Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does comparative advantage justify USA’s free-trade policy?
Trade deficit nations’ lesser than otherwise GDP due to their net balance of trade, are particularly reflected by their lesser numbers of jobs and wage amounts. If they had spent a lesser proportion for domestic rather than imported goods and services, their GDP, and aggregate numbers of jobs and amounts of wages would have been greater. Within the past half century, USA’s net trade balance has always been the highest of trade deficit nations.
Proponents of “pure free-trade”, cite “comparative-advantage” as economically justifying that policy should generally remain as our foreign trade policy.
"Trade Deficits" are just a distraction. Corporations that are making all the money, and doing all the trading are multi-national. They make money on both sides of border. They have employees on both sides of border.
US, and rest of western world is best place because of culture, laws, and all the wealthy controlling all the international trade want to live here, or have a foot in the door.
If Govt wants more piece, they will just have to grow the stones, and tax/tariff who and what they want.
"Trade Deficits" are just a distraction. Corporations that are making all the money, and doing all the trading are multi-national. They make money on both sides of border. They have employees on both sides of border.
US, and rest of western world is best place because of culture, laws, and all the wealthy controlling all the international trade want to live here, or have a foot in the door.
If Govt wants more piece, they will just have to grow the stones, and tax/tariff who and what they want.
NJ Brazen, I'm among the proponents of the improved trade policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. The unilateral proposal would significantly reduce, (if not eliminate) USA's annual trade deficits of goods.
Annual trade deficits indicate our nation has purchased more products than we have produced. Trade deficits are particularly detrimental to their nation's numbers of jobs and amounts of payrolls.
Direct net federal expenses due to the policy are passed on to importers and other U.S. purchasers of foreign goods. Any of the trade policie’s costs beyond federal expenses, (i.e. any costs due to markets’ behaviors) serve as indirect but effective price subsidies for USA’s exported goods.
The trade policy treats all goods and traders in foreign trade in the same equitable manner.
Does comparative advantage justify USA’s free-trade policy?
Trade deficit nations’ lesser than otherwise GDP due to their net balance of trade, are particularly reflected by their lesser numbers of jobs and wage amounts. If they had spent a lesser proportion for domestic rather than imported goods and services, their GDP, and aggregate numbers of jobs and amounts of wages would have been greater. Within the past half century, USA’s net trade balance has always been the highest of trade deficit nations.
Proponents of “pure free-trade”, cite “comparative-advantage” as economically justifying that policy should generally remain as our foreign trade policy.
Respectfully, Supposn
Looking back about 40 years where this began . . . and as an Econ student at the time . . . the whole "competitive advantage(s)" routine was really just sales and marketing rationalizations for the Transnational Corporations to exploit both areas with low defenses from their resources being exploited (workers, materials, environment) and at the same time undercut US labor, US sustaining taxes, and leave US with Debt and Trash.
In short -- pretty much just Neo-Liberal, Free-Market, Corporate Capitalism -- which is destroying Nature around the world, and creating MASSIVE Trade Losses and Debt for US.
NJ Brazen, I'm among the proponents of the improved trade policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. The unilateral proposal would significantly reduce, (if not eliminate) USA's annual trade deficits of goods.
Annual trade deficits indicate our nation has purchased more products than we have produced. Trade deficits are particularly detrimental to their nation's numbers of jobs and amounts of payrolls.
Direct net federal expenses due to the policy are passed on to importers and other U.S. purchasers of foreign goods. Any of the trade policie’s costs beyond federal expenses, (i.e. any costs due to markets’ behaviors) serve as indirect but effective price subsidies for USA’s exported goods.
The trade policy treats all goods and traders in foreign trade in the same equitable manner.
If you want to keep the jobs and production here, then you just make it policy. No need for any certificates, or the like. You just need protectionism/nationalism, and isolationism if it comes down to it.
You dont need to pander to anyone, or make them feel better with some loop holes, or "certficates" or some incentives. You dont need to make it fair, or reasonable, or nice/kind. You simply stamp your feet down and just keep the production domestic.
If you want to keep the jobs and production here, then you just make it policy. No need for any certificates, or the like. You just need protectionism/nationalism, and isolationism if it comes down to it.
You dont need to pander to anyone, or make them feel better with some loop holes, or "certficates" or some incentives. You dont need to make it fair, or reasonable, or nice/kind. You simply stamp your feet down and just keep the production domestic.
The China way isn't very efficient but I suppose it can be effective. Industries grow and wane; policies that involve smart tax policy, investment in prudent infrastructure, and investment in skills is more effective than "stamping your feet" in my opinion.
The China way isn't very efficient but I suppose it can be effective. Industries grow and wane; policies that involve smart tax policy, investment in prudent infrastructure, and investment in skills is more effective than "stamping your feet" in my opinion.
I am talking about how to just keep production here. You can have any tax policy, or investment in anything at the same time. They are not mutually exclusive.
I am talking about how to just keep production here. You can have any tax policy, or investment in anything at the same time. They are not mutually exclusive.
But it's not static. Such heavy handedness can work for awhile, but deciding when to stop heavily subsidizing (through regulations or taxes) production is tough.
Looking back about 40 years where this began . . . and as an Econ student at the time . . . the whole "competitive advantage(s)" routine was really just sales and marketing rationalizations for the Transnational Corporations to exploit both areas with low defenses from their resources being exploited (workers, materials, environment) and at the same time undercut US labor, US sustaining taxes, and leave US with Debt and Trash.
In short -- pretty much just Neo-Liberal, Free-Market, Corporate Capitalism -- which is destroying Nature around the world, and creating MASSIVE Trade Losses and Debt for US.
Countries/civilizations have life-cycles just like living organisms. For the past 40 years, most of the world is where America was post Civil War (1870-1920s) and modernizing in a similar fashion as we did.
Even though countries skirt climate and trade agreements, it's still better than every man for himself/isolationism.
Last edited by VitaminB12; 06-22-2020 at 02:08 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
