What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

A Republican trade deficit solution?

Supposn

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
2,129
Reaction score
139
Points
85
A Republican trade deficit solution?

Refer to: Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article

and to

https://taxfoundation.org/house-gop-s-destination-based-cash-flow-tax-explained/
#1. 20% corporate tax rate I suppose is negotiable?
#2. Single year duration of depreciation for anything and everything? that’s pushing it too much.
#3. No tax on foreign earnings? ? It wouldn’t destroy our economy.
#4. complete nonsense. No tax consideration for debt service expenses would extremely drive up prices for products from utilities, Railroads, and I suppose many other important industries.
#5. Border adjusted; absolutely YES!!!
///////////////////////////////////////////////

I suppose Congressman Ryan and other more intelligent Republicans meant to entice populists such as myself with a proposal that would reduce the disadvantages of USA wage scales globally competing with lower wage purchasing power nations. They drafted a method that eliminates what I consider to be Wikipedia’s Import-Certificate proposal’s weakest point; it requires federal value assessment of goods passing through USA’s borders and that’s reason for me to believe that Import-Certificates are not CERTAINLY superior to the Border-adjusted tax proposal Ryan and his colleges are promoting.


Entire net costs due to both the Import-Certificate and the Border-adjustment proposals are passed onto USA purchasers of imports.

Within the Import-Certificate proposal:
(1) There’s federal costs for assessing approximate values of shipments passing through USA borders. But among those costs are funding for additional attention and eyes upon our borders that augment our security but are attributed to the budget for border security.


(2) Any other costs passed on to USA purchasers of Imported goods are market determined and they additionally serve as price subsidies for USA’s exports at no additional cost to anyone else.

(3) The policy is only applicable to globally traded goods; it cannot be applied to service products.

Within the Border-Adjusted proposal: (1) There’s no need to assess approximate values of shipments passing through USA borders. (2) USA exported goods enjoy no price subsidy. (3) the proposal’s applicable to USA’s imported goods and service products.

I’m supposing the nonsensical proposal to disallow reducing enterprises’ taxable incomes due to their debt servicing expenses will not survive.

The Wikipedia described Import Certificates proposal would CERTAINLY almost or entirely eliminate USA’s trade deficit of goods while not reducing but rather increasing USA’s GDP and jobs more than otherwise; (I do mean certainly). I’m aware of no other proposal that might approach this extent of trade deficit reduction. It’s doubtful that the border-adjusted proposal could match the extent of desirable net consequences we can reasonably expect from enacting an Import-Certificate policy.

Respectfully, Supposn
 

Onyx

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2015
Messages
7,887
Reaction score
499
Points
155
Trade deficits are a non issue, and free trade is one of the few bipartisan stances in the US congress.

What difference does it make if one country imports more than the other? Both countries are still making a mutual profit.
 
OP
S

Supposn

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
2,129
Reaction score
139
Points
85

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
66,848
Reaction score
3,619
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
A Republican trade deficit solution?

Refer to: Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article

and to

https://taxfoundation.org/house-gop-s-destination-based-cash-flow-tax-explained/
#1. 20% corporate tax rate I suppose is negotiable?
#2. Single year duration of depreciation for anything and everything? that’s pushing it too much.
#3. No tax on foreign earnings? ? It wouldn’t destroy our economy.
#4. complete nonsense. No tax consideration for debt service expenses would extremely drive up prices for products from utilities, Railroads, and I suppose many other important industries.
#5. Border adjusted; absolutely YES!!!
///////////////////////////////////////////////

I suppose Congressman Ryan and other more intelligent Republicans meant to entice populists such as myself with a proposal that would reduce the disadvantages of USA wage scales globally competing with lower wage purchasing power nations. They drafted a method that eliminates what I consider to be Wikipedia’s Import-Certificate proposal’s weakest point; it requires federal value assessment of goods passing through USA’s borders and that’s reason for me to believe that Import-Certificates are not CERTAINLY superior to the Border-adjusted tax proposal Ryan and his colleges are promoting.


