means spending or 'investing' taxpayers money into his pet projects.

So we're in a WOS over the next four years.

#68 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -
[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work. EmpCom
Ok, so what WOULD work?

Do you ever do anything but ask ?

\ There's a reason why I am asking, you will find out how important what I am doing is during these next 3ish years.
#69 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -
[QUOTE="EmpCom"][QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] Ok, so what WOULD work?Canon-Gatorade
Do you ever do anything but ask ?

\ There's a reason why I am asking, you will find out how important what I am doing is during these next 3ish years.

I bet i dont
#70 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="EmpCom"][QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] Ok, so what WOULD work?Canon-Gatorade
Do you ever do anything but ask ?

\ There's a reason why I am asking, you will find out how important what I am doing is during these next 3ish years.

Not sure what project you're working on but one of the few countries in the world run by classical liberals doing what I suggested is Estonia.
#71 Posted by GOGOGOGURT (4470 posts) -

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The world is more competitive than it's ever been. So in order to be more competitive we need less government (fewer taxes, size of government, regulations, as percentage of economy).Get a higher percentage of our economy being non-government. Government as a percent of GDP is 10% higher than it was in the 90s.

KC_Hokie

 

This is absolutely true. 

 

But we should've had this all the time, not just now because it's competitive.  And it's not about competitiveness as much as success and a blooming economy.

 

But you are right about less government.

Problem is Obama doesn't understand the concept of less government and less spending. Competition to him means spending or 'investing' taxpayers money into his pet projects.

So we're in a WOS over the next four years.

 

Actually, no politicians have the balls to make cuts to actually make a difference.  It's going to have to get a lot worse for that to happen.

#72 Posted by Mafiree (3704 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Yea. Just like I said every reserve currency in the world is attempting the same thing in terms of currency devaluing. So nothing will get solved by copying that devaluing. KC_Hokie
And by doing so they are increasing their exports relative to no action. So it "is" working........

The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work.

And making it worse isn't a better course of action..........
#73 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

 

This is absolutely true. 

 

But we should've had this all the time, not just now because it's competitive.  And it's not about competitiveness as much as success and a blooming economy.

 

But you are right about less government.

GOGOGOGURT

Problem is Obama doesn't understand the concept of less government and less spending. Competition to him means spending or 'investing' taxpayers money into his pet projects.

So we're in a WOS over the next four years.

 

Actually, no politicians have the balls to make cuts to actually make a difference.  It's going to have to get a lot worse for that to happen.

"Era of big government is over" - President Bill Clinton, 1996

Wish that guy could take over.

#74 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] And by doing so they are increasing their exports relative to no action. So it "is" working........

The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work.

And making it worse isn't a better course of action..........

Why would it be worse if our purchasing power went up while simultaneously cutting government and government spending?
#75 Posted by GOGOGOGURT (4470 posts) -

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Problem is Obama doesn't understand the concept of less government and less spending. Competition to him means spending or 'investing' taxpayers money into his pet projects.

So we're in a WOS over the next four years.

KC_Hokie

 

Actually, no politicians have the balls to make cuts to actually make a difference.  It's going to have to get a lot worse for that to happen.

"Era of big government is over" - President Bill Clinton, 1996

Wish that guy could take over.

 

If only he walked the talk.

#76 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -
[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="EmpCom"] Do you ever do anything but ask ?EmpCom
\ There's a reason why I am asking, you will find out how important what I am doing is during these next 3ish years.

I bet i dont

It will unless you love Obama and want another one of him running for office.
#77 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

 

This is absolutely true. 

 

But we should've had this all the time, not just now because it's competitive.  And it's not about competitiveness as much as success and a blooming economy.

 

But you are right about less government.

GOGOGOGURT

Problem is Obama doesn't understand the concept of less government and less spending. Competition to him means spending or 'investing' taxpayers money into his pet projects.

So we're in a WOS over the next four years.

 

Actually, no politicians have the balls to make cuts to actually make a difference.  It's going to have to get a lot worse for that to happen.

That's because to them there are no benefits in doing so. Are there?
#78 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

 

Actually, no politicians have the balls to make cuts to actually make a difference.  It's going to have to get a lot worse for that to happen.

GOGOGOGURT

"Era of big government is over" - President Bill Clinton, 1996

Wish that guy could take over.

 

If only he walked the talk.

He did. He reduced the size of government and government spending was low. He reduced taxes such as the capital gains taxes which sparked investment in the economy.
#79 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -
[QUOTE="EmpCom"][QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] \ There's a reason why I am asking, you will find out how important what I am doing is during these next 3ish years.Canon-Gatorade
I bet i dont

It will unless you love Obama and want another one of him running for office.

