Why the Trade Deficit Matters

NYT: Why the Trade Deficit Matters, and What Trump Can Do About It
- excerpt:

“The jobs and wealth have been stripped from our country year after year, decade after decade, trade deficit upon trade deficit,” he said in March — as he ordered up a country-by-country review of the nation’s trade imbalances.

The president’s focus is misguided, of course. Bilateral trade balances are not a measure of comparative prowess. His proposals to reduce them by pulling the United States out of the North American Free Trade Agreement and slapping tariffs on Chinese goods would not create manufacturing jobs in the United States. Instead, they might generate jobs in another country with ce nation’s trade imbalances.
heap labor, or lead to more automation.

And yet the president’s political success, 30 years after his diatribes against Japan, underscores just how much the trade deficit matters. A symbol of America’s malaise, it helped propel his insurgent candidacy to the presidency by harnessing beleaguered workers’ anger at the status quo.

Click to expand...

His prescription remedy is a classic non-starter - and yet he understands very well the problem. He just wont admit it.

The jobs that have been lost aren't coming back. They were lost because higher US labor costs pushed them into the far-East, and those without the necessary advanced skills/competencies are being left behind. Worse yet, to obtain those skills companies are obliged to hire foreigners? (You betcha!)

What's happening? The post-secondary schooling costs to obtain the necessary qualifications are too effing expensive. So, our kids or their families are not able to obtain them.

Last count I saw from the Dept. of Education stats, 45% of our secondary-school graduates are not obtaining an advanced degree. Thus guaranteeing them a lifetime of below average individual wage existence (at $54K per year), and incarcerating 14% of them below the Poverty Threshold (at $24K per year for a family of four).

And that's the fault of who? The Democrats, who's last candidate promised free post-secondary education for all families below the $100K earnings threshold?

Yeah, right. We all collectively shot ourselves in the foot on that one! The irony being that it was in those key states of the Electoral College won by Donald Dork that those jobs were most necessary.

Only in America, could that have happened. It's the only country on earth to have warped an honestly democratic presidential election by means of an Electoral College artifice ... !

First of all, the issue is "fair trade". Countries that create artificial import barriers for US goods have skewed the economics against America. This must be rectified.

There is more to an advanced degree other than education. It's upbringing. Too many parents let bright kids wile away their days on video games, phones, etc. while the successful kids are competing with each other for the best grade. We are raising a nation of slackers. "I want a job I like". "I don't want to relocate". "I don't like that companies politics". "That company isn't inclusive enough".

The "low individual wage" is directly traceable to an excess of labor allowed into to hold wages down by Obama for his big business cronies. "Republicans want illegals to work and not vote. Democrats what illegals to vote and not work". Look around. Mexico has come into the USA and colonized a large part of our workforce and we still don't get it. Americans are fat and lazy. They are hungry and ambitious.

Free education post high school. The first year is where the students are sorted into those who don't belong, and those who do. There are plenty of ways to go to college with out it being the thirteenth grade in high school. Yet you can't find an American plumber, carpenter, landscaper, construction worker. "The work is too hard". "I might get skin cancer". "We have other people to do that". "The wages are too low".

The electoral college is a historical fact to prevent the failure of the union by tyranny of the majority. Of course you know that, and you'd be bitching if you were on the winning end of that argument. Unless you plan to write a new constitution, deal with it.

Lafayette said:

NYT: Why the Trade Deficit Matters, and What Trump Can Do About It
- excerpt:



His prescription remedy is a classic non-starter - and yet he understands very well the problem. He just wont admit it.

The jobs that have been lost aren't coming back. They were lost because higher US labor costs pushed them into the far-East, and those without the necessary advanced skills/competencies are being left behind. Worse yet, to obtain those skills companies are obliged to hire foreigners? (You betcha!)

What's happening? The post-secondary schooling costs to obtain the necessary qualifications are too effing expensive. So, our kids or their families are not able to obtain them.

