Is free trade among countries the same as among individuals?

[Toddsterpatriot]

Exactly! We must grow our own bananas.
Because the jobs created to grow bananas, even if they would cost $5 each,
more than make up for the reduction in our standard of living that would result.

Pure Trumpian STUPIDITY!
The smart trading country will produce what it makes most efficiently and trade that for the bananas thus getting more bananas per resource.

Pure Trumpian STUPIDITY!

Ummmmm.....it's Supposn, not Trump.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We're not disrespected for acting in our own best interests.

That's why no one has been upset by our recent tariffs, right?

ToddsterPatriot, We shouldn't be particularly concerned about upsetting other nations if what we're doing is justifiable, and in our opinion is for a desirable purpose. There's a difference between others being upset or others disrespecting us.

If other nation's disrespected us for acting against what they believed to be contrary to their interests. We shouldn't alter our policy if we believe our actions are justifiable, and the correct action to take.
But if we act foolishly and contrary to our own best interests, regardless of others opinions we should remedy our policies.
Respectfully, Supposn

So it's okay to upset them with your IC proposal but not okay to upset them for my banana proposal?

Your lack of consistency on this issue is troubling.

ToddsterPatriot, there's no inconsistency. Respectfully, Supposn

There is, respectfully.

You support a plan which will subsidize exports.
That will upset our trading partners.

You say my banana ban will also upset our trading partners, so it shouldn't be implemented.

 

[Supposn]

Exactly! We must grow our own bananas.
Because the jobs created to grow bananas, even if they would cost $5 each,
more than make up for the reduction in our standard of living that would result.

Pure Trumpian STUPIDITY!
The smart trading country will produce what it makes most efficiently and trade that for the bananas thus getting more bananas per resource.

EdTheCynic, due to USA seeking pure free trade policy, in excess of the last half-century been consequentially great USA trade deficits of goods every year. Annual trade deficits are always detrimental to their nation's GDP and they drag upon their numbers of jobs.

Regardless of a chronic trade deficit nation's economy within any year, if they experienced an annual trade deficit, their GDP was less than otherwise and that had a negative effect upon their numbers of jobs.
USA adopting the Import Certificate policy would increase our annual GDPs and numbers of jobs more than otherwise. Refer to Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Supposn]

There is [incosistency], respectfully.

You support a plan which will subsidize exports.
That will upset our trading partners.

You say my banana ban will also upset our trading partners, so it shouldn't be implemented.

ToddsterPatriot, no. That's not entirely what I said.

... The [Banana] proposal's not a sincere attempt to achieve a remedy; it's deliberately mischievous.

If USA banana producers cannot satisfy USA's effective demand, USA consumers will have no bananas.

If USA banana producers can satisfy USA's effective demand, USA consumers will have bananas at an increased price.

In all cases, it will not significantly improve our economy but it will to some extent upset our foreign relations. The USA will be reputed to be a nation that acts more foolishly and for no clear advantage even for ourselves.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is [incosistency], respectfully.

You support a plan which will subsidize exports.
That will upset our trading partners.

You say my banana ban will also upset our trading partners, so it shouldn't be implemented.

ToddsterPatriot, no. That's not entirely what I said.

... The [Banana] proposal's not a sincere attempt to achieve a remedy; it's deliberately mischievous.

If USA banana producers cannot satisfy USA's effective demand, USA consumers will have no bananas.

If USA banana producers can satisfy USA's effective demand, USA consumers will have bananas at an increased price.

In all cases, it will not significantly improve our economy but it will to some extent upset our foreign relations. The USA will be reputed to be a nation that acts more foolishly and for no clear advantage even for ourselves.

Respectfully, Supposn

"but it will to some extent upset our foreign relations"

Are you under the impression the IC plan won't "to some extent upset our foreign relations"?

 

[Supposn]

"but it will to some extent upset our foreign relations"

Are you under the impression the IC plan won't "to some extent upset our foreign relations"?

Toddsterpatriot, refer to post #57. Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"but it will to some extent upset our foreign relations"

Are you under the impression the IC plan won't "to some extent upset our foreign relations"?

