• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Balance of trade understated effects upon their nation's domestic production.

I

I'm Supposn

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
1,819
Reaction score
281
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Balances of trade understate their effects upon their nation's domestic production.

Nation's balances of international trade are determined by the total net prices of their globally traded goods and service products which contribute to trade surplus nations' and reduce trade deficit nations' gross domestic products, (GDPs).

We know productions from different enterprises can resonate with each other.

An example of a factory's units of production affecting sales volumes, (i.e. units of production) for some other enterprises would be a pizza shop nearby a factory. Both the factory and the pizza shop contribute to their nation's domestic production, and when more or fewer factory workers are employed, both enterprises' production, (i.e. their sales volumes) are more or less affected.

Both enterprises contribute to their nation's domestic production, but they do not affect each other's prices per units of production. If the factory increases their workforce to produce more export products, the increased Pizza shop sales will not be recognized and attributed as due to the nation's increased production for global trade. Trade surplus nation's positive balance of global trade contributes to their GDP, but their net trade balance to some extent understates global trades' effects upon their domestic production.

Nations' annual imports crowd their domestic products out of their nation's marketplaces and thus reduced their nation's domestic productions. Just as positive trade balances contributed to surplus trade nations' GDPs, negative trade balances reduced trade deficit nations' GDPs and their balances of trade to some extents understated their effects upon their nation's domestic production.

This leverage due to resonating production is the major among causes of trade balances understating their effects upon their nation's domestic production.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
We know it's not unusual for government or quasi-government entities such as universities, or utility companies providing some local producer with goods, services, or other considerations at lesser than market, or at no costs in order to promote their local economies.

Producers benefits from public infrastructures or other considerations at lesser than market costs are usually reflected as lower prices for those producers' products; regardless of this, all domestically produced goods and service products do contribute to their nation's GDP.
But to the extents that nations' entire contributions to their production of globally traded goods are not entirely reflected within the prices of their globally traded products, trade balances contribute to surplus trade nations' GDPs, and and their detrimental effects upon the GDPs of trade deficit nations, all exceed the their nation's net balances of trade.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
Last edited:
We know that production per unit costs are often affected by their volumes of production; (i.e mass production induces economies of scale). When the same production lines or tools are employed for both domestic and exported production costs, they similarly affect the per unit costs of both products produced for export or domestic markets which in turn affects the “real” values of those productions.

Trade balances contribute to surplus trade nations' GDPs. We cannot account or estimate the extent those additional production values due to global trade provided additional economies of scales to those trade surplus nations.
Similarly, trade deficits are detrimental to their nation's GDPs. We cannot account or estimate the extent of trade deficits nations reduced values of GDP beyond the extent of their negative balance of trade. Among those inestimable losses, were opportunities for economies of scale.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
I'm Supposn said:
Trade balances contribute to surplus trade nations' GDPs. We cannot account or estimate the extent those additional production values due to global trade provided additional economies of scales to those trade surplus nations.

Similarly, trade deficits are detrimental to their nation's GDPs. We cannot account or estimate the extent of trade deficits nations reduced values of GDP beyond the extent of their negative balance of trade. Among those inestimable losses, were opportunities for economies of scale.

Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...

According to Wiki, there are three methods of calculating GDP: Production approach, Income approach and Expenditure approach. The Expenditure approach does take imports and exports (trade balance) into consideration.

Expenditure approach
The third way to estimate GDP is to calculate the sum of the final uses of goods and services (all uses except intermediate consumption) measured in purchasers' prices.[2]

Market goods which are produced are purchased by someone. In the case where a good is produced and unsold, the standard accounting convention is that the producer has bought the good from themselves. Therefore, measuring the total expenditure used to buy things is a way of measuring production. This is known as the expenditure method of calculating GDP.

Components of GDP by expenditure

U.S. GDP computed on the expenditure basis.
GDP (Y) is the sum of consumption (C), investment (I), government spending (G) and net exports (X – M).

Y = C + I + G + (X − M)
Here is a description of each GDP component:

C (consumption) is normally the largest GDP component in the economy, consisting of private expenditures in the economy (household final consumption expenditure). These personal expenditures fall under one of the following categories: durable goods, nondurable goods, and services. Examples include food, rent, jewelry, gasoline, and medical expenses, but not the purchase of new housing.