Last count I saw from the Dept. of Education stats, 45% of our secondary-school graduates are not obtaining an advanced degree. Thus guaranteeing them a lifetime of below average individual wage existence (at $54K per year), and incarcerating 14% of them below the Poverty Threshold (at $24K per year for a family of four).

And that's the fault of who? The Democrats, who's last candidate promised free post-secondary education for all families below the $100K earnings threshold?

Yeah, right. We all collectively shot ourselves in the foot on that one! The irony being that it was in those key states of the Electoral College won by Donald Dork that those jobs were most necessary.

Only in America, could that have happened. It's the only country on earth to have warped an honestly democratic presidential election by means of an Electoral College artifice ... !

Click to expand...

Your blaming the wrong thing, bud. I would have voted for Sanders had the dude been on the ballot. But he wasn't. Why was that? Certainly not because of the EC.

KevinKohler said:

Your blaming the wrong thing, bud. I would have voted for Sanders had the dude been on the ballot. But he wasn't. Why was that? Certainly not because of the EC.

Click to expand...

Bernie was stabbed in the back by the democrats in plain view of the media and no one gave a rip.

maybe Bernie wasn't on the ballot because Mrs. Clinton received more primary votes than he did.

How was bernie stabbed in the back?

Floridafan said:

How was bernie stabbed in the back?

Click to expand...

The DNC colluded with their media partners and Clinton to torpedo Sanders campaign.

This is proven fact via leaked DNC emails.

This makes no sense, just how was Sanders campaign torpedoed? I heard him on TV on a regular basis and he did get his message out

KevinKohler said:

Your blaming the wrong thing, bud. I would have voted for Sanders had the dude been on the ballot. But he wasn't. Why was that? Certainly not because of the EC.

Click to expand...

Interesting conjecture.

However, have a read here: Did enough Bernie Sanders supporters vote for Trump to cost Clinton the election? - tiny excerpt:

New data is shedding light, however, on Sanders’s role in the last election — and on how many Sanders voters ended up supporting Trump. It’s a question many in the party will be asking about a candidate who may want to compete again for the Democratic nomination.

How many Sanders voters voted for Donald Trump?

Click to expand...

Reading the answer is well worth it ...

Lafayette said:

Interesting conjecture.

However, have a read here: Did enough Bernie Sanders supporters vote for Trump to cost Clinton the election? - tiny excerpt:



Reading the answer is well worth it ...

Click to expand...

Didn't read the article thoroughly, I skimmed to the end. Seems like what the DNC did cost them the White House, and to be honest, I can absolutely believe that. This past election was about establishment vs anti establishment.

The DNC ****ed up big time.

KevinKohler said:

Didn't read the article thoroughly, I skimmed to the end. Seems like what the DNC did cost them the White House, and to be honest, I can absolutely believe that. This past election was about establishment vs anti establishment.

The DNC ****ed up big time.

Click to expand...

There are always two No-Nos in politics. One is Too Dumb. The other is Too Smart.

A candidate in the middle must know how to appeal to both sides.

Hillary, one helluva smart lady, I suggest, was out of touch with "the other side" ...

PS: Husband "Billy boy" never made that mistake. Not even when he got caught with his hand in the cookie-jar.

Lafayette, annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP. They're reflected by their nation's lesser number of jobs than otherwise. If the USA adopted the Import Certificate policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article, it would increase our GDP and numbers of jobs more than otherwise.

Individual purchasers seek the best values for their money. If USA adopted the Import Certificate policy, what individual purchasers consider to be to their own best interests would also be to their nation's immediate and long-term economic best interest.

Respectfully, Supposn

I'm Supposn said:

If USA adopted the Import Certificate policy, what individual purchasers consider to be to their own best interests would also be to their nation's immediate and long-term economic best interest.

Click to expand...

another magical libcommie idea!! How is Americas interest served by protecting and crippling American industry and by impoverishing tariff taxes on what we buy?

James972 said:

another magical libcommie idea!! How is Americas interest served by protecting and crippling American industry and by impoverishing tariff taxes on what we buy?

Click to expand...

