100% of Economists Disagree with Trump

[Freewill]

100 percent of the economists are not as rich as Trump, I go with the rich guy.

Warren Buffett is the richest man in America, much richer than Trump, and he supports free trade.

So by your yardstick, you should support free trade because the guy with the most money supports it.

I support free FAIR trade, not what is going on today with every country able to dump goods made on the cheap.

 

[Freewill]

We are not buying so much Chinese crap because they are investing so much over here.

We are doing it, because of Cheap Labor and Currency Manipulation.

Question: Do we want our Middle Class and Working class to have their wages be "competitive" to the Third World Poor?

The Chinese currency is over-valued, not under-valued. It's going to fall a lot further.

We will have less jobs in total and a lower GDP by protecting jobs that we shouldn't be doing any more.

The good thing is that the DOW didn't drop today.

 

[Mad Scientist]

We suffered two devastating world wars during this time.

Less globalization has correlated to more war over the 200 years. The more integrated the world becomes, the less likely we are to blow things up.

Who's "We"? You're a Canadian.

You're wrong. America has had MORE Globalization and MORE Free Trade since WWII and all its done is ship good paying jobs overseas and devastate the middle class.

 

[eagle1462010]

Would Cruz's VAT be applied to the price of a house? aka I buy a home for $100,000 and his 16% VAT gets added making the cost of the house rise to $116,000. Then add in the State and Local taxes along with the closing fees and etc............................

Someone would pay around $19,000 in taxes to buy a home under Cruz's VAT plan?

 

[eagle1462010]

Both a Tariff and a VAT would generate Federal Revenue. Both would be passed on to the consumer, and cause prices to go up for certain goods..........One would give making it in the United States an advantage over foreign businesses, the other would raise the price of ALL GOODS and SERVICES across the board. Whether it's a loaf of bread, or a home. One might create jobs here by making some industries more able to compete against third world slave labor markets, with no standards at all. It can also cause foreign investment by building automobile plants in the United States to avoid the import taxes.

This has happened in the past with companies like Nissan, Toyota and etc................They built the plants here to be more competitive with U.S. auto manufacturers and they still made money. They just didn't build it in Japan.

We still pay more for the cars and trucks, but at least we know it might keep Americans working. On the other hand, we pay more for a vehicle anyway...............Under the VAT plan of Cruz a $30,000 dollar vehicle would add $4800 to the price, making it cost $34,800 for the vehicle.

Either way, I pay more for certain goods when I buy. One MIGHT SAVE JOBS HERE..............the other doesn't.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"100% of Economists Disagree with Trump"

Further evidence that Trump isn't a serious candidate – not that more evidence was needed, of course.

 

[Jackson]

Not surprising, given that economists - regardless of political stripe - agree that free trade is good for Americans.

Donald Trump’s solution is to ... levy a 45% tax on Chinese imports. The idea is to make Chinese goods more expensive so that American producers who pay their workers more can gain a competitive edge.

There’s a painful side effect to this plan, however: It would, well, make a lot of products more expensive, and most of the price hikes would come straight out of consumer wallets. ... A 45% tariff on Chinese imports would encourage other low-cost exporters, such as Vietnam, Bangladesh and Mexico, to ship more goods to America. Whether U.S. producers would gain an edge is debatable. ...

Trump’s tariff plan would likely meet firm public resistance. Economists would also protest. “Economists disagree about a lot,” says Ozimek, “but there’s very strong agreement that free trade benefits Americans, on average.” A poll of economists by the University of Chicago, for instance, found that 100% of them believe U.S. trade with China makes most Americans better off.

Most economists also agree that free trade—like anything that improves efficiency and market performance—produces winners and losers. And the losers usually include people who get the job done slower, at a higher cost than competitors. Protecting underperformers isn’t likely to help the U.S. economy. Helping them perform better would.​

Donald Trump wants you to pay more for smartphones, TVs and a lot else

That's a shame. The economists have done such a superb job the last 7 years, too. lol

Once Americans start to boycott products produced in China due to their costs, we just may see manufacturing coming back to the US. Yes!