Yeah because anything you do will have any impact on who is or is not elected in the us,
#80 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -
[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="EmpCom"] I bet i dontEmpCom
It will unless you love Obama and want another one of him running for office.

Yeah because anything you do will have any impact on who is or is not elected in the us,

Yes it could. But since the point is flying right by you, I'll just get back on topic, I am sensing negative vibes.
#81 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -
[QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]"Era of big government is over" - President Bill Clinton, 1996

Wish that guy could take over.

KC_Hokie

 

If only he walked the talk.

He did. He reduced the size of government and government spending was low. He reduced taxes such as the capital gains taxes which sparked investment in the economy.

And then gave him and the country a bad image a short-time after.
#82 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="GOGOGOGURT"]

 

If only he walked the talk.

Canon-Gatorade

He did. He reduced the size of government and government spending was low. He reduced taxes such as the capital gains taxes which sparked investment in the economy.

And then gave him and the country a bad image a short-time after.

I suppose. No one remembers that though...they remember economic prosperity.

People now think of Obama as being charismatic and all but in the future people will look back and see huge government, government spending up, mishandled economy, pet projects that went bankrupt, etc.

#83 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -
[QUOTE="EmpCom"][QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] It will unless you love Obama and want another one of him running for office.Canon-Gatorade
Yeah because anything you do will have any impact on who is or is not elected in the us,

Yes it could. But since the point is flying right by you, I'll just get back on topic, I am sensing negative vibes.

And i sense you may have an overinflated idea of your own importance but is this due to a low iq or a young age
#84 Posted by Mafiree (3704 posts) -

[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The status quo for fixing the economy isn't going to work. KC_Hokie
And making it worse isn't a better course of action..........

Why would it be worse if our purchasing power went up while simultaneously cutting government and government spending?

If US currency can buy more goods in south-east Asia that will only enchance the supposed problem (outsourcing)........

#85 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -
[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="EmpCom"] Yeah because anything you do will have any impact on who is or is not elected in the us, EmpCom
Yes it could. But since the point is flying right by you, I'll just get back on topic, I am sensing negative vibes.

And i sense you may have an overinflated idea of your own importance but is this due to a low iq or a young age

So what you are saying is that say.... For example, just for example, if Mitt Romney where to run again in 2006, he would have no impact on who is or is not elected?
#86 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -

[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]He did. He reduced the size of government and government spending was low. He reduced taxes such as the capital gains taxes which sparked investment in the economy. KC_Hokie

And then gave him and the country a bad image a short-time after.

I suppose. No one remembers that though...they remember economic prosperity.

People now think of Obama as being charismatic and all but in the future people will look back and see huge government, government spending up, mishandled economy, pet projects that went bankrupt, etc.

Spetzer did the same thing (i think I spelled it wrong) and everyone seemed to remember quite well instantly comparing him to bill clinton. He is often underrated like Nixon was because of this.
#87 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Mafiree"] And making it worse isn't a better course of action..........Mafiree
Why would it be worse if our purchasing power went up while simultaneously cutting government and government spending?

If US currency can buy more goods in south-east Asia that will only exasperate the supposed problem (outsourcing)........

Not if government spending and corporate taxes were lowered. We haven't made the stuff they make over there for a long time now.

We should target a high tech economy. And having a higher purchasing power relative to the world won't hurt us at all in that area. It would allow our standard of living to remain while potentially dropping elsewhere as well.

I don't see anything good from matching the devaluation going on. It's not like we export much anyways. And what we do (commodities, planes, high tech, etc.) have little competition anyways.

#88 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4499 posts) -

this thread got weird.

#89 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

this thread got weird.

MakeMeaSammitch
shut up go makemeasammitch
#90 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -
[QUOTE="EmpCom"][QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] Yes it could. But since the point is flying right by you, I'll just get back on topic, I am sensing negative vibes.Canon-Gatorade
And i sense you may have an overinflated idea of your own importance but is this due to a low iq or a young age

So what you are saying is that say.... For example, just for example, if Mitt Romney where to run again in 2006, he would have no impact on who is or is not elected?

1, You are not mitt romney 2, You mean 2016 not 2006
#91 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -

this thread got weird.

MakeMeaSammitch
How? It's still on topic.
#92 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -
[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="EmpCom"] And i sense you may have an overinflated idea of your own importance but is this due to a low iq or a young ageEmpCom
So what you are saying is that say.... For example, just for example, if Mitt Romney where to run again in 2006, he would have no impact on who is or is not elected?

