Trump's trade war with China

[Brain357]

Aren't you trying to get them to lower tariffs on our exports to them? What is it you think you are tryin to do?

I want "Fair trade" or mutually beneficial trade. I don't give a fuck how it happens, and truthfully, I would not believe any promises they make.

Define fair trade. What do you think that is? Currently they send us all their resources for next to nothing. Seems like a good deal to me. But explain to me what it is you think you want.

One where the trade balance is "fair".


Thought to be really "fair" we should have our turn for a massive trade surplus for the next 50 years, but that is probably asking too much.

You can't seem to answer the question. What is "fair"? I would say our balance is currently quite fair. Nobody is making anyone trade, buyers and seller seem happy. Why do we want to have a surplus? You want us sending out more resources than receiving? Japan had a trade surplus and now have had a stagnant economy for many years.

1. You trust that the Chinese market is open to our exports?

2. Intellectual property theft alone, is a major issue, that the American "Sellers" are not happy about. For one limited example.

3. Yes. Like Xi, I want my nation to be "Sending out more resources than receiving". Me and him, we both agree that is the better place to be in.

4. Japan has many issues. Trade balance is not one of them.

1. I don't know that I care. If not they are only hurting themselves. Currently we get all their resources for very cheap and they get to keep the pollution.
2. Yes that is an issue. But that isn't going to make our workers more wealthy. We already have lots of wealth. If Microsoft for example starts getting paid for windows that is going to executives and investors, not workers. This will do nothing to help our wages.
3. That makes no sense. Japan did that for many years, now how are they doing? We are much better off having real resources.
4. Well their big trade surplus certainly was not good for them.

 

[Brain357]

We have the largest economy in the world and our unemployment rate is very low. What are you talking about?

The displaced workers, were supposed to be temporarily displaced, and then find new, even better jobs, in new fields to be developed or in the old jobs when those industries became more competitive.

And it did not happen. Instead our corporations and businesses and citizens and politicians adjusted to the new shitty normal.

Well we certainly have plenty of wealth. Why is it Chinas fault our people aren't getting paid well? It was US companies that sent the jobs away. And we have more wealth then ever. Our unemployment rate is super low. China has nothing to do with it. We have the wealth and the jobs. The wages is an internal problem.

YOur words make no sense.


The displaced workers, were supposed to be temporarily displaced, and then find new, even better jobs, in new fields to be developed or in the old jobs when those industries became more competitive.

And it did not happen. Instead our corporations and businesses and citizens and politicians adjusted to the new shitty.


Your response is all over the place. Pick a point you want to focus on for discussion purposes.

You blaming China does not make sense. ....

China has a trade policy designed to grow jobs and wealth inside their country. I respect that. That is their government, representing the interests of their people. Your talk of "blame" is irrelevant.


It is on US that we go along with them benefiting at our expense.


I want to change that. TO at least, a more equal and mutually beneficial trade. Or shut it down. Either way.

Jobs in China don't hurt me or you. They don't have a trade policy for creating jobs. What they have is lots of cheap labor and few regulations. They have extremely poor wages and lots of health issues. Do you want to be treated like China workers? I thought you wanted better jobs?

 

[Brain357]

I have not seen that to be the case. He is retaliating against arbitrary tariffs imposed by the US. The trade balance is Trump's, and your, fantasy.

Why retaliate against a tax designed to change the balance of trade, if trade balance does not matter?

What does Nobel Price winning economist Milton Friedman have wrong? Sure sounds like our trade balance is good to me.

On what happened next. It did not go that way people like him said it would. As I already answered.


He might be a respected economist.


His authority does not trump historical reality.

We have lots of wealth and lots of jobs. Our problem is not trade policy.

We have generations of wage stagnation, relative to our productivity growth and previous historical trends.


Trade policy is at least part of the reason(s) for that.

Yes we do, but wealth has been growing. Were does all that wealth go?

 

[Correll]

I want "Fair trade" or mutually beneficial trade. I don't give a fuck how it happens, and truthfully, I would not believe any promises they make.

Define fair trade. What do you think that is? Currently they send us all their resources for next to nothing. Seems like a good deal to me. But explain to me what it is you think you want.

One where the trade balance is "fair".


Thought to be really "fair" we should have our turn for a massive trade surplus for the next 50 years, but that is probably asking too much.

