U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-07-2019, 03:11 PM
 
Location: Ohio
20,899 posts, read 14,808,128 times
Reputation: 17187

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Mircea, post #12 of this thread was my response to your post #11. I didn’t expect you to accept what I posted, but I had hoped you would refer to some credible explanation from some authoritative source. Obviously, you have not done so.
You don't know what you're talking about, which is why often I ignored your inane comments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Mircea, I’m unaware of what “table” you’re referring to.
That's because you don't know what you're talking about.

Not only have you no clue what you're talking about, you don't even know how to find the relevant data published by your government.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
I assume that you’re stating USA’s GDP in the third quarter of 2019 was $4,558.8 billion, and our trade deficit was 655.4 million.
Again, not only do you not know what you're talking about, you can't even find the data you're incessantly whining about.

I did not say US GDP was $4.5 TRILLION. I said the US consumed $4.5 TRILLION of goods.

US GDP QTR3 2019 was $21.5 TRILLION. The US consumed $4.5 TRILLION in goods and $10.1 TRILLION in services.

Your conspicuous failure and refusal to provide a single shred of evidence to support your pedantic musings is not lost on viewers here.

But, seeing how you don't even know how to find the data you need, no one seriously expects you to do anything except whine incessantly about something you don't even understand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-11-2019, 05:29 PM
 
1,466 posts, read 764,632 times
Reputation: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
You don't know what you're talking about, … Not only have you no clue what you're talking about, you don't even know how to find the relevant data published by your government.

Again, not only do you not know what you're talking about, you can't even find the data you're incessantly whining about.

I did not say US GDP was $4.5 TRILLION. I said the US consumed $4.5 TRILLION of goods.

US GDP QTR3 2019 was $21.5 TRILLION. The US consumed $4.5 TRILLION in goods and $10.1 TRILLION in services. ...
Mircea, I suppose when people have as much money as you. Or President Trump, or I have, it’s difficult for us to pay attention to details. You statement in post #11 was, “In Q3 2019 the US produced and consumed $4,558,800,000,000 in goods and services.
In Q3 2019 the US had a trade deficit of $655,400,000”.

I suppose when people have as much money as you, or President Trump, or I have, it’s difficult for us to pay attention to details.

What data have you’ve misplaced and believe that I should search for. Why is it my responsibility to do so? My memory is poor and I’m tolerant of your failure to recall the details. If you ever recall what the data is, and if it’s of any importance, I suppose you’ll inform me as to what it was?

Respectfully, Supposn
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2019, 11:34 PM
 
Location: Washington Park, Denver
7,550 posts, read 7,037,626 times
Reputation: 8318
The OP needs to take a real economics class.

I have a trade deficit with my barber. It doesn’t lower my earnings.

The data show that tariffs actually shrink GDP. I can draw the model for you when I have more time, but you can simply google “IS/LM tariff impact” and spend a few hours reading.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2019, 05:44 AM
 
7,657 posts, read 3,367,239 times
Reputation: 4889
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77 View Post
The OP needs to take a real economics class.

I have a trade deficit with my barber. It doesn’t lower my earnings.

The data show that tariffs actually shrink GDP. I can draw the model for you when I have more time, but you can simply google “IS/LM tariff impact” and spend a few hours reading.
Ending slavery shrink gdp too, how does economics account for human/social issues

I mean if we are being honest the “best” economic model is when slaves and robots make everything for the 1% and everyone else dies. With out factors in the equations for this stuff it’s really all nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2019, 08:54 AM
 
Location: Washington Park, Denver
7,550 posts, read 7,037,626 times
Reputation: 8318
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
Ending slavery shrink gdp too, how does economics account for human/social issues

I mean if we are being honest the “best” economic model is when slaves and robots make everything for the 1% and everyone else dies. With out factors in the equations for this stuff it’s really all nonsense.
That’s not remotely accurate. You need capital flows and if people are not being paid, there is less capital flow. If anything is nonsense here, it’s your example. GDP grows when more people have access to education, technology, and capital. Slavery prevents all of that.

Bloomberg - How Slavery Hurt the US Economy

But getting back on topic, the idea being put forward in this thread is that tariffs help American because trade deficits are bad. It’s a position that lacks any nuanced understanding of macroeconomics. When we install tariffs, our economy and citizens end up paying the price because tariffs make our currency stronger and therefore our goods become less desirable on the international market. The net effect is almost no change in trade deficits over the long run.

Again, I run trade deficits with lots of people and businesses. Just because I buy more from them than they do from me doesn’t mean my personal economic situation is compromised.

Last edited by SkyDog77; 11-17-2019 at 09:07 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2019, 02:12 PM
 
1,466 posts, read 764,632 times
Reputation: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77 View Post
The OP needs to take a real economics class.

I have a trade deficit with my barber. It doesn’t lower my earnings.

The data show that tariffs actually shrink GDP. I can draw the model for you when I have more time, but you can simply google “IS/LM tariff impact” and spend a few hours reading.
SkyDog77, if you’re consistently spending more than you’re earning, you do have a global trade deficit.
For any given level of individual nations’ annual spending, trade deficit nations have reduced, and trade surplus nations have increased their annual GDP. Does anyone you consider to be a credible economist believes otherwise?

I am not a tariff proponent. Respectfully, Supposn
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2019, 03:55 PM
 
Location: Washington Park, Denver
7,550 posts, read 7,037,626 times
Reputation: 8318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
SkyDog77, if you’re consistently spending more than you’re earning, you do have a global trade deficit.
For any given level of individual nations’ annual spending, trade deficit nations have reduced, and trade surplus nations have increased their annual GDP. Does anyone you consider to be a credible economist believes otherwise?

