Imports, Exports, and Exchange Rates: Crash Course Economics #15

[@darmusicalcompanies5052]

The University of KZbin. Never disappoints.

[@matiskrawiec]

"The creators of the thought bubble are Canadian. These GRAPHICS are IMPORTED" This made my day :D

[@jesusosegueda1699]

They look like the South Park depiction of Canadians!

[@78g476]

I'm an econ major. Had to brush up on some basics since it's been a while since I graduated. This was very well explained. Please keep it up

[@EmotionalAlchemy101]

Thank you so much for providing crash course economics. I didn't understand economics at all until I watched this series. While talking to economists at work I found that it's taken some people years to learn some of the fundamentals I've learn from your videos! Thank you so much!

[@malaikanaomi1408]

„Intellectual goods like Kanye West albums“ I caaaannn‘tt😂😂😂

[@balajiseenivasagan6411]

Seriously, isn't anyone gonna talk about that ACDC belt?

[@loganx7571]

no

[@boredsherbet]

ur right, he always wears it...

[@douglasug9025]

I love it

[@darikforrest976]

He has a consulting company called ACDC Leadership.

[@aritandan]

@@darikforrest976 I thought it was called joe

[@ThePatrick1118]

Even with taking a victory lap, there were so many classes I never got to take, economics was one of them, so being able watch these videos and the other series in my free time is awesome.

[@Ablemaung]

With all this free education on KZbin, how does this affect the value of college education? It's ironic how all of these are now paid for by ads. It's like companies are paying to educate its future employees

[@Pottyde]

Aren't ads a subtle form of collectivism?

[@seandafny]

Doesnt affect it one bit

[@kevinwade1661]

"Free Education" - nothing is free, if its "free" you are the product.

[@forthrichdubist28]

A factor you have to consider about the value of college education is it’s recognition. What I mean by recognition is it’s acceptance in a specific situation by an upper figure such as a government or an employer. A person who studied and read all courses and lessons that are applied to a field such as engineering can become worthless in employment if it is not recognized by a government in which case it is deemed illegal to practice engineering due to laws. About the free stuff thing, it is technically free in terms of monetary exchange but on a broader sense it isn’t. Companies such as Google take information about you and sell it to advertisers in which you exchanged your privacy for access to Google. Some companies are also going for a more donation form of business in which it is optional to pay but tou still get a service from them.

[@vybhavacharya9464]

Woah this is deep af

[@genesisdariana]

All these Economics videos felt better than all my Economics class at the University

[@Noscoped_jfk]

"Protectionism is unlikely to ever happen" Trump: "hold my Big Mac"

[@walterhunter3353]

Yeah! How is that turning out?

[@CSZG974]

Used to watch you years ago while studying. Just came back to say huge thank you to the entire Crash Course team :D

[@arynees]

igcse-students-who-are-too-lazy-to-open-books squad

[@christopheraris9154]

there is a slight difference between the two

[@luqmannassor8434]

Christopher Aris Unajifanya mjuaji,

[@Vishal-dd2rj]

what is igcse, aanyone let me know i'm in school.

[@saalarahmad1471]

O Levels here: GCE xD

[@dukevalentino5967]

iGCSE. Is the International GCSE!

[@Robonza]

The US is the biggest exporter of dollars printed out of thin air. That's a pretty good deal for Americans.

[@ramondenner5126]

+Robonza US print dolars = profit Other countries print their currency = inflation Yeah, the world is really fair

[@calebdunlap2656]

+Ramon Denner #America

[@therealnoodles7638]

yes and these people don't get it. China or India has been sending real resources, for numbers on a spreadsheet. They have received pollutions and sent their goods that they don't get to consume.

[@therealnoodles7638]

no such thing as petrodollar.

[@ray1983able]

Net Exports , Trade Surplus & Defecite , Re -Shuffling Jobs , Protectionism , Exchange Rate , Dollar appreciate & Depreciate , Balance Of Payments .

[@njmudaliar]

Capitalistic free trade is an amazing thing. Everyone is better off as the buyers get products worth more to them than the money they paid for it and the sellers get money that is worth more to them than the product they produced. More governments need to cut taxes & tariffs on trade and eliminate regulatory barriers so people can exchange goods more freely. It'll give us more jobs, more wealth, and more prosperity.

[@BioHazardCL4]

+Naveen Republican/Conservative.

[@culwin]

+Naveen So much success in Kansas, right?

[@qhack]

+culwin Well, the Kansas unemployment rate is dropping and the economy is doing pretty good. So I would say it isn't a bad strategy.

