Annual Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs.

I’m a proponent of the policy described within Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article.
Excluding values of materials that are explicit items within the list of scarce or precious minerals, the values of all goods passing through the Import certificate nation’s borders are subject to the nation’s Import Certificate regulations.

Tariffs are generally drafted to be applicable to fewer specific rather than to almost all imported goods. Within nations that have adopted a tariff policy, political entities usually jokey for their goods advantages over others; and usually some of those political schemes are successful. Among Import Certificate advantages over tariff policy is its drafted to (hopefully) remain general rather than applicable to specific goods.

It’s illogical to attempt protecting the nation’s steel industry from lower wage imports, unless you similarly protect the nation’s steel purchasing industries from such imports. Otherwise we’ve undermined our nation’s steel purchasers. If we’re going to protect domestic steel, we should protect it from imported substitutes for steel. Import Certificate policy does not discriminate among types of goods, enterprises, industries, or foreign nations. It doesn’t discriminate between agricultural or manufactured products but rather treats all products in an equitable manner.

Both tariffs and Import Certificate policy are dependent upon guide lines for goods’ assessed values. I’m among proponents that those assessment guide lines be determined and updated by civil servant statisticians rather than by politicians. Doing otherwise is a path to disaster. The three branches of our federal government do of course retain their full monitoring and oversite duties and jurisdictional powers.

Regardless of the variable free market prices of the nation’s Import certificates, (ICs) passed on to their purchasers of imported goods, the nation’s annual trade deficits of goods will be significantly reduced or eliminated.
Even if tariff rates reflected upon import prices passed on to their purchasers of imported goods are drastically high, imported goods price increases cannot assure reductions of annual trade deficits similar to the great reductions that Import Certificate policy would accomplish.

Respectfully, Supposn

OMG, not this crap again. Haven't you already posted this exact thing like 14 times before?

Cite?

Mods, please look into the OP's posts and decide what kind of lunatic posts like this.

They were 100% the right thing to do.

China joined the WTO in late 2002. Notice anything ****ed up? https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=mj2U

The truth about free trade is that it's just like any other market: it only works when no actor has effective total control like monopsonies and minimum wages.

China has near total access to the US markets; the US has effectively no export access to China; and China had a ton of national credit they could tap to fund losses and ensure employment. Good for US corporations. Bad for US workers.

Doesn't matter anymore anyways. Trump grew a pussy.

Otatop, trade deficits crowd domestic produced products out of their domestic marketplaces. Thus, they reduce their nations' domestic production volumes. It’s that simple.

Has any creditable economist ever claimed otherwise?
Respectfully, Supposn

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balanc...tion's_GDP Trade balance’s effects upon a nation's GDP[edit]
Exports directly increase and imports directly reduce a nation's balance of trade (i.e. net exports). A trade surplus is a positive net balance of trade, and a trade deficit is a negative net balance of trade. Due to the balance of trade being explicitly added to the calculation of the nation's gross domestic product using the expenditure method of calculating gross domestic product (i.e. GDP), trade surpluses are contributions and trade deficits are "drags" upon their nation's GDP.[44][45][46] ...
... (45) ^ Staff, Investopedia (11 May 2010). "Expenditure Method". Retrieved 15 March 2018.
(46) ^ Analysis, US Department of Commerce, BEA, Bureau of Economic. "Bureau of Economic Analysis". www.bea.gov. Retrieved 15 March 2018.
(47) ^ "gross domestic product - Definition & Formula". Retrieved 15 March 2018.

And yet China's still our largest overseas trade partner.
So what impact does buying products from China that aren't produced domestically have? Surely that can't also be "always net detrimental" to US GDP.

Otatop, I made no mention of individual products, or cargos, or transactions. All nations’ annual trade deficits of goods were always net detrimental to their nations’ GDP and dragged upon their numbers of jobs.
Respectfully, Supposn

lol

12-15-2013 08-08-2016 12-07-2016 05-26-2018 08-09-2018 12-03-2018 You really slacked off in 2017.

omg those videos are horrific. that's faces of death type stuff. good grief, gonna need time to recover from that

Annual Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation’s GDP.

I don’t know why the discussion thread “Trump’s Tariffs” was closed, but a remark by Ack Shawn should be responded to. Ack Shawn posted, “The truth about free trade is that it's just like any other market: it only works when no actor has effective total control like monopsonies and minimum wages”.

Ack Shawn, the free-trade is a concept describing some particular characteristics of government’s or a marketplace’s trade practices. I am not opposed to free-trade markets, but I’m opposed to USA seeking to practice a policy of international pure free-trade.

There are critical differences of consequences due to nations domestic marketplaces and their participation within international markets. Nation’s net balances of international trade effect their GDPs and their numbers of jobs.
Annual trade surpluses always contribute, and deficits always reduce their nation’s annual amounts of production.
I’m firmly opposed to USA’s chronic annual trade deficits of goods.

Respectfully, Supposn

right

lol this guy made a new thread to respond to a single post in a locked thread he made

Unless those we are trading with want to hoard dollars then they must use the funds earned from their exports to either invest in the US or buy American products.

In the event they do decide to hoard dollars then they are just giving us stuff for free.

There's no way this guy will be around much longer, right?

You know you actually don't need to start a new thread every time you want to make the same dumb point.

Your Obedient Servant,
otatop

Most favored nation clauses.

Other than mutual agreement of a “most favored nation” in its simplest form, I’m opposed to USA entering or remaining in any mutual trade agreements for economic purposes. Sovereign nations should unilaterally determine of what they permit, and under what conditions they permit any products from entering their jurisdiction.
There are “most favored nation” agreements stated explicitly or by implicitly within the text of every international trade agreement that the USA has ever entered into.

The concept of “most favored nation” does not in itself prohibit participating mutually agreeing nations from favoring their own entities in matters that are the subject of the agreement, (except when within the agreement, the practice is explicitly prohibited).
But the clause does prohibit the mutually agreeing nations from granting to any foreign nations, advantage that they deny to any among the agreeing nations; (i.e. the mutually agreeing nations cannot be treat each other any less equitably than they treat any other foreign nation).

Respectfully, Supposn

what about import certificates? where can I go to learn more about them?

Bigt2k4, google to Wikipedia's "Import Certificates" article.

Respectfully, Supposn

lol

Come on Wook, we were cool letting you get a couple days off when you missed the politard FF playoffs on the last week of the season but this is ridiculous.

StinkUBus, you’re ignoring the difference between investment and transfers of wealth. Investments are contributions to producing enterprises or their products. A financial fund in itself is not an investment; it has not contributed to an enterprise that produces goods or service products. That’s why investments are, and transfers of wealth are not included within the calculation of gross domestic product, (GDP).

Transfer of wealth occurs when documents of ownership are traded. When someone purchases or sells shares of Ford common stock or Ford bonds, they contribute nothing to the Ford corporation. (Other than any brokerage fees which in aggregate contribute to USA’s GDP as creations of additional service products, they contributed nothing to our nation’s GDP).
Only contributions to the nation’s final productions of goods and service products contribute to their nation’s GDP.

Annual trade surpluses always contribute, and deficits always reduce their nation’s annual amounts of production.
Respectfully, Supposn

The US trade deficit with China gives China more to lose than the US in a trade breakdown between the two.

By any chance does one of your previously-used 2+2 account names rhyme with 'Fallon Claw Swan'?