You can't seem to answer the question. What is "fair"? I would say our balance is currently quite fair. Nobody is making anyone trade, buyers and seller seem happy. Why do we want to have a surplus? You want us sending out more resources than receiving? Japan had a trade surplus and now have had a stagnant economy for many years.
1. You trust that the Chinese market is open to our exports?
2. Intellectual property theft alone, is a major issue, that the American "Sellers" are not happy about. For one limited example.
3. Yes. Like Xi, I want my nation to be "Sending out more resources than receiving". Me and him, we both agree that is the better place to be in.
4. Japan has many issues. Trade balance is not one of them.
1. I don't know that I care. If not they are only hurting themselves. Currently we get all their resources for very cheap and they get to keep the pollution.
2. Yes that is an issue. But that isn't going to make our workers more wealthy. We already have lots of wealth. If Microsoft for example starts getting paid for windows that is going to executives and investors, not workers. This will do nothing to help our wages.
3. That makes no sense. Japan did that for many years, now how are they doing? We are much better off having real resources.
4. Well their big trade surplus certainly was not good for them.
1. Milton Friedman, said the way it was supposed to work, was that we give them dollars for those resources, and then they buy our stuff, making jobs here. I have lived in the Rust Best, my entire life. It does not feel like they are hurting themselves.
2. You said the sellers were happy. I pointed out one major example of that not being true. You changing the subject to workers wages does not change that. Not all the sellers are happy.
3. Japan did very well for itself for a very long time. That the good times, did not last for ever, does not change the massive increase in national wealth that occurred during that time. Even today, their per capita wealth is climbing (last I heard)
1. We have plenty of jobs here. Unemployment is really low.
2. So then you don't care about wages? We wouldn't be buying so much from China if most buyers weren't happy. Nobody is forced to buy from them.
3. Very long time? I would argue it was quite a short time relative to the US. They did well briefly, while we continue to do well.
1. You brought up Milton. I made a point about what he claimed would happen, and is not happening. Would you like to address it, or do you want to concede the point, that "Free Trade" and giving them our little pieces of paper did not work out as Milton said it would?
2. This is a complex issue. YOu brought up a point, and I addressed the point. You are trying to change the subject to avoid defending your point. Because you know that your point, ie that the "no one is forceing the buyers and sellers, who are happy" is false.
3. They went from being bombed out ruins after WWII, to a first world country, in a single generation. That is blindingly fast on the scale of nations rising and falling. They are still a first world nation, and still benefiting from good trade policy, 50 years after that. That is a long time for economic good times on the scale of individual citizens lives.
Their growth was fueled by strong trade surpluses, and is still maintained by strong surpluses. They have other problems. Your bringing them up, would be relevant, if I was claiming that trade balance was the only important aspect of economics. Which I am not, so, unless you can show some connection between their problems and their trade balance, stop wasting time.
