The costs and benefits of producing or importing.

James972 · Jan 28, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP

obviously raising taxes will only make it GDP worse. 1+1=2

Mircea · Jan 28, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
Trade deficit nation's net trade balances reduce their GDP because although the imported goods purchasers were of their nation, the products were not produced by their nation.

I'm Supposn said:
Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs.

No, they are not. You've been schooled on this dozens of times. You're just not capable of admitting you're wrong or that you don't understand Economics.

You don't even understand how imports enhance and increase Standard of Living.

You also operate on the baseless assumption that $1 of imports generates $1 of GDP. It does not. $1 of imports generates far more $ in GDP.

$600 Billion in imports generates $2 TRILLION to $3 TRILLION in GDP.

Sorry, but no matter how you look at it, that is a net increase in GDP.

The domestic GDP of every country is capped. It can only produce so much domestically, and no more.

Yes, if the economy is expanding, the domestic GDP will increase annually, but it's still limited.

If your domestic GDP capacity is $14 TRILLION, and you import $600 Billion in goods that generates an additional $2 TRILLION to $3 TRILLION in GDP, that is a net increase, no matter how you look at it.

It also created jobs you wouldn't otherwise have.

Your ignorance is truly astounding. It wasn't that long ago when you had 24-hour nothing, except some diners and truck stops, but the truck stops only sold diesel and no gasoline. Gas stations closed at 9:00 PM, so you couldn't drive all night or late at night. All retail stores in the US closed at 6:00 PM. Grocery might be open until 8:00 PM.

Now, you have 24-hour everything. Retail is open until 9:00 PM or later, grocery stores open until 11:00 PM and later, and some open 24-hours, you have 24-hour gas stations and convenience stores, and a helluva lot more 24-hour restaurants, plus restaurants that are open later than 9:00 PM.

Why do you suppose that is?

It's because you started off-shoring jobs to Taiwan (then to Japan, and later Korea and now China).

That freed up the labor so that retail, grocery, restaurant and other services could expand their hours of operation and make your life easier and more enjoyable.

A worker can produce plastic kitchen gadgets or produce electronics, but he cannot do both at the same time, right?

The smart move is to off-shore the plastic kitchen gadgets to free up labor to produce electronics. Everyone wins. So what if you have to import plastic kitchen gadgets? Everyone still wins.

You have some bizarre Eraserhead fantasy where the US is one gigantic factory, and every American aspires to work in a factory.

It just ain't so. Lots of Americans would prefer never to work in a factory.

Lots of Americans would prefer to do other things, but to do those things they need labor, and they're not going to have the labor available if Americans are making stupid stuff that other countries can make. That's one reason we off-shore jobs, so we can produce the things and provide the services we actually want, instead of your fantasy vision.

The sooner you figure that out, the better off you'll be.

I'm Supposn · Jan 28, 2019

OrphanSlug said:
This conversation is off the rails... again. ... So now back to a nation's GDP. ... the assumption is domestically all of those impacted source or finished products can be completely handled domestically. It also assumes that all other economic and market factors stay constant. ... An Import Certificate is just as dumb as a tariff, the US is not in a closed economy. In fact, we never have been in a closed economy nor should we.

OrphanSlug, Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article describes the trade proposal in a manner that's to some extent specific and I try to post in a similar manner.
If you could point out some of the the specific faults you perceive within the proposal and explain why you contend they will prevent the proposal from achieving its purpose, I'll try to respond to your specific points. The preponderance of your post #100 is not applicable and/or inconsequential to a discussion of Import Certificate policy.

Within post #100 you stated, “It [, i.e. Wikipedia's Import Certificate proposal] also assumes that all other economic and market factors stay constant. also assumes that all other economic and market factors stay constant”.
On the contrary, the concept of the Import Certificate proposal assumes that USA will continue trading globally and we'll try not to purchase more goods than we produce. It assumes global and domestic markets will always be fluid, that's why the proposal's very sensitive to markets, and grants federal government officials minimal discretion of federal trade policy.

The government Import certificate fees are set and annually modified with advise from our federal civil-service. The fees charged to exporters goods from the USA that REQUEST their shipments be assessed. By law those fee rates are set and annually updated to no more than recover U.S. federal direct expenses due to the Import Certificate policy. The certificate fees are by law not a source of net government revenue.

Import Certificate policy's not applicable and doesn't intervene in matters of intangible products or product attributes such as intellectual property. Its not applicable to the value of specifically listed scarce or precious mineral materials integral to globally traded products and it significantly reduces, (if not entirely preventing) USA from experiencing annual trade deficits of goods. It's not pure free trade because it favors its adopting nation's goods. Its competitive trade among the producers and products within our own and among all foreign nations.