[@culwin]

Q-Hack! Trolltastic!

[@qhack]

+culwin Do you have an actual argument, or are you just going to stick with false analogy and name calling?

[@johnc1014]

Right. Free trade is great. 1) You introduce foreign competition which helps further increase quality and decrease prices. Americans have the option of buying from either American or foreign businesses. 2) You free up American labor for more important things like technological innovation. This might be bad for employment in some industries, but that just means those employees must gain skills that are more in demand in order to stay competitive. 3) You provide jobs to people abroad. This allows foreigners who may be much poorer to at least begin to earn something and improve their own situation. By the way, in case you haven't already figured it out, I'm 100% anti-protectionism and 100% pro-free trade. I believe Americans should be able to buy from whomever they please, whether that's from American producers or foreigner. There should be no government restriction on this. The only area the government should be involved is in protecting against unethical practices like fraud. You are not allowed to murder, rape, steal, commit fraud, or otherwise infringe on the rights of others to their own person/property. Other than that, people should be free to live their lives as they see fit. This is especially true with economics.

[@husseintoney]

Your point about provide jobs to people abroad is silly. Every country puts it's own interests first. Also *protectionism doesn't mean banning you from buying things from abroad but it means placing tariffs on it so the prices can go up and no longer have a low-price advantage over local products*. If you believe government have a role then why limit it there. Government role is represent the country abroad and manage it's relationships over the world. Pure protectionism is bad and an absolute open free trade is bad and hurts without subsidizing important industries like agriculture. We can't give up on agriculture and rely on foreign food. That impairs on our national security so this is why every country in the world subsidize their farmers.

[@mewdude98]

It's funny that he said our largest trade partner is Canada when China surpassed them like a week ago.

[@zachruhl6008]

This video must me late in a way

[@danielbillotti6489]

Warrior Son you think Canada would try to goto with anyone?

[@mobbs8229]

As a Sudanese, with our hyperinflation at the rate of 40% (so far). and a trade deficit on the rise every year, I know everything that has been said in this video like the back of my hand, but I still enjoyed it.

[@DaylnBryant]

Love the show, sometimes hard to follow, especially when those paragraphs come up, but still love it!

[@laurawilliams2445]

the protectionist comment is a great point, I wish some political leaders in 2016-2020 watched this video!

[@leoromana5162]

I'm taking a Economics of the EU class and this helps me with some questions I have been having. Thanks Crash Course.

[@tomh779]

Studying for my social studies PRAXIS and they ask some questions about economics. These vids are a big help

[@Patrickallan100]

Brazil's foreign policy is bad for us brazilians. This is because the BC artificially depreciates our local currency to export more, but it makes imported goods and our local products be more expansive for us own . But sadly, the exporters' lobby is very strong here. Oh, by the way, thanks for the video, it helped me for the test tomorrow.

[@GonzoTehGreat]

2:53 The "import a TV" example overlooked that if US (real) incomes stagnate (as they've done since the 1980s) then the ONLY way to afford a TV is by purchasing a cheap import but any "savings" from doing so aren't spent locally because they don't exist! In other words, if incomes stop rising (or even fall) consumers are only able to maintain/improve their QoL by purchasing (relatively) cheap imports. Meanwhile, local businesses suffer from a "crowding out" effect resulting unless overall demand for their goods or services, so unless they can switch to relying on exports instead the net result is typically a trade deficit. The only way to avoid this is to ensure incomes (e.g. from wages and savings) continue increasing, so consumers have enough money to spend on both cheap imports AND local discretionary purchases. Unfortunately, this hasn't been the case in the USA for the last 30-40 years.

[@sadmanles3165]

I don't know why but Jacob Clifford has always been an inspiration to me. Please author a reference book for IGCSE and IAL students, Jacob. Will help a lot

[@joecurran2811]

This video is a good example of what they were saying in the last one of how economic ideas change with time.

[@CharlesCarmichael-j5l]

Why does this man never blink lol

[@tamannadave2350]

I should have taken economics for igcse. Its fun to learn it!

[@space5339]

Something that wasn't addressed were two worries that seem to be most common with globalization. Differences in regulation (aka we have strict environmental laws but other place might not) and wealth inequality. The idea that the benefits of globalization mostly go to a few. Is there any truth to either of these worries. The first seems obviously true, while the second seems like it might be due to different labor laws in different countries.

