Top Ten Trade Deficit Partners!

[Supposn]

I share your concerns.

However unlike you I do not give the GOP a pass on these developments.

Editec, refer to:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/282653-why-i-ain-t-a-republican.html

Rewspectfully, Supposn

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Toddsterr Patriot, among the legal requirements of contracts are they may not be characteristic of agreements or require activity that our governments' have described to be contrary to the public interests and thus deemed to be illegal.

My freely choosing to pay cash for a foreign good is going to be deemed illegal?

Take your big government ideas and stick them up your ass.

ToddsterPatriot, please explain what you meant by this response. There's nothing illegal about paying cash.

But within a policy of Import Certificates, you could not bring goods into the USA unless you surrendered ICs with face values to cover the assessed value of your imported goods.

Respectfully, Supposn

among the legal requirements of contracts are they may not be characteristic of agreements or require activity that our governments' have described to be contrary to the public interests and thus deemed to be illegal.

You want your big government to make my private contract illegal, unless I use an Import Certificate.

Take your big government ideas and stick them up your ass.

Clear enough?

 

[Supposn]

among the legal requirements of contracts are they may not be characteristic of agreements or require activity that our governments' have described to be contrary to the public interests and thus deemed to be illegal.

You want your big government to make my private contract illegal, unless I use an Import Certificate.

Take your big government ideas and stick them up your ass. Clear enough?

ToddsterPatriot, within a USA policy of Import Certificates, (ICs), if any provision of the contract makes it necessary that goods be imported into the USA prior their delivery, the deliverer will be unable to comply if ICs with face values sufficient to cover the assessed value of the imported goods are not first surrendered to the federal government’s agents.

I assume it’s not just mine but our government now. In the future if that government adopts an IC policy for global trade, (and If I’m still alive), it will remain to be my government and I assume it will remain to be also our government.

If those circumstances should ever occur, your displeasure and your foolish threats then as now would remain to be of little concern to other than yourself and they will remain to be of no concern to me.

Supposn

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

imported goods are not first surrendered to the federal government’s agents.

interesting how conservatives are always peaceful and liberals always need violent government agents. They say 15,000 new IRS soviet agents are needed to violently enforce Obama care. I wonder how many would be needed for Supposins tax on imports that would impoverish Americans and cripple American industry!!

Why are liberal solutions always violent? I guess they spied for Stalin becuase there is no end to the violence they would impose if given the opportunity.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The higher the trade deficit, the better for Americans.

perfectly stupid as usual. If the trade deficit is because our goods and services are junk and nobody wants them it is not better for Americans. IF the deficit is exacerbated by currency manipulation in China and our own fiscal deficit that enables the Chinese and Japanese to buy our deficits rather than our goods and services the trade deficit is not good for Americans.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

among the legal requirements of contracts are they may not be characteristic of agreements or require activity that our governments' have described to be contrary to the public interests and thus deemed to be illegal.

You want your big government to make my private contract illegal, unless I use an Import Certificate.

Take your big government ideas and stick them up your ass. Clear enough?

ToddsterPatriot, within a USA policy of Import Certificates, (ICs), if any provision of the contract makes it necessary that goods be imported into the USA prior their delivery, the deliverer will be unable to comply if ICs with face values sufficient to cover the assessed value of the imported goods are not first surrendered to the federal government’s agents.

I assume it’s not just mine but our government now. In the future if that government adopts an IC policy for global trade, (and If I’m still alive), it will remain to be my government and I assume it will remain to be also our government.

If those circumstances should ever occur, your displeasure and your foolish threats then as now would remain to be of little concern to other than yourself and they will remain to be of no concern to me.

Supposn

Yes, big government lovers, like you, love big government. No surprise there.

 

[Kimura]

The higher the trade deficit, the better for Americans.

perfectly stupid as usual. If the trade deficit is because our goods and services are junk and nobody wants them it is not better for Americans. IF the deficit is exacerbated by currency manipulation in China and our own fiscal deficit that enables the Chinese and Japanese to buy our deficits rather than our goods and services the trade deficit is not good for Americans.

A trade deficit, as I previously explained, raises our standard of living. There are domestic policy instruments, such as the FED and fiscal policy, which have free reign to focus on domestic policy knowing that our exchange rate will resolve any currency imbalances resulting from trade surpluses, trade deficits, etc.

We are benefiting tremendously from the trade deficit. The foreign sector sends us hundreds of billions of dollars in the form of real goods and services in excess of what we send back to them in return. The foreign sector gets to produce and export, and we get to import and consume. Is this unsustainable? Should we end it? As long as the foreign sector wants to send us real goods and services without requiring any real goods ans services in return, why should we end the arrangement?

There isn't any imbalance, since international trade is a zero sum game. If someone is a running a trade surplus, then someone else must be running a trade deficit. Everybody is benefiting from the arrangement. For example, the banks have loans and deposits, so they aren't complaining at all, while the Chinese car manufacturer has the dollar deposits and they aren't complaining. And you probably want a car and have a car note that you agree to. Everyone benefits, and on and on the wheels of capitalism go.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We are benefiting tremendously from the trade deficit.

lets say the unions destroyed all of our domestic manufacturing, we then had to buy everything abroad, and our trade deficit soared far higher. Would we benefit even more tremendously????