You can't seem to answer the question. What is "fair"? I would say our balance is currently quite fair. Nobody is making anyone trade, buyers and seller seem happy. Why do we want to have a surplus? You want us sending out more resources than receiving? Japan had a trade surplus and now have had a stagnant economy for many years.

1. You trust that the Chinese market is open to our exports?

2. Intellectual property theft alone, is a major issue, that the American "Sellers" are not happy about. For one limited example.

3. Yes. Like Xi, I want my nation to be "Sending out more resources than receiving". Me and him, we both agree that is the better place to be in.

4. Japan has many issues. Trade balance is not one of them.

1. I don't know that I care. If not they are only hurting themselves. Currently we get all their resources for very cheap and they get to keep the pollution.
2. Yes that is an issue. But that isn't going to make our workers more wealthy. We already have lots of wealth. If Microsoft for example starts getting paid for windows that is going to executives and investors, not workers. This will do nothing to help our wages.
3. That makes no sense. Japan did that for many years, now how are they doing? We are much better off having real resources.
4. Well their big trade surplus certainly was not good for them.

1. Milton Friedman, said the way it was supposed to work, was that we give them dollars for those resources, and then they buy our stuff, making jobs here. I have lived in the Rust Best, my entire life. It does not feel like they are hurting themselves.


2. You said the sellers were happy. I pointed out one major example of that not being true. You changing the subject to workers wages does not change that. Not all the sellers are happy.

3. Japan did very well for itself for a very long time. That the good times, did not last for ever, does not change the massive increase in national wealth that occurred during that time. Even today, their per capita wealth is climbing (last I heard)

 

[Correll]

The displaced workers, were supposed to be temporarily displaced, and then find new, even better jobs, in new fields to be developed or in the old jobs when those industries became more competitive.

And it did not happen. Instead our corporations and businesses and citizens and politicians adjusted to the new shitty normal.

Well we certainly have plenty of wealth. Why is it Chinas fault our people aren't getting paid well? It was US companies that sent the jobs away. And we have more wealth then ever. Our unemployment rate is super low. China has nothing to do with it. We have the wealth and the jobs. The wages is an internal problem.

YOur words make no sense.


The displaced workers, were supposed to be temporarily displaced, and then find new, even better jobs, in new fields to be developed or in the old jobs when those industries became more competitive.

And it did not happen. Instead our corporations and businesses and citizens and politicians adjusted to the new shitty.


Your response is all over the place. Pick a point you want to focus on for discussion purposes.

You blaming China does not make sense. ....

China has a trade policy designed to grow jobs and wealth inside their country. I respect that. That is their government, representing the interests of their people. Your talk of "blame" is irrelevant.


It is on US that we go along with them benefiting at our expense.


I want to change that. TO at least, a more equal and mutually beneficial trade. Or shut it down. Either way.

Jobs in China don't hurt me or you. ...?

If they exist at the expense of jobs here, then they do.

 

[Correll]

Why retaliate against a tax designed to change the balance of trade, if trade balance does not matter?

What does Nobel Price winning economist Milton Friedman have wrong? Sure sounds like our trade balance is good to me.

On what happened next. It did not go that way people like him said it would. As I already answered.


He might be a respected economist.


His authority does not trump historical reality.

We have lots of wealth and lots of jobs. Our problem is not trade policy.

We have generations of wage stagnation, relative to our productivity growth and previous historical trends.


Trade policy is at least part of the reason(s) for that.

Yes we do, but wealth has been growing. Were does all that wealth go?

To the stockholders and employers.


Time for the workers to get some. I would say, at least for the next 50 years, to be fair.

 

[Brain357]

Define fair trade. What do you think that is? Currently they send us all their resources for next to nothing. Seems like a good deal to me. But explain to me what it is you think you want.

One where the trade balance is "fair".


Thought to be really "fair" we should have our turn for a massive trade surplus for the next 50 years, but that is probably asking too much.

You can't seem to answer the question. What is "fair"? I would say our balance is currently quite fair. Nobody is making anyone trade, buyers and seller seem happy. Why do we want to have a surplus? You want us sending out more resources than receiving? Japan had a trade surplus and now have had a stagnant economy for many years.

1. You trust that the Chinese market is open to our exports?

2. Intellectual property theft alone, is a major issue, that the American "Sellers" are not happy about. For one limited example.