I (investment) includes, for instance, business investment in equipment, but does not include exchanges of existing assets. Examples include construction of a new mine, purchase of software, or purchase of machinery and equipment for a factory. Spending by households (not government) on new houses is also included in investment. In contrast to its colloquial meaning, "investment" in GDP does not mean purchases of financial products. Buying financial products is classed as 'saving', as opposed to investment. This avoids double-counting: if one buys shares in a company, and the company uses the money received to buy plant, equipment, etc., the amount will be counted toward GDP when the company spends the money on those things; to also count it when one gives it to the company would be to count two times an amount that only corresponds to one group of products. Buying bonds or stocks is a swapping of deeds, a transfer of claims on future production, not directly an expenditure on products.

G (government spending) is the sum of government expenditures on final goods and services. It includes salaries of public servants, purchases of weapons for the military and any investment expenditure by a government. It does not include any transfer payments, such as social security or unemployment benefits.

X (exports) represents gross exports. GDP captures the amount a country produces, including goods and services produced for other nations' consumption, therefore exports are added.

M (imports) represents gross imports. Imports are subtracted since imported goods will be included in the terms G, I, or C, and must be deducted to avoid counting foreign supply as domestic.

Note that C, G, and I are expenditures on final goods and services; expenditures on intermediate goods and services do not count. (Intermediate goods and services are those used by businesses to produce other goods and services within the accounting year.[14])

According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, which is responsible for calculating the national accounts in the United States, "In general, the source data for the expenditures components are considered more reliable than those for the income components [see income method, below]."[15]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product​

So yes, trade surpluses or deficits do directly affect the GDP.
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product[/INDENT]
So yes, trade surpluses or deficits do directly affect the GDP.
Click to expand...
MyCroft, thank you for your contributing response. Yes, nation's balance of international trade do explicitly effect their gross domestic productions, (GDPs).
(Refer to the first three messages of this thread).
Respectfully, Supposn
I'm Supposn said:
Balances of trade understate their effects upon their nation's domestic production. ...
... Just as positive trade balances contributed to surplus trade nations' GDPs, negative trade balances reduced trade deficit nations' GDPs and their balances of trade to some extents understated their effects upon their nation's domestic production. ...
... This leverage due to resonating production is the major among causes of trade balances understating their effects upon their nation's domestic production. ...
Click to expand...
 
I'm Supposn said:
Balances of trade understate their effects upon their nation's domestic production.

Nation's balances of international trade are determined by the total net prices of their globally traded goods and service products which contribute to trade surplus nations' and reduce trade deficit nations' gross domestic products, (GDPs).

We know productions from different enterprises can resonate with each other.

An example of a factory's units of production affecting sales volumes, (i.e. units of production) for some other enterprises would be a pizza shop nearby a factory. Both the factory and the pizza shop contribute to their nation's domestic production, and when more or fewer factory workers are employed, both enterprises' production, (i.e. their sales volumes) are more or less affected.

Both enterprises contribute to their nation's domestic production, but they do not affect each other's prices per units of production. If the factory increases their workforce to produce more export products, the increased Pizza shop sales will not be recognized and attributed as due to the nation's increased production for global trade. Trade surplus nation's positive balance of global trade contributes to their GDP, but their net trade balance to some extent understates global trades' effects upon their domestic production.

Nations' annual imports crowd their domestic products out of their nation's marketplaces and thus reduced their nation's domestic productions. Just as positive trade balances contributed to surplus trade nations' GDPs, negative trade balances reduced trade deficit nations' GDPs and their balances of trade to some extents understated their effects upon their nation's domestic production.

This leverage due to resonating production is the major among causes of trade balances understating their effects upon their nation's domestic production.

Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...

well it is better if everyone wants to buy your country's products because they are superior in quality and price. Rather than tax imports to protect and cripple our industries making them higher priced and lower quality what can you suggest??
 
