Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
trade deficit nations' productions are reduced due to their annual net balances of trade.
The US has been screwing countries over for a long, long time.
... State delegates to what became the USA’s constitutional convention of 1787 understood that some states had commercial advantages over other states. (At that time, people and their state's delegates' allegiances were more for their states and less for a national government. Despite that, they were able to negotiate a constitutional agreement for absolutely supreme federal jurisdiction over interstate and international commerce. They negotiated for the advantaged states to relinquish their advantages for the good of the nation.
Those advantaged states that agreed to accept the new federal government, did grudgingly accept an reduction of their individual then current economies.
My primary allegiance is to the USA. Unlike those constitutional delegates, [that wished to retain the right to levy tariffs at their states' borders], I'm currently opposed to accepting lesser economy for my nation. I'm opposed to sacrificing the finances of USA's wage-earning families on behalf of the global economy.
I'm a proponent of federal government's promoting the general welfare as stated within the preamble of the U.S. Constitution). That's why I'm a proponent of the trade policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. Additionally, I'm a proponent of internet neutrality, federal promotion of public infrastructures, communication, and transportation systems. ...
EdwardBaiamonte, I don't suppose that you advocate sacrificing the finances of USA's wage-earning families on behalf of the global economy. I suppose you, as all of us participating and reading this thread, are aware of the compromises that occurred during that first U.S. Constitutional convention. Federal supreme jurisdiction of interstate commerce grants net economic benefits to our entire nation. Thus, it denies advantages of some U.S. states over other states.Individuals, cities, states, regions, countries have trade deficits all the time. Do you want Nazi govts everywhere to be constantly imposing taxes so there are no deficits anywhere? Its absurd but perfectly liberal.
It is obvious that something must be done about the exponentially growing budget deficit. More importantly, the trade deficit, which is a huge problem, and is mostly a result of billions of dollars owed to foreign countries. America and the government must do something in order to set imports and exports at equilibrium. Currently, our imports far exceed our exports due to the fact that these foreign power nations are making many products found in America, but at a much cheaper price. In order to reduce trade deficit we must compete with these nations. We can not allow foreign countries to steal some of our GDP. The American producers must fight to compete with foreign prices and the American people most make a stand on domestic consumption.
Let me hear your thoughts on this topic?
Shoooot9, Import Certificate policy does not prevent importing of goods, but it does not tolerate their nation suffering an annual trade deficit of goods. It cannot prevent an item from being imported if there's an effective USA demand for that item. It favors USA products. It does not discriminate among industries, enterprises, types of goods, or among foreign nations. It would increase USA's GDP and numbers of jobs more than otherwise.It is obvious that something must be done about the exponentially growing budget deficit. More importantly, the trade deficit, which is a huge problem, and is mostly a result of billions of dollars owed to foreign countries. America and the government must do something in order to set imports and exports at equilibrium. Currently, our imports far exceed our exports due to the fact that these foreign power nations are making many products found in America, but at a much cheaper price. In order to reduce trade deficit we must compete with these nations. We can not allow foreign countries to steal some of our GDP. The American producers must fight to compete with foreign prices and the American people most make a stand on domestic consumption.
Let me hear your thoughts on this topic?
My thought's that you’ve never taken a class in economics, and are totally ignorant of the subject.
Correct me if I'm misunderstanding you but what I'm getting is trade deficits are always a failure of some domestic production. If that's what not what you're saying then please clarify....due to USA's annual trade deficits, the net extents of domestic production we failed to achieve...
If it is then lets consider the $billions of trade deficit that the U.S. has w/ say, Nigeria. That trade deficit is caused by importing cocoa beans for U.S. chocolate factories like Hersheys and Mars. There's no domestic production failure as cocoa beans don't grow in the U.S.
This line of thinking is easy to ignore at maybe a union hall or a political rally, but when it comes to earning a living it's time to sober up and look at how hard numbers for GDP soar when the trade deficit grows.
Expat_Panama, yes, you certainly are not “getting it”.
if you'll explain how from my posts, you derived their meaning to be “trade deficits are always a failure of some domestic production”, I might better understand many of the other less than logical conclusions expressed within your posts.
I did state that annual net trade deficits are always detrimental to their nation’s volume of domestic production. I did not state that importers or importing is detrimental to USA’s GDP, our domestic production and our numbers of jobs.
