CDZ U.S. and Mexico trade balance by year

[RandomPoster]

Year : Millions of dollars (negative means deficit)

1994 : 1,349.8 positive
1995 : -15,808.3 negative
2000 : -24,577.3 negative
2005: -49,861.0 negative
2010: -66,321.0 negative
2015: -59,973.2 negative
2017: -70,952.9 negative

I wonder if NAFTA had anything to do with this. How does this look beneficial to the U.S.?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The better question- how is it more favorable to send out more than you take in, in other words, how is a trade surplus beneficial? People who only listen to politicians and don’t study economics believe the country would be better if we sent more of what we make to other countries rather than have more of what they produce sent to us. Milton Friedman does an excellent job of explaining why a deficit is actually the preferred side of trade. I suggest you take a listen.

 

[RandomPoster]

The better question- how is it more favorable to send out more than you take in, in other words, how is a trade surplus beneficial? People who only listen to politicians and don’t study economics believe the country would be better if we sent more of what we make to other countries rather than have more of what they produce sent to us. Milton Friedman does an excellent job of explaining why a deficit is actually the preferred side of trade. I suggest you take a listen.

How is it favorable to send out more than you take in? Selling enriches the seller and makes the buyer poorer on account of the buyer's weakness and desire for comfort. The buyer has made a choice to give his money to a salesman for a product that may or may not be worth the price. Stockpiling money pays off. If you want to own the world, you do not spend your money on cheap foreign products you do not need.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The better question- how is it more favorable to send out more than you take in, in other words, how is a trade surplus beneficial? People who only listen to politicians and don’t study economics believe the country would be better if we sent more of what we make to other countries rather than have more of what they produce sent to us. Milton Friedman does an excellent job of explaining why a deficit is actually the preferred side of trade. I suggest you take a listen.

How is it favorable to send out more than you take in? Selling enriches the seller and makes the buyer poorer on account of the buyer's weakness and desire for comfort. The buyer has made a choice to give his money to a salesman for a product that may or may not be worth the price. Stockpiling money pays off. If you want to own the world, you do not spend your money on cheap foreign products you do not need.

Ok, you haven’t study economics at all, have you? You have a trade deficit with the grocery store. You give them your money for food. If that is bad for you, why don’t you start growing vegetables in your yard and sell them to create a surplus? Markets want to be efficient. It’s more efficient for you to keep your job, earn your paycheck and have a trade deficit with the grocery store, rather than spend time growing your own food.

Just because you are a Republican doesn’t mean you can’t think for yourself. Trump is not always right, just because Pelosi is always wrong. I urge you to read more about trade deficits and the economies of countries which have them. Trade deficits are not the economic booggie man.

 

[Toronado3800]

The better question- how is it more favorable to send out more than you take in, in other words, how is a trade surplus beneficial? People who only listen to politicians and don’t study economics believe the country would be better if we sent more of what we make to other countries rather than have more of what they produce sent to us. Milton Friedman does an excellent job of explaining why a deficit is actually the preferred side of trade. I suggest you take a listen.

How is it favorable to send out more than you take in? Selling enriches the seller and makes the buyer poorer on account of the buyer's weakness and desire for comfort. The buyer has made a choice to give his money to a salesman for a product that may or may not be worth the price. Stockpiling money pays off. If you want to own the world, you do not spend your money on cheap foreign products you do not need.

Ok, you haven’t study economics at all, have you? You have a trade deficit with the grocery store. You give them your money for food. If that is bad for you, why don’t you start growing vegetables in your yard and sell them to create a surplus? Markets want to be efficient. It’s more efficient for you to keep your job, earn your paycheck and have a trade deficit with the grocery store, rather than spend time growing your own food.

Just because you are a Republican doesn’t mean you can’t think for yourself. Trump is not always right, just because Pelosi is always wrong. I urge you to read more about trade deficits and the economies of countries which have them. Trade deficits are not the economic booggie man.

So we get cell phones from China, they get $'s to build infrastructure.

Next we will get cars from China. Then they'll use $'s to build the world's best space force.

If it doesn't show I disagree with Milton and find your insinuation that anyone who disagrees does no agree is ignorant, distasteful.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The better question- how is it more favorable to send out more than you take in, in other words, how is a trade surplus beneficial? People who only listen to politicians and don’t study economics believe the country would be better if we sent more of what we make to other countries rather than have more of what they produce sent to us. Milton Friedman does an excellent job of explaining why a deficit is actually the preferred side of trade. I suggest you take a listen.

How is it favorable to send out more than you take in? Selling enriches the seller and makes the buyer poorer on account of the buyer's weakness and desire for comfort. The buyer has made a choice to give his money to a salesman for a product that may or may not be worth the price. Stockpiling money pays off. If you want to own the world, you do not spend your money on cheap foreign products you do not need.

Ok, you haven’t study economics at all, have you? You have a trade deficit with the grocery store. You give them your money for food. If that is bad for you, why don’t you start growing vegetables in your yard and sell them to create a surplus? Markets want to be efficient. It’s more efficient for you to keep your job, earn your paycheck and have a trade deficit with the grocery store, rather than spend time growing your own food.

Just because you are a Republican doesn’t mean you can’t think for yourself. Trump is not always right, just because Pelosi is always wrong. I urge you to read more about trade deficits and the economies of countries which have them. Trade deficits are not the economic booggie man.

Y
So we get cell phones from China, they get $'s to build infrastructure.

Next we will get cars from China. Then they'll use $'s to build the world's best space force.

If it doesn't show I disagree with Milton and find your insinuation that anyone who disagrees does no agree is ignorant, distasteful.

You are a simpleton, is that better than being ignorant? What military forces out there rival the US? We have a trade deficit and the best military in the world. We spend more on our military than the next 7 countries combined. You’re one of those guys who was screaming in the 1980’s that Japan was going to own this country. Yeah, I know your type.

 

[RandomPoster]

The better question- how is it more favorable to send out more than you take in, in other words, how is a trade surplus beneficial? People who only listen to politicians and don’t study economics believe the country would be better if we sent more of what we make to other countries rather than have more of what they produce sent to us. Milton Friedman does an excellent job of explaining why a deficit is actually the preferred side of trade. I suggest you take a listen.

How is it favorable to send out more than you take in? Selling enriches the seller and makes the buyer poorer on account of the buyer's weakness and desire for comfort. The buyer has made a choice to give his money to a salesman for a product that may or may not be worth the price. Stockpiling money pays off. If you want to own the world, you do not spend your money on cheap foreign products you do not need.

Ok, you haven’t study economics at all, have you? You have a trade deficit with the grocery store. You give them your money for food. If that is bad for you, why don’t you start growing vegetables in your yard and sell them to create a surplus? Markets want to be efficient. It’s more efficient for you to keep your job, earn your paycheck and have a trade deficit with the grocery store, rather than spend time growing your own food.

Just because you are a Republican doesn’t mean you can’t think for yourself. Trump is not always right, just because Pelosi is always wrong. I urge you to read more about trade deficits and the economies of countries which have them. Trade deficits are not the economic booggie man.

I understand economics just fine. I have never purchased anything on credit. I pay for everything up front. I didn't buy my house until I could pay for it. No financing. No interest. I could have purchased a much larger home, except I don't need it. Back in my twenties, while making nearly 6 figures a year, I rented out a filthy shithole apartment with horse hair insulation in the walls where I needed blankets in my living room during Minnesota winters until I could stockpile 150,000 cash for my house. I have saved money by refusing to go to a doctor or chiropractor. I live far below my means and stockpile MY money. Even now, I'm not above utilizing resources such as free food shelters. There's no rule that says when you make X dollars a year, you can't be frugal.

As far as food and defense are concerned, we have to eat and we have to spend money on defense because we have to defend ourselves. We invest in a military because that is our economic future. That is how we should negotiate trade deals and overall economic issues.

We should not have trade deficits and we should not be in debt.

 

[Toronado3800]

The better question- how is it more favorable to send out more than you take in, in other words, how is a trade surplus beneficial? People who only listen to politicians and don’t study economics believe the country would be better if we sent more of what we make to other countries rather than have more of what they produce sent to us. Milton Friedman does an excellent job of explaining why a deficit is actually the preferred side of trade. I suggest you take a listen.

How is it favorable to send out more than you take in? Selling enriches the seller and makes the buyer poorer on account of the buyer's weakness and desire for comfort. The buyer has made a choice to give his money to a salesman for a product that may or may not be worth the price. Stockpiling money pays off. If you want to own the world, you do not spend your money on cheap foreign products you do not need.

Ok, you haven’t study economics at all, have you? You have a trade deficit with the grocery store. You give them your money for food. If that is bad for you, why don’t you start growing vegetables in your yard and sell them to create a surplus? Markets want to be efficient. It’s more efficient for you to keep your job, earn your paycheck and have a trade deficit with the grocery store, rather than spend time growing your own food.

Just because you are a Republican doesn’t mean you can’t think for yourself. Trump is not always right, just because Pelosi is always wrong. I urge you to read more about trade deficits and the economies of countries which have them. Trade deficits are not the economic booggie man.

Y
So we get cell phones from China, they get $'s to build infrastructure.

Next we will get cars from China. Then they'll use $'s to build the world's best space force.

If it doesn't show I disagree with Milton and find your insinuation that anyone who disagrees does no agree is ignorant, distasteful.

You are a simpleton, is that better than being ignorant? What military forces out there rival the US? We have a trade deficit and the best military in the world. We spend more on our military than the next 7 countries combined. You’re one of those guys who was screaming in the 1980’s that Japan was going to own this country. Yeah, I know your type.

View attachment 227596

Ok name caller.

Who bought their military on deficit spending? I can make 20k a year and own a mansion by your accounting.

If you didn't care about Obama's deficit, that is fine. I wasn't freaking out either but I know the interest is there and the effect of higher rates on future borrowing.

So yeah, why does the grocery store sell me things? To get my money?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The better question- how is it more favorable to send out more than you take in, in other words, how is a trade surplus beneficial? People who only listen to politicians and don’t study economics believe the country would be better if we sent more of what we make to other countries rather than have more of what they produce sent to us. Milton Friedman does an excellent job of explaining why a deficit is actually the preferred side of trade. I suggest you take a listen.

How is it favorable to send out more than you take in? Selling enriches the seller and makes the buyer poorer on account of the buyer's weakness and desire for comfort. The buyer has made a choice to give his money to a salesman for a product that may or may not be worth the price. Stockpiling money pays off. If you want to own the world, you do not spend your money on cheap foreign products you do not need.

Ok, you haven’t study economics at all, have you? You have a trade deficit with the grocery store. You give them your money for food. If that is bad for you, why don’t you start growing vegetables in your yard and sell them to create a surplus? Markets want to be efficient. It’s more efficient for you to keep your job, earn your paycheck and have a trade deficit with the grocery store, rather than spend time growing your own food.

Just because you are a Republican doesn’t mean you can’t think for yourself. Trump is not always right, just because Pelosi is always wrong. I urge you to read more about trade deficits and the economies of countries which have them. Trade deficits are not the economic booggie man.

I understand economics just fine. I have never purchased anything on credit. I pay for everything up front. I didn't buy my house until I could pay for it. No financing. No interest. I could have purchased a much larger home, except I don't need it. Back in my twenties, while making nearly 6 figures a year, I rented out a filthy shithole apartment with horse hair insulation in the walls where I needed blankets in my living room during Minnesota winters until I could stockpile 150,000 cash for my house. I have saved money by refusing to go to a doctor or chiropractor. I live far below my means and stockpile MY money. Even now, I'm not above utilizing resources such as free food shelters. There's no rule that says when you make X dollars a year, you can't be frugal.

As far as food and defense are concerned, we have to eat and we have to spend money on defense because we have to defend ourselves. We invest in a military because that is our economic future. That is how we should negotiate trade deals and overall economic issues.

We should not have trade deficits and we should not be in debt.

It’s sounds to me like you understand your economic situation perfectly, and are an extremely (rightfully so, probably) proud person. But you have not demonstrated any knowledge of actually economics, or investing and accounting for that matter. I predict you will never be poor, but if you refuse to take on debt (leverage), you will never be rich either.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

The better question- how is it more favorable to send out more than you take in, in other words, how is a trade surplus beneficial? People who only listen to politicians and don’t study economics believe the country would be better if we sent more of what we make to other countries rather than have more of what they produce sent to us. Milton Friedman does an excellent job of explaining why a deficit is actually the preferred side of trade. I suggest you take a listen.

How is it favorable to send out more than you take in? Selling enriches the seller and makes the buyer poorer on account of the buyer's weakness and desire for comfort. The buyer has made a choice to give his money to a salesman for a product that may or may not be worth the price. Stockpiling money pays off. If you want to own the world, you do not spend your money on cheap foreign products you do not need.

Ok, you haven’t study economics at all, have you? You have a trade deficit with the grocery store. You give them your money for food. If that is bad for you, why don’t you start growing vegetables in your yard and sell them to create a surplus? Markets want to be efficient. It’s more efficient for you to keep your job, earn your paycheck and have a trade deficit with the grocery store, rather than spend time growing your own food.

Just because you are a Republican doesn’t mean you can’t think for yourself. Trump is not always right, just because Pelosi is always wrong. I urge you to read more about trade deficits and the economies of countries which have them. Trade deficits are not the economic booggie man.

Y
So we get cell phones from China, they get $'s to build infrastructure.

Next we will get cars from China. Then they'll use $'s to build the world's best space force.

If it doesn't show I disagree with Milton and find your insinuation that anyone who disagrees does no agree is ignorant, distasteful.

You are a simpleton, is that better than being ignorant? What military forces out there rival the US? We have a trade deficit and the best military in the world. We spend more on our military than the next 7 countries combined. You’re one of those guys who was screaming in the 1980’s that Japan was going to own this country. Yeah, I know your type.

View attachment 227596

Ok name caller.

Who bought their military on deficit spending? I can make 20k a year and own a mansion by your accounting.

If you didn't care about Obama's deficit, that is fine. I wasn't freaking out either but I know the interest is there and the effect of higher rates on future borrowing.

So yeah, why does the grocery store sell me things? To get my money?

Hold on, we are talking about a trade deficit with Mexico and other countries. Not the deficit spending of the federal government. Do you not understand the difference between the two? Countries with a trade deficits mean the people are making enough money to buy things from other countries. Why do you think corporate leaders are concerned about this trade war? It will hurt the economy! Here’s a good article about that very topic-Trade Deficit Is Most Meaningless Economic Indicator Of All | Investor's Business Daily

A trade deficit is a sign that Americans have purchasing power and are creating demand for products. When the economy is in a downturn, the trade deficit shrinks. In 2006, for example, the trade deficit was $762 billion and the unemployment rate was 4.9%. By the end of 2009, the trade deficit declined to $384 billion, and the unemployment rate peaked at 10%.

 

[RandomPoster]

The better question- how is it more favorable to send out more than you take in, in other words, how is a trade surplus beneficial? People who only listen to politicians and don’t study economics believe the country would be better if we sent more of what we make to other countries rather than have more of what they produce sent to us. Milton Friedman does an excellent job of explaining why a deficit is actually the preferred side of trade. I suggest you take a listen.

How is it favorable to send out more than you take in? Selling enriches the seller and makes the buyer poorer on account of the buyer's weakness and desire for comfort. The buyer has made a choice to give his money to a salesman for a product that may or may not be worth the price. Stockpiling money pays off. If you want to own the world, you do not spend your money on cheap foreign products you do not need.

Ok, you haven’t study economics at all, have you? You have a trade deficit with the grocery store. You give them your money for food. If that is bad for you, why don’t you start growing vegetables in your yard and sell them to create a surplus? Markets want to be efficient. It’s more efficient for you to keep your job, earn your paycheck and have a trade deficit with the grocery store, rather than spend time growing your own food.

Just because you are a Republican doesn’t mean you can’t think for yourself. Trump is not always right, just because Pelosi is always wrong. I urge you to read more about trade deficits and the economies of countries which have them. Trade deficits are not the economic booggie man.

I understand economics just fine. I have never purchased anything on credit. I pay for everything up front. I didn't buy my house until I could pay for it. No financing. No interest. I could have purchased a much larger home, except I don't need it. Back in my twenties, while making nearly 6 figures a year, I rented out a filthy shithole apartment with horse hair insulation in the walls where I needed blankets in my living room during Minnesota winters until I could stockpile 150,000 cash for my house. I have saved money by refusing to go to a doctor or chiropractor. I live far below my means and stockpile MY money. Even now, I'm not above utilizing resources such as free food shelters. There's no rule that says when you make X dollars a year, you can't be frugal.