3. Yes. Like Xi, I want my nation to be "Sending out more resources than receiving". Me and him, we both agree that is the better place to be in.

4. Japan has many issues. Trade balance is not one of them.

1. I don't know that I care. If not they are only hurting themselves. Currently we get all their resources for very cheap and they get to keep the pollution.
2. Yes that is an issue. But that isn't going to make our workers more wealthy. We already have lots of wealth. If Microsoft for example starts getting paid for windows that is going to executives and investors, not workers. This will do nothing to help our wages.
3. That makes no sense. Japan did that for many years, now how are they doing? We are much better off having real resources.
4. Well their big trade surplus certainly was not good for them.

1. Milton Friedman, said the way it was supposed to work, was that we give them dollars for those resources, and then they buy our stuff, making jobs here. I have lived in the Rust Best, my entire life. It does not feel like they are hurting themselves.


2. You said the sellers were happy. I pointed out one major example of that not being true. You changing the subject to workers wages does not change that. Not all the sellers are happy.

3. Japan did very well for itself for a very long time. That the good times, did not last for ever, does not change the massive increase in national wealth that occurred during that time. Even today, their per capita wealth is climbing (last I heard)

1. We have plenty of jobs here. Unemployment is really low.
2. So then you don't care about wages? We wouldn't be buying so much from China if most buyers weren't happy. Nobody is forced to buy from them.
3. Very long time? I would argue it was quite a short time relative to the US. They did well briefly, while we continue to do well.

 

[Brain357]

Well we certainly have plenty of wealth. Why is it Chinas fault our people aren't getting paid well? It was US companies that sent the jobs away. And we have more wealth then ever. Our unemployment rate is super low. China has nothing to do with it. We have the wealth and the jobs. The wages is an internal problem.

YOur words make no sense.


The displaced workers, were supposed to be temporarily displaced, and then find new, even better jobs, in new fields to be developed or in the old jobs when those industries became more competitive.

And it did not happen. Instead our corporations and businesses and citizens and politicians adjusted to the new shitty.


Your response is all over the place. Pick a point you want to focus on for discussion purposes.

You blaming China does not make sense. ....

China has a trade policy designed to grow jobs and wealth inside their country. I respect that. That is their government, representing the interests of their people. Your talk of "blame" is irrelevant.


It is on US that we go along with them benefiting at our expense.


I want to change that. TO at least, a more equal and mutually beneficial trade. Or shut it down. Either way.

Jobs in China don't hurt me or you. ...?

If they exist at the expense of jobs here, then they do.

How is it at our expense? We have lots of wealth and jobs here. China jobs are no more at our expense than jobs anywhere else.

 

[Brain357]

What does Nobel Price winning economist Milton Friedman have wrong? Sure sounds like our trade balance is good to me.

On what happened next. It did not go that way people like him said it would. As I already answered.


He might be a respected economist.


His authority does not trump historical reality.

We have lots of wealth and lots of jobs. Our problem is not trade policy.

We have generations of wage stagnation, relative to our productivity growth and previous historical trends.


Trade policy is at least part of the reason(s) for that.

Yes we do, but wealth has been growing. Were does all that wealth go?

To the stockholders and employers.


Time for the workers to get some. I would say, at least for the next 50 years, to be fair.

Correct. So we have plenty of wealth, its just going to the wrong people. That is not at all a trade problem.

 

[charwin95]

I have got good news, and I have got bad news. The good news is the Dow is up 373 points. We finally have surpassed where we were in January 2018.

The bad news is, the reason for the leap forward is that Chinese officials agreed to resume talks. Meaning, thanks to Trump, Wall Street is dependent upon what China does.

Thank you, Mr. President.

American corporations have adjusted to the reality of the US being the world's bitch on trade.


If Trump manages to fix that, it will upset their current business models.


Seems worth it, and I speak as someone heavily invested in stocks.

What is the fix? We start paying more? That's a win?

The fix is jobs and trade balance moving back to US.


Even if it means paying more.


And yes, that would be a win. Obviously.

You are an anti American.


