The costs and benefits of producing or importing.

I'm Supposn · Sep 24, 2018

The costs and benefits of producing or importing:

The expenditure formula itself only reduces or increases GDP by the nation's net trade balance which is based upon the dollar value of globally traded products. But there's often additional production supporting goods and services that are not fully paid for by product producers, and are not reflected within the products price valuation.

GDP cannot report what may have been produced if we did not experience a trade deficit, (i.e. a negative net balance of trade). Surpluses always increase, and trade deficits always decrease the amount of their nation's GDP more than otherwise.

The extent of global trades' actual effects upon their nation's annual GDP amounts almost always, (if not always) exceeds, and is never less than the extent of their nation's net global balance of trade.

For example, it's not unusual for governments and universities to boost local economies by providing producers with valuable research and development at lesser than market value or costs; government infrastructure that favors an important producer or industries; training and education tailored to serve a particular company or industry. These all increase their nation's GDP but if they are not reflected within the prices of exported products, exports full contributions to the nation's GDP are not attributed to the nation's global trade.

Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Sep 28, 2018

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

There is no cost, only benefit, in importing for example bananas at $.05/LBS rather than producing them here in greenhouses at $10/LBS with high priced American labor. Do you understand?

I'm Supposn · Sep 28, 2018

James972 said:
There is no cost, only benefit, in importing for example bananas at $.05/LBS rather than producing them here in greenhouses at $10/LBS with high priced American labor. Do you understand?

James972, for any given amount of national expenditures within the GDP expenditure formula, (the conventional formula used throughout the world), annual trade surpluses increase, and trade deficits decrease their nation's GDP. That's a fact rather than an opinion.

GDP only reports what has been produced, It does not speculate upon the lesser GDP of trade surplus nations, or the greater GDP of trade deficit nations if their imports instead had matched their nation's export volumes. That's because we cannot account for production supporting domestic production that's not reflected within the prices of globally traded goods, or the additional domestic production that was induced by the production of the nation's exported products but are not themselves exported products.

We do know that that the increase of a trade surplus nations' or decrease of trade deficit nations' actual domestic production that's due to global trade will usually exceed and are never less than the extent of their nation's net balance of trade.

If we eliminate all USA agricultural price supports and export subsidies, we could have huge trade deficits of agricultural products as we now have for manufacturing products. Both our current and that policy are not my preferences.

I'm an advocate of the policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. Annual trade deficits indicate the nation has purchased more goods and service products than it has produced. You consider that to be a preferred economic policy?

Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Sep 30, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
James972, for any given amount of national expenditures within the GDP expenditure formula, (the conventional formula used throughout the world), annual trade surpluses increase, and trade deficits decrease their nation's GDP. That's a fact rather than an opinion.

GDP only reports what has been produced, It does not speculate upon the lesser GDP of trade surplus nations, or the greater GDP of trade deficit nations if their imports instead had matched their nation's export volumes. That's because we cannot account for production supporting domestic production that's not reflected within the prices of globally traded goods, or the additional domestic production that was induced by the production of the nation's exported products but are not themselves exported products.

We do know that that the increase of a trade surplus nations' or decrease of trade deficit nations' actual domestic production that's due to global trade will usually exceed and are never less than the extent of their nation's net balance of trade.

If we eliminate all USA agricultural price supports and export subsidies, we could have huge trade deficits of agricultural products as we now have for manufacturing products. Both our current and that policy are not my preferences.

I'm an advocate of the policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. Annual trade deficits indicate the nation has purchased more goods and service products than it has produced. You consider that to be a preferred economic policy?

Respectfully, Supposn

You've been spamming us for years but still cant understand the basics of trade. Why not give up?? Once again, it is better to import tropical bananas at 5 cents a pound than grow our own with American labor in expensive greenhouses for $10 a pound. Do you understand now?

I'm Supposn · Sep 30, 2018

James972 said:
You've been spamming us for years but still cant understand the basics of trade. Why not give up?? Once again, it is better to import tropical bananas at 5 cents a pound than grow our own with American labor in expensive greenhouses for $10 a pound. Do you understand now?

James972, I'm a proponet rather than an opponent of USA's participation in global trade. We're both in favor of our nation participating in global trade.

[Reduced or increased annual nation's GDP and balances of global trade do not indicate cause and effect. When a nation's GDP performs poorly, It's expected to be reflected by their domestic marketplaces' similarly poor sales volumes. Both domestic and imported products are sold within those marketplaces, and their sales volumes (in aggregate) are not expected to perform in any particular proportion to each other; but they are expected to move in somewhat in tandem to each other.]