 

[Toro]

We suffered two devastating world wars during this time.

Less globalization has correlated to more war over the 200 years. The more integrated the world becomes, the less likely we are to blow things up.

Who's "We"? You're a Canadian.

You're wrong. America has had MORE Globalization and MORE Free Trade since WWII and all its done is ship good paying jobs overseas and devastate the middle class.

I'm an American. I became an American citizen in 2012. And I'm proud to be an American by choice.

And no, you're history and economics are are simply flat out wrong. Global trade, including American trade, has risen faster than GDP since World War II.

 

[jasonnfree]

Not surprising, given that economists - regardless of political stripe - agree that free trade is good for Americans.

Donald Trump’s solution is to ... levy a 45% tax on Chinese imports. The idea is to make Chinese goods more expensive so that American producers who pay their workers more can gain a competitive edge.

There’s a painful side effect to this plan, however: It would, well, make a lot of products more expensive, and most of the price hikes would come straight out of consumer wallets. ... A 45% tariff on Chinese imports would encourage other low-cost exporters, such as Vietnam, Bangladesh and Mexico, to ship more goods to America. Whether U.S. producers would gain an edge is debatable. ...

Trump’s tariff plan would likely meet firm public resistance. Economists would also protest. “Economists disagree about a lot,” says Ozimek, “but there’s very strong agreement that free trade benefits Americans, on average.” A poll of economists by the University of Chicago, for instance, found that 100% of them believe U.S. trade with China makes most Americans better off.

Most economists also agree that free trade—like anything that improves efficiency and market performance—produces winners and losers. And the losers usually include people who get the job done slower, at a higher cost than competitors. Protecting underperformers isn’t likely to help the U.S. economy. Helping them perform better would.​

Donald Trump wants you to pay more for smartphones, TVs and a lot else

Free trade is good for americans? Maybe it's good for american economists and corporation bottom lines, but not for the millions of blue collar workers that lost their jobs. I remember not seeing cost reductions in prices after Nafta was passed. Why is the TPP kept secret and not allowed to be debated anyway, if it's so great?

 

[eagle1462010]

Countries like Japan and China still put import Quotas on our goods and services.............Just as we did to them in the past which brought some of their plants here.

Report: U.S. drops bid to end Japanese import rules

In April 2013, Japan announced it would more than double the number of motor vehicles eligible for import under its fast-track rules. Detroit's Big Three automakers are now be allowed to export up to 5,000 vehicles annually of each vehicle type under the program, compared with the prior ceiling of 2,000 vehicles per vehicle type.

The U.S., Japan, Mexico, Canada and eight other nations have been negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership that would create a free trade zone comprising 40 percent of the world's economy for more than four years. Australia, Brunei, Chile, New Zealand, Malaysia, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam are part of the talks.

Automakers have been pushing for at least three years to convince the Obama administration to include provisions in the agreement barring the countries from currency manipulation, but Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and Froman have repeatedly shown no interest in doing so, arguing such issues are better addressed by global forums like the World Trade Organization.

Automakers worry that foreign governments — like Japan — will be able to weaken their currency to undercut U.S. vehicle production.

 

[Indeependent]

We suffered two devastating world wars during this time.

Less globalization has correlated to more war over the 200 years. The more integrated the world becomes, the less likely we are to blow things up.

Who's "We"? You're a Canadian.

You're wrong. America has had MORE Globalization and MORE Free Trade since WWII and all its done is ship good paying jobs overseas and devastate the middle class.

I'm an American. I became an American citizen in 2012. And I'm proud to be an American by choice.

And no, you're history and economics are are simply flat out wrong. Global trade, including American trade, has risen faster than GDP since World War II.

it's obvious your business and/or portfolio are very important to you...not to me.
I's rather see more people employed.

 

[Jackson]

Countries like Japan and China still put import Quotas on our goods and services.............Just as we did to them in the past which brought some of their plants here.

