Partner Content

How do we fix our trade imbalance?

However, with the culmination of the 2008–2009 financial crisis and the signing of more trade agreements, the problem of unfair trade was finally recognized.

Recently, plenty of discussion has swirled around President Trump’s policy of imposing tariffs on many of the imported goods coming from China, Europe, Canada and other nations.

The intent behind these tariffs has been to fix what Trump and others see as an international trade imbalance that is unfair to our nation.

At this point, though, there is only speculation regarding the outcomes of the tariffs. As China and the United States continue their jawboning, we believe that there will be a settlement somewhere in the middle. Many years ago, after World War II, there was a drive to stabilize the world, not just politically, but economically. The U.S. government believed that if we could open up trade and banking across nations, a more stable and safer world would follow, bringing with it peace and prosperity. As such, we created the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization and more programs designed to work together for the goal of globalization.

The United States, as the most powerful and wealthiest nation of all, had nothing but good intentions in these negotiations; and, indeed, the world started to flourish in many ways. The advantages to all were economic—but unfortunately, they were also relatively short-lived.

Over time, as more trade agreements developed, along with various nations, the intention was to help business, rather than to advance the original goals of stabilization and prosperity.

In the 1980s and 1990s, trade ballooned (see chart opposite) as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the most well-known of these agreements, and hundreds of other trade pacts were being made.

The biggest flaw in all this, however, was not only that the United States was too generous to our trading partners; our country was also making trade agreements based on politics. For that reason, the United States ended up with politicians making arrangements that were no longer beneficial to our citizens.

The negotiators analyzing the situation, meanwhile, did so against a backdrop of a strong American economy, and did not view the offers we made as potentially harmful to our nation.

However, with the culmination of the 2008–2009 financial crisis and the signing of more trade agreements, the problem of unfair trade was finally recognized.

While many do not agree with the current administration’s handling of the trade negotiations, hopefully the United States will be better positioned going forward. In the past, there was rhetoric, but no actual attempt at addressing these issues. Today, we are still not sure if the tariffs will get us the economic adjustments needed to fix our trade imbalance. But certain moves from some nations, like Mexico, tell us that a trade balance will eventually be restored, assuming some give-and-take from both sides.

In the end, the outcome may not be perfect or completely fair, but it will be more beneficial to the United States. Short-term, there may even be some instability; but as more and more nations join in the effort to advance the notion of fairness, we will all gain confidence that things will work out better for our nation.

Wealth Management

Disclaimer: Worth magazine is a financial publisher and does not recommend or endorse investment, legal, insurance or tax advisors. The listing of any firm in the 2023 Worth® Leading AdvisorsTM Program does not constitute a recommendation or endorsement by Worth magazine of any such firm and is not based upon Worth magazine’s experience with, or prior dealings with, any advisor. The information presented for each advisor, including but not limited to any related profile, statistical data, presentation, report, commentary, recommendation or strategy, has been provided by such advisor without review or independent verification by Worth magazine. Any such information is the sole responsibility of the advisor. Worth magazine makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of such information, assumes no liability for any inaccuracies or omissions therein and disclaims responsibility for the suitability of any particular investment recommendation or strategy for any person. Nothing contained in Worth magazine constitutes or should be construed as any form of investment, legal, insurance or tax advice or as a recommendation to buy, sell, hold or trade any securities, financial instruments or assets. Readers are advised to consult their legal, financial, insurance and tax advisors prior to making any investment or pursuing any investment strategy. Past, model or hypothetical performance is not indicative of future results.

back to top