Toddsterpatriot, refer to post #57. Respectfully, Supposn

We shouldn't be particularly concerned about upsetting other nations if what we're doing is justifiable,

We should upset other nations, raise the cost of things we buy and use that money to reduce the prices of things we sell.

It's a wonder your plan wasn't adopted decades ago.

 

[edthecynic]

Exactly! We must grow our own bananas.
Because the jobs created to grow bananas, even if they would cost $5 each,
more than make up for the reduction in our standard of living that would result.

Pure Trumpian STUPIDITY!
The smart trading country will produce what it makes most efficiently and trade that for the bananas thus getting more bananas per resource.

EdTheCynic, due to USA seeking pure free trade policy, in excess of the last half-century been consequentially great USA trade deficits of goods every year. Annual trade deficits are always detrimental to their nation's GDP and they drag upon their numbers of jobs.

Regardless of a chronic trade deficit nation's economy within any year, if they experienced an annual trade deficit, their GDP was less than otherwise and that had a negative effect upon their numbers of jobs.
USA adopting the Import Certificate policy would increase our annual GDPs and numbers of jobs more than otherwise. Refer to Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article.

Respectfully, Supposn

Pure free trade policies would require producing what you can make most efficiently and trading for what you don't produce efficiently, the US does not follow that essential free trade policy. So free trade has nothing to do with trade deficits, bad corporate production decisions about what to make here and what to trade for are producing our trade deficits.

 

[cnelsen]

Conservatives and libertarians support free trade between individuals and between countries in the belief that Republican capitalism works best in both cases. isn’t it amazing how despite liberals best efforts they really can’t hide from us the real And constant issue of political economy ie, capitalism versus socialism.

EdwardBaiamonte, I responded to James972 within another group. His thread's title is EXACTLY as yours which was posted 3 minutes later. Do you also post over the pen-name James972?

James972, you're incorrect; the consequences of free trade among nations is not similar to consequences of free trade among self determined entities if the nations' governments were not among the principals that actually determined the individual trade or sales agreements.

Enterprises choose to internationally outsource when they believed it's to their net advantage; (i.e. they perceived a comparative advantage to do so).

Enterprises discontinuing production of any item may benefit by numerous methods. They could shift their displaced labor to perform other tasks that need to be done, or dismiss higher priced and/or specialized labor to perform those other tasks, or simply dismiss their now excess labor with no additional hiring. Their choice of action will be dependent upon circumstances and in aggregate, those choices will be to the enterprise's net benefit.

Enterprises can directly benefit from purchasing imported goods but they do not pay for their decisions net detrimental effects upon USA's economy. Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nations GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs.

We should not blame enterprises or persons for acting in what they (usually correctly) believe to be to their own individual best interests. USA's chronic annual trade deficits are a condition that we can recognize and remedy. If USA adopted the trade policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article, it would significantly, (if not entirely) eliminate our annual trade deficits of goods, increasing our GDP and numbers of jobs more than otherwise.

Within an Import Certificate policy, what individual enterprises (correctly) perceive to be in their own best interests will also be to our nation's best interests.

Respectfully, Supposn

you'd buy a banana from a tropical county because it is cheaper than one grown local in a greenhouse. An intelligent country would not prevent you from buying from a tropical country tropical and rejecting local bananas if grown by individuals unless they wanted to reduce you standard of living. Get it now? We must be allowed to buy from those who have a comparative advantage.

Here's why you are wrong. It is far more expensive to be an American than to be a Chinese.

 

[Supposn]

Pure free trade policies would require producing what you can make most efficiently and trading for what you don't produce efficiently, the US does not follow that essential free trade policy. So free trade has nothing to do with trade deficits, bad corporate production decisions about what to make here and what to trade for are producing our trade deficits.

EdTheCynic, trade deficits are negative balances of trade.

A pure free trade nation's balance of global balance of trade policy is certainly affected by markets' behaviors. To some extent, all nations' global balances of trade are affected by markets' behaviors.

