Uri Dadush
{
"authors": [
"Uri Dadush"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia",
"Japan"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Trade"
]
}Source: Getty
Japanese Trade Deficit
The lesson for the United States from Japan’s experience is fairly straightforward: worry less about America’s trade deficit, and worry more about large U.S. government deficits and why the savings rate in U.S. households is so low.
Even though the shift to trade deficit is economically insignificant, it is worthy of note because of the message it contains about economic policy in the long run. There are two main messages here: first, expect the demographic profile and speed of development of a country to be reflected in its balance of payments. When Japan’s population was relatively young and the rise in its standard of living was very rapid, Japanese household savings were high. As growth slowed and Japanese people aged, their savings rates declined and so did their trade surplus. Meanwhile, the Japanese built large foreign assets to tide them over in their golden years. This is an example of how integration into a global economy where countries have very diverse age profiles can help manage a major demographic transition. It is also another example of how mercantilists who obsess over trade imbalances have it wrong. Second, expect large and rising government deficits to sooner or later be reflected into trade deficits. Japan’s unsuccessful multiple attempts to use deficit spending to pull out of its growth slump has contributed to one of the world’s largest and most persistent government deficits, and these deficits are no longer supported by adequate household savings.
The lesson for the United States from Japan’s experience is fairly straightforward: worry less about America’s trade deficit, which is an adjustment to broader forces. Worry instead about large U.S. government deficits and why the savings rate in U.S. households is so low despite the fact that the baby boomers are about to retire. In other words, deal with the causes, not the symptoms.
About the Author
Former Senior Associate, International Economics Program
Dadush was a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He focuses on trends in the global economy and is currently tracking developments in the eurozone crisis.
- The Labors of TsiprasCommentary
- Greece, Complacency, and the EuroIn The Media
Uri Dadush
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie China
- The Plaza Accord and Its Relevance for ChinaCommentary
The Plaza Accord was not an externally imposed punishment of Japan but part of a broader restructuring that Japanese economists and policymakers themselves recognized was necessary. Its effects were undermined, however, when Tokyo responded to the resulting slowdown with policies that exacerbated investment, credit expansion, and the very imbalances the adjustment was intended to resolve.
Michael Pettis
- Untangling the Nuclear Knot: A Constructive Agenda for Managing China’s Nuclear Relations with the United States and Its AlliesPaper
The nuclear relationship between China and the United States is increasingly shaped by widening perception gaps rather than deliberate strategic design.
Tong Zhao
- Who Paid for China’s Last Debt Cleanup, and Who Will Pay for the Next?Commentary
China’s banking crisis in the 2000s was resolved by transferring the costs to households through financial repression—a decision that recapitalized the banks while exacerbating the structural imbalances that continue to shape the Chinese economy today.
Michael Pettis
- Caught in the Middle: Chinese Biotech Firms’ Divergent Responses to U.S. SanctionsCommentary
Chinese biotech companies have been on the receiving end of U.S. economic coercion. Yet their responses have differed significantly because firm and state interests are not uniformly aligned. For Washington, treating all Chinese tech firms the same, irrespective of their actual interests, risks pushing them farther into Beijing’s corner.
Xue Gong
- Trump and Xi Are Angling for Three Years of StabilityCommentary
But their "principal to principal" model will only be as effective as the political strength of each leader back home.
Damien Ma