[@Pokeylope]

+space Free trade sounds like it might be good for developing countries, but the video didn't have time to get much deeper into the consequences of it. Think of it this way. You live in a poor country that makes lot of wool. You could trade that raw wool for other good and services, but it takes a lot of unprocessed wool to buy a TV. You could try processing the wool, weave cloth, make clothes, dye it. These things are harder to do and require special equipment and skilled labor, but will earn you a higher return. This is where free trade can become a problem. If you're looking to develop an industry, there will be a period of time where you're turning out a more expensive, often lower quality product than other nations that already have the infrastructure in place to make clothes from wool. Countries need tariffs (high import taxes) to encourage their citizens to buy domestic when foreign products are cheaper and better, but the money is needed domestically to get their industry to the point where it can compete, and the tariffs can come down. This is where the WTO comes in, to say they don't much care for tariffs is an understatement. Removing trade barriers might seem like a win win, but it keeps nations whose economies are focused on low tech, low profit sectors from advancing into more profitable and competitive markets. FYI: The wool example is real, Great Britain used tariffs to help pull themselves into the industrial era and now, like many wealthy nations, refuse to acknowledge their usefulness, so as to keep competition out and a steady supply of cheap raw materials coming in.

[@filipfilipovic2974]

+Pokeylope Smith What you're saying seems logical. But if you're a poor country with bad infrastructure and a lack of skilled workforce, what good are tariffs for you? How do you educate your people? How do you get the money for expensive manufacturing facilities? It seems to me the best thing you can do is invite foreign companies to build their factories on your territory and give them incentives. I am concerned about reckless deregulation, but I can't see how tariffs can help poor countries.

[@DavidWilliamsaz]

+space But matters are not that simple, and the moral lines are not that clear. In fact, let me make a counter-accusation: The lofty moral tone of the opponents of globalization is possible only because they have chosen not to think their position through. While fat-cat capitalists might benefit from globalization, the biggest beneficiaries are, yes, Third World workers. -lower tariff barriers, improved telecommunications, cheaper air transport--reduced the disadvantages of producing in developing countries. (Other things being the same, it is still better to produce in the First World--stories of companies that moved production to Mexico or East Asia, then moved back after experiencing the disadvantages of the Third World environment, are common.) In a substantial number of industries, low wages allowed developing countries to break into world markets. And so countries that had previously made a living selling jute or coffee started producing shirts and sneakers instead. Paul Krugman. www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/1997/03/in_praise_of_cheap_labor.html

[@tbeller80]

+space A developing country might not become home to a bunch of billionaires like the country that owns their new factory, but those workers often make higher wages at that factory than they would doing anything else in their home country. A lot of folks against this kind of arrangement complain about that worker only making a few dollars a day, but that dollar goes a lot farther in their home than it would here. I've spent a lot of time in Middle East countries that import labor from places like Pakistan and the Pacific island nations. They don't make much by our standards, but there are waiting lists in those countries to get those jobs. You're right that the vast differences in labor and environmental laws are a problem. This is why you'll see "free trade" and "fair trade" used at different times. Fair trade means that country is complying with international standards for labor, environmental, and intellectual property laws. All things being equal, if a country can make something at lower cost than another country, then so be it. If that country is crushing the market with cheap goods because it doesn't give a damn about sweat shops and destroying its environment, then that is a problem. Bringing all these countries up to the same legal standards is a very difficult process, but more and more new trade agreements contain clauses that require adherence to these laws.

[@DavidWilliamsaz]

Here is the problem with fair trade. When you attempt to raised the wage floor instead of going to the poorest country they are going to go to the second poorest country. Often the price increases don't go to the field or factory worker. There are all kinds of problems with fair trade. Several developmental economist have said that it's the second least effective option to eliminate poverty right behind giving a kid a computer. It gives you a warm fuzzy but doesn't accomplish much. www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-wydick/10-reasons-fair-trade-coffee-doesnt-work_b_5651663.html The solution is not restricting sweatshops but expanding them. The way you increase the wages of billions of people is buy employing them. When you increase the demand for the labor your going to increase the wages that they are paid. Paul Krugman from the New York Times said. But matters are not that simple, and the moral lines are not that clear. In fact, let me make a counter-accusation: The lofty moral tone of the opponents of globalization is possible only because they have chosen not to think their position through. While fat-cat capitalists might benefit from globalization, the biggest beneficiaries are, yes, Third World workers. www.slate.com/articles/business/the_dismal_science/1997/03/in_praise_of_cheap_lab or.html Nicholas Krisfof NYT I’m glad that many Americans are repulsed by the idea of importing products made by barely paid, barely legal workers in dangerous factories. Yet sweatshops are only a symptom of poverty, not a cause, and banning them closes off one route out of poverty. At a time of tremendous economic distress and protectionist pressures, there’s a special danger that tighter labor standards will be used as an excuse to curb trade. I often hear the argument: Labor standards can improve wages and working conditions, without greatly affecting the eventual retail cost of goods. That’s true. But labor standards and “living wages” have a larger impact on production costs that companies are always trying to pare. The result is to push companies to operate more capital-intensive factories in better-off nations like Malaysia, rather than labor-intensive factories in poorer countries like Ghana or Cambodia. The best way to help people in the poorest countries isn’t to campaign against sweatshops but to promote manufacturing there. One of the best things America could do for Africa would be to strengthen our program to encourage African imports, called AGOA, and nudge Europe to match it. www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/opinion/15kristof.html