Within an Import Certificate policy, regardless of Import Certificates global markets' values, the nation's trade deficit of goods will be significantly reduced, if not entirely eliminated and in all cases, the policy certainly affects their nation's balance of trade.

To the extent that tariff policies are applied, they certainly do affect their nation's balance of trade.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It is far more expensive to be an American than to be a Chinese.

yes it is very expensive to be an American so the last thing Americans need is to be forced by a libcommie govt to incur the expense of buying bananas from a local greenhouse for $10/Lbs. when they could import tropical bananas or $1/Lbs

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Within an Import Certificate policy, regardless of Import Certificates global markets' values, the nation's trade deficit of goods will be significantly reduced,

reducing a trade deficit by taxing imports protects and cripples protected industries making them even less competition and thus increasing the trade deficit.

 

[edthecynic]

Pure free trade policies would require producing what you can make most efficiently and trading for what you don't produce efficiently, the US does not follow that essential free trade policy. So free trade has nothing to do with trade deficits, bad corporate production decisions about what to make here and what to trade for are producing our trade deficits.

EdTheCynic, trade deficits are negative balances of trade.

A pure free trade nation's balance of global balance of trade policy is certainly affected by markets' behaviors. To some extent, all nations' global balances of trade are affected by markets' behaviors.

Within an Import Certificate policy, regardless of Import Certificates global markets' values, the nation's trade deficit of goods will be significantly reduced, if not entirely eliminated and in all cases, the policy certainly affects their nation's balance of trade.

To the extent that tariff policies are applied, they certainly do affect their nation's balance of trade.

Respectfully, Supposn

That has nothing to do with what I posted and nothing to do with free trade.
Pure free trade is governed by the Law of Comparative Advantage, not tariffs or Import Certificate policy.

 

[cnelsen]

It is far more expensive to be an American than to be a Chinese.

yes it is very expensive to be an American so the last thing Americans need is to be forced by a libcommie govt to incur the expense of buying bananas from a local greenhouse for $10/Lbs. when they could import tropical bananas or $1/Lbs

The point is, there is no way an American company using American labor can compete head-to-head with a Chinese company using Chinese labor. When I lived in China, I made $5.00 per day, and I was rich. Economic dullards who believe that they should compete head-to-head because, hey, we all get to buy shirts for $4.00 each are just ignorant. First, it isn't fair to the textile workers in this country, whom we are suppose to look out for, second, once the textile industry is destroyed, all the textile workers go into the job market and drive down the wages for, say, your kids. Then your industry goes belly up, too, and then another, but hey! we are all consuming the shit out of some super-cheap crap...and as all Americans know: THE PURPOSE OF LIFE IS CONSUMPTION.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It is far more expensive to be an American than to be a Chinese.

yes it is very expensive to be an American so the last thing Americans need is to be forced by a libcommie govt to incur the expense of buying bananas from a local greenhouse for $10/Lbs. when they could import tropical bananas or $1/Lbs

The point is, there is no way an American company using American labor can compete head-to-head with a Chinese company using Chinese labor. When I lived in China, I made $5.00 per day, and I was rich. Economic dullards who believe that they should compete head-to-head because, hey, we all get to buy shirts for $4.00 each are just ignorant. First, it isn't fair to the textile workers in this country, whom we are suppose to look out for, second, once the textile industry is destroyed, all the textile workers go into the job market and drive down the wages for, say, your kids. Then your industry goes belly up, too, and then another, but hey! we are all consuming the shit out of some super-cheap crap...and as all Americans know: THE PURPOSE OF LIFE IS CONSUMPTION.

of course that’s totally mistaken we are competing with China now and the employment rate in America is 96%. And we are competing with massive liberal interference with our ability to compete. We have legal labor unions tons of regulstions and the highest corporate taxes in the world.Get rid of the liberal influence and we would do far better than we are doing even now. and we can pray that Trump is able to negotiate fair trade deals with China enable us to sell there is easily as they can sell here. Congratulations for getting it 100% backwards. Wages in China are the least of the trade issues we face .