Report: U.S. drops bid to end Japanese import rules

In April 2013, Japan announced it would more than double the number of motor vehicles eligible for import under its fast-track rules. Detroit's Big Three automakers are now be allowed to export up to 5,000 vehicles annually of each vehicle type under the program, compared with the prior ceiling of 2,000 vehicles per vehicle type.

The U.S., Japan, Mexico, Canada and eight other nations have been negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership that would create a free trade zone comprising 40 percent of the world's economy for more than four years. Australia, Brunei, Chile, New Zealand, Malaysia, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam are part of the talks.

Automakers have been pushing for at least three years to convince the Obama administration to include provisions in the agreement barring the countries from currency manipulation, but Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and Froman have repeatedly shown no interest in doing so, arguing such issues are better addressed by global forums like the World Trade Organization.

Automakers worry that foreign governments — like Japan — will be able to weaken their currency to undercut U.S. vehicle production.

Trump has addressed that.

 

[Toro]

Both a Tariff and a VAT would generate Federal Revenue. Both would be passed on to the consumer, and cause prices to go up for certain goods..........One would give making it in the United States an advantage over foreign businesses, the other would raise the price of ALL GOODS and SERVICES across the board. Whether it's a loaf of bread, or a home. One might create jobs here by making some industries more able to compete against third world slave labor markets, with no standards at all. It can also cause foreign investment by building automobile plants in the United States to avoid the import taxes.

This has happened in the past with companies like Nissan, Toyota and etc................They built the plants here to be more competitive with U.S. auto manufacturers and they still made money. They just didn't build it in Japan.

We still pay more for the cars and trucks, but at least we know it might keep Americans working. On the other hand, we pay more for a vehicle anyway...............Under the VAT plan of Cruz a $30,000 dollar vehicle would add $4800 to the price, making it cost $34,800 for the vehicle.

Either way, I pay more for certain goods when I buy. One MIGHT SAVE JOBS HERE..............the other doesn't.

Incorrect.

You learn this in Economics 101.

The price of the good with the tariff goes from Pworld to Ptariff. The triangles that say "Societal Loss" is the loss in wealth because of the tariff. Those are the jobs destroyed by the tariff used to "protect" jobs.

Compare that to a VAT.

A VAT shifts the supply curve up and to the left. The triangle on the demand curve that intersects between P and P1 represents the deadweight loss because of the VAT.

However - and this is important - the deadweight loss from the VAT is less than the tariff. The tariff destroys more wealth than the VAT.

This isn't a controversial topic in economics.

 

[Indeependent]

Both a Tariff and a VAT would generate Federal Revenue. Both would be passed on to the consumer, and cause prices to go up for certain goods..........One would give making it in the United States an advantage over foreign businesses, the other would raise the price of ALL GOODS and SERVICES across the board. Whether it's a loaf of bread, or a home. One might create jobs here by making some industries more able to compete against third world slave labor markets, with no standards at all. It can also cause foreign investment by building automobile plants in the United States to avoid the import taxes.

This has happened in the past with companies like Nissan, Toyota and etc................They built the plants here to be more competitive with U.S. auto manufacturers and they still made money. They just didn't build it in Japan.

We still pay more for the cars and trucks, but at least we know it might keep Americans working. On the other hand, we pay more for a vehicle anyway...............Under the VAT plan of Cruz a $30,000 dollar vehicle would add $4800 to the price, making it cost $34,800 for the vehicle.

Either way, I pay more for certain goods when I buy. One MIGHT SAVE JOBS HERE..............the other doesn't.

Incorrect.

You learn this in Economics 101.

The price of the good with the tariff goes from Pworld to Ptariff. The triangles that say "Societal Loss" is the loss in wealth because of the tariff. Those are the jobs destroyed by the tariff used to "protect" jobs.

Compare that to a VAT.

A VAT shifts the supply curve up and to the left. The triangle on the demand curve that intersects between P and P1 represents the deadweight loss because of the VAT.

However - and this is important - the deadweight loss from the VAT is less than the tariff. The tariff destroys more wealth than the VAT.

