In any of those cases the deficit itself is not a debt. It leads other people to have extra dollars, and one use of those dollars is to loan them to Americans (not just T-bills but also purchase of private bonds, or other types of loans), but that doesn't make the deficit itself a debt, even if every dollar went in to T-bills, and the cycle repeated endlessly.
I'll agree that many economists think long term trade deficits are no more of a problem than many of those same economists thought low interests rates coupled with innovative mortgage products in a "low" inflationary environment were in the last 5 years. I'll also claim that said economists exhibit about equal insight in both situations. Just another example of how economics seems to largely lack predictive power, even with pretty gross system dynamics.
Other companies buy stock, buy land, or as the dollar declines they might be more likely to buy some American products with the dollars from previous sales.
If they are buying anything other than debt, it is reducing the trade deficit, so that should not be in this discussion. If they are simply accumulating paper (either greenbacks or T-bills, or bonds, or anything like that) then they are accumulating debt. When they seek to do something with that debt, we will find out how remarkable the effects are. |