[@freegg123]

How did they found these two to present, it is just fantastic.

[@roselle9614]

wow, i've learned a lot of economics jargon i never knew existed or i could encounter in this lifetime. thanks CrashCourse. I love your episodes

[@mpandesyambayi5898]

3 or 4 course in one Video,thanks so much

[@ShawnRavenfire]

So what would happen to international trade if currency never changed? Like suppose every country used the same currency, like gold coins or bitcoins or some international central bank's currency?

[@GelidGanef]

+Shawn Ravenfire Then you'd just have money piling up in some countries and other countries always having to borrow or trade to get some back. Which is essentially what happens now, it's just mediated by currency exchange.

[@MrRecconfox]

+Shawn Ravenfire look at the credit crisis from europe, thats basically what could happen. (we get more greece-like countries).

[@MatthewGraham027]

+Shawn Ravenfire Trade would be the same. However you wouldn't have to go through the rigamarolll of calculating exchange rates. For instance look at California & Texas. They both use the same currency. However a dollar in Texas is worth more than a dollar in California. (It costs more to live in Cali vs. TX) So the difference in costs would still be there, they simply wouldn't have the differences expressed in different currencies. So Chinese goods would actually be priced low in dollar terms rather than Yuan.

[@ragnaroksora8129]

it's alot better to be a producer then a consumer. helps the economy overall when they have a strong workforce.

[@therealnoodles7638]

bitcoin isn't a currency but capital flows would be nonexistent. It would be like domestic trade.

[@fannymaldonado9831]

JUST THE VIDEO I NEEDED FOR MY INTERNATIONAL TRADE MANAGEMENT CLASS!!! EXCELLENT, LOVED IT

[@mojojojo921]

Protectionism is a must in the case of developing countries. The the constant influx of cheap goods from the outside, countries like Serbia or Romania can have a really hard time building up an industry, simply because nobody will buy the goods produced just because they are expensive, even if they were slightly better.

[@Deadlyaztec27]

Not true. Japan, Taiwan and South Korea all started off with a lack of tariffs and yet grew much faster than India and México who had high tariffs.

[@VK-pk8uz]

Alright, this will be my first ever sassy comment on a Green Bro's related production: Jacob Clifford, you need a 101 on picking clothes. I'm not talking about the belt (rock on, friend!), but about judging the size. That aside: awesome vid, guys. Love your work. Keep it up.

[@chrisray9653]

Will you have an episode on the effects of currency unions like the Euro and a theoretical global currency.

[@alexturlais8558]

i dont know about it on a macro level but I love the euro, as i can go most places in europe without losing money at exchange rates

[@ramondenner5126]

+Qio Cio I would like to see it too. There's a talk about an "euro" in the Mercosul, but im not sure if it will be good or bad.

[@HomeSkillenSLICE]

A global currency where every good is valued the same and people in India are paid no less then people in America, would at least IMO be best. But then there's the fact that there's only one .... O.O

[@ramondenner5126]

HomeSkillenSLICE it only works in regions with similar culture, costumes, stable economy etc. Not even the mercosul is abble to have that kind of currency yet. the world needs to change a lot to have a global currency, we are very far away from such thing.

[@GelidGanef]

+Ramon Denner Essentially, the US$ already is the global currency, because it's used for trade between other countries and because so many other currencies are tied to it. All you really need for a unified currency is a governing economic body which everyone can agree to follow, and we already have a bunch of those too to protect the dollar *ahem* I mean to improve the world economy!

[@deepthin7480]

hey could you do an episode on U.S and china trade war and what it means in economy??

[@dansattah]

I'm honestly surprised, that you did not mention Germany, the country, that has been the Export Champion for years.