James972 said:
well it is better if everyone wants to buy your country's products because they are superior in quality and price. Rather than tax imports to protect and cripple our industries making them higher priced and lower quality what can you suggest??
Click to expand...
EdwardBaiamonte aka James972, as you're aware, I'm a proponent of the improved version of the superior trade policy concept, as described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. It's substantially more market rather than government driven, would significantly reduce, if not entirely eliminate USA's chronic trade deficits of goods while increasing our annual GDPs and numbers of jobs more than otherwise. The proposed policy is superior to tariffs or pure free trade policies.

Refer to https://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/322331-import-certificate-trade-policy.html

Respectfully, Supposn
 
I'm Supposn said:
EdwardBaiamonte aka James972, as you're aware, I'm a proponent of the improved version of the superior trade policy concept, as described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. It's substantially more market rather than government driven, would significantly reduce, if not entirely eliminate USA's chronic trade deficits of goods while increasing our annual GDPs and numbers of jobs more than otherwise. The proposed policy is superior to tariffs or pure free trade policies.

Refer to https://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/322331-import-certificate-trade-policy.html

Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...

well, it is far better if other countries want to buy our country's products because they are superior in quality and price. Rather than tax imports to protect and cripple our industries making them higher priced and lower quality what can you suggest, other than paper shuffling, to make our products better???
 
James972 said:
well, it is far better if other countries want to buy our country's products because they are superior in quality and price. Rather than tax imports to protect and cripple our industries making them higher priced and lower quality what can you suggest, other than paper shuffling, to make our products better???
Click to expand...
EdwardBaiamonte aka James972, superior in both quality and price is a “high bar to go over”; improving quality often requires increasing labor costs. Labor costs and quality are not usually mutually exclusive factors.
We all benefit from cheaper priced imports, but they do not compensate for USA's chronic trade deficits detrimental effects upon our domestic production and numbers of jobs; (the net detriments to the finances of USA's aggregate employees and their dependents).
Respectfully, Supposn
I'm Supposn said:
Import Certificate trade policy.


Annual trade deficits indicate their nation used and or consumed more products than they produced.
I'm among the proponents of the improved trade policy described in Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article.
The unilateral IC policy would significantly reduce, if not entirely eliminate our nations chronic annual trade deficits of goods.


IC policy is not applicable to the values of specifically listed scarce or precious mineral materials integral to globally traded goods. The federal fees are monitored and annually set to only defray all of the federal direct expenses due to the policy. The fees and value assessment guidelines are by law annually updated.


IC policy's entire net costs are passed on to USA's purchasers of imported goods., and government's granted no discretion of policy. It's of some advantage to any USA producer competing or aspiring to compete with foreign produced goods. (A USA producing subsidiary of a foreign enterprise is no less a USA producer).


If there's effective demand for any foreign item, this policy could not prevent that item from being imported. The government does not determine what items are shipped to or from where, or when, or at what price, or at what volumes. Those are all determined and regulated by normal market behavior, government is granted no discretion of policy.
Increased prices of imports that are beyond what's attributable to the federal fees, (i.e. market-determined price increases) serve as indirect but effective price subsidies of USA's exported goods.


This unilateral, substantially market driven trade policy, doesn't discriminate among foreign nations, or among enterprises, or among types of goods. If we consider importing and exporting as a single industry engaged in foreign trade, this policy doesn't discriminate among industries.


For further details, google: Wikipedia + Import Certificates .
Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...
 
I'm Supposn said:
EdwardBaiamonte aka James972, superior in both quality and price is a “high bar to go over”; improving quality often requires increasing labor costs. Labor costs and quality are not usually mutually exclusive factors.
We all benefit from cheaper priced imports, but they do not compensate for USA's chronic trade deficits detrimental effects upon our domestic production and numbers of jobs; (the net detriments to the finances of USA's aggregate employees and their dependents).
Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...

well, it is far better if other countries want to buy our country's products because they are superior in quality and price. Rather than tax imports to protect and cripple our industries making them higher priced and lower quality what can you suggest, other than paper shuffling, to make our products better???
 
Moderator's Warning:
Stop repeating the same post, over and over.
 
James972 said:
well, it is far better if other countries want to buy our country's products because they are superior in quality and price. Rather than tax imports to protect and cripple our industries making them higher priced and lower quality what can you suggest, other than paper shuffling, to make our products better???
Click to expand...
James972, all direct costs due to Import Certificate policy are passed on to USA purchasers of foreign goods. Beyond U.S. Federal administrative and value assessing expenditures, all of those costs are market determined and they serve as indirect but effective price subsidies for USA exported goods.