Respectfully, Supposn

I'm Supposn · Jan 29, 2019

Mircea said:
... You also operate on the baseless assumption that $1 of imports generates $1 of GDP. It does not. $1 of imports generates far more $ in GDP.

$600 Billion in imports generates $2 TRILLION to $3 TRILLION in GDP. ...

Mircea, similar imported or domestic vehicles being merchandised, distributed, refueled, maintained, repaired in the USA, similarly contribute to USA's GDP.
The entire economic differences between similar USA or imported products cease when the products are under the jurisdiction of the USA governments and are being handled by the USA labor; (which includes non-citizens in the USA).

As imported products are being produced and/or processed by foreign entities, or being shipped to the USA on foreign carriers, they contribute nothing to USA's GDP. But when they “crowded” USA products out of our domestic markets, our chronic annual trade deficits reduced our annual GDPs.

International trades' entire increase of surplus trade nations' annual GDP, or reduction of trade deficit nations' GDP are actually understated by their nation's annual balance of trade. USA's annual trade deficits are the understated amount of our reduced GDP due to our negative balance of international trade.

Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs. They indicate the nation has purchased more products than it produced. That's true during nations' good or poor economic years.

Respectfully, Supposn

I'm Supposn · Jan 30, 2019

Mircea, regarding your post #102:

Mircea said:
... You also operate on the baseless assumption that $1 of imports generates $1 of GDP. It does not. $1 of imports generates far more $ in GDP.
$600 Billion in imports generates $2 TRILLION to $3 TRILLION in GDP.
Sorry, but no matter how you look at it, that is a net increase in GDP. ...

Mircea, annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs. They indicate the nation has purchased more products than it produced. That's true during nations' good or poor economic years. I'm discussing a nation's entire annual balance of global trade rather than individual transactions.
Refer to post #104 for further explanation.

Mircea said:
...The domestic GDP of every country is capped. It can only produce so much domestically, and no more. …

limitations are conceivable,but I'm unaware of any person or nation that achieved their entire potential. Among the reasons that nation's competitive marketplaces can do so well is due to their nations' GDP is not “capped”.

NY City has always been a 24 hour town; now it often seems less so and the remainder of our nation seems more so. How's that related to USA's trade policy?

You state “A worker can produce plastic kitchen gadgets or produce electronics, but he cannot do both at the same time”. I never contended otherwise.
(I have stated within discussions of other topics that conditions of the nation's workers being unemployed or underemployed, or their wages of being lesser purchasing powers, is detrimental to our nation's economic and social condition). The Import Certificate policy would increase our nation's GDP more than otherwise in a manner that would also increase our numbers of jobs.

The Import Certificate policy is applicable to almost all tangible products of almost all industries. It's no less applicable to farming and ranching than to production of vehicles or electronic goods. What's the point of your commenting, “ lots Americans would prefer never to work in a factory”?

Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Jan 30, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
If you could point out some of the the specific faults you perceive within the proposal

simple! and import tax certificate is a tariff tax on the American people. To stimulate the economy you cut taxes as Trump just did, you don't raise taxes!!

I'm Supposn · Jan 30, 2019

James972 said:
simple! and import tax certificate is a tariff tax on the American people. To stimulate the economy you cut taxes as Trump just did, you don't raise taxes!!

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/tax
A compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers' income and business profits, or added to the cost of some goods, services, and transactions.

James972, all transfers of wealth are not taxes. The federal fee to the exporters of goods from the USA are not compulsory. Should exporters of goods from the USA decline the opportunity to acquire import certificates, they need not request that their shipment be assessed.

Although importing is not compulsory, I will not quibble regarding importers being required to surrender Import Certificates to enable their shipments to enter the USA. I agree it's effectively a tax.
But Import Certificate policy would increase USA's GDP and numbers of jobs more than otherwise.
Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Jan 31, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
I agree it's effectively a tax.
But Import Certificate policy would increase USA's GDP and numbers of jobs more than otherwise.

taxing the American people will cause them to spend less and reduce GDP. 1+1=2

GDP grows when Republican supply-siders, supply new inventions. GDP grew from Stone age to here because of new inventions, not because of idiotic taxes.

Kushinator · Jan 31, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
But Import Certificate policy would increase USA's GDP and numbers of jobs more than otherwise.

This is simply false. It has been pointed out in post #92, a post that was quoted then followed up with a "nuh uh" response that has been repeated (and defeated) thousands of times. It's while your obsession continues in it's failure to garner ANY support from the political, economic, or financial realms. While Warren Buffett is investment Yoda, he clearly doesn't understand the economics of trade and economic growth.

