Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage [Archive] - Debate Policy

Supposn

02-01-2013, 09:15 PM

I'm a proponent of an economic stimulus proposal lacking any net government expense. I'm among those favoring Warren Buffett's concept underlying the proposed S-3899 Dorgan/Feingold Balanced Trade Restoration Act that was proposed to the 109th session of the U.S. Senate. The bill would significantly reduce USA's trade deficit of goods and induces increasing USA exports.

Trade deficit's detriment to the gross domestic product, (GDP) exceeds the amount of the deficit itself. Anything detrimental to the GDP is generally detrimental to the median wage.

As proposed to the U.S. Senate, goods leaving the USA would be assessed and transferable IMPORT certificates for their assessed value would be issued to the exporter.

Importers would be required to surrender transferable IMPORT certificates for the assessed value of their goods entering the USA. Surrendered certificates are cancelled. This would significantly reduce our trade deficit and induce the sum of our imports plus exports to increase.

I concur with those who fault the 2006 draft as proposed. We advocate assessment of goods from the USA and issuance of the valuable transferable IMPORT certificate be done only for exporters choosing to pay fees (to cover all federal assessment and administrative expenses). Exporters of USA goods will be sufficiently motivated by the opportunities for additional profits.

We also believe that 2006 draft should have excluded the value of specifically listed scarce or precious minerals integral to goods being assessed. We desire discouraging export of gem studded cast gold paper weights in order to import hi-tech manufactured goods. We also want to bypass the political issues of crude oil and natural gas. With regard to precious gems, ores, and metals, this is a "deal buster". The lack of their exclusion would undermine (if not completely evade) the proposal's purpose.

GDP and median wage are the most indicative measures of current production and distribution of wealth. Due to significantly reducing our trade deficit of goods and supporting our exports, this proposal would increase USA's GDP and median wage. USA's global trade will thrive, but in both directions. We can continue enjoying cheap, (but not the absolute cheapest) foreign goods.

This is a permanent economic stimulus that doesn’t require federal disbursement or risk of trillions of dollars. There is no net expense to our government. I'm aware of no single economic proposal that could accomplish all this with less government intervention or less increased prices of imported goods.

Respectfully, Supposn

Refer to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_Certificates

fj1200

02-02-2013, 06:42 AM

fj1200

02-02-2013, 06:45 AM

IBthecrickets

Supposn

02-03-2013, 10:23 AM

Not it wouldn't. It's protectionism in another form; Protectionism which didn't work out so well in 1929. Besides, GDP is improved if we take advantage of lower wages overseas while focusing on higher wage jobs at home.

If you want permanent economic stimulus with no federal disbursement, eliminate the corporate income tax (including incumbent corporate welfare) and slash the capital gains tax (or at least index to inflation); I would even take an increase in the income tax rates to get it.

I just gave you a proposal with even less government intervention and no increased price of imported goods; what say you?

FJ1200, due to a trade deficit a nation’s GDP is always less than otherwise; (otherwise being the reduction of the nation’s trade deficit). 

A trade deficit’s always immediately detrimental to the nation’s GDP; but if the imports are net contributors to the nation’s production, (i.e. imported tools, production machinery, raw materials for the support of production), the nation could benefit from eventual increased future production. Unfortunately In the USA that’s not the general case.

There are those that confuse causes and effects. Both our imported and domestic produced goods are sold within our domestic market places. USA’s annual trade deficits and GDPs share timing of their growth and reductions.
This leads to foolishly concluding that nations’ trade deficits are advantageous to their GDPs.
Using that same logic they could conclude that icy roads cause lower outdoor temperatures.

I’m opposed to special strokes for special folks. All income sources should be treated similarly; their top rates should be similar. Otherwise entrepreneurs and enterprise executives will to greater extent declare less personal incomes and live comfortably upon expense accounts derived from their enterprises.

Trade deficits are (more than otherwise) detrimental to their nations GDPs. You believe increasing our annual trade deficits would improve our GDP and median wage?

In response to your last question, (“I just gave you a proposal with even less government intervention and no increased price of imported goods; what say?”), I say you’ve provided a short description of Tea Party proposals for further undermining USA’s economy.

Respectfully, Supposn

fj1200

02-03-2013, 02:43 PM

FJ1200, due to a trade deficit a nation’s GDP is always less than otherwise; (otherwise being the reduction of the nation’s trade deficit).