The substantially market driven Import Certificate policy cannot prevent importation of an item for which effective USA demand arises.
Respectfully, Supposn
 
I'm Supposn said:
James972, all direct costs due to Import Certificate policy are passed on to USA purchasers of foreign goods. Beyond U.S. Federal administrative and value assessing expenditures, all of those costs are market determined and they serve as indirect but effective price subsidies for USA exported goods.

The substantially market driven Import Certificate policy cannot prevent importation of an item for which effective USA demand arises.
Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...

What do you suggest to make our products better and cheaper so there will be more demand for them?
 
James972 said:
What do you suggest to make our products better and cheaper so there will be more demand for them?
Click to expand...
James972, even if you consider my response unsatisfactory, Your question Is reasonable. You're not initiating the question with an accusation that I'm advocating taxing imports “to protect and cripple our industries making them higher priced and lower quality”.
Trade surplus nations produce more, and trade deficit nations produce less products than they purchase.
Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs more than otherwise.

USA adopting the policy described within Wikipedia's Import Certificate would significantly reduce, (if not eliminate) chronic annual trade deficits of goods while increasing our GDP and jobs more than otherwise.
The policy does not cripple USA industries, or increase our goods' costs, or reduce their quality. It does not reduce competition among foreign producers or among USA producers, but it is of some limited advantage to USA producers.

The policy is self-funding, all of its net costs, (including direct federal expenses) are passed on to U.S. purchasers of imported goods). To any extent import prices to USA purchasers reflect more than federal net expenses, those market determined increases behave as an indirect but effective price subsidy of USA's expored goods,

International trade's effects upon their nation's GDP actually exceed the extents of the international trade balances. We cannot identify all domestic production that was not entirely passed on as costs to producers of exports or was induced due to the production of exported products, These domestic productions are not reflected within the price valuation of exported products.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
I'm Supposn said:
James972, even if you consider my response unsatisfactory, Your question Is reasonable. You're not initiating the question with an accusation that I'm advocating taxing imports “to protect and cripple our industries making them higher priced and lower quality”.
Trade surplus nations produce more, and trade deficit nations produce less products than they purchase.
Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs more than otherwise.

USA adopting the policy described within Wikipedia's Import Certificate would significantly reduce, (if not eliminate) chronic annual trade deficits of goods while increasing our GDP and jobs more than otherwise.
The policy does not cripple USA industries, or increase our goods' costs, or reduce their quality. It does not reduce competition among foreign producers or among USA producers, but it is of some limited advantage to USA producers.

The policy is self-funding, all of its net costs, (including direct federal expenses) are passed on to U.S. purchasers of imported goods). To any extent import prices to USA purchasers reflect more than federal net expenses, those market determined increases behave as an indirect but effective price subsidy of USA's expored goods,

International trade's effects upon their nation's GDP actually exceed the extents of the international trade balances. We cannot identify all domestic production that was not entirely passed on as costs to producers of exports or was induced due to the production of exported products, These domestic productions are not reflected within the price valuation of exported products.

Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...

for 27th time: What do you suggest to make our products better and cheaper so there will be more international demand for them?
 
I'm Supposn said:
Balances of trade understate their effects upon their nation's domestic production.
Click to expand...

Still trying to foist your nonsense on people.

Your entire theory fails, because you incorrectly and falsely assume that $1 of imports equals $1 of GDP.

It does not.

$1 of imports generates $8 to $20 or more in GDP, so imports always produce a net positive GDP.

If $600 Billion in imports generates $2.4 TRILLION in GDP, then you have a net positive GDP gain of $1.8 TRILLION.

If you have $600 Billion in imports and $400 Billion in exports and that $600 Billion generates $2.4 TRILLION in GDP, then you have a net positive gain of $2 TRILLION in GDP.

In every single possible case, imports generate more in GDP than they cost, so all countries benefit from trade, whether they have a trade surplus, a trade balance or a trade deficit.
 
Mircea said:
Still trying to foist your nonsense on people.