[@dansattah]

Adam Weddell Research the data again, THEN we can talk. or-politics.com/finance-message/economy-if-germany-2015-export-champion/117399/

[@johnandan1594]

+dani sechzehn you really shouldn't site sources with a ".com" domain this indicates that whoever owns the site is primarily there for commercial reasons (ie buisnesses) and is generally less reliable than sites that have a domain of "edu" or ".org" which focuses more on actual facts on either their own organization or for educational purposes. Also looking at an article this doesn't look like it was written by a professional journalist who would have had to at least include two sources before they write their article. Also looking at the article the first paragraph failed to site where the information came from and cannot be reliable unless sited from a credible source. I did find a site : atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/deu/ which has a bit more credibility.

[@TheThOdOr1s]

That's arguably no good either. at least from a European perspective. Since Germany is part of he euro and the bigger force in it, this constant trade surplus is bumping up the price of the euro, and has been for decades, forcing other eurozone countries with trade deficits to no longer be competitive, and to borrow increasingly more money to cover the distance. In essence, Germany's huge trading surplus hurts other EU countries, which then hurt the euro, and therefore Germany. So its generally accepted that Germany should import more.

[@adamweddell3496]

dani sechzehn TheThOdOr1s He just shat on your entire life

[@white_finch]

+dani sechzehn they do have a very big rate os export of cars, actually the volkswagen scandal was bad for Germany's economy.

[@lindatran5615]

thank you so much for these videos ! YOu guy bring cast of lights to my economic knowlegde

[@sargeant121]

Who else is studying International Trade?

[@rickysimasiku1802]

I love this video. Economics is beautiful.

[@SidPrasanannaRaghavan]

Loved Economics simplified by Jacob and Adriene:):):). Really beneficial for the International AS and A level standards of economics, which is the second hardest curriculum of Economics in the world. Keep up the work and keep crash coursing!!!!!!

[@MantisRay861]

I'm writing a paper for an online econ class, so any help would be awesome. I don't understand why that's true at 7:17. If the US imports more products from Mexico, they receive US dollars. The total amount of US dollars doesn't change. How does that decrease demand for US dollars? Is it because Mexico now has more US dollars than they had before? Thanks in advance!

[@MantisRay861]

Thanks for the response. So basically that means there are less pesos available for other people in Mexico, therefore (just like how price increases when demand decreases) the value goes up? That makes sense. I appreciate the help!

[@tanmayparasher5339]

so companies in Mexico exchange the US dollars to pesos and this increases the amount of pesos in the Mexican economy. But how does it increase the demand for pesos and how does it appreciate them?

[@tanmayparasher5339]

I think I understand now. Because the Mexican companies need pesos (to exchange for dollars) there is a demand for pesos so they appreciate. Thanks Walter!

[@emmettfrancis]

"Its unlikely the worlds largest economies will return to strict protectionism".... 1 year later Donald Trump is elected and Trade War is started haha. Good video tho!

[@AC-uh6ce]

Lol, I literally stopped this video and went looking for this comment as soon as she said that!

[@luelfasil5823]

A C OMG...I just did the same thing.

[@roscellevisita2011]

Can I tweet this video to Trump?

[@thugix]

To clarify, the "Trade War" is Trump only putting up tariffs if other countries do not take down theirs. Trump is for true free & fair trade.

[@CycleGirl-77]

Trump's stated goal is to eliminate protectionism on the other side. You can't deny that counties like China put massive tariffs on US made goods. If the US can reduce or stop that practice, it would be a good thing.

[@peace10000able]

Crashcourse , you are the only thing better then actually school

[@ezradavid9089]

5:03 isnt that happening right now ?

[@賴學霖-j3b]

nice AC/DC belt buckle

[@iAkOu1]

Great video. There's one thing I'm still curious about. How does an individual's choice to buy Chinese products result in the government owing money to China? How does one follow the money to answer that? For instance, if a US company buys cheap Chinese products and sells them in the US and makes a profit (the company doesn't owe anybody money at this point, right?), how do multitudes of these interactions over the entire economy result in the US government owing China money?

[@williamarmstrong8455]

It doesn't. The US national debt is an entirely separate issue from trade. The US deficit is caused by the government spending more than it receives from taxes, and china buying some of that debt with the promise it will be paid back later.(just like all other creditors) What Walter talks about is business and consumer debt if they were buying a car or using credit cards, but that money is not connected to the US government would only go to china if they were using a chinese financial institution(most of the time it's not. it would be an american or european one)

[@therealnoodles7638]