Annual trade deficits are always indicated their nation has purchased more products than it produced and thus they're always net detrimental to their nation's GDP. For any given amount of annual national net purchases of products, trade surpluses always contributed, and trade deficit's always reduced their nation's GDP . Furthermore, the extent of global trades effects upon their nation's actual domestic production almost always, (if not always), exceeded and never was less thsn the extent of their nation's net international balance of trade.

Have you a valid logical response the any of this?
Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Sep 30, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
James972, I'm a proponet rather than an opponent of USA's participation in global trade. We're both in favor of our nation participating in global trade.

[Reduced or increased annual nation's GDP and balances of global trade do not indicate cause and effect. When a nation's GDP performs poorly, It's expected to be reflected by their domestic marketplaces' similarly poor sales volumes. Both domestic and imported products are sold within those marketplaces, and their sales volumes (in aggregate) are not expected to perform in any particular proportion to each other; but they are expected to move in somewhat in tandem to each other.]

Annual trade deficits are always indicated their nation has purchased more products than it produced and thus they're always net detrimental to their nation's GDP. For any given amount of annual national net purchases of products, trade surpluses always contributed, and trade deficit's always reduced their nation's GDP . Furthermore, the extent of global trades effects upon their nation's actual domestic production almost always, (if not always), exceeded and never was less thsn the extent of their nation's net international balance of trade.

Have you a valid logical response the any of this?
Respectfully, Supposn

you've been spamming us for years about you tariff tax on the American consumer designed to make him poorer but still cant understand the basics of trade. Why not give up?? Once again, it is better to import tropical bananas at 5 cents a pound than grow our own with American labor in expensive greenhouses for $10 a pound. Do you understand now?

I'm Supposn · Sep 30, 2018

James972 said:
You've been spamming us for years but still cant understand the basics of trade. Why not give up?? Once again, it is better to import tropical bananas at 5 cents a pound than grow our own with American labor in expensive greenhouses for $10 a pound. Do you understand now?

James972, no one (but possibly yourself) is arguing that our government should prohibit or micro-manage our nation's participation in international trade. But our great annual trade deficits of goods products has reduced our annual GDPs and dragged upon our number of jobs more than otherwise. The proposal described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article is substantially market driven and the preferable alternative.

Respectfully, Supposn

I'm Supposn · Sep 30, 2018

James972 said:
you've been spamming us for years about you tariff tax on the American consumer designed to make him poorer but still cant understand the basics of trade. Why not give up?? Once again, it is better to import tropical bananas at 5 cents a pound than grow our own with American labor in expensive greenhouses for $10 a pound. Do you understand now?

I'm Supposn said:
James972, no one (but possibly yourself) is arguing that our government should prohibit or micro-manage our nation's participation in international trade. But our great annual trade deficits of goods products has reduced our annual GDPs and dragged upon our number of jobs more than otherwise. The proposal described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article is substantially market driven and the preferable alternative. ...

I'm Supposn said:
James972, I'm a proponent rather than an opponent of USA's participation in global trade. We're both in favor of our nation participating in global trade.

[Reduced or increased annual nation's GDP and balances of global trade do not indicate cause and effect. When a nation's GDP performs poorly, It's expected to be reflected by their domestic marketplaces' similarly poor sales volumes. Both domestic and imported products are sold within those marketplaces, and their sales volumes (in aggregate) are not expected to perform in any particular proportion to each other; but they are expected to move in somewhat in tandem to each other.]

Annual trade deficits are always indicated their nation has purchased more products than it produced and thus they're always net detrimental to their nation's GDP. For any given amount of annual national net purchases of products, trade surpluses always contributed, and trade deficit's always reduced their nation's GDP . Furthermore, the extent of global trades effects upon their nation's actual domestic production almost always, (if not always), exceeded and never was less than the extent of their nation's net international balance of trade.

Have you a valid logical response the any of this? ...

James972 said:
You've been spamming us for years but still cant understand the basics of trade. Why not give up?? Once again, it is better to import tropical bananas at 5 cents a pound than grow our own with American labor in expensive greenhouses for $10 a pound. Do you understand now?

James972, I suppose your response is an indication that you have no valid logical response you wish to share with all of us.
Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Sep 30, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
James972, I suppose your response is an indication that you have no valid logical response you wish to share with all of us.
Respectfully, Supposn

valid response is that free trade is best and your tariff tax is worst: Once again, it is better to import tropical bananas at 5 cents a pound than grow our own with American labor in expensive greenhouses for $10 a pound. Do you understand now?Taxing banana imports to punish American consumers and reward greenhouse workers and their bosses is stupid.

