If Donald Trump becomes President, how will it affect our economy?

[Onyx]

Protectionism and Fair Trade are NOT the same.

Fair trade is mutually profitable trade. Capitalists do not make trade agreements that are not mutually profitable unless influenced by governments.

Protectionism is meant to steer the partner back to the terms of the Fair Trade Agreement.

What terms and what fair trade agreement?

If there is a Trade Imbalance due to the partner producing a better product than the other partner better get their act together.

By producing a competitive product themselves. Not by lobbying the government to institute tariffs restricting consumer choice.

If the Imbalance is due to violating the conditions of the Agreement, such as slave labor/hours/benefits, then Protectionism will restore the terms of the Agreement.

Do you even understand what you are talking about?

Since when has a deficit correlated to poor trade? Did you know it is possible to make more money than the other nation with a negative trade deficit, and that is exactly what is being done with Mexico?

There is no such thing as equal Trade, as I never meant to infer such.

Actually that is exactly what you are implying.

You are talking about equalizing deficits. It is uneducated babble.

However, the Trade the US carries out in reality, whether we have an Agreement or not, is disastrous for the overwhelming percentage of US citizens.

Baseless conjecture.

All trade strengthens the economy. You are using broken and uneducated theory that there is such a thing as negative trade. If trade negatively impacted one parties ability to make a profit, they would not of engaged in that trade interaction in the first place or bailed out immediately.

Basically you want to instigate market control by raising the barrier of entry, which reduces activity among both entrepreneurs and consumers. Reducing competition and economic activity costs jobs, and strengthens the power of those elites you despise by enabling them to act lazier and more abusive.

This is clearly a difficult concept for you to grasp, but free trade is the equivalent of no war. Let's fortify the wall of common sense...

Back to the wall of unanswered questions.

1. How is protectionism good for the long term self sufficiency of markets?

2. How do protectionist policies influence consumer choice and purchasing power?

3. How come historically, protectionism has led to depressions, sustained periods of limited growth, and increases in unemployment?
,

 

[nicoleivy5]

Protectionism and Fair Trade are NOT the same.

Fair trade is mutually profitable trade. Capitalists do not make trade agreements that are not mutually profitable unless influenced by governments.

Protectionism is meant to steer the partner back to the terms of the Fair Trade Agreement.

What terms and what fair trade agreement?

If there is a Trade Imbalance due to the partner producing a better product than the other partner better get their act together.

By producing a competitive product themselves. Not by lobbying the government to institute tariffs restricting consumer choice.

If the Imbalance is due to violating the conditions of the Agreement, such as slave labor/hours/benefits, then Protectionism will restore the terms of the Agreement.

Do you even understand what you are talking about?

Since when has a deficit correlated to poor trade? Did you know it is possible to make more money than the other nation with a negative trade deficit, and that is exactly what is being done with Mexico?

There is no such thing as equal Trade, as I never meant to infer such.

Actually that is exactly what you are implying.

You are talking about equalizing deficits. It is uneducated babble.

However, the Trade the US carries out in reality, whether we have an Agreement or not, is disastrous for the overwhelming percentage of US citizens.

Baseless conjecture.

All trade strengthens the economy. You are using broken and uneducated theory that there is such a thing as negative trade. If trade negatively impacted one parties ability to make a profit, they would not of engaged in that trade interaction in the first place or bailed out immediately.

Basically you want to instigate market control by raising the barrier of entry, which reduces activity among both entrepreneurs and consumers. Reducing competition and economic activity costs jobs, and strengthens the power of those elites you despise by enabling them to act lazier and more abusive.

This is clearly a difficult concept for you to grasp, but free trade is the equivalent of no war. Let's fortify the wall of common sense...

Back to the wall of unanswered questions.

1. How is protectionism good for the long term self sufficiency of markets?

2. How do protectionist policies influence consumer choice and purchasing power?

3. How come historically, protectionism has led to depressions, sustained periods of limited growth, and increases in unemployment?
,

good questions!

