alt Hacker NewsIf you balance the trade, it means reduced foreign ownership of U.S. assets, yes, which means ownership of U.S. assets by domestic citizens will increase. One of the primary problems with an unbalanced trade deficit is that your own inhabitants are left with less wealth over time, as assets are sold off to fund consumption.
Replies
> If you balance the trade, it means reduced foreign ownership of U.S. assets, yes, which means ownership of U.S. assets by domestic citizens will increase.
Proportionately, perhaps, but that doesn't mean by value of assets owned. It just means the aggregate value of assets in the US will be less.
>U.S. assets by domestic citizens will increase.
You think zero sum like accountant or land owner.
They money coming is invested for opportunities. There will be less opportunities for startups, less VC money. Less affordable loans for corporations to expand and invest.
Why would it even be desirable to have less foreign ownership of US assets?
Like what is the sound logic here?
As an Italian I would love more foreign ownership of Italian businesses, that would not only bring capital but more scrutiny.
>which means ownership of U.S. assets by domestic citizens will increase
Which to be clear will be largely domestic oligarchs and other whales since the vast majority of domestic citizens in the US don't have enough capital to own any significant amount of assets, US or otherwise.
That’s zero-sum thinking. Increases demand for US assets can make americans wealthier in many ways (e.g. providing more capital to american businesses).