I'm Supposn · Oct 1, 2018

James972 said:
valid response is that free trade is best and your tariff tax is worst: Once again, it is better to import tropical bananas at 5 cents a pound than grow our own with American labor in expensive greenhouses for $10 a pound. Do you understand now?Taxing banana imports to punish American consumers and reward greenhouse workers and their bosses is stupid.

James972, please inform me where I can purchase market acceptable bananas in my neighborhood at a nickle per pound. I've generally been paying 70 cents per pound. Prices vary plus or minus by as much as a dime.

It is preferable that we pay 7 or 8 cents more per pound within an Import Certificate policy and greater increase our GDP, bolster our numbers of jobs and median wage; if the costs to importers of foreign goods reflect much more than fees to defray federal administration costs due to the trade policy, it preferable that those market induced increased prices serve as an indirect and efficient price subsidy for USA exports which in turn further increase our GDP, and bolstered numbers of jobs and median wage.

We do not have to continue experiencing lesser numbers of jobs and lesser wage rates because we wish to continue eating foreign bananas.

Respectfully, Supposn

I'm Supposn · Oct 1, 2018

James972 said:
valid response is that free trade is best and your tariff tax is worst ... Taxing banana imports to punish American consumers and reward greenhouse workers and their bosses is stupid.

James972, USA median wage of greater purchasing power is stupid? Excessive profits of bosses? Are you schizophrenic? You can't decide if you're a pure Darwinist or a socialist?

I suppose you understand the concept of free competitive enterprise? Then you should understand that although the Import Certificates acquired by exporters of USA goods would be of value exceeding the fees they paid to defray federal administrative costs, market behaviors will induce their passing substantial portions of those gains to their foreign customers; (i.e. an indirect price subsidy of USA exported goods).

Yes, some increase of prices to purchasers of foreign goods is a tax (on selected American consumers). Their choice somewhat reduces USA jobs and drags upon USA wages. You consider that to be punishment; I consider that to be paying their equitable costs to our nation.

Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Oct 1, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
James972, USA median wage of greater purchasing power is stupid? Excessive profits of bosses? Are you schizophrenic? You can't decide if you're a pure Darwinist or a socialist?

I suppose you understand the concept of free competitive enterprise? Then you should understand that although the Import Certificates acquired by exporters of USA goods would be of value exceeding the fees they paid to defray federal administrative costs, market behaviors will induce their passing substantial portions of those gains to their foreign customers; (i.e. an indirect price subsidy of USA exported goods).

Yes, some increase of prices to purchasers of foreign goods is a tax (on selected American consumers). Their choice somewhat reduces USA jobs and drags upon USA wages. You consider that to be punishment; I consider that to be paying their equitable costs to our nation.

Respectfully, Supposn

so you are saying you want to grow our bananas in greenhouses rather than import at 1% the price?

I'm Supposn · Oct 1, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
James972, USA median wage of greater purchasing power is stupid? Excessive profits of bosses? Are you schizophrenic? You can't decide if you're a pure Darwinist or a socialist?

I suppose you understand the concept of free competitive enterprise? Then you should understand that although the Import Certificates acquired by exporters of USA goods would be of value exceeding the fees they paid to defray federal administrative costs, market behaviors will induce their passing substantial portions of those gains to their foreign customers; (i.e. an indirect price subsidy of USA exported goods).

Yes, some increase of prices to purchasers of foreign goods is a tax (on selected American consumers). Their choice somewhat reduces USA jobs and drags upon USA wages. You consider that to be punishment; I consider that to be paying their equitable costs to our nation.

Respectfully, Supposn

James972 said:
so you are saying you want to grow our bananas in greenhouses rather than import at 1% the price?

James972, no, that was your nonsensical idea and you now own it. Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Oct 1, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
James972, no, that was your nonsensical idea and you now own it. Respectfully, Supposn

do you want to put a tax on imported bananas?

I'm Supposn · Oct 1, 2018

James972 said:
so you are saying you want to grow our bananas in greenhouses rather than import at 1% the price?

jAMES972. no, that's not what I posted.

I'm Supposn said:
James972, ... some increase of prices to purchasers of foreign goods is a tax (on selected American consumers). Their choice somewhat reduces USA jobs and drags upon USA wages. You consider that to be punishment; I consider that to be paying their equitable costs to our nation. ...

JAMES972, regarding federal determination of what should or should not be imported:

I'm Supposn said:
James972, no, that was your nonsensical idea and you now own it. Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Oct 2, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
jAMES972. no, that's not what I posted.

