China produces lots of manufactured goods, and sells them to the US. The US produces tons of valuable urban real estate and exports it to China. (Similarly the US produces lots of higher education, and exports it in the form of international students)
Economically, there is a fundamental difference between finite, rent-generating resources like land, and value-added goods like Chinese trinkets or international students.
Exporting value-added goods builds the economy. Exporting rent-collecting resources results in significant long-term harm to the economy.
American policy makers have chosen policies (eg zoning law) that make it easy to produce valuable urban residences. Now they have a massive competitive advantage in high-end residences, so of course they will become exporters.
“Capable of growth” and “not finite” are not the same thing.
> there is a fundamental difference between finite, rent-generating resources like land, and value-added goods
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_account
Just like a business, a country can maintain short term losses by accepting outside investment, or debt. This is not necessarily a bad thing. Almost all companies take on debt and investment to fund their growth.
Also, just like a business, you can’t do this forever. At some point the debt comes due, and/or you end up selling the whole business.
Outside investment in businesses is not a bad thing. Outside investment in land is.
i'm in the market for a few TEUs of US land, preferably downtown san francisco. i'll pick it up in Hamburg or Antwerp and would like a house on it.
sarcasm off - just no.