1, You are not mitt romney 2, You mean 2016 not 2006

If you replace mitt romney with some random person running it's the same thing, they do have an impact.
#93 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -

[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Why would it be worse if our purchasing power went up while simultaneously cutting government and government spending?KC_Hokie

If US currency can buy more goods in south-east Asia that will only exasperate the supposed problem (outsourcing)........

Not if government spending and corporate taxes were lowered. We haven't made the stuff they make over there for a long time now.

We should target a high tech economy. And having a higher purchasing power relative to the world won't hurt us at all in that area. It would allow our standard of living to remain while potentially dropping elsewhere as well.

I don't see anything good from matching the devaluation going on. It's not like we export much anyways. And what we do (commodities, planes, high tech, etc.) have little competition anyways.

Yeah its not like as you say you export much being the worlds 2nd largest exporter
#94 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -
[QUOTE="EmpCom"][QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] So what you are saying is that say.... For example, just for example, if Mitt Romney where to run again in 2006, he would have no impact on who is or is not elected?Canon-Gatorade
1, You are not mitt romney 2, You mean 2016 not 2006

If you replace mitt romney with some random person running it's the same thing, they do have an impact.

None of which are you
#95 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="Mafiree"] If US currency can buy more goods in south-east Asia that will only exasperate the supposed problem (outsourcing)........EmpCom

Not if government spending and corporate taxes were lowered. We haven't made the stuff they make over there for a long time now.

We should target a high tech economy. And having a higher purchasing power relative to the world won't hurt us at all in that area. It would allow our standard of living to remain while potentially dropping elsewhere as well.

I don't see anything good from matching the devaluation going on. It's not like we export much anyways. And what we do (commodities, planes, high tech, etc.) have little competition anyways.

Yeah its not like as you say you export much being the worlds 2nd largest exporter

Like I said the stuff we export now won't be affected by an increase in currency price. We don't exactly compete with many countries in the few areas we do export heavily (commodities and hi tech mainly).
#96 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -
[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="EmpCom"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Not if government spending and corporate taxes were lowered. We haven't made the stuff they make over there for a long time now.

We should target a high tech economy. And having a higher purchasing power relative to the world won't hurt us at all in that area. It would allow our standard of living to remain while potentially dropping elsewhere as well.

I don't see anything good from matching the devaluation going on. It's not like we export much anyways. And what we do (commodities, planes, high tech, etc.) have little competition anyways.

Yeah its not like as you say you export much being the worlds 2nd largest exporter

Like I said the stuff we export now won't be affected by an increase in currency price. We don't exactly compete with many countries in the few areas we do export heavily (commodities and hi tech mainly).

What you said was "It's not like we export much anyways"
#97 Posted by Canon-Gatorade (153 posts) -
[QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"][QUOTE="EmpCom"] 1, You are not mitt romney 2, You mean 2016 not 2006EmpCom
If you replace mitt romney with some random person running it's the same thing, they do have an impact.

None of which are you

You know I am not the latter how? May I see your crystal ball?
#98 Posted by KC_Hokie (16099 posts) -

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="EmpCom"] Yeah its not like as you say you export much being the worlds 2nd largest exporterEmpCom
Like I said the stuff we export now won't be affected by an increase in currency price. We don't exactly compete with many countries in the few areas we do export heavily (commodities and hi tech mainly).

What you said was "It's not like we export much anyways"

Not much variety is what I meant. It's all high tech, highly refined, or commodities.

So if we didn't devalue our currency as well it wouldn't hurt the few industries we do export. And it's not going to be a significant increase in purchasing power if we don't devalue our currency in the first place.

#99 Posted by EmpCom (3451 posts) -
[QUOTE="EmpCom"][QUOTE="Canon-Gatorade"] If you replace mitt romney with some random person running it's the same thing, they do have an impact.Canon-Gatorade
None of which are you

You know I am not the latter how? May I see your crystal ball?

The fact you are on gamespot asking economic advice is a big clue
#100 Posted by Mafiree (3704 posts) -

[QUOTE="Mafiree"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]Why would it be worse if our purchasing power went up while simultaneously cutting government and government spending?KC_Hokie

If US currency can buy more goods in south-east Asia that will only exasperate the supposed problem (outsourcing)........

Not if government spending and corporate taxes were lowered. We haven't made the stuff they make over there for a long time now.

We should target a high tech economy. And having a higher purchasing power relative to the world won't hurt us at all in that area. It would allow our standard of living to remain while potentially dropping elsewhere as well.

I don't see anything good from matching the devaluation going on. It's not like we export much anyways. And what we do (commodities, planes, high tech, etc.) have little competition anyways.

Planes aren't competitive? Boeing vs Airbus.......