Your entire theory fails, because you incorrectly and falsely assume that $1 of imports equals $1 of GDP.

It does not.

$1 of imports generates $8 to $20 or more in GDP, so imports always produce a net positive GDP.

If $600 Billion in imports generates $2.4 TRILLION in GDP, then you have a net positive GDP gain of $1.8 TRILLION.

If you have $600 Billion in imports and $400 Billion in exports and that $600 Billion generates $2.4 TRILLION in GDP, then you have a net positive gain of $2 TRILLION in GDP.

In every single possible case, imports generate more in GDP than they cost, so all countries benefit from trade, whether they have a trade surplus, a trade balance or a trade deficit.
Click to expand...

Mircea, trade deficits do not “generate more in GDP”, they're subtracted from their nation's spending for purchasing final goods and service products; they reduce their nation's calculated GDP. Annual trade surpluses contribute, and deficits always reduce their nation's GDP.
Respectfully, Supposn
 
Mircea said:
Still trying to foist your nonsense on people.

Your entire theory fails, because you incorrectly and falsely assume that $1 of imports equals $1 of GDP.

It does not.

$1 of imports generates $8 to $20 or more in GDP, so imports always produce a net positive GDP.

If $600 Billion in imports generates $2.4 TRILLION in GDP, then you have a net positive GDP gain of $1.8 TRILLION.

If you have $600 Billion in imports and $400 Billion in exports and that $600 Billion generates $2.4 TRILLION in GDP, then you have a net positive gain of $2 TRILLION in GDP.

In every single possible case, imports generate more in GDP than they cost, so all countries benefit from trade, whether they have a trade surplus, a trade balance or a trade deficit.
Click to expand...

Mircea, the nation's net international balance of trade, rather than individual transactions that determine global trades' effects upon their nation's GDP. That net effect exceeds the nation's net balance of trade. Annual trade surpluses increase, and deficits reduce their nation's GDP to a greater extent than their nation's net balance of trade.

Regarding your suggestion of trade balance's leverage factor upon GDP, I very much doubt your suggestion that it could reach a factor of 8.
The economic differences between domestic and imported products occur prior to their reaching the shipping platform of their domestic producers, or prior to their being under the importing nation's and their enterprise's jurisdictions and handled by their laborers. Beyond those points and times, there's extremely little or no economic differences between similar domestic and imported products.

To use your example, a nation with an annual trade deficit of only $2 billion:
The nation in aggregate has spent some determined amount for goods and services. (transfers of wealth are not included within that amount). It was spent by consumers, investors, and the government. That aggregate spending was reduced by the nation's $2 billion trade deficit which was spent for products not domestically produced. The remainder is what was calculated to be the nation's annual gross domestic product.

The leverage factor occurs because (although all domestic production is “captured” within the nation's costs of produced goods and services), producers of exported products often do not entirely pay for their full values and they are not entirely reflected within the prices of those exported products. To that extent, nation's trade balance understate their actual net amount of goods and services that contributed to their production, we cannot account for the entire amounts of GDP that should be attributed due to the nation's global trade.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
Last edited:
I'm Supposn said:
Mircea, … Annual trade surpluses increase, and deficits reduce their nation's GDP to a greater extent than their nation's net balance of trade. …
Click to expand...
Mircea, for further explanation, refer to “Trade balance’s effects upon a nation's GDP” section of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance_of_trade .
“Exports directly increase and imports directly reduce a nation's balance of trade (i.e. net exports). A trade surplus is a positive net balance of trade, and a trade deficit is a negative net balance of trade. Due to the balance of trade being explicitly added to the calculation of the nation's gross domestic product using the expenditure method of calculating gross domestic product (i.e. GDP), trade surpluses are contributions and trade deficits are "drags" upon their nation's GDP.[44][45][46] …

… 44. Jump up ^ Staff, Investopedia (11 May 2010). "Expenditure Method". Retrieved 15 March 2018.
45. Jump up ^ Analysis, US Department of Commerce, BEA, Bureau of Economic. "Bureau of Economic Analysis". U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). Retrieved 15 March 2018.
46. Jump up ^ "gross domestic product - Definition & Formula". Retrieved 15 March 2018”.
 