I stated USA’s chronic annual trade deficits indicate we're purchasing more products than we’re producing. If you derive that to mean that Hersey is purchasing more products than they’re producing, you would again be incorrect.
Respectfully, Supposn
Federal supreme jurisdiction of interstate commerce grants net economic benefits to our entire nation. Thus, it denies advantages of some U.S. states over other states.
But your nasty little post presupposes that all other members of this forum are ignorant and less aware than you.
Supposn
ToddsterPatriot, you read, but don't comprehend what was written? You cannot understand the posts that you quoted? Possibly you were in a hurry and sped read?I did not state that importers or importing is detrimental to USA’s GDP, our domestic production and our numbers of jobs.... I did state that annual net trade deficits are always detrimental to their nation’s volume of domestic production. I did not state that importers or importing is detrimental to USA’s GDP, our domestic production and our numbers of jobs.
I stated USA’s chronic annual trade deficits indicate we're purchasing more products than we’re producing. ...
When did you change your tune?
EdwardBaiamonte, regarding your first point: we're all relieved that you're not opposed to the U.S. Constitution. We're pleased that you agree the federal government has supreme jurisdiction upon USA's international and interstate commerce.1) Constitution lets Feds regulate commerce
2) they could regulated it by letting every state have a tariff against any other state(s) within the USA
3) you should love this since trade wars are you want between nations; why not between states too?
EdwardBaiamonte, regarding your first point: we're all relieved that you're not opposed to the U.S. Constitution. We're pleased that you agree the federal government has supreme jurisdiction upon USA's international and interstate commerce.1) Constitution lets Feds regulate commerce
2) they could regulated it by letting every state have a tariff against any other state(s) within the USA
3) you should love this since trade wars are you want between nations; why not between states too?
ToddsterPatriot, you read, but don't comprehend what was written? You cannot understand the posts that you quoted? Possibly you were in a hurry and sped read?I did not state that importers or importing is detrimental to USA’s GDP, our domestic production and our numbers of jobs.... I did state that annual net trade deficits are always detrimental to their nation’s volume of domestic production. I did not state that importers or importing is detrimental to USA’s GDP, our domestic production and our numbers of jobs.
I stated USA’s chronic annual trade deficits indicate we're purchasing more products than we’re producing. ...
When did you change your tune?
Respectfully, Supposn
ToddsterPatriot, to clarify, annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nations GDP, drag upon their numbers of jobs and payroll amounts.... I could have sworn your previous whining about the trade deficit was due to the fact that you claimed it harmed domestic production, but now it sounds like you're just whining about the formula.ToddsterPatriot, you read, but don't comprehend what was written? You cannot understand the posts that you quoted? Possibly you were in a hurry and sped read? ...
Feel free to clarify.
ToddsterPatriot, to clarify, annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nations GDP, drag upon their numbers of jobs and payroll amounts.... I could have sworn your previous whining about the trade deficit was due to the fact that you claimed it harmed domestic production, but now it sounds like you're just whining about the formula.ToddsterPatriot, you read, but don't comprehend what was written? You cannot understand the posts that you quoted? Possibly you were in a hurry and sped read? ...
Feel free to clarify.
EdwardBaiamonte, regarding your first point: we're all relieved that you're not opposed to the U.S. Constitution. We're pleased that you agree the federal government has supreme jurisdiction upon USA's international and interstate commerce.
Regarding your second point: Refer to article 1, section 10, clause 2 of the United States Constitution.
“No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Control of the Congress”.
Regarding your third point: There has always been, there now exists, and I expect that for a very long time of our future there will continue to be commercial competition between cities and states, provinces, and nations of our world.
If the USA adopted an Import Certificate policy, it wouldn't much increase or decrease our commercial disagreements with other nations.
. Exports contribute and imports reduce their nation's GDP.
ToddsterPatriot, to clarify, annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nations GDP, drag upon their numbers of jobs and payroll amounts.... I could have sworn your previous whining about the trade deficit was due to the fact that you claimed it harmed domestic production, but now it sounds like you're just whining about the formula.ToddsterPatriot, you read, but don't comprehend what was written? You cannot understand the posts that you quoted? Possibly you were in a hurry and sped read? ...
Feel free to clarify.
The expenditure formula's calculation of a nation's GDP is explicit. The nation's final sales of products include sales of imported and exported products. Exports contribute and imports reduce their nation's GDP.
Respectfully, Supposn