You cannot even point out instances where trade deficit decay has ever coincided with overall consumption, investment, government, or aggregate growth.

I'm Supposn · Feb 1, 2019

Kushinator said:
You are wrong, and given the number of times you have been corrected on this matter, you can't chalk it up to naivety.

[... In other words, imports don’t count negatively in GDP. They amount to zero.

This means that a higher trade deficit doesn’t have to make the U.S. poorer. Imagine a situation where the U.S. keeps consuming and investing the same amount of domestically made goods, but starts exporting $1 billion more to foreign countries and importing $3 billion more. The trade deficit just went up by $2 billion dollars, but GDP went up by $1 billion! Growth was positive! The new imports didn’t change U.S. GDP, but the new exports added to it.]

The rest of the article can be found here. Hopefully these pathetic threads stop popping up in every single econ message board on the English speaking net.

Kushinator, owe you and all others my apology; what you posted is correct.

I did neglect to consider the fact that USA's GDP approximates the U.S. Dollar value of what we produced.
GDP , (i.e. what we produced ) is NOT reduced by the value of our imports.
(refer to the accompanying algebraic presentation).

My foolish logical error does not negate these two contentions that I suppose the preponderance of credible economists do not disagree upon:
(1) Annual trade deficits indicate their nation has purchased more goods and services than it has produced.
(2) Annual trade deficits, ( i.e. negative balances of international trade) do “crowd” their nations productions out of their nation's and the remainder of the world's marketplaces.
Due to the trade deficits, we produced less than otherwise. Thus, (unless the nation effectively enjoying full employment), the annual trade deficit dragged upon their nation's numbers of jobs and payrolls.

Respectfully, Supposn
//////////////////////////////////////////

(USA investment) = I
(USA governments' spending) = G
(USA Consumption of imported products) = M = $3
(USA exports) = X = $1
(USA consumption of domestic products ) = D
(total consumption) = C = (D + M) = (D + $3)
USA net balance of international trade = N = (X – M) = ($1 - $3) = (Negative $2)

GDP = (D + $3) + I + G + (Negative $2)

(Refer to the paragraph entitled “ Components of GDP by expenditure”
within Wikipedia's “Gross domestic product” article).

I'm Supposn · Feb 1, 2019

Kushinator said:
This is simply false. It has been pointed out in post #92, a post that was quoted then followed up with a "nuh uh" response that has been repeated (and defeated) thousands of times. It's while your obsession continues in it's failure to garner ANY support from the political, economic, or financial realms. While Warren Buffett is investment Yoda, he clearly doesn't understand the economics of trade and economic growth.

You cannot even point out instances where trade deficit decay has ever coincided with overall consumption, investment, government, or aggregate growth.

Kushinator, I don't suppose any creditable economist believes that our chronic annual trade deficits are beneficial to our economy. But too many of them contend USA's trade deficits proportional to our entire GDP, are too small to have materially reduced our GDP.

My foolish logical error does not negate these two contentions that I suppose the preponderance of credible economists do not disagree upon:
(1) Annual trade deficits indicate their nation has purchased more goods and services than it has produced.
(2) Annual trade deficits, ( i.e. negative balances of international trade) do “crowd” their nations productions out of their nation's and the remainder of the world's marketplaces. Thus, (unless the nation effectively enjoying full employment), the annual trade deficit dragged upon their nation's numbers of jobs and their payrolls.

I agree with those credible economists contending USA's great chronic trade deficits' “crowding” our own products from our marketplaces, are substantially detrimental to our domestic production.
USA's 2017 trade deficit of $795.6898 billion, (almost 0.8 trillion U.S. Dollars), That approximately 4% of our GDP represented substantially lesser USA jobs and payrolls for that year.

Trade surplus nations' increases, and trade deficit nations' decreases of their actual domestic production cannot be entirely accounted for. Increased domestic production not fully reflected within the prices of globally traded goods are not attributed to international trade and we're unable to account for goods and services that were not produced.

International trades' net effects upon individual nation's domestic production, actually exceed the extents of their net trade balance.

Respectfully, Supposn

I'm Supposn · Feb 1, 2019

Kushinator said:
This is simply false. ... You cannot even point out instances where trade deficit decay has ever coincided with overall consumption, investment, government, or aggregate growth.

Kushinator, we sometimes agree upon facts but differ as to which is the cause or which is the effect and what causes simultaneous occurrences.