James972 said:
for 27th time: What do you suggest to make our products better and cheaper so there will be more international demand for them?
Click to expand...
James972, are you suggesting that USA producers are not independent competing enterprises always striving to improve the value of their products? You don't have confidence in the concept of free competitive enterprises?
USA enterprises are at price disadvantages to foreign producers due to lower foreign wage rates and other reasons.

I'm among the proponents of USA adopting the policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. That would enable USA products to be priced more competitively in comparison to foreign products.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
I'm Supposn said:
James972, are you suggesting that USA producers are not independent competing enterprises always striving to improve the value of their products?
Click to expand...

USA producers are hindered by liberal programs: taxes, unions, regulations, trade deals, budget deficits, etc. Conservatives would eliminate those problems to reduce our trade surpluses
 
I'm Supposn said:
James972, are you suggesting that USA producers are not independent competing enterprises always striving to improve the value of their products? You don't have confidence in the concept of free competitive enterprises?
USA enterprises are at price disadvantages to foreign producers due to lower foreign wage rates and other reasons.

I'm among the proponents of USA adopting the policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. That would enable USA products to be priced more competitively in comparison to foreign products. Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...
James972 said:
USA producers are hindered by liberal programs: taxes, unions, regulations, trade deals, budget deficits, etc. Conservatives would eliminate those problems to reduce our trade surpluses
Click to expand...
James972, among USA products' price disadvantages, are some foreign governments' superior health plans. Due to those government policies, their citizens are healthier at lesser cost per capita to their governments, commercial enterprises, and their citizens. Those nations' superior national health policies better enable their producers to compete with the USA.
Labor organizations have greater political power within many of those nations. Within those nations there's no less conflict (than in the USA), with regard to labor-management relations, but their governments, industrial enterprises and labor unions have somehow cooperated to establish better apprenticeship systems that feed their labor pools. USA cannot compete with some foreign industries due to some foreign nations' superior (to USA's) labor pools.

The products of many foreign nations training and educational systems are superior to that of the USA. Any improvement of a nation's training and educational systems will be reflected by no lesser extent of improving their economic and social well-being.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
I'm Supposn said:
James972, among USA products' price disadvantages, are some foreign governments' superior health plans. Due to those government policies, their citizens are healthier at lesser cost per capita to their governments, commercial enterprises, and their citizens. Those nations' superior national health policies better enable their producers to compete with the USA.
Labor organizations have greater political power within many of those nations. Within those nations there's no less conflict (than in the USA), with regard to labor-management relations, but their governments, industrial enterprises and labor unions have somehow cooperated to establish better apprenticeship systems that feed their labor pools. USA cannot compete with some foreign industries due to some foreign nations' superior (to USA's) labor pools.

The products of many foreign nations training and educational systems are superior to that of the USA. Any improvement of a nation's training and educational systems will be reflected by no lesser extent of improving their economic and social well-being.

Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...

USA producers are hindered by liberal programs: taxes, unions, regulations, trade deals, budget deficits, and expensive liberal health care etc. Conservatives would eliminate those problems to reduce our trade surpluses and greatly enhance our competitiveness.

your idea of crippling tariffs is juvenile
 
James972 said:
USA producers are hindered by liberal programs: taxes, unions, regulations, trade deals, budget deficits, and expensive liberal health care etc. Conservatives would eliminate those problems to reduce our trade surpluses and greatly enhance our competitiveness.

your idea of crippling tariffs is juvenile
Click to expand...
James972, I'm a proponent of Import Certificates rather than tariffs. Import Certificate policy would significantly reduce, if not entirely eliminate USA's chronic annual trade deficits of goods while increasing their nation's GDP more than otherwise.

Annual trade deficits are always (more than otherwise) net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their nation's numbers of jobs.
Refer to post #22. Respectfully, Supposn
 
I'm Supposn said:
James972, I'm a proponent of Import Certificates rather than tariffs.
Click to expand...

Certificates or tariffs are identical taxes on American consumers that protect and cripple our economy

USA producers are hindered by idiotic liberal programs: taxes, unions, regulations, trade deals, budget deficits, and expensive liberal health care etc. Conservatives would eliminate those problems to reduce our trade surpluses and greatly enhance our competitiveness. Do you understand?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom