Obama policies about to kill a small business

[Polk]

Quantum Windbag, for a nation that generally suffers annual trade deficits, Warren Buffett’s concept of Import Certificates, ICs) is far superior to tariffs or to USA’s seeking “pure” unrestricted free trade.
I can best explain the IC version I’m a proponent of by comparing it to the more familiar tariffs.

Transferable ICs are ONLY issued to exporters of USA goods. They’re issued for face amounts of the USA goods assessed values IF they agree to pay the assessment fees defray ALL, (BUT ONLY ALL) net federal expenses due to this trade policy.

The assessed values of the goods are the ICs “face values” expressed in U.S. dollars.
(Values of specifically listed precious or scarce minerals integral to the goods, (e.g. gold, diamonds, crude oil, rare earths) are excluded from all assessments).

Importers of foreign goods are required to surrender ICs of face values that will cover the assessed values of their goods; surrendered ICs are cancelled.

Unlike tariffs, USA purchasers' additional costs for foreign goods are Markets’ rather than a federal determined.
ICs are an indirect but effective subsidy of USA exported goods and even if they added only a dime to each imported item they will effectively eliminate USA’s trade deficit of all assessment adjusted goods.

Note that This IC policy is grants government no policy discretion. Assessing the value of goods is a technical rather than a policy determination.

Refer to the topic
of “Warren Buffett's concept to significantly reduce USA's trade deficit’

Respectfully, Supposn

We do not suffer trade deficits.

What are you talking about? We haven't run a trade surplus since the 70s.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

We do not suffer trade deficits.

Quantum Windbag, when the annual values of nation’s imports exceeds our exports, that’s the nation’s annual trade deficit. Each year for more than a half century the USA has suffered annual trade deficits of goods.

Respectfully, Supposn

The world does not work the way you think it does, the trade imbalance is based on an outdated model of commerce. Politicians like to use it because it is simple, and they can pretend they understand how the world works.

In other words, official trade data imply that the invention of the iPhone has cost the U.S. jobs, reduced our competitive position and made us poorer relative to the Chinese. That alone should cause any policy-maker to question the use of trade data in the development of international economic policies.

Here is what they would find: What the 19th-century approach ignores is that Chinese workers contribute only $6.50 to the value of the phone. According to a study by Yuqing Xing and Neal Detert of the Asian Development Bank Institute (ADBI), this is far less than the value add provided by Japan ($60.60), Germany ($28.85), South Korea ($22.96) or the U.S. ($10.75).
When the value add from the U.S. is taken into account, every iPhone imported into the U.S. in 2009 actually contributed $4.25 to the U.S. trade balance with China--the difference between the $10.75 of parts China imported from the U.S. and the $6.50 in payments received for assembling the iPhone. That turns the $1.9 billion iPhone trade deficit with China using official trade data into a $48 million trade surplus.

Don't Be Fooled By Misleading U.S.-China Trade Data - Forbes.com

We do not suffer from a trade deficit because we don't live in the 19th century anymore, we live in the 21st century.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Quantum Windbag, for a nation that generally suffers annual trade deficits, Warren Buffett’s concept of Import Certificates, ICs) is far superior to tariffs or to USA’s seeking “pure” unrestricted free trade.
I can best explain the IC version I’m a proponent of by comparing it to the more familiar tariffs.

Transferable ICs are ONLY issued to exporters of USA goods. They’re issued for face amounts of the USA goods assessed values IF they agree to pay the assessment fees defray ALL, (BUT ONLY ALL) net federal expenses due to this trade policy.

The assessed values of the goods are the ICs “face values” expressed in U.S. dollars.
(Values of specifically listed precious or scarce minerals integral to the goods, (e.g. gold, diamonds, crude oil, rare earths) are excluded from all assessments).

Importers of foreign goods are required to surrender ICs of face values that will cover the assessed values of their goods; surrendered ICs are cancelled.

Unlike tariffs, USA purchasers' additional costs for foreign goods are Markets’ rather than a federal determined.
ICs are an indirect but effective subsidy of USA exported goods and even if they added only a dime to each imported item they will effectively eliminate USA’s trade deficit of all assessment adjusted goods.