This isn't a controversial topic in economics.

Too bad your favored Economic Theories work for only 1% of America's population.

 

[Toro]

it's obvious your business and/or portfolio are very important to you...not to me.
I's rather see more people employed.

Less people will be employed with a tariff.

Tariffs are one of the worst wealth-destroying taxes around.

That's why countries have spent the last 70 years lowering tariffs around the world. We understand how tariffs destroy wealth.

 

[eagle1462010]

Countries like Japan and China still put import Quotas on our goods and services.............Just as we did to them in the past which brought some of their plants here.

Report: U.S. drops bid to end Japanese import rules

In April 2013, Japan announced it would more than double the number of motor vehicles eligible for import under its fast-track rules. Detroit's Big Three automakers are now be allowed to export up to 5,000 vehicles annually of each vehicle type under the program, compared with the prior ceiling of 2,000 vehicles per vehicle type.

The U.S., Japan, Mexico, Canada and eight other nations have been negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership that would create a free trade zone comprising 40 percent of the world's economy for more than four years. Australia, Brunei, Chile, New Zealand, Malaysia, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam are part of the talks.

Automakers have been pushing for at least three years to convince the Obama administration to include provisions in the agreement barring the countries from currency manipulation, but Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and Froman have repeatedly shown no interest in doing so, arguing such issues are better addressed by global forums like the World Trade Organization.

Automakers worry that foreign governments — like Japan — will be able to weaken their currency to undercut U.S. vehicle production.

Trump has addressed that.

There is a double standard on the BS deals we make. Free Trade isn't really Free..........Tariffs are still used as are quota's...........before these so called Free Deals we made trade agreements via a country by country basis............Give and Take.........You drop that duty, and we'll drop this one.........until a deal is struck.................

Now we go to the World Courts to decide our fate............best example is the Country of Origin labeling...........Challenged by the WTO and NAFTA courts our country lost and the court allowed Billions in Tariff penalties because of OUR LAW.............. And as a result, they just passed the legislation to end Country of Origin labeling.

It's not whether you agree or disagree with the law.................It's whether they should have to abide by the LAWS OF OUR COUNTRY to do business here. Just the same as we must abide by their laws to do business there. We are a SOVEREIGN NATION.......Our Laws should not be determined by a foreign court.

 

[Toro]

Too bad your favored Economic Theories work for only 1% of America's population.

That's a nice bumper sticker slogan, but isn't backed up by empirical evidence.

 

[Indeependent]

it's obvious your business and/or portfolio are very important to you...not to me.
I's rather see more people employed.

Less people will be employed with a tariff.

Tariffs are one of the worst wealth-destroying taxes around.

That's why countries have spent the last 70 years lowering tariffs around the world. We understand how tariffs destroy wealth.

Trump will tear up bad Free Trade Agreements and force other Western Nations to do the same.
He will strangle China and India to pat their workers better wages and the world will be happier.
I'm very happy that Free Trade has worked out for you.
I'm very unhappy it hasn't worked out for the other 99 other people in the room with you.

 

[Indeependent]

Too bad your favored Economic Theories work for only 1% of America's population.

That's a nice bumper sticker slogan, but isn't backed up by empirical evidence.

Your favorite theories have been backed up by massive under and unemployment.
I'm not impressed by FoxNews sound bites.

 

[eagle1462010]

it's obvious your business and/or portfolio are very important to you...not to me.
I's rather see more people employed.

Less people will be employed with a tariff.

Tariffs are one of the worst wealth-destroying taxes around.

That's why countries have spent the last 70 years lowering tariffs around the world. We understand how tariffs destroy wealth.

Whether the VAT or the Tariff I pay more for goods. Both destroy my wealth by causing me to spend more for products. One doesn't hit the pocketbook on everything, the other does..................

A Flat tax with extra income via Tariffs and going back to direct negotiation with countries on conducting business............Other countries are using QUOTA'S for PROTECTIONISM against us..........just as we have on them in the past..........Because of this they built plants in the United States which employ 10's of thousands of workers in this country.