Oh really?

In those years since 1980 in which the current account deficit actually shrank as a share of GDP, real GDP growth averaged 1.9 percent.
In those years in which the deficit grew modestly, between 0.0 and 0.5 percent, GDP growth averaged 3.0 percent.
And in those years in which the current account deficit expanded by more than 0.5 percent of GDP, real GDP growth grew by an average of 4.1 percent.

In other words, economic growth has been more than twice as fast, on average, in years in which the current account deficit grew sharply compared to those years in which it actually declined. If trade deficits drag down growth, somebody forgot to tell the economy.
http://www.cato.org/publications/free-trade-bulletin/are-trade-deficits-drag-us-economic-growth

A trade deficit’s always immediately detrimental to the nation’s GDP; but if the imports are net contributors to the nation’s production, (i.e. imported tools, production machinery, raw materials for the support of production), the nation could benefit from eventual increased future production. Unfortunately In the USA that’s not the general case.

If I can buy something cheaper overseas than it costs to make domestically it is better economically. See Comparative Advantage.

There are those that confuse causes and effects. Both our imported and domestic produced goods are sold within our domestic market places. USA’s annual trade deficits and GDPs share timing of their growth and reductions.
This leads to foolishly concluding that nations’ trade deficits are advantageous to their GDPs.
Using that same logic they could conclude that icy roads cause lower outdoor temperatures.

Which would describe you unfortunately. You assume that foreign goods are identical to domestic goods.

I’m opposed to special strokes for special folks. All income sources should be treated similarly; their top rates should be similar. Otherwise entrepreneurs and enterprise executives will to greater extent declare less personal incomes and live comfortably upon expense accounts derived from their enterprises.

Where did I favor treating people differently. I made no mention of sources of income. You confuse corporate income with personal income. Corporations are not tax payers, they are tax collectors in the sense that they only force higher prices, lower wages, or lower returns that would otherwise benefit consumers, labor, or investors. And you apparently have no faith in the IRS in determining proper business expenses.

Trade deficits are (more than otherwise) detrimental to their nations GDPs. You believe increasing our annual trade deficits would improve our GDP and median wage?

In response to your last question, (“I just gave you a proposal with even less government intervention and no increased price of imported goods; what say?”), I say you’ve provided a short description of Tea Party proposals for further undermining USA’s economy.

Respectfully, Supposn

You'll have to point out how I advocated increasing our trade deficits, my plan would lower them by making domestic manufacturing more competitive against foreign.

Link to the Tea Party proposals? I've not seen them but your idea is just more of the idea that the fix will come from some new bits of legislation and regulation out of DC; They have been abysmal failures at it so far and give me no confidence in their abilities.

Supposn

02-16-2013, 10:26 PM

FJ1200, I’m not opposed to global trade; I’m, opposed to the extent of USA’s trade deficit.
USA’s wage earning families benefit from cheaper imported goods but our trade deficit is net detrimental to their finances and our economy. 

Due to trade deficits their nations’ GDPs are less and due to trade surpluses their GDPs are more than otherwise.
It is conceivable that annual trade deficits’ immediate detriment to their nations’ GDPs could be remedied in the future if that deficit was due to production supporting goods; but that’s not the case with regard to USA’s trade deficit. 

You’re confusing cause and effect. Both domestic and imported goods are sold within our domestic markets. When our economy is robust, our sales volumes increase and when our economy slows down our sales volumes decrease. But domestic and imported goods are not hitched up in tandem and they do not tied to remain abreast with each other.

Within an Import Certificate trade policy we can continue to enjoy cheap but not the absolutely possible cheapest imported goods. We cannot afford the absolutely cheapest goods.

Refer to:
http//www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?39311-Trade-deficits-are-ALWAYS-detrimental-to-their-nation’s-GDPs&p=617943#post617943c
or http://wh.gov/dBww (http://wh.gov/dBww)
or google: wikipedia import certificate

Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn

02-16-2013, 10:41 PM

Comparative advantage:

FJ1200, with respect to commercial enterprises, if it’s to their advantage to outsource it’s hoped that they can apply their existing labor force to more profitable tasks. If they must lay off labor there’s some additional increase of their unemployment insurance rates but they will and should lay off employees if it’s to the best interests of the enterprises.