JAMES972, regarding federal determination of what should or should not be imported:

do you want a tax on imported bananas to encourage domestic greenhouse bananas and employment that would cost 10,000% more than tropical imports?? Why or why not?

I'm Supposn · Oct 2, 2018

James972 said:
do you want a tax on imported bananas to encourage domestic greenhouse bananas and employment that would cost 10,000% more than tropical imports?? Why or why not?

James972, producing domestic greenhouse bananas and employment that would cost 100 times the cost of imported bananas is your idea and you own it.
Within pure free trade, or tariffs, or Import Certificates, or any other USA trade policy that has ever existed or been seriously proposed, people and their enterprises would not choose to produce domestic greenhouse bananas that would cost 100 times the cost of imported bananas. That's your foolish idea and you own it.

I'm a proponent of USA adopting the improved policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article.
Within that substantially market-driven policy, the government is not granted powers to require or even encourage its people to act contrary to what they believe to be in their own best interests. Unlike pure free trade, it doesn't promote or in any manner induce people to act contrary to their nation's best interests.

James972 · Oct 3, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
James972, producing domestic greenhouse bananas and employment that would cost 100 times the cost of imported bananas is your idea and you own it.
Within pure free trade, or tariffs, or Import Certificates, or any other USA trade policy that has ever existed or been seriously proposed, people and their enterprises would not choose to produce domestic greenhouse bananas that would cost 100 times the cost of imported bananas. That's your foolish idea and you own it.

I'm a proponent of USA adopting the improved policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article.
Within that substantially market-driven policy, the government is not granted powers to require or even encourage its people to act contrary to what they believe to be in their own best interests. Unlike pure free trade, it doesn't promote or in any manner induce people to act contrary to their nation's best interests.

for 5th time: does the liberal want a tax on imported bananas to encourage domestic greenhouse bananas and employment that would cost 10,000% more than tropical imports?? Why or why not?

I'm Supposn · Oct 3, 2018

James972 said:
for 5th time: does the liberal want a tax on imported bananas to encourage domestic greenhouse bananas and employment that would cost 10,000% more than tropical imports?? Why or why not?

James972, refer to post #17.

danielpalos · Oct 3, 2018

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

The expenditure formula itself only reduces or increases GDP by the nation's net trade balance which is based upon the dollar value of globally traded products. But there's often additional production supporting goods and services that are not fully paid for by product producers, and are not reflected within the products price valuation.

GDP cannot report what may have been produced if we did not experience a trade deficit, (i.e. a negative net balance of trade). Surpluses always increase, and trade deficits always decrease the amount of their nation's GDP more than otherwise.

The extent of global trades' actual effects upon their nation's annual GDP amounts almost always, (if not always) exceeds, and is never less than the extent of their nation's net global balance of trade.

For example, it's not unusual for governments and universities to boost local economies by providing producers with valuable research and development at lesser than market value or costs; government infrastructure that favors an important producer or industries; training and education tailored to serve a particular company or industry. These all increase their nation's GDP but if they are not reflected within the prices of exported products, exports full contributions to the nation's GDP are not attributed to the nation's global trade.

Respectfully, Supposn

it is not reasonable to expect isolationism to be better than globalism. global trade is always better than global war.

it may require a federal UN, to make that happen.

I'm Supposn · Oct 3, 2018

danielpalos said:
it is not reasonable to expect isolationism to be better than globalism. global trade is always better than global war.

it may require a federal UN, to make that happen.

DanielPalos, Import Certificate policy is not an isolationist policy. Respectfully, Supposn

danielpalos · Oct 4, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
DanielPalos, Import Certificate policy is not an isolationist policy. Respectfully, Supposn

The US has a federal Government; we have a "free trade zone among the several States" as a result.

I'm Supposn · Oct 4, 2018

danielpalos said:
The US has a federal Government; we have a "free trade zone among the several States" as a result.

DanielPalos, so there's free trade among ALL states in the United States. What's your point?
Respectfully, Supposn

James972 · Oct 4, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
DanielPalos, so there's free trade among ALL states in the United States. What's your point?
Respectfully, Supposn

probably that we should have free trade among all countries for exactly the same reasons. 1+1=2

James972 · Oct 4, 2018

I'm Supposn said:
DanielPalos, Import Certificate policy is not an isolationist policy. Respectfully, Supposn

sure it is , it's a protectionist scam to isolate and cripple our industries promoted by those who lack the ability to understand why capitalism is superior to socialism.