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.
And some days we are told the stock market is a barometer of Trump's success but the days it records a loss because of his trade polices -- Trump has nothing to do with it.
And when the next recession hits, I’m sure he won’t take credit for that either. How convenient.
Donald Trump inherited unemployment rates that have been steadily falling for 9 years. And Obama had greater drops in unemployment rates during 2016-2017, than Trump had in 2017-2018.
In Obama's last 11 months in office 2.09 million jobs were added.
In the last 11 months while Trump was in office 1.84 million jobs were added.
The stock market and unemployment rates are controlled by things like the cost of shipping goods, oil prices, recent new technology, new markets, and consumer trends. And GW Bush, Obama, and Trump have little control over those variables, and most policies enacted by presidents take many years to actually effect things like unemployment rates and stocks.
But if you want to look at unemployment and stock market numbers compared to presidents, Obama beats Trump on unemployment and the stock market. But Trump and his supporters would have everyone believe that Trump is a economic miracle (and they use manipulation and cover up facts to do it.)
Well done. Facts are hard for some to believe. I believe it was Romney who warned the GOP that if they did not win the Presidency in 2016, they may never win again. So by hook or crook the GOP went all out. It turned out it was a crook. +1
Well done. Facts are hard for some to believe. I believe it was Romney who warned the GOP that if they did not win the Presidency in 2016, they may never win again. So by hook or crook the GOP went all out. It turned out it was a crook. +1
And some days we are told the stock market is a barometer of Trump's success but the days it records a loss because of his trade polices -- Trump has nothing to do with it.
If trump’s tariffs cause a trade war, he will be blamed for the recession.
I try to avoid wal mart but a couple months ago I needed an ironing board pronto. Got one there made in USA for like $14.
Except for s couple of things like electronics the US still makes practically anything you could want.
You are either completely ignorant of the realities of manufacturing in the US or simply lying.
Lets see, you needed an ironing board and you found one "made in the USA." Goody for you. I concede that you are an absolute genius!
I recall when there were commercial laundries in most cities where they washed and ironed and folded your clothes (even underwear) also tablecloths, sheets, other bedding, etc. on automated equipment. No need for primitive ironing boards. Question: Is there a US company that makes this type of equipment for commercial laundries? Answer: No. Who makes this type of product? Answer: Germany. See link.
Import Certificate policy is only recommended for a nation that otherwise expects to continue experiencing significant annual trade deficits of goods. Import Certificates are market sensitive to foreign nations trade responses and are intolerant of their nation's experiencing annual trade deficits. Nations' adopting the policy would increase their annual GDP's more than otherwise, and increasing nation's GDPs bolster their numbers of jobs and their payrolls, more than otherwise.
It's inconsequential if Buffett's opinion was, (or was not) a nation adopting Import Certificate policy would increase their exports and aggregate global trade. What matters is that the nation's GDP per capita will be increased regardless of foreign nations responses to the adopted policy. USA would produce more products to satisfy the more than otherwise increases of demands for our products within domestic and/or foreign marketplaces.
But the author also joins other Import Certificate critics that believe due to our trade deficits' lesser proportions to our GDPs, USA's trade deficits cannot be of significance to our entire economy.
This is the second of three posts responding to your link to Forbes magazines article:
I'll further address Mr. Worstall's positions in my next responding post.
You stated that USA's trade deficit amounts are proportionally only 3% of our GDP amounts. But a 3% reduction of our nation's jobs and payrolls had a much greater than 3% affect upon our GDP.
GDP reports what the nation produced. It cannot and does not speculate upon what the nation hasn't been produced due to our trade deficit. Unlike most service products, goods products can and often are produced in locations remote from their purchasers and users. In most cases where there continues to be an effective USA demand for a service product when a USA service producer ceases to operate, other USA enterprises satisfy that demand.
That's often not the case for goods products. When USA goods products are crowded out of USA's markets by lower-cost foreign goods, those continuing existing USA effective demands continue to be satisfied by foreign produces and major portions of USA industry's goods producers cease producing. When there's less production of USA goods, there's less demand for all of the USA goods and service products that were previously purchased by reduced or eliminated USA goods producers.
Additionally, due to reduced production and economies of scale, the unit costs of products that previously were sold to the now non-existing USA goods producers, have increased. Due to those USA produced goods increased unit costs, many USA that supported the eliminated USA producers, are themselves reduced or eliminated.
Manufacturing being of lesser economic consequences or some products are of lower-value than other USA goods or service products should not be primarily, (if at all) government determining. Import Certificate policy does not tolerate its nation's experiencing chronic annual trade deficits of goods. Beyond that, all else is for the markets to determine.
You stated that USA's trade deficit amounts are proportionally only 3% of our GDP amounts. But a 3% reduction of our nation's jobs and payrolls had a much greater than 3% affect upon our GDP.
GDP reports what the nation produced. It cannot and does not speculate upon what the nation hasn't been produced due to our trade deficit. Unlike most service products, goods products can and often are produced in locations remote from their purchasers and users. In most cases where there continues to be an effective USA demand for a service product when a USA service producer ceases to operate, other USA enterprises satisfy that demand.
That's often not the case for goods products. When USA goods products are crowded out of USA's markets by lower-cost foreign goods, those continuing existing USA effective demands continue to be satisfied by foreign produces and major portions of USA industry's goods producers cease producing. When there's less production of USA goods, there's less demand for all of the USA goods and service products that were previously purchased by reduced or eliminated USA goods producers.
Additionally, due to reduced production and economies of scale, the unit costs of products that previously were sold to the now non-existing USA goods producers, have increased. Due to those USA produced goods increased unit costs, many USA that supported the eliminated USA producers, are themselves reduced or eliminated.
Manufacturing being of lesser economic consequences or some products are of lower-value than other USA goods or service products should not be primarily, (if at all) government determining. Import Certificate policy does not tolerate its nation's experiencing chronic annual trade deficits of goods. Beyond that, all else is for the markets to determine.
“If a foreign country can supply us with a commodity cheaper than we ourselves can make it, better buy it of them with some part of the produce of our own industry employed in a way in which we have some advantage.”—Adam Smith - The Wealth of Nations.
Income Certificates would just lead to goods become more expensive in the US, as other countries can produce these goods more cheaply and supply would be curtailed according to the ability to buy certificates. Whilst commodities used in manufacturing processes should also be imported in order to make goods cheaper and more affordable, in order to make your own industry that can utilise such commodities more competitive. Free trade is always preferable to regulation, and it should be noted that the least regulated post-war economy in Europe was Germany.
Last edited by Brave New World; 09-08-2018 at 11:43 AM..
Brave New World, regarding your link to Forbes magazines article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors.../#7c8d16892372 .
Mr. Worstall, the author states, “trade makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to how many jobs there are in an economy”. I don't recall, but I'd be surprised if Buffett doesn't agree that increasing GDP's bolster their nation's numbers of jobs and their aggregate payrolls.
Trade deficits reduce, and trade surpluses increase their nation's annual GDPs. That's an indisputable fact, (rather than an opinion). USA's chronic negative annual balances of trade reduced our GDPs.
Its reasonably expected USA's GDP affects and in turn is affected by our numbers of jobs and aggregate payrolls.
This is the first of three posts responding to your link to Forbes magazines article.
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.