Note that This IC policy is grants government no policy discretion. Assessing the value of goods is a technical rather than a policy determination.

Refer to the topic
of “Warren Buffett's concept to significantly reduce USA's trade deficit’

Respectfully, Supposn

We do not suffer trade deficits.

What are you talking about? We haven't run a trade surplus since the 70s.

Read my previous post, you need to study economics and move into the modern world. Stop buying into what politicians tell you to get elected and pay attention to facts so you can make intelligent decisions. That might actually make you realize that Ryan knows what he is talking about, and that Obama doesn't.

 

[Polk]

You claimed we're running a trade surplus. That isn't true.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You claimed we're running a trade surplus. That isn't true.

as a liberal you will lack the IQ to say if you are for or against free trade and why so why comment at all!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You claimed we're running a trade surplus. That isn't true.

Who claimed that? Trade surpluses are just as impossible as trade deficits, neither happens in a free market.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You claimed we're running a trade surplus. That isn't true.

Who claimed that? Trade surpluses are just as impossible as trade deficits, neither happens in a free market.

very true but way way over a liberals head!! In a free market if $100 goes to China through Walmart, for example, then Walmart either burns the money or spends it in the only place possible: the USA. In which case there is no trade deficit!!

 

[Polk]

I love you guys telling me that I need to study economics when neither of you know that a nation can have a negative (or positive) balance of trade.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I love you guys telling me that I need to study economics when neither of you know that a nation can have a negative (or positive) balance of trade.

I actually addressed the various problems with how governments measure the balance of trade, and all you can do is insist that the official numbers back you up. That means that one of us can actually discuss the issues, and the other relies on appeals to authority.

 

[Polk]

You haven't discussed the issue. You've pretended the issue doesn't exist. Notice that no one seriously involved in the topic agrees with you on the issue. Your party's presidential candidate doesn't agree with you on the issue. Milton Friedman doesn't agree with you on the issue (he thinks balance of trade is an overrated problem, but different from saying it doesn't exist).

Just because countries aren't shipping sacks of gold across the sea anymore doesn't mean it's not harmful to buy more than you produce.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You haven't discussed the issue. You've pretended the issue doesn't exist. Notice that no one seriously involved in the topic agrees with you on the issue. Your party's presidential candidate doesn't agree with you on the issue. Milton Friedman doesn't agree with you on the issue (he thinks balance of trade is an overrated problem, but different from saying it doesn't exist).

Just because countries aren't shipping sacks of gold across the sea anymore doesn't mean it's not harmful to buy more than you produce.

This isn't my post?

We do not suffer trade deficits.

Quantum Windbag, when the annual values of nation’s imports exceeds our exports, that’s the nation’s annual trade deficit. Each year for more than a half century the USA has suffered annual trade deficits of goods.

Respectfully, Supposn

The world does not work the way you think it does, the trade imbalance is based on an outdated model of commerce. Politicians like to use it because it is simple, and they can pretend they understand how the world works.

In other words, official trade data imply that the invention of the iPhone has cost the U.S. jobs, reduced our competitive position and made us poorer relative to the Chinese. That alone should cause any policy-maker to question the use of trade data in the development of international economic policies.

Here is what they would find: What the 19th-century approach ignores is that Chinese workers contribute only $6.50 to the value of the phone. According to a study by Yuqing Xing and Neal Detert of the Asian Development Bank Institute (ADBI), this is far less than the value add provided by Japan ($60.60), Germany ($28.85), South Korea ($22.96) or the U.S. ($10.75).
When the value add from the U.S. is taken into account, every iPhone imported into the U.S. in 2009 actually contributed $4.25 to the U.S. trade balance with China--the difference between the $10.75 of parts China imported from the U.S. and the $6.50 in payments received for assembling the iPhone. That turns the $1.9 billion iPhone trade deficit with China using official trade data into a $48 million trade surplus.