The US government DOES NOT owe money to China. This is how it works. China sends you goods, China gets the USD. So what do they do with all these USD? They buy treasury bonds with it. It's a higher interest earning asset than cash, cash does not earn anything. So China gets all these numbers on a spreadsheet at the Federal Reserve, while you as an American, get goods and resources the Chinese created. So the question is, are treasury bonds like a loan? No they are not. The national debt is a collection of Treasury Bonds, they are not credit card loans. They are literally risk free assets created by the government, the safest financial asset in the world. So how does the government pay you for holding treasury bonds? By just crediting your account. Where did they get the money? By typing the number on a keyboard, you can't run out of something you can create. In the same way, STEAM cannot run out of games it sells unless it chooses to stop selling them. Then the government sells another Treasury bond to someone after you redeem the bond, because pretty much all countries and investors want to hold Treasury bonds. That is why they exist. So the Government must create them. Treasury bonds are just like a savings account at the bank.

[@brycealley5457]

I liked how Jacon did a little doe-si-doe into the shot at (9:41).

[@connorgabor4972]

This is really interesting

[@Creepzza]

Haven't commented yet but really like the hosts and the course, thanks for it! :)

[@DJAIV]

the words "intellectual" and "kanye" cancel each other out

[@alexturlais8558]

yeah. its like saying stupid kardashian, you dont need both

[@krombopulos_michael]

2intellectual4u

[@GelidGanef]

I just hope all NorthWest's Kardashian-stupid is limited to his name, and we can expect earth-shattering hip-hop albums from "Lil' NorthWest" in just a few years.

[@davidp5823]

4Smart6You

[@joflame737]

lol

[@i.emredogan1495]

I have question : What determines whether a small open economy will have a trade surplus or a trade deficit? can someone explain please?

[@yomamasofat413]

the moment i hear protectionism hurts an economy more than it benefits, I am out. The US used protectionism for example, in their steel industry to get rich. Free trade lowers the price of consumer goods in the US by tearing down the protectionism barriers in poor countries, therefore, making those poor countries stay poor.

[@cosmicmariner6621]

Your right. 1776 was the refusal to stay a 3rd world back water to England's manufacturing wealth. Started our industry and became great. Now all the sudden we don't need real jobs. Everyone is going to work at a University, Microsoft, or Google -people who work are dirty scum.

[@Ramesess_II]

I really appreciate your way of facilitating those kinda solid definitions and make it simplistic for us

[@SirCrest]

Hey, I had that cash register toy in the background!

[@theawkwardcurrypot9556]

The playlist must be called, Crash course American Economics.

[@talos1279]

China has been smart in knowing what is really important to them: the technology to produce high quality goods and services and the human resources capable of producing and using these technologies. By making their currency depreciated, they were able to get a lot of manufacturing contracts. This had resulted into a lot of bad things like unfair trade practices, heavy exploitation of workers, pollution, human rights problem, etc. However, the good side is that they were able to get the US currency to exchange for higher technology, education on local workers and engineers who had learnt how to do things, and business people who know how to conduct business in new industries that had not been in China in the past. The new industries include: research in pharmaceutical, health care, telecommunication, automation, robot, artificial intelligence. If there is one aspect that China tops all countries in the world, it's the number of engineers specialized in all sorts of fields. What most economic theories lack to consider is the value created by the human resource, especially in the 4th revolution which is focused on creative industry.

[@mihajlo961x]

Wow, this is basically a primer for 2018. Edit: I also really appreciate that they present multiple views on each of the topics they discuss.

[@ludo7759]

"It's unlikely that the world's largest economies will return to strict protectionism." You still sure about that?

[@cosmicmariner6621]

They will once they see some of the big players collapse in the hell of Civil War.

[@therealnoodles7638]

only USA, rest of the world is still pretty much free trade

[@tvlangsam]

Great video! Free trade allows the overwhelming majority to freely improve their standard of living while also gracing those who lose jobs and opportunities with more and more affordable products and services. Protectionism allows a minority to keep their standard of living via coercion while denying themselves and everyone else more affordable products and services.

[@travis3995]

Starts at 0:28

[@flilguy]

Before NAFTA a lot of jobs in the late 1970's and 1980's went to Mexico. I have an older Zenith television from 1981, that has Mexican made parts. The cabinet was made in the USA. The final assembly was done in the US. My furnace from 1988 has Mexican made parts inside of it as well. What really hurt jobs was free trade with China in the year 2000.

[@abdallah-qi6jg]

Multinational corporations will only only trade with countries where labour laws are lax or environmental protection is poor. The moment these are made stringent, they move to other countries. What you're calling trade is exploitation.

[@dalurinzinia829]

".......................China" - Trump, circa 2016 **crowd goes wild and cheering in support**

[@therealnoodles7638]

we want fair free trade. Not free trade.