A problem arises because with regard to importing products and laying off labor the better interests of our individual commercial enterprises and our society significantly diverge. The loss of U.S. industries and the resulting under-employment is detrimental to our gross domestic product and to some extent reduces our median wage. [Unemployment is the most severe condition of under-employment].

I spent many too long hours repairing or trying to repair my cars and my homes. The money, aggravation and time spent on too many of those projects were unjustified by their cost-savings; but if I didn’t go through that learning process, I wouldn’t have benefit from similar later projects.

Doing it myself was a teaching opportunity for my children. Even when my children didn’t want to help, they at least saw their father work, sweat and take pride when he accomplished something. One of my sons still resents 2 weekends installing wall switch operated ceiling fans where there had been no ceiling fixtures at all. I think it was less than a month later he installed ceiling fans for his girl friend’s best friend.

Excerpted from message #5, “Manufacturing’s Economic Significance” within the site of
http://www.usa-imports.blogspot.com (http://www.usa-imports.blogspot.com/) .

I believe there’s a symbiotic relationship between manufacturing and technological knowledge. USA’s deindustrialization has begun to cost us our technological edge. Our colleges and universities are not producing the creators of the globe’s technical future. Due to USA's deindustrialization, we invest less and others are spending more for research and development. Those who sow less, harvest less. As we manipulate materials, and create products, we learn more of the materials, tools and the products. If we do not manufacture today, will we be able to resume manufacturing in the future?

Respectfully, Supposn

Robert A Whit

02-16-2013, 11:28 PM

fj1200

02-17-2013, 12:53 AM

You’re confusing cause and effect.

No, not really.

I believe there’s a symbiotic relationship between manufacturing and technological knowledge. USA’s deindustrialization has begun to cost us our technological edge. Our colleges and universities are not producing the creators of the globe’s technical future. Due to USA's deindustrialization...

Our own policies lead to our "deindustrialization" and lower our labor competitiveness on the global stage. I've mentioned them before and you prattled something about the Tea Party. I countered your statement about GDP being harmed with data that shows growth being higher where the Current Account Deficit grows yet you remain silent on that point.

I spent many too long hours repairing or trying to repair my cars and my homes. The money, aggravation and time spent on too many of those projects were unjustified by their cost-savings; but if I didn’t go through that learning process, I wouldn’t have benefit from similar later projects.

BTW, you've proven my point. Division of labor and comparative advantage. Both you and your mechanic gain by engaging in your own individual expertise. The 'deficit' that you spent on having your car fixed allowed you to take advantage of a restful Saturday NOT working on your car.

Nevertheless, you ignore what's not convenient to your argument and repeat disputed statements. I'll see if I remember to come back to this thread but my guess is it would not be to either of our comparative advantages. ;)

fj1200

02-17-2013, 12:59 AM

I am trying hard to follow both points of view. Usually I have no problems. But math is my best friend and so far, all I have spotted is crafty words but little if any actual proof.

So how about it you two, can you supply us with some clear proof?

Did you miss my cato link? How about this validation of my inferrance about corporate taxes.

Corporations are nothing more than legal entities, so corporate tax levies are in reality paid by those who buy from a corporation, work for one, or own stock in one. The burden of corporate taxes falls on individuals, and what is worse, the burden is invisible.
Policy Facts
Fact 1: Domestic labor bears more than 70 percent of theburden of the corporate income tax.
http://heartland.org/policy-documents/policy-tip-sheet-corporate-income-taxes

Supposn

04-01-2013, 12:39 PM

... Our own policies lead to our "deindustrialization" and lower our labor competitiveness on the global stage. I've mentioned them before and you prattled something about the Tea Party. I countered your statement about GDP being harmed with data that shows growth being higher where the Current Account Deficit grows yet you remain silent on that point....

FJ1200, that’s precisely what I meant when I wrote you confuse cause and effect.

USA’s domestic markets trade in both domestic and foreign goods. In better times there are more sales transactions; in poorer times there are less sales transactions; and there is no logically proportional relationship between the sales volumes of domestic and imported goods within USA’s domestic markets.

Sales volumes of both domestic and imported goods decrease during poor business cycles. Trade deficits are ALWAYS immediate detriments to their nation’s GDPs and median wages. (Due to trade deficits they are less than OTHERWISE).

Respectfully, Supposn

fj1200

04-01-2013, 12:57 PM

FJ1200, that’s precisely what I meant when I wrote you confuse cause and effect.