Entire net costs due to both the Import-Certificate and the Border-adjustment proposals are passed onto USA purchasers of imports.

Within the Import-Certificate proposal:
(1) There’s federal costs for assessing approximate values of shipments passing through USA borders. But among those costs are funding for additional attention and eyes upon our borders that augment our security but are attributed to the budget for border security.


(2) Any other costs passed on to USA purchasers of Imported goods are market determined and they additionally serve as price subsidies for USA’s exports at no additional cost to anyone else.

(3) The policy is only applicable to globally traded goods; it cannot be applied to service products.

Within the Border-Adjusted proposal: (1) There’s no need to assess approximate values of shipments passing through USA borders. (2) USA exported goods enjoy no price subsidy. (3) the proposal’s applicable to USA’s imported goods and service products.

I’m supposing the nonsensical proposal to disallow reducing enterprises’ taxable incomes due to their debt servicing expenses will not survive.

The Wikipedia described Import Certificates proposal would CERTAINLY almost or entirely eliminate USA’s trade deficit of goods while not reducing but rather increasing USA’s GDP and jobs more than otherwise; (I do mean certainly). I’m aware of no other proposal that might approach this extent of trade deficit reduction. It’s doubtful that the border-adjusted proposal could match the extent of desirable net consequences we can reasonably expect from enacting an Import-Certificate policy.

Respectfully, Supposn
I believe we need to "upgrade our economic infrastructure" in the US, to improve our trade position in the world's markets.
 

EdwardBaiamonte

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
34,607
Reaction score
2,142
Points
1,100

Onyx

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2015
Messages
7,887
Reaction score
499
Points
155
Trade deficits can mean that your products are crap and nobody wants to buy them. This is obviously very important .

It could mean that, but it could also mean a lot of other things. The number alone isn't indicative of much.
 

EdwardBaiamonte

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
34,607
Reaction score
2,142
Points
1,100
Trade deficits can mean that your products are crap and nobody wants to buy them. This is obviously very important .

It could mean that, but it could also mean a lot of other things. The number alone isn't indicative of much.
the number is critical because it begs you to look for the explanation and that explanation is usually that your business, city, state, or country does not have great stuff to sell!!!
 
OP
S

Supposn

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
2,129
Reaction score
139
Points
85
I believe we need to "upgrade our economic infrastructure" in the US, to improve our trade position in the world's markets.

DanielPalos, I’m in complete agreement with you. But that does not directly address USA’s chronic annual global trade deficits. USA is at trade disadvantage to nations of wage rates with lesser purchasing powers.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
OP
S

Supposn

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
2,129
Reaction score
139
Points
85
Trade deficits can mean that your products are crap and nobody wants to buy them. This is obviously very important .

Excerpted from the 9:23 PM post within the thread
Trade balances effects upon their nation's GDPs. :
“EdwardBaiamonte, both the quality and price of products are affected by the time and quality of labor that was devoted to the products. (Note; differing quality of labor command differing wage rates).

The price advantages of imports from lower-wage nations exist even among their mass-produced products; labor’s required to create and maintain the mass production tools, assembly lines and infrastructures to support the production of goods].

USA’s labor or management are not at fault because they’re unable to compete with foreign nation’s lower wages’ purchasing powers. We should not fault USA purchasers because they seek the optimum value for the money they spend.
We must all function within our environment. USA’s trade policies encourage our annual trade deficits. Change the policies and we change purchasing decisions.

Your equating our inability to produce cheaply as being an inability to produce quality is nonsense”.

Respectfully, Supposn
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
66,848
Reaction score
3,619
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
I believe we need to "upgrade our economic infrastructure" in the US, to improve our trade position in the world's markets.

DanielPalos, I’m in complete agreement with you. But that does not directly address USA’s chronic annual global trade deficits. USA is at trade disadvantage to nations of wage rates with lesser purchasing powers.

Respectfully, Supposn
Hostess management had the same complaint. They blamed Labor for not taking a pay cut to allegedly, "help save the company".

Better products at lower cost is what increases market share.
 

EdwardBaiamonte

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
34,607
Reaction score
2,142
Points
1,100
Your equating our inability to produce cheaply as being an inability to produce quality is nonsense”.

we must be able to compete on price and quality or we fall further and further behind, obviously. Protecting our industry from competition only causes it to fall further and further behind 1+1=2
 
OP
S

Supposn

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
2,129
Reaction score
139
Points
85
we must be able to compete on price and quality or we fall further and further behind, obviously. Protecting our industry from competition only causes it to fall further and further behind 1+1=2

EdwardBaiamonte,fortunately, the USA did not choose the policy you advocate and we became the greatest producing nation on earth. Had we acted as you propose, the Nazis would have become the rulers of the world.
Unfortunately, too many in power do agree wi
th you.

I’m opposed to any other than a unilateral trade policy. Each sovereign nation should govern their own international trade policy.
I’m not opposed to international agreements for purposes other than economics.
I believe in the concept of “most favored nation that I believe is explicit or implied within every USA international agreement referring to regulating of goods at national borders.

The concept of “most favored nation” does not prohibit a nation from favoring their own entities but simply prohibits the agreeing nations from granting any other foreign nation more favorable treatment than is not granted to all other nation’s participating in the mutual international agreement. That I agree with.


If USA continues to internationally negotiate our border regulations, our trade policies will continue to be less beneficial to ourselves. I’m opposed to trading away the best interests of USA wage earners for the benefit of nations unwilling or unable to better compensate their own laborers.
I have not viewed with favor any existing or proposed USA trade policy that discriminates among foreign nations, or among the industries, or entities, or types of goods from any nation.

The cube root of 15625 = 25 and Bismark is the capital of North Dakota.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
Last edited:

EdwardBaiamonte

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
34,607
Reaction score
2,142
Points
1,100
I’m opposed to trading away the best interests of USA wage earners

why not if it is in the best interests of American consumers?? Workers over consumers is right out of Marx only you lack the IQ to know that you've been brainwashed by the worst economist in history who killed 120 million.
 
OP
S

Supposn

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
2,129
Reaction score
139
Points
85
. Had we acted as you propose, the Nazis would have become the rulers of the world.

how??????????????????????????????????????

EdwardBaiamonte, USA GDP during the WW2 years were a critical component of Germany’s defeat. Had we not been able to outproduce Germany, the allies would have not won the war and Germany would have been then have been and likely would still now be the most powerful nation on earth.



Respectfully, Supposn
 

EdwardBaiamonte

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
34,607
Reaction score
2,142
Points
1,100
. Had we acted as you propose, the Nazis would have become the rulers of the world.

how??????????????????????????????????????

EdwardBaiamonte, USA GDP during the WW2 years were a critical component of Germany’s defeat. Had we not been able to outproduce Germany, the allies would have not won the war and Germany would have been then have been and likely would still now be the most powerful nation on earth.
Respectfully, Supposn

as it was our equipment was crap and our soldiers got killed 2 to 1. If our industry had been more protected the equipment would have been worse and deaths higher too. Do you understand?
 
OP
S

Supposn

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
2,129
Reaction score
139
Points
85
I’m opposed to trading away the best interests of USA wage earners

why not if it is in the best interests of American consumers?? Workers over consumers is right out of Marx only you lack the IQ to know that you've been brainwashed by the worst economist in history who killed 120 million.

EdwardBaiamonte, there are some illogical fools that believe a nation’s democratic republican government can sustain itself while continuing to disregard the consequences of their policies effects upon the wellbeing of their citizens; they’re wrong.



there are some illogical fools that believe the use of bumper-sticker slogans with no logically supporting arguments is an effective debating tactic; you’re wrong.



Respectfully, Supposn
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top