 

[TNHarley]

You know that "our" economy isn't the global economy, right?

Duh. You really are dumb.

Yes because they are the same thing... Dumbass

 

[nicoleivy5]

Indeependent Let Walter Block preach the truth

If companies were operating up to competitive standards, they would not need protection from the government. If the government is the reason for why companies cannot reach competitive standards, then the answer is to limit the level of socialism and not implement more damage in the form of tariffs. Not only is it enabling behavior, but it costs consumers and the working class greatly.

Time to face reality and stop sucking ruling class dick. System whoring is totally uncool.

agreed great post

 

[Ozone]

the economy is tricky because people bring their political ideologies into it and so it's impossible to trust what anyone says about it. the best thing for the economy would be to eliminate all the income taxes, retool the irs into collecting sales taxes, and reducing all tariffs to the absolute minimum necessary for maintaining the ports of entry. it's difficult to convince most democrats and some republicans of this, however. they want their progressive tax brackets so they can play the game of class warfare every election year, turn rich people and poor people against each other to squeeze out the middle class. so then it's a race riot every time there's an officer involved shooting, and apparently race riots are good for the economy, right? sheesh, it's always the people who demand equality who are dead set on making sure there's plenty of inequality to go around.

 

[nicoleivy5]

the economy is tricky because people bring their political ideologies into it and so it's impossible to trust what anyone says about it. the best thing for the economy would be to eliminate all the income taxes, retool the irs into collecting sales taxes, and reducing all tariffs to the absolute minimum necessary for maintaining the ports of entry. it's difficult to convince most democrats and some republicans of this, however. they want their progressive tax brackets so they can play the game of class warfare every election year, turn rich people and poor people against each other to squeeze out the middle class. so then it's a race riot every time there's an officer involved shooting, and apparently race riots are good for the economy, right? sheesh, it's always the people who demand equality who are dead set on making sure there's plenty of inequality to go around.

real talk

 

[nicoleivy5]

You are SERIOUSLY stating on a public forum that a record number of Americans forced into FOOD SERVICE is good?
If so, fuck you and go to hell.

Dirty debating. Stop with the deflection.

Unemployment is under 5%. That is generally recognized safe territory, and part of why we got there came from shifting back towards free trade.

Protectionism costs jobs. It is the real reason Americans were pushed into food service. . No level of emotional appeal will change the hard truth.

Now please tell me I misinterpreted your post.

Yes, you intentionally misconstrued my post to save your hide from accountability.

Because if I interpreted it correctly, fuck you and go to hell.

Stop acting like a child and answer the questions.

1. How is protectionism good for the long term self sufficiency of markets?

2. How do protectionist policies influence consumer choice and purchasing power?

3. How come historically, protectionism has led to depressions, sustained periods of limited growth, and increases in unemployment?

You must listen to Rush Limbaugh because you're introducing the "famous' "GDP is UP!" argument.
You see, GDP IS up...and enjoyed by 1.x% of the population.
That means either you're one of the 1.x% or you're stupid enough to fall for ROLLED UP numbers.
I am not.

You probably believe that if 100 homeless people are put in a room with Bill Gates that the average Stock Worth between them is 80 billion / 101; It seems to me you would be that stupid.

Protectionism should NEVER Evergreen; it is constantly adjusted based on supply / demand / national fiscal health.
NO Legislation should ever be Evergreen.
There, are, in fact, times when zero protectionism is required, UNTIL one or more of the players violates the Agreement.

good point

 

[nicoleivy5]

You must listen to Rush Limbaugh because you're introducing the "famous' "GDP is UP!" argument.
You see, GDP IS up...and enjoyed by 1.x% of the population.
That means either you're one of the 1.x% or you're stupid enough to fall for ROLLED UP numbers.
I am not.

I did not make that argument.

Stop using strawman. You have done nothing besides act intellectually dishonest.