James972, if you're able, please identify which specific USA industry and/or enterprises would be crippled if USA adopted the proposed Import Certificate policy and how would it be crippled?

Respectfully, Supposn

I'm Supposn said:

James972, if you're able, please identify which specific USA industry and/or enterprises would be crippled if USA adopted the proposed Import Certificate policy and how would it be crippled?

Respectfully, Supposn

Click to expand...

all industries that are protected from competition are progressively crippled. This is a formula to cripple our country.

I'm Supposn said:

... If USA adopted the Import Certificate policy, what individual purchasers consider to be to their own best interests would also be to their nation's immediate and long-term economic best interest. ...

Click to expand...

James972 said:

another magical libcommie idea!! How is Americas interest served by protecting and crippling American industry and by impoverishing tariff taxes on what we buy?

Click to expand...

I'm Supposn said:

James972, if you're able, please identify which specific USA industry and/or enterprises would be crippled if USA adopted the proposed Import Certificate policy and how would it be crippled?...

Click to expand...

James972 said:

all industries that are protected from competition are progressively crippled. This is a formula to cripple our country.

Click to expand...

James972, you're so astute. You know precisely how and which enterprises will go down, but you don't wish to let all of your “libcommie” enemies know that you know. We understand.
Be careful; don't let your aluminum foil cap fall off or the aliens will be able to hack into your thoughts.

We all wish you well but I don't suppose you believe that.
Continue keeping the White House informed of latest developments, Supposn

I'm Supposn said:

James972, you're so astute. You know precisely how and which enterprises will go down, but you don't wish to let all of your “libcommie” enemies know that you know.

Click to expand...

nobody knows which protected industries will go down, by how much, and on what schedule. What we know is that if you protect a student, business, or athlete from competition their performance will deteriorate. Now do you understand?

I'm Supposn said:

Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDPLafayette, regardless of a nation’s annual GDP, if their trade balance was positive, (i.e. an annual trade surplus) increased, or a negative balance (i.e. an annual trade deficit) reduced their annual gross domestic product. That's not an opinion, it is a factor integral to the expenditure formula for calculating a nation's annual GDP; (that the prevalent formula used by economists and statisticians throughout the world).

Click to expand...

The national income accounting identity cannot be used to understand the relationship between trade deficits and economic growth. You have stated this same falsehood on this forum multiple times, even though you've been corrected many, many times. Please stop trying to make things up... it's weird.

Kushinator said:

The national income accounting identity cannot be used to understand the relationship between trade deficits and economic growth. You have stated this same falsehood on this forum multiple times, even though you've been corrected many, many times. Please stop trying to make things up... it's weird.

Click to expand...

Kushinator, you have often stated the quoted excerpt from your post transcript from your post. This same falsehood has been corrected many, many times. Please stop trying to make things up... it's weird.

Regardless of a nation’s annual GDP's amount, if their trade balance was positive, (i.e. an annual trade surplus) increased, or a negative balance (i.e. an annual trade deficit) reduced their annual gross domestic product. That's not an opinion, it is a factor integral to the expenditure formula for calculating a nation's annual GDP; (that the prevalent formula used by economists and statisticians throughout the world).

Occurrences of a nation's significant annual GDP changes are expected to be accompanied by similarly modified numbers of jobs.
Trade deficits are always, (more than otherwise) net detrimental to their nation's GDP and numbers of jobs; (otherwise being if the nation had not experienced a trade deficit).

Respectfully, Supposn

I'm Supposn said:

Kushinator, you have often stated the quoted excerpt from your post transcript from your post. This same falsehood has been corrected many, many times. Please stop trying to make things up... it's weird.

Click to expand...

You've never corrected anything pertaining to this topic. We can simply examine the data from the past 35 years to get an idea how gdp and net exports behave:

That's not an opinion, it is a factor integral to the expenditure formula for calculating a nation's annual GDP; (that the prevalent formula used by economists and statisticians throughout the world).

Click to expand...