1. Are you speaking for the rest of poor Americans?

2. You have not solved the trade wars yet. We are already paying high prices.

3. Most or all businesses from different categories trashing inept Trump Trade wars. Are you telling me they are wrong?

4. There will be a loss of jobs and businesses.

5. Negotiations started last year and theres no end insight. No way for that moron to get out.

6. Tariffs are passed on to American consumers. American consumers loss.

7. Name me one business ( except steel industry) or any company that supports Trump foolish trade wars?

IDIOT



https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5d66f52fe4b022fbceb5a725/amp

More Than 200 Shoe Companies Urge Trump To Cancel New China Tariffs

The trade war is resulting in "hidden taxes paid by American individuals and families," the footwear brands wrote.
By Lydia O'Connor
08/28/2019 07:00 PM E

 

[charwin95]

The fix is jobs and trade balance moving back to US.


Even if it means paying more.


And yes, that would be a win. Obviously.

Jobs? Jobs are moving to other countries. Your guy seems to be failing. Does the trade balance matter? Remember when we had a similar situation with Japan? How they doing now?

I've been asking though this whole thread. If the trade balance does not matter, then why is Xi fighting to maintain the current trade balance?


Page 39, and no one has been able to really explain that.

You really need to listen to this.

Yeah we tried that. It did not work out the way it was supposed to. The Chinese got a lot of our dollars, and yet do NOT spend them in our country.


We lost jobs for the steel makers, and did not get the other jobs promised.


And when we did, they went to younger immigrants who worked cheaper, not to out of work Americans.

We have the largest economy in the world and our unemployment rate is very low. What are you talking about?

Do you even understand what you just said?
Our economy is booming because of several reasons. One of them are our trade partners. Despite of all the negativities of China. China is big factor of our success.

You can even ask Donnie and Ivanka why their products are made in China.

 

[charwin95]

I have got good news, and I have got bad news. The good news is the Dow is up 373 points. We finally have surpassed where we were in January 2018.

The bad news is, the reason for the leap forward is that Chinese officials agreed to resume talks. Meaning, thanks to Trump, Wall Street is dependent upon what China does.

Thank you, Mr. President.

In fact 2/3 of Americans are saying, Thank you Mr. President for standing up to China.

More than two-thirds of American voters want the U.S. to confront Beijing over its trade policies despite believing that they are suffering more from tariffs than China, a Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll survey released exclusively to The Hill found.

The poll showed 63 percent of registered voters said that tariffs imposed on Chinese products ultimately hurt the U.S. more than China, while 74 percent said that American consumers are shouldering most of the burden of those tariffs.

But 67 percent said that it is necessary to confront China over its trade practices, which President Trump and his allies have deemed unfair to the U.S.

Poll: Voters want US to confront China over trade

Hopefully, the Democrats will continue banging away on this issue right through the election.

I read your link. But I totally disagree.

If you ask ordinary citizens out there. There are millions and millions of Americans that don’t understand this trade wars.
In this site alone. Trumpets don’t understand the negative impact of Trade wars despite with input from anti trade wars. Out there they only listen with Trump bullshit. Nothing else.

Aside from higher prices there will be loss of jobs and businesses.

Just about the entire American businesses disagree with Trump. Are you telling me they are wrong? I have not seen a single company (except steel industry) support Trump trade wars.





The trade war has already cost electronics companies $10 billion and it gets worse on Sept. 1

'Whipsaw' of US-China trade war will force small businesses to close, bike start-up CEO says

Business Groups Warn of Peril as Trump’s Trade War Spirals

 

[charwin95]

Jobs? Jobs are moving to other countries. Your guy seems to be failing. Does the trade balance matter? Remember when we had a similar situation with Japan? How they doing now?

I've been asking though this whole thread. If the trade balance does not matter, then why is Xi fighting to maintain the current trade balance?


Page 39, and no one has been able to really explain that.

The answer is obvious. Tariffs are a tax. Xi wants the tax dollars. His country is full of low income people.

Tariffs go to the country that is importing, not to the exporter.


If Xi wants to put taxes on his nation's exports, I fully support him, and I would bet money that Trump would too.

Your answer makes no sense, what so ever.

Aren't you trying to get them to lower tariffs on our exports to them? What is it you think you are tryin to do?

I want "Fair trade" or mutually beneficial trade. I don't give a fuck how it happens, and truthfully, I would not believe any promises they make.

Ain’t that easy bro. Despite with the threat to our trade partners..... Donnie could have solve it by now..

 

[charwin95]

Jobs? Jobs are moving to other countries. Your guy seems to be failing. Does the trade balance matter? Remember when we had a similar situation with Japan? How they doing now?