You probably believe that if 100 homeless people is put in a room with Bill Gates that the average Stock Worth between them is 80 billion / 101; It seems to me you would be that stupid.

More deflection.

Protectionism should NEVER Evergreen; it is constantly adjusted based on supply / demand / national fiscal health.
NO Legislation should ever be Evergreen.

Protectionism never works. The economic theory behind it is fallacious and broken. Historically the American school of economics has failed the common man and served the interests of crooks with special interests.

There, are, in fact, times when zero protectionism is required, UNTIL one or more of the players violates the Agreement.

Answer these questions.

1. How is protectionism good for the long term self sufficiency of markets?

2. How do protectionist policies influence consumer choice and purchasing power?

3. How come historically, protectionism has led to depressions, sustained periods of limited growth, and increases in unemployment?

those are some good questions

 

[Vandalshandle]

If Trump were elected president, which is not going to happen, i would sell everything and stuff the money into my mattress.

 

[nicoleivy5]

If Trump were elected president, which is not going to happen, i would sell everything and stuff the money into my mattress.

how do you know it wont happen

 

[nicoleivy5]

BTW, that post was VERY emotional.

Very ironic.

I am just espousing the facts. Something you should start doing.

real talk

 

[nicoleivy5]

Trump is NOT an elitist.
I have been following him in the news for over 20 years and he has been pro-US for that entire period.

You see what you want to see.

Apparently you were never exposed to his history of being one of the bigges douchebags and crooks in modern America, a position I maintained before he put his name in for president.

He's has been completely consistent.

Uh? He contradicts himself ALL the time. Even before the election.

I see that you are trying to bail out from defending ruling class protectionist policies. Noted.

If Trump's a douchebag, then everybody else, including Milton, must be 1,000 times the douchebag Trump is.

true, trump is a leader

 

[Indeependent]

Trump is NOT an elitist.
I have been following him in the news for over 20 years and he has been pro-US for that entire period.

You see what you want to see.

Apparently you were never exposed to his history of being one of the bigges douchebags and crooks in modern America, a position I maintained before he put his name in for president.

He's has been completely consistent.

Uh? He contradicts himself ALL the time. Even before the election.

I see that you are trying to bail out from defending ruling class protectionist policies. Noted.

If Trump's a douchebag, then everybody else, including Milton, must be 1,000 times the douchebag Trump is.

true, trump is a leader

Bu-bu-bu-but ONYX!

 

[Onyx]

true, trump is a leader

If he gets elected he will be your ruler.

He certainly thinks highly of his ability to be your master.

 

[nicoleivy5]

true, trump is a leader

If he gets elected he will be your ruler.

He certainly thinks highly of his ability to be your master.

yeah he does think very highly

 

[nicoleivy5]

also will the effect on the economy be positive or negative

 

[nicoleivy5]

Trump is NOT an elitist.
I have been following him in the news for over 20 years and he has been pro-US for that entire period.

You see what you want to see.

Apparently you were never exposed to his history of being one of the bigges douchebags and crooks in modern America, a position I maintained before he put his name in for president.

He's has been completely consistent.

Uh? He contradicts himself ALL the time. Even before the election.

I see that you are trying to bail out from defending ruling class protectionist policies. Noted.

If Trump's a douchebag, then everybody else, including Milton, must be 1,000 times the douchebag Trump is.

true, trump is a leader

Bu-bu-bu-but ONYX!

onyx?

 

[nicoleivy5]

true, trump is a leader

If he gets elected he will be your ruler.

He certainly thinks highly of his ability to be your master.

true lol

 

[AZGAL]

 

[Onyx]

also will the effect on the economy be positive or negative

If Trump institutes new tariffs it could be disastrous. Hillary Clinton really has not proposed anything radically dangerous, but many of her policies cost $$$

Anaylsts show that Donald will run the debt up higher than Clinton, but I cannot personally verify whether that is true.