People affected by gin and tonic, 7 & 7, and high-balls, should refrain from driving after they've ingested anything with carbonated water; statics indicate that cancer causes cigarette smoking?

You're among those contending reduction of USA's trade deficits has been the cause of generally reduced sales of aggregate domestic and USA products in our domestic marketplaces, and thus were detrimental to our economy?

Even when we may agree upon facts, our opinions differ regarding which is cause or effect. We often disagree upon how, and/or which facts are related to each other. (Refer to my prior post).

Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Feb 1, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
The costs and benefits of producing or importing:

obviously if you import from another city, state, or country you get richer than if you buy local or make every thing yourself. Free trade is simple, but still way over a liberal's head.

I'm Supposn · Feb 10, 2019

James972 said:
obviously if you import from another city, state, or country you get richer than if you buy local or make every thing yourself. Free trade is simple, but still way over a liberal's head.

James972, obviously a trade deficit indicates the nation has purchased more products than it produced.
Therefore due to their trade deficit, domestic products have been crowded out of their aggregate purchases.
Unless a trade deficit nation has experienced effectively “full employment”, it has experienced lesser increased domestic production which in turn was lesser numbers of jobs than otherwise.

Only you and certainly not I, mention or advocate national isolationism. Obviously, you're unable to logically argue contrary to Wikipedia's Import Certificate proposal.
Obviously I remain respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Feb 10, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
Obviously, you're unable to logically argue contrary to Wikipedia's Import Certificate proposal.

An import certificate is merely a tax on imports that American consumers would pay. China would then tax our stuff; no net gain would be possible. Its a very dumb liberal idea.

Best idea is Republican supply-side economics: encourage Americans to supply competitive products. 1+1=2

I'm Supposn · Feb 10, 2019

James972 said:
An import certificate is merely a tax on imports that American consumers would pay. China would then tax our stuff; no net gain would be possible. Its a very dumb liberal idea.

Best idea is Republican supply-side economics: encourage Americans to supply competitive products. 1+1=2

James972, an Import Certificate, (IC) policy is effectively an indirect tax USA final purchasers of foreign goods choose to pay.

China, a trade surplus nation would not enact an IC policy but if in retaliation to USA's IC policy, China levied additional tariffs upon USA products, it would of course additionally increase, rather than possibly decrease prices to Chinese purchasers USA products.
It would also induce USA purchasers to more favor imports from nations other than China, and further reduce China's exports.

To any extent that China's tariffs reduced USA's global exports and increased our certificates global prices, it would increase the prices of foreign goods entering the USA and encourage increased USA production. Increased certificate prices behave as price subsidy for USA exports.

All of this occurs regardless if the U.S. Government does, or does not choose to take any proactive steps.
Due to ignorance or stupidity, some people cannot thoroughly think through the nuances between tariffs and Import Certificate policies. There are people considering 1 + 1 = 2 is all they need understand.

Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Feb 10, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
James972, an Import Certificate, (IC) policy is effectively an indirect tax USA final purchasers of foreign goods choose to pay.

yes its yet another dumb liberal tax on Americans, as if China couldn't tax our exports too. Slow?????

James972 · Feb 10, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
some people cannot thoroughly think through the nuances between tariffs and Import Certificate policies.

What is essential difference between tariff tax and Import Certificate tax?

I'm Supposn · Feb 10, 2019

James972 said:
What is essential difference between tariff tax and Import Certificate tax?

[James972, it was beyond your comprehension the first time you read it. I hope you're able to have someone explain it to you.

I'm Supposn said:
Import Certificates Vs. Tariffs:

I’m a proponent of USA could adopt an Import Tariff policy somewhat similar to the policy described in the Wikipedia article entitled “Import Certificates”.
Refer to:
Import certificates - Wikipedia
or to
Import Certificates .

The subject of tariffs often arises within discussions of Import Certificates.

Comparisons between tariffs and import certificate policies:

Both tariffs and import certificate proposals would require importers of goods surrender something’s of value to the U.S. government before their goods are enabled to enter the USA and the policies can be drafted in a manner to be self-funded; (i.e. all direct costs due to the trade policy be eventually passed onto final USA purchasers of imported goods.
The values of what importers are surrendering (and thus the additional expense to the importers) are proportionally related to approximate values of their shipments being brought into the USA.
In both cases, the net differences between goods costs to importers and their USA domestic market prices motivate the importation of goods into the USA; (availability is reflected within those market prices).

The nature of the Import Certificate policy significantly reduces (if not entirely eliminates) USA’s trade deficit of goods REGARDLESS of how small are the additions to prices paid by USA purchasers of imported goods. Only if tariffs were set to drastically increase prices of imports sold to USA purchasers, could we reasonably hope (but cannot assure) that USA’s trade deficits of goods could be reduced to similar extents as that due to an Import Certificate policy.

