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.
You can eliminate the trade deficit. Of course, another great depression would be needed.
Hopefully we will never see elimination of the trade deficit.
Assuming you are correct about another great depression, is allowing the wages of US workers to find equilibrium with those of Chinese peasants a better outcome?
Had US incomes not declined under NAFTA and the 2000 China Trade Act, more US mortgage holders would have been able to make their payments and the 2009 financial crisis would not have been as sever and the recovery would have been more robust.
If American workers are going to prosper, we have to change the way we do business with international corporations and with the rest of the world.
The interests of US workers, their wages and benefits, have to be a priority if we are to avoid becoming another Mexico.
Assuming you are correct about another great depression, is allowing the wages of US workers to find equilibrium with those of Chinese peasants a better outcome?
The wage of all workers globally will eventually rise to reach an equilibrium.
The Laws of Economics will guarantee it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Had US incomes not declined under NAFTA and the 2000 China Trade Act, more US mortgage holders would have been able to make their payments and the 2009 financial crisis would not have been as sever and the recovery would have been more robust.
Actually, it's been 16 years since incomes have risen in the US.
Quote:
One last statistic, from Sentier Research. Median annual household income in the US reached $57,263 this past March, which was 4.5% higher than in March 2015.
But — and here’s where the anger comes in — this March’s figure is still slightly below the $57,342 median annual income in January 2000.
January 2000!
Americans haven’t gotten a raise in more than 16 years.
Not gonna happen and it's a losing battle fighting the Laws of Economics.
Laws of economics? What a joke. What passes for "laws" are just baseless assertions, the equivalent of declaring that the moon is made out of green cheese.
Laws of economics? What a joke. What passes for "laws" are just baseless assertions, the equivalent of declaring that the moon is made out of green cheese.
Thank you for demonstrating the idiocy of people who support protectionism.
If ya ignore economic laws, such as the law of supply and demand and comparative advantage, ya might just be a protectionist.
I find it funny... there are certainly things that are impossible... THIS is not one of them... there are 300+ million of Americans, I am sure somebody here will have an intelligent answer... it depends on how hard you look.... not trying is the first step to failure... that is Hillary Clinton... at least the other two candidates propose to look for the answer... THAT is the path to success...
Hillary isn't so stupid as to think we don't have a problem. She will look for answers -- but she isn't going to promise easy-peasy answers like Trump ad Sanders. Trump's "better deals" is no answer at all.
It is really a nonissue. If the economy can be made to grow fast enough that there are good jobs for everyone, who cares if we are running a trade deficit? And a lot of those jobs sent away really weren't that good.
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.