[@michaelschipper3312]

There is explotation make no mistake. But the vast vast majority of people manufacturing in the developing world are there because its the best job available.

[@oleksiy4618]

If exploitation benefits both parties, then there's nothing wrong with exploitation.

[@cosmicmariner6621]

Some are actually leaving China now for Vietnam. If TRUMP had a brain he would have gone to the Climate Accords and refused all imports that don't meet U.S. e.p.a standards. We would have gotten a Green New Deal that would work, and domestic jobs and helped the Global Environment.

[@TimMcMahon80]

One thing that they tended to gloss over was the fact that a negative trade balance may be beneficial in the short run but can hurt a country in the long run as it trades its financial assets for consumer goods. In the case of the U.S. and China for instance, China sends us cheap goods and receives Dollars and then spends those dollars on U.S. financial assets such as stock, bonds (both Corporate and Government) and it spends a small portion on U.S. goods. So, in the long run, China could end up owning most of the U.S. companies. Some financial analysts have said that the U.S. will end up trading all of its productive assets for a pile of cheap toys.

[@FatFilipinoUK]

In the long run, the global economy will always experience booms and busts. When (not if) the next financial crash happens in the near future, Chinese investors will find that all of their stocks and bonds are worthless. They will find themselves as deep in the gutter as the US, if not deeper. The benefits of a positive trade balance will disappear. Everything tends towards the equilibrium in the long run.

[@williamhaward1140]

Thanks for this series guys really helped me get ahead on the basics for my A-levels

[@FaisalUmarMulalira]

Very Educative and unpackaging lots of myths on International Trade

[@ConBroCal]

"intellectual goods, like kanye west albums" LMAO dead

[@davidread1987]

Drew Vanheistel nah

[@josemax2443]

this channel is fantabulous 👌👌👌

[@lucaspincerato]

I just love the animation and editing work you guys do! Awesome!

[@castrozzz]

Can someone further explain the comment at minute: 8:38. "When the US spends money in Chinese Goods the people in China, in theory, have only two things they can do with that money: They can buy U.S. goods or they can buy U.S. financial assets, like stocks and bonds. Why is that? Why can't they spend the money elsewhere? Thanks and Best regards, Joao

[@yasminefathalah7042]

China can do so of course but they only made this example to simplify the concept that is why he said in theory

[@simplyTHATNerdGirl]

Love this series! Thank you so much for breaking it down. Very helpful!

[@Nurlan085]

Love from Azerbaijan

[@mswhatzittooya]

Maybe Trump should watch this

[@Ben-hy2hl]

I'm pretty sure trump understands economics better than you ever will.

[@mswhatzittooya]

sheesh can't you take a joke

[@Ben-hy2hl]

***** I knew it was supposed to a joke. It was one of the worst attempts a joke I've ever seen though, and to be honest I don't think you made it entirely as a joke.

[@mswhatzittooya]

You must be fun at parties. Love to stay and have a meaningless banter with a random stranger online but I've got stuff to do. Cheers

[@Ben-hy2hl]

***** If those are your jokes you probably aren't very fun anywhere.

[@robertnam121]

When the US imports increases, shouldn't the export decrease thus causing the dollar to appreciate? according to 7:21, the dollar depreciates. PROVE ME WRONG PLS

[@MrTacticalinuit]

A lot of our imports come from other countries.

[@montymonty5040]

Thats why they are called imports, duh

[@brutusmaximusdecimus7680]

+MrTacticalinuit Ahhhhh, yes. George W. Bush.... One of the most amazing quotes from him. So.... Philosophical -.-(I am joking, idk how he won twice)

[@coopsnz1]

Who caused that left government

[@hannibalbarca7914]

I'd prefer Bush than Trump any day now

[@grrr1351]

No, it was imported from Michigan.

[@neeneko]

The trouble with 'net gain' as a metric is that it prioritizes the, well, net gain. NAFTA did indeed make the US wealthier in an absolute sense, but that gain was concentrated fairly high up the ladder, creating a small number of well paid jobs, a large number of 'worse than before', and a tiny number of extreme wealth generation. The final number comes out higher, but the median drops.

[@Beastinvader]

You export Kanye West albums to the world? Why would you dot that?

[@Moribus_Artibus]

Nobody really buys them anyways except for UK and Canada

[@Beastinvader]

freddo 1614 Yeah stupid mistake, I admit.

[@LOSTGAM3R]

His music is good af

[@nobaso620]

To destabilise them

[@rubberbandproductions6885]

im a fish

[@NewAirsoft]

The most amazing thing about this video is the Karl Marx bust on the desk in background.