And for the nth time... how growth is accounted for does not explain the relationship between these synthetic subsets. Don't feel too bad, as you're not the first and certainly not the last to misinterpret the utility of national income accounting. If you continue to push this false narrative, i will advise others not to take you seriously.

I'm Supposn said:

James972, if you're able, please identify which specific USA industry and/or enterprises would be crippled if USA adopted the proposed Import Certificate policy and how would it be crippled?

Respectfully, Supposn

Click to expand...

James972 said:

nobody knows which protected industries will go down, by how much, and on what schedule. What we know is that if you protect a student, business, or athlete from competition their performance will deteriorate. Now do you understand?

Click to expand...

James972, I understand your inability to know when, or which USA enterprises would be "crippled". But you haven't a clue as to what industries, or types of industries, or some clue as to how they would be crippled?
Respectfully, Supposn

I'm Supposn said:

James972, I understand your inability to know when, or which USA enterprises would be "crippled". But you haven't a clue as to what industries, or types of industries, or some clue as to how they would be crippled?
Respectfully, Supposn

Click to expand...

when an industry is protected from competition it does not have to have products of the best quality. Consumers prefer the rising standard of living they get from buying products with the best quality.

and never forget that a liberal will lack the IQ to understand how capitalism works and thus have 10001 other ways to interfere with free market besides protecting and crippling industry with tariffs.

Kushinator said:

You've never corrected anything pertaining to this topic. We can simply examine the data from the past 35 years to get an idea how gdp and net exports behave:

And for the nth time... how growth is accounted for does not explain the relationship between these synthetic subsets. Don't feel too bad, as you're not the first and certainly not the last to misinterpret the utility of national income accounting. If you continue to push this false narrative, i will advise others not to take you seriously.

Click to expand...

Kushinator, soda and whiskey, or scotch, or Gin, or wine, all induce drunkenness. Obviously we should regulate the sale and use of sodas?
What're the causes and what's the effects?

Trade balances are driven by foreign goods sales within their nation's domestic markets. Generally when nation's GDP are reduced, domestic markets' sales volumes are similarly reduced.

Regardless of a nation’s annual GDP's amount, if their trade balance was positive, (i.e. an annual trade surplus) increased, or a negative balance (i.e. an annual trade deficit) reduced their annual gross domestic product. That's not an opinion, it is a factor integral to the expenditure formula for calculating a nation's annual GDP; (that the prevalent formula used by economists and statisticians throughout the world).

Don't feel too bad, as you're not the first and certainly not the last to misinterpret statistics. But if you continue to push your false narrative, your opinions should and hoperfully will be less seriously considered.

Respectfully, Supposn

James972 said:

when an industry is protected from competition it does not have to have products of the best quality. Consumers prefer the rising standard of living they get from buying products with the best quality.

and never forget that a liberal will lack the IQ to understand how capitalism works and thus have 10001 other ways to interfere with free market besides protecting and crippling industry with tariffs.

Click to expand...

James972,I'm not discussing tariffs; I'm a proponent of the policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article.
Are you contending USA enterprises do not effectively compete among themselves; USA enterprises are generally incompetent and/or conspiring to evade all USA antitrust laws; all governments within the USA are unwilling or unable to enact and enforce such laws? USA marketplaces with only evil USA participants fail to serve USA purchasers due to the absence of the more altruistic foreign producers?


There are imports from nations with lesser USA scales. Both the quality and price of products are affected by the time and quality of labor that was devoted to the products. (Note; differing quality of labor command differing wage rates).

The infrastructures to support the production of goods].

Individual persons and enterprises derive direct financial benefits when they(correctly) choose to purchase imported goods.
Although individual purchasers benefit, a nation’s annual trade deficits AlWAYS “drag” upon their nation’s GDP and numbers of jobs;(i.e. annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their economies).

All USA purchasers benefit due to any imports’ superior values per dollar, but those advantages do not compensate for our chronic annual trade deficits effects upon employees, their dependents, and all others to any extent they’re dependent upon enterprises that are themselves dependent upon the purchasing powers of USA employees and their families.

Respectfully,Supposn