Rather than the proposed USA adoption of the transferable Import Certificates policy for USA’s global trade of goods, our existing trade practices and all other proposed USA trade policies are more rather than less subject to mischief upon our economy. Within the certificate policy, (with no additional pro-action by our federal government, USA’s economy would suffer less mischief perpetrated upon our global trade.

Effects upon prices of imported goods within USA’s domestic markets within an Import policy (rather than a tariff policy) are much more market and less government driven.
Also due to market forces an Import Certificate policy serves as an indirect but somewhat effective subsidy of USA’s exported goods.

Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Feb 11, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
[James972, it was beyond your comprehension the first time you read it. I hope you're able to have someone explain it to you.

What is essential difference between tariff tax and Import Certificate tax other than both equally impoverish American consumers, and protect and cripple American industry. Its an obvious lose-lose. Do you understand?

I'm Supposn · Feb 11, 2019

James972 said:
What is essential difference between tariff tax and Import Certificate tax?

I'm Supposn said:
[James972, it was beyond your comprehension the first time you read it. I hope you're able to have someone explain it to you.
Refer to post #1 within the discussion thread:
https://www.debatepolitics.com/econ...rt-certificate-policies-3.html#post1065975371

James972 said:
What is essential difference between tariff tax and Import Certificate tax other than both equally impoverish American consumers, and protect and cripple American industry. Its an obvious lose-lose. Do you understand?

James972, yes I understand your frustration. In 2016 you couldn't comprehend trade deficits detriments to their individual nations' domestic production, and now in 2019 you're still unable to understand it. Despite your frustration, you continue to try. That's encouraging.

If a jungle room full of monkeys had typewriters available to them within an eternal duration, it's conceivable that at least one monkey may possibly type out a meaningful word of 5 or more letters. I think you're smarter than a monkey. It's conceivable that you may someday understand annual trade deficits' consequences upon their individual nations' economies.

Keep trying. Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Feb 12, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
James972, yes I understand your frustration. In 2016 you couldn't comprehend trade deficits detriments to their individual nations' domestic production, and now in 2019 you're still unable to understand it. Despite your frustration, you continue to try. That's encouraging.

If a jungle room full of monkeys had typewriters available to them within an eternal duration, it's conceivable that at least one monkey may possibly type out a meaningful word of 5 or more letters. I think you're smarter than a monkey. It's conceivable that you may someday understand annual trade deficits' consequences upon their individual nations' economies.

Keep trying. Respectfully, Supposn

for 12th time: What is essential difference between tariff tax and Import Certificate tax?

I'm Supposn · Feb 12, 2019

James972 said:
for 12th time: What is essential difference between tariff tax and Import Certificate tax?

James972, I regret that you're unable to comprehend the posted English texts and economics is obviously not your forte. I'm not the person that can best tutor you.
[ I certainly did try to do so; refer to this thread's posts #121, and #119,
and from the thread
Comparisons between tariffs and import certificate policies , posts #11, and #1].

Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Feb 13, 2019

I'm Supposn said:
James972, I regret that you're unable to comprehend the posted English texts and economics is obviously not your forte. I'm not the person that can best tutor you.
[ I certainly did try to do so; refer to this thread's posts #121, and #119,
and from the thread
Comparisons between tariffs and import certificate policies , posts #11, and #1].

Respectfully, Supposn

A tariff tax and import certificate are identical. Don't you realize that Trump is using tariffs and liberals are 100% opposed?

I'm Supposn · Feb 13, 2019

James972 said:
A tariff tax and import certificate are identical. Don't you realize that Trump is using tariffs and liberals are 100% opposed?

James972, regarding annual trade deficits' detriments to their nation's economies, if and when you acquire a tutor, have them explain this link to you. Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn said:
Credible economists do not refute annual trade deficits detrimental affects upon their nation's GDP.

I believe you'll find creditable economists do not refute that due to USA's annual trade deficits, the nation's domestic production was less than otherwise; (i.e. the nation's domestic products (more than otherwise), were net “crowded out” of all, [our USA domestic plus foreign] marketplaces. ...

I'm Supposn said:
James972, I regret that you're unable to comprehend the posted English texts and economics is obviously not your forte. I'm not the person that can best tutor you.
[ I certainly did try to do so; refer to this thread's posts #121, and #119,
and from the thread
Comparisons between tariffs and import certificate policies , posts #11, and #1]. …

The costs and benefits of producing or importing.

I'm not-low all the time