Would have thought advertising and transaction fees myself, but the article says it's usually oil (ok I should have thought of that), "pharmaceuticals" (mkay, seems cheaper to make elsewhere so that's a bit strange), or aircraft and their parts (wut? How many aircraft can the world need that it commonly tops the export chart of the wealthiest country?!)
> How many aircraft can the world need that it commonly tops the export chart of the wealthiest country?!
Consider how many American companies exclusively manufacture in the far east.
If a European buys a product "made by" Apple or nvidia or Nike or Levis - that's not an American export, it's an export of Indonesia, China, Vietnam, Taiwan, or wherever. America still gets the profits, though.
Because in-patent pharmaceuticals are a LOT more expensive than out of patent ones their monetary value is far greater than the greater volume of out of patent pharmaceuticals. If you look at where big pharma makes its revenues and their sales relative to generics sellers you can see this. Because of that the cost of making them is not really that important.
As for aircraft, not that many in number, but very expensive things with very expensive parts.
> How many aircraft can the world need that it commonly tops the export chart of the wealthiest country?
Airliners and military aircraft are expensive. Consider that nearly the entire aircraft production capacity of Boeing and Lockheed-Martin as well as the engine production capacity of GE and P&W are booked for years to come. Also, unlike Airbus which has multiple final assembly plants across the world, Boeing only does final assembly in the US.
I think those count as services. Gold is the most-exported good.
Title doesn't mention good specifically.
How are service exports counted? All together? Or not considered exports?
> Title doesn't mention good specifically
Literally the link in the first paragraph: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IEAXGG.
It’s conventional, in American English, for exports unadorned to mean just goods. It’s anachronistic. But it isn’t wrong.
Would have thought advertising and transaction fees myself, but the article says it's usually oil (ok I should have thought of that), "pharmaceuticals" (mkay, seems cheaper to make elsewhere so that's a bit strange), or aircraft and their parts (wut? How many aircraft can the world need that it commonly tops the export chart of the wealthiest country?!)
> How many aircraft can the world need that it commonly tops the export chart of the wealthiest country?!
Consider how many American companies exclusively manufacture in the far east.
If a European buys a product "made by" Apple or nvidia or Nike or Levis - that's not an American export, it's an export of Indonesia, China, Vietnam, Taiwan, or wherever. America still gets the profits, though.
Because in-patent pharmaceuticals are a LOT more expensive than out of patent ones their monetary value is far greater than the greater volume of out of patent pharmaceuticals. If you look at where big pharma makes its revenues and their sales relative to generics sellers you can see this. Because of that the cost of making them is not really that important.
As for aircraft, not that many in number, but very expensive things with very expensive parts.
> How many aircraft can the world need that it commonly tops the export chart of the wealthiest country?
Airliners and military aircraft are expensive. Consider that nearly the entire aircraft production capacity of Boeing and Lockheed-Martin as well as the engine production capacity of GE and P&W are booked for years to come. Also, unlike Airbus which has multiple final assembly plants across the world, Boeing only does final assembly in the US.
Goods versus services. We tend to use the word “exports” to refer to only the former in America, which is anachronistic.
I mean, wouldn't that make sense given the market caps?
So many trillion-dollar valued AI-focused companies.
It would make sense if the AI companies were rationally valued, yes. But they're not, so it's not.