I've been asking though this whole thread. If the trade balance does not matter, then why is Xi fighting to maintain the current trade balance?


Page 39, and no one has been able to really explain that.

You really need to listen to this.

Yeah we tried that. It did not work out the way it was supposed to. The Chinese got a lot of our dollars, and yet do NOT spend them in our country.


We lost jobs for the steel makers, and did not get the other jobs promised.


And when we did, they went to younger immigrants who worked cheaper, not to out of work Americans.

We have the largest economy in the world and our unemployment rate is very low. What are you talking about?

Do you even understand what you just said?
Our economy is booming because of several reasons. One of them are our trade partners. Despite of all the negativities of China. China is big factor of our success.

You can even ask Donnie and Ivanka why their products are made in China.

My apologies Brain357..... I thought I was quoting Correl.
Please ignore this post.

 

[cnm]

I've been asking though this whole thread. If the trade balance does not matter, then why is Xi fighting to maintain the current trade balance?

I have not seen that to be the case. He is retaliating against arbitrary tariffs imposed by the US. The trade balance is Trump's, and your, fantasy.

Why retaliate against a tax designed to change the balance of trade, if trade balance does not matter?

See?

 

[FA_Q2]

Worse for the world. Chinese control over international markets is a very bad thing for almost every nation.

From the point of view of the US, granted. From elsewhere, not so much.

From the point of view of almost the entire world. Period.

China is a bad actor atm.

You think China might start imposing arbitrary tariffs on trading partners in the name of national security?

No, I know China will continue to manipulate its markets, bar entry into their own markets, openly steal IP and leverage their technological exports as national security tools.

China's bad actions are pretty obvious. That you ignore them only tells me you are not interested in honest discussion.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I have got good news, and I have got bad news. The good news is the Dow is up 373 points. We finally have surpassed where we were in January 2018.

The bad news is, the reason for the leap forward is that Chinese officials agreed to resume talks. Meaning, thanks to Trump, Wall Street is dependent upon what China does.

Thank you, Mr. President.

In fact 2/3 of Americans are saying, Thank you Mr. President for standing up to China.

More than two-thirds of American voters want the U.S. to confront Beijing over its trade policies despite believing that they are suffering more from tariffs than China, a Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll survey released exclusively to The Hill found.

The poll showed 63 percent of registered voters said that tariffs imposed on Chinese products ultimately hurt the U.S. more than China, while 74 percent said that American consumers are shouldering most of the burden of those tariffs.

But 67 percent said that it is necessary to confront China over its trade practices, which President Trump and his allies have deemed unfair to the U.S.

Poll: Voters want US to confront China over trade

Hopefully, the Democrats will continue banging away on this issue right through the election.

I read your link. But I totally disagree.

If you ask ordinary citizens out there. There are millions and millions of Americans that don’t understand this trade wars.
In this site alone. Trumpets don’t understand the negative impact of Trade wars despite with input from anti trade wars. Out there they only listen with Trump bullshit. Nothing else.

Aside from higher prices there will be loss of jobs and businesses.

Just about the entire American businesses disagree with Trump. Are you telling me they are wrong? I have not seen a single company (except steel industry) support Trump trade wars.





The trade war has already cost electronics companies $10 billion and it gets worse on Sept. 1

'Whipsaw' of US-China trade war will force small businesses to close, bike start-up CEO says

Business Groups Warn of Peril as Trump’s Trade War Spirals

You are correct that many people don't understand the trade war between the US and China, clearly you among them, but the poll shows that many people do, and they are willing to go through some slight inconveniences in order to force China to give up defending its domestic industries if it wants to continue to enjoy access to the US.

 

[cnm]

China's bad actions are pretty obvious. That you ignore them only tells me you are not interested in honest discussion.

That you ignore the US' bad actions tells me you don't understand international trade.

edit...By 'bad actions' I mean arbitrarily increasing tariffs on allies using spurious 'national security' concerns as an excuse to break agreements. How bad can a trade partner get?

 

[Correll]

One where the trade balance is "fair".


Thought to be really "fair" we should have our turn for a massive trade surplus for the next 50 years, but that is probably asking too much.

You can't seem to answer the question. What is "fair"? I would say our balance is currently quite fair. Nobody is making anyone trade, buyers and seller seem happy. Why do we want to have a surplus? You want us sending out more resources than receiving? Japan had a trade surplus and now have had a stagnant economy for many years.