I am not a tariff proponent. Respectfully, Supposn
A trade deficit does not equal a fiscal deficit. These are different things.

We could run a balanced budget and still have a trade deficit. Our fiscal deficit is not a result of our trade deficit. It’s the result of the government spending more money than it takes in.

Going back to my example, I run a trade deficit with my barber because I pay her but she doesn’t pay me anything. I have a fiscal surplus because I spend less than I make.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2019, 04:53 PM
 
1,466 posts, read 764,632 times
Reputation: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77 View Post
A trade deficit does not equal a fiscal deficit. These are different things.

We could run a balanced budget and still have a trade deficit. Our fiscal deficit is not a result of our trade deficit. It’s the result of the government spending more money than it takes in.

Going back to my example, I run a trade deficit with my barber because I pay her but she doesn’t pay me anything. I have a fiscal surplus because I spend less than I make.
SkyDog77, the GDP expenditure formula, the conventional formula most generally used by economists and statistician communities throughout the world, adds the nation’s balance of trade to their total purchases of products, and the result is described as the nation’s gross domestic product, (aka GDP). The title of this thread explains “A trade deficit indicates the nation consumed more than it produced”.
I again inquire, if anyone you consider to be a credible economist believes otherwise?

You are correct in stating the annual federal budget could be in balance while the nation had also experienced an annual trade deficit; but that trade deficit would indicate the spending of the entire nation exceeded their production during that year.
The entire nation is more than just the federal government. We could run a balanced budget and still have a trade deficit. The GDP we’re referring to is that of the entire nation.

You may or may not be in debt to your barber, while having spent more than you have earned. What’s the point of your barber analogy?

Respectfully, Supposn

Last edited by Supposn; 11-17-2019 at 05:08 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2019, 11:57 PM
 
7,657 posts, read 3,367,239 times
Reputation: 4889
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyDog77 View Post
That’s not remotely accurate. You need capital flows and if people are not being paid, there is less capital flow. If anything is nonsense here, it’s your example. GDP grows when more people have access to education, technology, and capital. Slavery prevents all of that.

Bloomberg - How Slavery Hurt the US Economy

But getting back on topic, the idea being put forward in this thread is that tariffs help American because trade deficits are bad. It’s a position that lacks any nuanced understanding of macroeconomics. When we install tariffs, our economy and citizens end up paying the price because tariffs make our currency stronger and therefore our goods become less desirable on the international market. The net effect is almost no change in trade deficits over the long run.

Again, I run trade deficits with lots of people and businesses. Just because I buy more from them than they do from me doesn’t mean my personal economic situation is compromised.
Yet our gdp is high in light of rapid automation and the rise of the mcjob. Engineers don’t have offers flowing in like the 80s and getting a good job is much harder than it used to be.

No capital does not have to flow, slavery and automation making goods results in huge gdp and massive export markets. The filthy rich get even richer. This isent rocket science.

Of course your financial situation does not change when you are doing “business” with pseudo slaves. Why would it if you are wealthy and you are paying peanuts for something from desperate people.

The civil war is what really killed it, that was a massive costly war fought mostly over slavery, if slavery was able to carry on it would mean higher and higher GDP for the south and I DID mention slavery in combination with automation and technology. Slavery alone wont cut it but slavery combined with automation and starve out the rest would sky rocket GDP. There is no care for the fellow american, its all about the bottom line in economics and the most efficient way to get there is machines AND slaves, not one or the other.

Economics does not account for this.

Tarrifs make it so that Americans have a fighting chance at a wage high enough to make it out of poverty before they are old men/women. The average american does not care about imports or exports, they care about paying their mortgages, getting their kids educated, etc. Economics cares not about that stuff (unless the bread winner can manager to extract enough from the market in a rare good job).

This is not really complicated. Yes tarrifs are bad for certian industries that need to leverage cheap labor over seas and then sell the stuff back to our markets at MASSIVE mark ups. The tarrifs we are discussing as a nation are not with Germany or Norway (even though Trump stubbed his toe with them), it is about China and any other poor south east asian or other nation where cheap labor can be extracted. The issue is cheap labor, cheap labor is not healthy for the average american.

Maybe you get a better deal on some shoes but now though the circuitous market your job eventually gets put on the chopping block because you yourself are too expensive and an Indian can do it cheaper. Ops, you got some cheap shoes at the expense of your mortgage, jokes on you. Oh wait but your a super star ... everyone is a super star ... until they arent.

Last edited by pittsflyer; 11-18-2019 at 12:12 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2019, 12:22 AM
 
7,657 posts, read 3,367,239 times
Reputation: 4889
Economics is not like physics (and even physics is subject to change with quantum), economics is even less durable. Apologists act like its the quadratic equation and it isn't, its just applying math to social markets. The only reason these markets exist in the first place is due to sin and the fall of man trying to met out various levels of Maslow's hierarchy and those higher up on the pyramid exploiting those at the bottom and then coming up with fancy equations for it.

Yes if you are lazy and do nothing you will suffer, that much is biblical but we are talking about a much more nuanced discussion of extremely crafty labor and time theft by those who have more leverage in the crony markets.

Why is it that you are able to run all these deficits with these "businesses" and your finances barely are effected? Is it maybe because those at the bottom of the Maslow's hierarchy are not protected and are exploited because they need to eat and have shelter so these do these shameful jobs to survive ... Not because thats the market rates. Real market rates would be determine if everyone had some measure of needs met without being compelled to do exploitive work to survive through taxation.

If someones next meal was not determined by having to cut your hair or bag your groceries do you think they would do it for that rate? Or would they go eat their govt cheese and demand higher wages and wait you out?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top