[@jillelkins9864]

Trying to study for economics but every time i watch this, I almost fall asleep... ugh

[@seandafny]

Lmaooooo so me

[@seandafny]

Keep trying bro it will work out. 1 day u will finish it. Keep going.

[@fatphobicandproud9003]

Drink some coffee, it helps.

[@maeangelietan4303]

I like it! Trade improves global standard of living.

[@TheDilettante]

The Fulton Recovery System aids in international trade :)

[@g21g28]

+Michael Kandrashoff Fed-Ex, bringing Russians to your Mother Base since 1984.

[@bessiedouglas4530]

This is the best video for anyone who needs to seek out out about this topic. You notice a lot its virtually arduous to argue with you (not that I actually would needHaHa). You definitely put a new spin on a topic thats been written about for years. Nice stuff, simply great!

[@chaturiwathsala2720]

thank you sir, thank you so much. I'm really like your teaching style and, it makes me easy to understand those complex thing. This is really helpful to me and hope this would be a great help to other students too. I feel lucky to be your student even through the KZbin. thank you again.

[@crinosis2302]

If I understood right, the benefits of currency depreciation has a limited effect until currency appreciation happens. Thus it is a back and forth game of manufacturing, unless a country manipulates its currency to keep it depreciated and maintain the upper hand in exports.

[@oneaboveall1895]

"Best wishes, John Green"

[@amanpathak7742]

😁

[@njmudaliar]

NAFTA was good for all three countries. We are manufacturing more in the US than at any time in history, and though some small industries may have been temporarily hit, the job gains across all other economic sectors way outweigh the losses. The US needs to approve the Trans Pacific Partnership free trade deal. It's not perfect, but it cuts taxes & tariffs on trade and eliminates regulatory barriers so people can live free. It'll give us more jobs, more wealth, and more prosperity.

[@vaughnmcgill-adami7760]

Free trade would be a good thing if both governments involved had the same rules regulating the economy, otherwise corperations will just move to the country that has the lowest minimum wage and the longest working hours. Motivating the two countries to compete for worse working condions so corperations stay in their country

[@mrhypnagogia]

Vaughn McGill-Adami dude the usa has been arguing for free market since the 70s EVERYWHERE AROUND THE WORLD.

[@Kenny-hr5wl]

A one legged man China is a communist country.

[@Lazarosaliths]

the ac-dc belt show begins !!

[@blspot]

Crash Course: No large country will go for protectionism Donald Trump : Hold my Beer

[@jhonnyvergaraadrian3797]

I really like Economics! This videos have helped me a lot! Greetings from the country with the worst inflation in the world, Venezuela!

[@lukemekenkamp1198]

"It is unlikely that the worlds largest economies will return to protectionism." This would have sounded so reasonable before Trump came along. But no it doesnt anymore in the Trump economy.

[@ADEehrh]

Oh... why.... you're mistaken; the US economy is doing great! The best in the world. I know 'cause dmfp says so; and since his blind lemming followers believe anything he says and... all thoose people can't be wrong!..... 🙃😟 Come on 2020!!!

[@oscartelfer3029]

Great Video, but I do think you should explain the risks and negative sides of free trade agreements a bit more.

[@dannysegundo4018]

Trump baby!!

[@19james77]

starting at 2:45 she described the destruction of the middle class as a thing that was kind of okay

[@Matt_Kole]

James C just no

[@treyark49]

Please read the chapter and retake the test after you study.

[@koukkoufos2000]

+xXCoolCatXx He's correct though unless you support Globalism (Free Trade which mostly benefits corporations) lol don't get me wrong I support International Trade based on NECESSITY but not Free Trade because we need to bring back Protectionism lol

[@elliotunderhill3617]

Harry Christofi "Bring back protectionism" Why do you hate the global poor?

[@bruce5868]

Well yeah. The same thing happened during the industrial revolution. People learned different skills and moved on, and everyone was better off as a result. The middle class will move to the upper middle class as the United States becomes a service based economy.

[@user-ri2uj2ff9y]

A bonus episode on TPP would be awesome.

[@h.i.sjoevall4213]

4:52 "it's unlikely that the worlds larges economies will return to strict protectionism" hehe

[@dh2950]

It’s so crazy how I’m watching this in 2018. NAFTA, protectionism, tariffs. All a reality now. Just hope this great county doesn’t get run into the ground

[@justvirtuoso3668]

no ones gonna mention his acdc belt?

[@cheshirexpirate]

Will you be doing an episode about how countries handle trading natural resources?