1. You trust that the Chinese market is open to our exports?

2. Intellectual property theft alone, is a major issue, that the American "Sellers" are not happy about. For one limited example.

3. Yes. Like Xi, I want my nation to be "Sending out more resources than receiving". Me and him, we both agree that is the better place to be in.

4. Japan has many issues. Trade balance is not one of them.

1. I don't know that I care. If not they are only hurting themselves. Currently we get all their resources for very cheap and they get to keep the pollution.
2. Yes that is an issue. But that isn't going to make our workers more wealthy. We already have lots of wealth. If Microsoft for example starts getting paid for windows that is going to executives and investors, not workers. This will do nothing to help our wages.
3. That makes no sense. Japan did that for many years, now how are they doing? We are much better off having real resources.
4. Well their big trade surplus certainly was not good for them.

1. Milton Friedman, said the way it was supposed to work, was that we give them dollars for those resources, and then they buy our stuff, making jobs here. I have lived in the Rust Best, my entire life. It does not feel like they are hurting themselves.


2. You said the sellers were happy. I pointed out one major example of that not being true. You changing the subject to workers wages does not change that. Not all the sellers are happy.

3. Japan did very well for itself for a very long time. That the good times, did not last for ever, does not change the massive increase in national wealth that occurred during that time. Even today, their per capita wealth is climbing (last I heard)

1. We have plenty of jobs here. Unemployment is really low.
2. So then you don't care about wages? We wouldn't be buying so much from China if most buyers weren't happy. Nobody is forced to buy from them.
3. Very long time? I would argue it was quite a short time relative to the US. They did well briefly, while we continue to do well.

1. You brought up Milton. I made a point about what he claimed would happen, and is not happening. Would you like to address it, or do you want to concede the point, that "Free Trade" and giving them our little pieces of paper did not work out as Milton said it would?


2. This is a complex issue. YOu brought up a point, and I addressed the point. You are trying to change the subject to avoid defending your point. Because you know that your point, ie that the "no one is forceing the buyers and sellers, who are happy" is false.


3. They went from being bombed out ruins after WWII, to a first world country, in a single generation. That is blindingly fast on the scale of nations rising and falling. They are still a first world nation, and still benefiting from good trade policy, 50 years after that. That is a long time for economic good times on the scale of individual citizens lives.

Their growth was fueled by strong trade surpluses, and is still maintained by strong surpluses. They have other problems. Your bringing them up, would be relevant, if I was claiming that trade balance was the only important aspect of economics. Which I am not, so, unless you can show some connection between their problems and their trade balance, stop wasting time.

 

[Correll]

YOur words make no sense.


The displaced workers, were supposed to be temporarily displaced, and then find new, even better jobs, in new fields to be developed or in the old jobs when those industries became more competitive.

And it did not happen. Instead our corporations and businesses and citizens and politicians adjusted to the new shitty.


Your response is all over the place. Pick a point you want to focus on for discussion purposes.

You blaming China does not make sense. ....

China has a trade policy designed to grow jobs and wealth inside their country. I respect that. That is their government, representing the interests of their people. Your talk of "blame" is irrelevant.


It is on US that we go along with them benefiting at our expense.


I want to change that. TO at least, a more equal and mutually beneficial trade. Or shut it down. Either way.

Jobs in China don't hurt me or you. ...?

If they exist at the expense of jobs here, then they do.

How is it at our expense? ....

Please stop peppering your posts with partisan filler. It is a dishonest tactic and threatens to bury your actual answer(s) in garbage.



To your point, "How is it at our expense?"


1. One possible example. That I have read of occurring. They build a plant, and produce a widget that they do not have the patent for. THey gain market share, because of lower prices, because of lower wages and they did not put out the money to research and design the product, so less costs.

Those jobs should be here. They are "at our expense".


That is one limited and extra clear example. Don't bother telling me that "we have plenty of jobs" THAT IS NOT THE POINT AND YOU KNOW IT.


2. Another point. Trade is supposed to be mutually beneficial. Milton said that if we gave them our little pieces of paper, that they would use them to buy our products. That is not happening nearly as much as we are buying theirs. Thus, on the highest macro economic level, they are getting more jobs out of it than we are. We don't have to do that, if we don't want to.


And I don't want to.