 

[cnelsen]

It is far more expensive to be an American than to be a Chinese.

yes it is very expensive to be an American so the last thing Americans need is to be forced by a libcommie govt to incur the expense of buying bananas from a local greenhouse for $10/Lbs. when they could import tropical bananas or $1/Lbs

The point is, there is no way an American company using American labor can compete head-to-head with a Chinese company using Chinese labor. When I lived in China, I made $5.00 per day, and I was rich. Economic dullards who believe that they should compete head-to-head because, hey, we all get to buy shirts for $4.00 each are just ignorant. First, it isn't fair to the textile workers in this country, whom we are suppose to look out for, second, once the textile industry is destroyed, all the textile workers go into the job market and drive down the wages for, say, your kids. Then your industry goes belly up, too, and then another, but hey! we are all consuming the shit out of some super-cheap crap...and as all Americans know: THE PURPOSE OF LIFE IS CONSUMPTION.

of course that’s totally mistaken we are competing with China now and the employment rate in America is 96%. And we are competing with massive liberal interference with our ability to compete. We have legal labor unions tons of regulstions and the highest corporate taxes in the world.Get rid of the liberal influence and we would do far better than we are doing even now. and we can pray that Trump is able to negotiate fair trade deals with China enable us to sell there is easily as they can sell here. Congratulations for getting it 100% backwards. Wages in China are the least of the trade issues we face .

You are the one who has it backwards. Labor is by far the primary cost component of anything you buy. If I need to earn $20 / hour to have a middle class lifestyle while a Chinese needs only to earn $5 / day, and we are both shirt makers, under a free trade system, guess who isn't going to be able to compete?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It is far more expensive to be an American than to be a Chinese.

yes it is very expensive to be an American so the last thing Americans need is to be forced by a libcommie govt to incur the expense of buying bananas from a local greenhouse for $10/Lbs. when they could import tropical bananas or $1/Lbs

The point is, there is no way an American company using American labor can compete head-to-head with a Chinese company using Chinese labor. When I lived in China, I made $5.00 per day, and I was rich. Economic dullards who believe that they should compete head-to-head because, hey, we all get to buy shirts for $4.00 each are just ignorant. First, it isn't fair to the textile workers in this country, whom we are suppose to look out for, second, once the textile industry is destroyed, all the textile workers go into the job market and drive down the wages for, say, your kids. Then your industry goes belly up, too, and then another, but hey! we are all consuming the shit out of some super-cheap crap...and as all Americans know: THE PURPOSE OF LIFE IS CONSUMPTION.

of course that’s totally mistaken we are competing with China now and the employment rate in America is 96%. And we are competing with massive liberal interference with our ability to compete. We have legal labor unions tons of regulstions and the highest corporate taxes in the world.Get rid of the liberal influence and we would do far better than we are doing even now. and we can pray that Trump is able to negotiate fair trade deals with China enable us to sell there is easily as they can sell here. Congratulations for getting it 100% backwards. Wages in China are the least of the trade issues we face .

You are the one who has it backwards. Labor is by far the primary cost component of anything you buy. If I need to earn $20 / hour to have a middle class lifestyle while a Chinese needs only to earn $5 / day, and we are both shirt makers, under a free trade system, guess who isn't going to be able to compete?

we do have largely free trade and we have 96% employment. Shall I repeat that? But we have free trade greatly impeded by the highest tax rate in the world the most regulations in the world and really really counterproductive labor unions. Elluminate those things and we can compete just fine if in fact we’re not already competing just fine. Now do you understand?

 

[cnelsen]

96% employment

Wages have been stagnant for 40 years. Even slaves are "employed". Now, do YOU get it?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

96% employment

Wages have been stagnant for 40 years. Even slaves are "employed". Now, do YOU get it?

Wages?
Why not compensation?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Wages have been stagnant for 40 years. Even slaves are "employed". Now, do YOU get it?

so lets bring in another 30 million liberal illegals, raise corporate taxes and regulations to highest in world so corporations have the incentive to leave with their jobs, and lets support unions that drive even more corporations and their jobs off shore, or, do what conservatives want ie none of the above!!

Can you guess which is the better idea?