by Tyler_JC » Sat 13 Dec 2008, 15:57:46
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')ow would it be that nations completely decimated in WWII, nations far smaller in size and natural resources than the "Winner" end up being the "Rich" folks?
The reason my friends is the fiat money system and money as debt. It is simply impossible for a nation like Germany to have created more wealth than the US over the period from WWII to the present, particularly if you take into account war reparations and so forth. What they did have though was a savvy banking system that perpetuated itself after the war, funnelled through the American economy and then funnelled back in the aftermath of the war.
Not exactly...
Japan and Germany received large amounts of foreign direct investment in the post war years. Brand new modern factories were built by the thousands.
They had no overhang from existing pensions, existing outdated infrastructure, old inefficient businesses, and the rest.
They started over brand new on everything. Moreover, they had no international credibility, no military to fund, and a burning desire to work hard and prove themselves.
And they did.
Germany's unemployment rate stayed below 2% for decades. They rebuilt their entire country and became a manufacturing powerhouse.
Japan did the same thing with a slight lag. They started off from a much lower starting point but eventually came to overtake much of the world.
Compare the savings rates of these countries to the savings rate of the United States.
Why wouldn't they have a large current account surplus?
Moreover, a trade deficit is a measure of a YEARLY deficit or surplus. Not a cumulative figure.
It is not a measure of wealth creation, either. It's a measure of wealth creation relative to wealth consumption (using a rather poetic definition of "wealth")
The US produces more wealth than Saudi Arabia or Russia. We just happen to consume a lot more than we produce.