Don't Be Fooled By Misleading U.S.-China Trade Data - Forbes.com

We do not suffer from a trade deficit because we don't live in the 19th century anymore, we live in the 21st century.

The only person that seriously questioned me in this thread hasn't come back. You, personally, are so stupid you took my comment that we do not have a trade deficit to mean that we have a surplus. Romney is using the trade issue to score political points, the same way Obama did. As for Friedman, he doesn't agree with me, but he doesn't agree with you either. He thought it was wonderful that we get hard goods for money, which is nothing more than a concept, and argued that a high trade deficit reduces unemployment.

Does the Trade Deficit Matter?

Come to think of it, I think that kinda proves my point, we don't have a deficit.

 

[Supposn]

Quantum windbag, I believe you considering different statistics as if they are one and the same; they ain’t.

Balance of trade refers to goods and services. It excludes transfers of wealth. (Although technically when you spend dollars to purchase goods or services, you’re actually transferring wealth). Economists use the expenditure formula to track the values nationally produced goods and service products. The expenditure formula is not the only formulas but it’s among the simpler and most commonly used formulas to calculate gross domestic product, (i.e. GDP). All of the acceptable formulas more or less produce the same resulting GDP amounts and balance of trade directly or directly are factors integral to those amounts.

Capital accounts deal with transfers of national wealth between nations (rather than products) between nations. Unless stocks and bonds are purchased from the corporation’s capital accounts, those security transfer transactions are of benefit to the enterprise that issued those securities. Financial markets promote liquidity and are of economic benefit to a nation but capital accounts are not the same as GDP. Capital accounts track the aggregate values of assets other than products being transferred across national borders.

Balance of payments are similar to your personal check book; it reconciles the amounts of currency moving between nations. Each nation keeps an account that is actually a reconciliation account. That account’s only purpose is to make payment when necessary and hopefully recoup those payments at a later date. When some clown writes of some natural balance or some balance that’s created as “markets’ self corrections, they’re writing nonsense.

Government’s national banks or their equivalent make up the differences. Our U.S. Treasury Department, Federal Reserve Banks and the Federal Reserve Board are not magical good fairies. The balances of payments always balance because when necessary cash is deposited to their nations’ reconciliation accounts to insure that equilibrium.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Quantum windbag, I believe you considering different statistics as if they are one and the same; they ain’t.

Balance of trade refers to goods and services. It excludes transfers of wealth. (Although technically when you spend dollars to purchase goods or services, you’re actually transferring wealth). Economists use the expenditure formula to track the values nationally produced goods and service products. The expenditure formula is not the only formulas but it’s among the simpler and most commonly used formulas to calculate gross domestic product, (i.e. GDP). All of the acceptable formulas more or less produce the same resulting GDP amounts and balance of trade directly or directly are factors integral to those amounts.

Capital accounts deal with transfers of national wealth between nations (rather than products) between nations. Unless stocks and bonds are purchased from the corporation’s capital accounts, those security transfer transactions are of benefit to the enterprise that issued those securities. Financial markets promote liquidity and are of economic benefit to a nation but capital accounts are not the same as GDP. Capital accounts track the aggregate values of assets other than products being transferred across national borders.

Balance of payments are similar to your personal check book; it reconciles the amounts of currency moving between nations. Each nation keeps an account that is actually a reconciliation account. That account’s only purpose is to make payment when necessary and hopefully recoup those payments at a later date. When some clown writes of some natural balance or some balance that’s created as “markets’ self corrections, they’re writing nonsense.

Government’s national banks or their equivalent make up the differences. Our U.S. Treasury Department, Federal Reserve Banks and the Federal Reserve Board are not magical good fairies. The balances of payments always balance because when necessary cash is deposited to their nations’ reconciliation accounts to insure that equilibrium.

Respectfully, Supposn

Why do you believe that when I specifically pointed out what is wrong with the way that government measures balance of trade?

 

[Supposn]

Why do you believe that when I specifically pointed out what is wrong with the way that government measures balance of trade?

