Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
Correct. So we have plenty of wealth, its just going to the wrong people. That is not at all a trade problem.Yes we do, but wealth has been growing. Were does all that wealth go?We have lots of wealth and lots of jobs. Our problem is not trade policy.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 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.
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.
What is the fix? We start paying more? That's a win?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.
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
More Than 200 Shoe Companies Urge Trump To Cancel New China Tariffs
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
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?The answer is obvious. Tariffs are a tax. Xi wants the tax dollars. His country is full of low income people.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.
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.
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..
See?Why retaliate against a tax designed to change the balance of trade, if trade balance does not matter?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.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?
So, which is it? NOt easy, or easy? You are all over the place.
I want "Fair trade" or mutually beneficial trade.
That is a completely reasonable position,
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.
And our trade with China is mutually beneficial, if it were not then all those good things going on like the low UE and the record setting period of economic expansion would not be happening. You cannot look around at our country and claim we are suffering.
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.
And our trade with China is mutually beneficial, if it were not then all those good things going on like the low UE and the record setting period of economic expansion would not be happening. You cannot look around at our country and claim we are suffering.
Can I use that argument, against everything you don't like?
If, I don't know, if you complain about <insert complaint>? can I point out that the UE is low, so "you can't really claim we are suffering"?
So, which is it? NOt easy, or easy? You are all over the place.
I want "Fair trade" or mutually beneficial trade.
That is a completely reasonable position,
There is no such thing as "fair trade" because there is no such thing as fair. Fair is always in the eye of the beholder.
You cannot look at our country as a whole and say we have not benefited from the current trade deals. Well you can, but you would be lying.
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.
And our trade with China is mutually beneficial, if it were not then all those good things going on like the low UE and the record setting period of economic expansion would not be happening. You cannot look around at our country and claim we are suffering.
Can I use that argument, against everything you don't like?
If, I don't know, if you complain about <insert complaint>? can I point out that the UE is low, so "you can't really claim we are suffering"?
It is far more than the UE rate, and you know it. How can you claim that a country that has set a record for the longest period of economic expansion in its history has not gotten any benefit from our trade deals?
Almost as though he never referred to trade wars himself. Fake news!China had been engaged in a trade war against us long before Trump came to office. It's just that Trump is the first president to fight back, but all the globalists and so-called free traders falsely accuse him of "starting a trade war" with China.
the equivalent to gunboat diplomacy with our exorbitantly expensive superpower?"Trump's trade war with China"? Bull crap. The title should be, "China's 25 year old Trade War on America."
CNN's John King: ‘Trump is absolutely right’ on China and he 'deserves a lot of credit'
CNN's John King: ‘Trump is absolutely right’ on China and he 'deserves a lot of credit'
CNN anchor John King acknowledged that President Trump is "absolutely right" in his stance on the U.S.-China relationship........
.......King was a guest on CNN Right Now, which is hosted by Brianna Keilar, following the president's remarks. She said, “On the trade war, he actually tried to distance himself from his own trade war.” “That’s Obama’s fault," King answered. "And look, the President is absolutely right when he says that China has been cheating for 25 years and that Bill Clinton didn’t do enough about it........"
You blaming China does not make sense. Our country still has lots and lots of wealth. It was our corporations that sent the jobs away. China dictates wages in our country? It seems we have an internal problem. The wealth is here.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.We have the largest economy in the world and our unemployment rate is very low. What are you talking about?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.
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.
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.
Fair can be difficult to be objective by, I grant you that.
But setting new records in trade deficits almost every year, is pretty clear cut.
I look a the way wages have stagnated and how that started not long after we choose a "Free Trade" policy, and,
I say that it is time for a change.
The benefits we have received have been outweighed by the costs.
So, can I use that argument to dismiss all concerns of yours?
(and seriously dude. That you did not get that point, is pretty lame. )
1. Milton's claim required everything else to remain constant. He could not have predicted the decline in Unions and government corruption. Unions increase wages, we now have a workforce with much fewer unions. Many of our current jobs require more skills than manufacturing, but are paid less.1. We have plenty of jobs here. Unemployment is really low.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.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.
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)
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.
1. So did we issue a complaint to the WTO? Let me know if you have a specific example we can look at.How is it at our expense? ....Jobs in China don't hurt me or you. ...?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.
If they exist at the expense of jobs here, then they do.
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.
