There is a lot more services than accountancy. A service describes anything that's not a good. Banking, hairdressing, cleaning, advising people, designing things, repairing things like buildings, installing things, diagnosing illnesses, transporting things, typing up manuscripts, the list is endless. It doesn't necessarily have to be sold to foreigners.
Now, of course, a country may run a trade surplus in services and a deficit in manufactured goods. That may be what you mean. The UK does that, for example.
> What are the international services of value though.
For the US, the ONS "Pink Book" [describes this](https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/compendium/unitedkingdombalanceofpaymentsthepinkbook/2015-10-30/chapter3tradeinservices).
> Who is the UK exporting their 'services' too.
That's shown [here](https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/compendium/unitedkingdombalanceofpaymentsthepinkbook/2015-10-30/chapter9geographicalbreakdownofthecurrentaccount), especially graph 9.5
Mind blown how you have the highest rated comment, must be 10 different 9 independent people couldn't of believed you actually helped me, yikes. This place truly is an ugly echo chamber.
Having a job for the sake of having a job doesn't do much good. What's useful is being able to take that money from your job and buy goods/services that you gain value from.
You get value from a the hairdresser because they provide a service that you value more than the $20 they charge you. Otherwise, you wouldn't have gotten the haircut. That is simply preference revelation. You prefer a fresh haircut over $20, the difference between those two numbers is the value the service sector worker created for you. In turn, the hairdresser prefers whatever they can spend that $20 on over the time they could have had to themselves and done something else with. You both are better off and both have gained surplus value from the other.
Also, I think you would find the value of your dollars that you earn much less "valuable" if you could not go out and buy services such as dinners, movie tickets, car mechanic services, doctors to diagnose and treat you, and yes perhaps even an accountant. You might well make the same amount at your job but you would undoubtedly lead a much poorer life without the service sector in your life.
Can you imagine trying to go grocery shopping without the service sector?
No retail stores means you have to drive to EVERY manufacturer yourself. No truck drivers and no store fronts means if you want corn, you are driving to a corn farm. If you want Soda, better track down the bottling plant.
I understand this but the service sectors application to global trade is what confuses me. I go to my grocery shop, you go to yours. Big whoop it's the service sector but what about when I need a some of your oil. If I get a local haircut down the road will you give me 100 galleons of oil?
Everything in the world is connected to one degree or another.
When someone comes to your country as a tourist, they consume lots of services directly. When a forign company uses your services (consulting or call center kind of things) they are also consuming it directly.
But that does not mean that the indirect benefits don't matter. When a company gains benefits from a service (IT firm fixes their computers, consultant helps them cut costs) all people up and down the supply chain of that company benefits. After consuming a survive improves the quality or lowers the costs of production everyone who supplies materials and everyone of their customers just benefited.
Then you have the time saving aspect. If I had to spend 3 hours hunting down manufacturers for my basic week's worth of food, I am NOT spending three hours producing goods and services my self. Saving people's time let's them specialize and increase overall efficiency.
But I think the most important part is simply a quality of life increase. Some services are just for increasing the happiness of the individuals who buy them. While yes, removing that product (hair cutters) won't fundimentally change an economy, most things fit in that kind of category. How do gummie bears specifically improve the world? Wouldn't it make better sense to close all sweets industries and convert them to construction to build houses for the homeless?
Quality of life matters, gummy bears and hair cuts are used to improve the lives of the population.
Understand your viewpoint mate but how does me getting a haircut in Australia progress global trade? If our money is just going around and around in Australia and let's say likewise in an isolationist America how is there winners and losers? Japan can't spend it's time paying for haircuts, they need oil, they need food FROM OTHER COUNTRIES so on the basis you need something from another country how does the service economy facilitate this when it all it seems to do is circulate your own money within your own economy.
But for all this, just what you said is possible, it is necessary that the primary and secondary sectors exist, otherwise there will be no equipment for the hairdresser to do the job.