As far as food and defense are concerned, we have to eat and we have to spend money on defense because we have to defend ourselves. We invest in a military because that is our economic future. That is how we should negotiate trade deals and overall economic issues.

We should not have trade deficits and we should not be in debt.

It’s sounds to me like you understand your economic situation perfectly, and are an extremely (rightfully so, probably) proud person. But you have not demonstrated any knowledge of actually economics, or investing and accounting for that matter. I predict you will never be poor, but if you refuse to take on debt (leverage), you will never be rich either.

It is always money in, money out. It's no different than a billionaire telling his wife and kids that they are going to live like he makes minimum wage. They're going to sell all their possessions, move into a modest house, and dress in clothes from the salvation army. If we all agree to lower our level of luxuries, the nation could stockpile money for the future. Another issue is that if we cut social programs, non-productive members of society will help themselves by traveling to Canada. We whine to the world about how poor we are and wait for humanitarian aid from other countries while we pay off our debts and start stockpiling money. There should be a human caravan leaving America.

You should read about Hetty Green. She was a multi-millionaire in the late 1800s. Her son broke his leg and she stubbornly insisted on a free clinic. She was rejected several times simply because she had money until the leg got so bad they eventually had to treat it. By the time she died, she was so rich we would have been a billionaire in today's dollars.

 

[Toronado3800]

How is it favorable to send out more than you take in? Selling enriches the seller and makes the buyer poorer on account of the buyer's weakness and desire for comfort. The buyer has made a choice to give his money to a salesman for a product that may or may not be worth the price. Stockpiling money pays off. If you want to own the world, you do not spend your money on cheap foreign products you do not need.

Ok, you haven’t study economics at all, have you? You have a trade deficit with the grocery store. You give them your money for food. If that is bad for you, why don’t you start growing vegetables in your yard and sell them to create a surplus? Markets want to be efficient. It’s more efficient for you to keep your job, earn your paycheck and have a trade deficit with the grocery store, rather than spend time growing your own food.

Just because you are a Republican doesn’t mean you can’t think for yourself. Trump is not always right, just because Pelosi is always wrong. I urge you to read more about trade deficits and the economies of countries which have them. Trade deficits are not the economic booggie man.

Y
So we get cell phones from China, they get $'s to build infrastructure.

Next we will get cars from China. Then they'll use $'s to build the world's best space force.

If it doesn't show I disagree with Milton and find your insinuation that anyone who disagrees does no agree is ignorant, distasteful.

You are a simpleton, is that better than being ignorant? What military forces out there rival the US? We have a trade deficit and the best military in the world. We spend more on our military than the next 7 countries combined. You’re one of those guys who was screaming in the 1980’s that Japan was going to own this country. Yeah, I know your type.

View attachment 227596

Ok name caller.

Who bought their military on deficit spending? I can make 20k a year and own a mansion by your accounting.

If you didn't care about Obama's deficit, that is fine. I wasn't freaking out either but I know the interest is there and the effect of higher rates on future borrowing.

So yeah, why does the grocery store sell me things? To get my money?

Hold on, we are talking about a trade deficit with Mexico and other countries. Not the deficit spending of the federal government. Do you not understand the difference between the two? Countries with a trade deficits mean the people are making enough money to buy things from other countries. Why do you think corporate leaders are concerned about this trade war? It will hurt the economy! Here’s a good article about that very topic-Trade Deficit Is Most Meaningless Economic Indicator Of All | Investor's Business Daily

A trade deficit is a sign that Americans have purchasing power and are creating demand for products. When the economy is in a downturn, the trade deficit shrinks. In 2006, for example, the trade deficit was $762 billion and the unemployment rate was 4.9%. By the end of 2009, the trade deficit declined to $384 billion, and the unemployment rate peaked at 10%.

The military thing got me on the national debt tangent.

Trade deficits can be a useful foreign policy tool. Ask George Marshall. Want to make capitalism look good someplace, buy a lot of things from that country.

By the same token, want to make capitalism look good in China, buy a lot of stuff from them. Its better than going to war for sure. A slippery slope though it is.