Quantum Windbag, I did a fast scan on your latest posts; (I didn’t scan the entire discussion thread).
I read “Trade surpluses are just as impossible as trade deficits, neither happens in a free market”; which beyond false is additionally nonsensical.

That was among the reasons I speculated you may be confusing 3 different statistics as being one and the same.

I have no reason to believe you specifically pointed out what is wrong with the way that government measures balance of trade. Please post the message number of the explanation post you're referred to. I apparently failed to notice it.

Is what you perceive as government’s error actually due to the definition of trade balance and of GDP? Both statistics by definition exclude transfers of wealth.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Obama certainly deserves credit here, without him this company would be prospering.

Don't worry though, he didn't build that.

With just his dream, determination and hard work, Bill Keith started a solar fan business nearly a decade ago out of his garage in northwest Indiana. The one-time roofer simply wanted to make enough money to care for his family and to create a ripple effect for other workers, particularly in this economically depressed area outside Chicago.
Keith vowed to create his solar attic fans entirely out of parts made in the United States.
Using only the sun's energy, the fan pumps hot air out of the attic -- lowering cooling bills -- and doesn't have to be in direct sunlight to work. His first year, Keith said he barely made enough to scrape by -- about $39,000 in sales.

Obama policy could put solar 'poster boy' out of business - CNN

Keith said he has never received government financial assistance and is taxed in the 40 percent bracket.

The 40 percent bracket. Really?
Keith should swtich CPA's.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why do you believe that when I specifically pointed out what is wrong with the way that government measures balance of trade?

Quantum Windbag, I did a fast scan on your latest posts; (I didn’t scan the entire discussion thread).
I read “Trade surpluses are just as impossible as trade deficits, neither happens in a free market”; which beyond false is additionally nonsensical.

That was among the reasons I speculated you may be confusing 3 different statistics as being one and the same.

I have no reason to believe you specifically pointed out what is wrong with the way that government measures balance of trade. Please post the message number of the explanation post you're referred to. I apparently failed to notice it.

Is what you perceive as government’s error actually due to the definition of trade balance and of GDP? Both statistics by definition exclude transfers of wealth.

Respectfully, Supposn

Keep looking.

 

[Supposn]

Why do you believe that when I specifically pointed out what is wrong with the way that government measures balance of trade?

Quantum Windbag, I did a fast scan on your latest posts; (I didn’t scan the entire discussion thread).
I read “Trade surpluses are just as impossible as trade deficits, neither happens in a free market”; which beyond false is additionally nonsensical...............\I have no reason to believe you specifically pointed out what is wrong with the way that government measures balance of trade. Please post the message number of the explanation post you're referred to. I apparently failed to notice it............Respectfully, Supposn

Keep looking.

Quantum Windbag, am I overestimating you? You cannot point to the message you referred to?

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Quantum Windbag, I did a fast scan on your latest posts; (I didn’t scan the entire discussion thread).
I read “Trade surpluses are just as impossible as trade deficits, neither happens in a free market”; which beyond false is additionally nonsensical...............\I have no reason to believe you specifically pointed out what is wrong with the way that government measures balance of trade. Please post the message number of the explanation post you're referred to. I apparently failed to notice it............Respectfully, Supposn

Keep looking.

Quantum Windbag, am I overestimating you? You cannot point to the message you referred to?

Respectfully, Supposn

There are less than 40 posts in the thread, use your imagination.

 

[Supposn]

Keep looking.

Quantum Windbag, am I overestimating you? You cannot point to the message you referred to?

Respectfully, Supposn

There are less than 40 posts in the thread, use your imagination.

Quantum Windbag, apparently I have overestimating you. You cannot point to the message actually explaining the foundation of your position?

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

if we conducted our global trade to serve our own best interests.

too stupid!! Should the liberals in each state conduct national trade to serve their own state's best interests?

We got from the stone age to here by buying what was cheaper and better no matter if it was made next door or in the next country. Any interference merely slows down the growth in our standard of living and makes our economy less than world class which is why we have free trade and why most economists support free trade.

Is everything over a liberal's
head????