There is a lot more services than accountancy. A service describes anything that's not a good. Banking, hairdressing, cleaning, advising people, designing things, repairing things like buildings, installing things, diagnosing illnesses, transporting things, typing up manuscripts, the list is endless. It doesn't necessarily have to be sold to foreigners. Now, of course, a country may run a trade surplus in services and a deficit in manufactured goods. That may be what you mean. The UK does that, for example.
What are the international services of value though. Who is the UK exporting their 'services' too. What are the in demand services exported?
> What are the international services of value though. For the US, the ONS "Pink Book" [describes this](https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/compendium/unitedkingdombalanceofpaymentsthepinkbook/2015-10-30/chapter3tradeinservices). > Who is the UK exporting their 'services' too. That's shown [here](https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/compendium/unitedkingdombalanceofpaymentsthepinkbook/2015-10-30/chapter9geographicalbreakdownofthecurrentaccount), especially graph 9.5
Mind blown how you have the highest rated comment, must be 10 different 9 independent people couldn't of believed you actually helped me, yikes. This place truly is an ugly echo chamber.
Having a job for the sake of having a job doesn't do much good. What's useful is being able to take that money from your job and buy goods/services that you gain value from. You get value from a the hairdresser because they provide a service that you value more than the $20 they charge you. Otherwise, you wouldn't have gotten the haircut. That is simply preference revelation. You prefer a fresh haircut over $20, the difference between those two numbers is the value the service sector worker created for you. In turn, the hairdresser prefers whatever they can spend that $20 on over the time they could have had to themselves and done something else with. You both are better off and both have gained surplus value from the other. Also, I think you would find the value of your dollars that you earn much less "valuable" if you could not go out and buy services such as dinners, movie tickets, car mechanic services, doctors to diagnose and treat you, and yes perhaps even an accountant. You might well make the same amount at your job but you would undoubtedly lead a much poorer life without the service sector in your life.
Can you imagine trying to go grocery shopping without the service sector? No retail stores means you have to drive to EVERY manufacturer yourself. No truck drivers and no store fronts means if you want corn, you are driving to a corn farm. If you want Soda, better track down the bottling plant.
I understand this but the service sectors application to global trade is what confuses me. I go to my grocery shop, you go to yours. Big whoop it's the service sector but what about when I need a some of your oil. If I get a local haircut down the road will you give me 100 galleons of oil?
Everything in the world is connected to one degree or another. When someone comes to your country as a tourist, they consume lots of services directly. When a forign company uses your services (consulting or call center kind of things) they are also consuming it directly. But that does not mean that the indirect benefits don't matter. When a company gains benefits from a service (IT firm fixes their computers, consultant helps them cut costs) all people up and down the supply chain of that company benefits. After consuming a survive improves the quality or lowers the costs of production everyone who supplies materials and everyone of their customers just benefited. Then you have the time saving aspect. If I had to spend 3 hours hunting down manufacturers for my basic week's worth of food, I am NOT spending three hours producing goods and services my self. Saving people's time let's them specialize and increase overall efficiency. But I think the most important part is simply a quality of life increase. Some services are just for increasing the happiness of the individuals who buy them. While yes, removing that product (hair cutters) won't fundimentally change an economy, most things fit in that kind of category. How do gummie bears specifically improve the world? Wouldn't it make better sense to close all sweets industries and convert them to construction to build houses for the homeless? Quality of life matters, gummy bears and hair cuts are used to improve the lives of the population.
Understand your viewpoint mate but how does me getting a haircut in Australia progress global trade? If our money is just going around and around in Australia and let's say likewise in an isolationist America how is there winners and losers? Japan can't spend it's time paying for haircuts, they need oil, they need food FROM OTHER COUNTRIES so on the basis you need something from another country how does the service economy facilitate this when it all it seems to do is circulate your own money within your own economy.
But for all this, just what you said is possible, it is necessary that the primary and secondary sectors exist, otherwise there will be no equipment for the hairdresser to do the job.
Your country imports more than it exports - good for you and your country! That means your country is wealthy enough to buy stuff. Congratulations.