Trump is emphatically not correct. See for example Wiki's fine article, and many many others available on the net, on "Balance of Trade." A few excerpts: from Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations: In the foregoing part of this chapter I have endeavoured to show, even upon the principles of the commercial system, how unnecessary it is to lay extraordinary restraints upon the importation of goods from those countries with which the balance of trade is supposed to be disadvantageous. Nothing, however, can be more absurd than this whole doctrine of the balance of trade, upon which, not only these restraints, but almost all the other regulations of commerce are founded. from Wiki: The notion that bilateral trade deficits are bad in and of themselves is overwhelmingly rejected by trade experts and economists. from Foreign Policy, 3 (2017): Gramer, Robbie. "Economists Take Aim at Trump Trade Theory -- Again." "Navarro’s comments drew skepticism from trade experts and economists across the political spectrum, who said that line of thinking on economics was flawed. Economists say trade deficits aren’t an indication of good or bad economic times, but rather a function of savings and investments. (The United States enjoyed a stellar trade surplus during the Great Depression in the 1930s, for example.) “He won’t find economists — either on the left or the right — that believe trade deficits are this huge a problem,” Chip Roh, a former assistant U.S. trade representative and trade lawyer, told Foreign Policy. “It doesn’t make economic sense.” “When economists hear, ‘Our goal is reduce the trade deficit,’ it baffles us,” Gordon Hanson, a trade economist at the University of California, San Diego, told FP. “He’s either using it as a cheap political ploy or there’s a misconception — he doesn’t understand how it operates.”
Another aspect of the tRump tariffs causing havoc in international commerce is indirectly causing the dollar to strengthen and the Yuan, among many other major trading partners currencies to weaken, making those other countries goods and services cheaper and ours - you betcha - more expensive. ECO 101 over and over with this clown. Guess his mysterious MBA from Wharton didn't cover that. His kindergarten records are even sealed with threats of many, many .... many, many lawsuits if ever revealed. LOL edit: should be directly first line, not indirectly.
It was a September class, and he was out being certified as Cadet BoneSpurs that day. ["You think I'm stupid, I'm not going to Vietnam," Trump said. "I like people who weren't captured." ]
Naaa, you misread me. I wasn't protecting anyone here. Its just that it seems we now live in a culture where everybody has their "feelings" sheathed in eggshells. Make one wrong remark and you're labeled a racist, a homophobe, a misogynist... the list goes on and on and I get sick of hearing it day in and day out from anyone with an audience. Its too easy now for people to claim they're a victim or they are oppressed. So that said... I guess I just have a soft spot for those in this world that are truly defenseless. And truly beautiful to those that understand what true beauty really is. They need a voice too. That's all. Sorry if I was tad harsh.
Well, if the sneakers will last a few years when make in the US instead of a few months, then it is a good trade off. Cheap goods lead to us buying more than we need and discard them without thinking.
Oh no, I lost the evil mouse? That is sad. He should know better about the ignore function. I guess mental stops are not enough for some people, they need the hard stop of the ignore/block function. Online message boards used to be a fun thing, where there is no harm no foul against faceless entities. But these days, everyone takes it so serious. Oi! Or, maybe he has me on block because he is afraid he will want to lash out at me, and "appear" to be the assclown that I have been in this thread. My deepest apologies to you, @LacesOut. We disagree on the IP thing. I guess I went too far in our argument. But this is what happens sometimes on a message board.
Trump’s ‘economic illiteracy’ caused the US-China trade war, says professor https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/23/tru...-caused-us-china-trade-war-columbia-prof.html
Trump’s trade illiteracy comes back to haunt him By Jennifer Rubin Opinion writer March 6 President Trump doesn’t understand that the trade deficit is not an accounts payable that the United States must settle by writing a big check. He insists money is being “taken out” of the United States. That’s just wrong. It’s also wrong to assert that a big trade deficit means high unemployment or a rotten economy. In fact, Trump has proved as much. The Post reports: The Commerce Department said Wednesday that — despite more than two years of President Trump’s “America First” policies — the United States last year posted a $891.2 billion merchandise trade deficit, the largest in the nation’s 243-year history. The trade gap with China also hit a record $419 billion, underscoring the stakes for the president’s bid to reach a deal with Chinese President Xi Jinping as soon as this month. . . .The shortfall topped the 2006 record of $838.3 billion, set as the housing bubble was peaking, and marked the third consecutive year of rising deficits. Maybe Trump will go back to German Chancellor Angela Merkel for one more tutoring session on trade. When we purchase more German or Chinese or whoever’s goods than they purchase of ours, they have a whole lot of U.S. dollars — which they use to invest in our economy, create jobs and generate more wealth. No matter how many times Merkel points to German plants in the U.S. producing cars and employing Americans, Trump doesn’t get it. For all of the tariff wars and fights with allies, Trump didn’t even accomplish his goal. But he did inflict pain on farmers (who now require billions in taxpayer subsidies) and increase costs for American consumers, including U.S.-based businesses that rely on foreign suppliers. In sum, his entire trade policy has failed and has in fact been counterproductive. He set out to fix a non-problem (a trade deficit) and created real ones including international conflict, higher consumer prices and gross inefficiency in our economy when certain businesses have lobbying clout to get tariff exemptions and others do not. In essence, Trump has imposed a giant tax on Americans: “When we impose a tariff, it is the domestic consumers and purchasers of imports that bear the full cost of the tariffs,” said David Weinstein, an economics professor at Columbia University, who co-wrote one of the papers. . . . Weinstein’s study, co-written with Mary Amiti of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Princeton University’s Stephen J. Redding, reviewed what actually occurred last year after U.S. tariffs took effect. It concluded that Americans paid the entire tariff bill. A second study — by four economists from the University of California at Los Angeles, Yale University, the University of California at Berkeley and Columbia University — reached the same conclusion. What’s more, it’s Trump voters who have absorbed the brunt of the pain. That second study referenced above also showed that “workers in Republican-leaning counties, especially in farm states, suffered the greatest losses from tariffs that U.S. trading partners imposed in retaliation for the president’s actions.” Republicans in Congress have been too timorous to claw back tariff power to stop this economic idiocy. And too many Democrats have been on the protectionist bandwagon to credibly criticize Trump. Here’s an idea: Republican presidential primary challengers and Democratic contenders should go after Trump for hurting Americans. What’s he got against hard-working farmers, middle-class consumers struggling to buy a washer and dryer, and American car companies who have to pay extra for steel and aluminum, which, in turn, gets passed on to consumers? Trump may think he’s winning, but he’s apparently too dim to realize Americans are losing. Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D) knows this. His state is the fifth-hardest hit by Trump’s tariffs. Former San Antonio mayor Julián Castro, whose state is the sixth-most reliant on trade, also knows the risk of trade wars. Washington ranks eighth in that department, and Sen. Cory Booker’s state of New Jersey is ninth. They and other Democrats should stop mimicking Trump’s economic silliness, pledge to end trade wars, vow to open up markets, and then outline a generous and comprehensive package to address workers and regions adversely impacted by trade. They should also promise to go after a serious problem — China’s theft of our intellectual property — via the World Trade Organization. Oddly, Trump, ever the sucker for a dictator, hasn’t done anything on that front, perhaps because his “friend” President Xi Jinping rolled out the red carpet and complimented Trump. Democrats, if they play this smart, have a chance to make the case that Trump is too ignorant and gullible to protect the well-being of U.S. consumers, workers and producers.