Neither Trump nor Sanders will remedy USA’s global trade deficits.

Discussion in 'Election Forums' started by Supposn, Apr 28, 2016.

  1. Supposn
    Offline

    Supposn VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,033
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    71
    Ratings:
    +63
    Neither Trump nor Sanders will remedy USA’s global trade deficits.


    Trump & Sanders at least acknowledge USA’s chronic trade deficits extents of harm to USA’s economy; no candidates dare propose explicit answers.


    All nations, enterprises and people behave in what they perceive to be their there own best interests.


    Trump and Sanders believe that can be changed by negotiation, rather than changing USA’s trade policy so their best interests coincide with USA’s best economic interests.


    Currently USA’s policies encourage enterprises to produce and/or import from other nations.


    Both candidates believe we can negotiate for entities to behave against their best interests rather than changing USA’s trade policy. Both believe we can negotiate better and trump additionally believes he above all others is the master of “deal”.

    They’re both wrong.


    Refer to the paragraphs entitled “Trade balances affects upon their nations economies” within Wikipedia’s article entitled “Trade balances”

    and/or

    the Wikipedia article entitled “Import Certificates”.


    Respectfully, Supposn
     
  2. jwoodie
    Offline

    jwoodie Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,037
    Thanks Received:
    1,511
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,172
    A reduced trade surplus will be in their best interests if the alternative is no trade surplus.
     
  3. Supposn
    Offline

    Supposn VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,033
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    71
    Ratings:
    +63
    JWoodie, the price of USA’s acquisition of Florida from Spain was our assuming all liability for United States citizens’ legal claims against the Spanish government. We purchased Alaska from Russia. The United States has not done badly when we directly entered into single transactions with other nation’s governments.

    I’m not against our entering into international agreements for other than economic purposes. Agreements primarily for the purposes of mutual concern for the global environment, common standards of weights and measures, international shipping, peaceful and safe navigation within international spaces, respect for each agreements’ participant’s patents and copyrights can be and usually are of mutual benefit to the participating nations.

    But I agree with you; the USA should not enter agreements that infringe upon national sovereignty.

    Generally we should not submit or press other nations to submit to international courts determining what we may or may not permit to pass through their nation's borders.

    Treaties require a 2/3 U.S Senate vote to be ratified. If the U.S. Supreme court does not deem a treaty to be unconstitutional, only a constitutional amendment can terminate a treaty. Although NAFTA is often described as a treaty, it is not recognized as such in federal law.

    USA's international agreements other than treaties are executive orders of the president or congressional-executive agreements that are subject to modification or repeal.

    We should not continue participating within NAFTA in its present form.

    I’m a proponent of a proposed unilateral policy of “Import Certificates”. It would significantly reduce if not entirely eliminate USA’s chronic annual trade deficits, which drag upon our numbers of jobs, wages and GDP.

    Google Wikipedia Import Certificates.

    Respectfully, Supposn
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2016

Share This Page