USA’s domestic markets trade in both domestic and foreign goods. In better times there are more sales transactions; in poorer times there are less sales transactions; and there is no logically proportional relationship between the sales volumes of domestic and imported goods within USA’s domestic markets.

Sales volumes of both domestic and imported goods decrease during poor business cycles. Trade deficits are ALWAYS immediate detriments to their nation’s GDPs and median wages. (Due to trade deficits they are less than OTHERWISE).

Respectfully, Supposn

Your statements are meaningless as they have no support that you've presented.

Supposn

04-01-2013, 01:23 PM

FJ1200, I spent many too long hours repairing or trying to repair my cars and my homes. The money, aggravation and time spent on too many of those projects were unjustified by their cost-savings; but if I didn’t go through that learning process, I wouldn’t have benefit from similar later projects.

...BTW, you've proven my point. Division of labor and comparative advantage. Both you and your mechanic gain by engaging in your own individual expertise. The 'deficit' that you spent on having your car fixed allowed you to take advantage of a restful Saturday NOT working on your car.

You missed the point. What I learned and passed on to my children was a net bernerfit to our fsmily. Aside from the work we do ourselves, there's a benefit in knowing what has to be done and how it should be done.

Even if I haven't a specialized tool or my children are not acually doing the work, we have a handle on what's to be done and the nuances between vairios prices quoted to us. There's a cost for ignorance.

Germany is at some advantage to the USA because they value crasftsmanship and strongly support their technical schools. You're opposed to education and training because it doesn't immediatly pay off?

Respectfully, Supposn

fj1200

04-01-2013, 01:31 PM

FJ1200, I spent many too long hours repairing or trying to repair my cars and my homes. The money, aggravation and time spent on too many of those projects were unjustified by their cost-savings; but if I didn’t go through that learning process, I wouldn’t have benefit from similar later projects.

You missed the point. What I learned and passed on to my children was a net bernerfit to our fsmily. Aside from the work we do ourselves, there's a benefit in knowing what has to be done and how it should be done.

Even if I haven't a specialized tool or my children are not acually doing the work, we have a handle on what's to be done and the nuances between vairios prices quoted to us. There's a cost for ignorance.

No, it's exactly the point. You feel that your family is better for learning and accomplishing something and not having had to pay someone to do it for you; fine, no argument, nevertheless it was a poor economic decision. Our trade policy shouldn't hinge on intangible factors especially when decided upon by a government program of questionable outcome. Free trade is the better plan because it allows specialization that enhances all parties.

Germany is at some advantage to the USA because they value crasftsmanship and strongly support their technical schools. You're opposed to education and training because it doesn't immediatly pay off?

Respectfully, Supposn

Germany is at an advantage because it has a superior trade policy to our own. And why would you attempt to pin a position on me that a) is not at the heart of the question, and b) incorrect?

Robert A Whit

04-01-2013, 02:48 PM

FJ1200, that’s precisely what I meant when I wrote you confuse cause and effect.

USA’s domestic markets trade in both domestic and foreign goods. In better times there are more sales transactions; in poorer times there are less sales transactions; and there is no logically proportional relationship between the sales volumes of domestic and imported goods within USA’s domestic markets.

Sales volumes of both domestic and imported goods decrease during poor business cycles. Trade deficits are ALWAYS immediate detriments to their nation’s GDPs and median wages. (Due to trade deficits they are less than OTHERWISE).

Respectfully, Supposn

What you miss is that this nation is harmed by import taxes other countries charge. You need to address their penchant for taxing our exporters.

Your document amounts to creating money such as is done using checks.

DragonStryk72

04-01-2013, 03:18 PM

This whole argument seems like its just rhetoric based on supposn's side, with no real foundations, and so much political doublespeak that the core points get lost.

Robert A Whit

04-01-2013, 04:58 PM

This whole argument seems like its just rhetoric based on supposn's side, with no real foundations, and so much political doublespeak that the core points get lost.

Yup, yup, yup.

Supposn

04-01-2013, 07:09 PM

No, it's exactly the point. You feel that your family is better for learning and accomplishing something and not having had to pay someone to do it for you; fine, no argument, nevertheless it was a poor economic decision. ...

FJ1200, my time is now less costly than it had been but even in my younger years, doing it for myself became financially justified.
It was a good investment of my time and efforts.

Due to what I and my children have learned, our jobs run smoother and quicker. We receive superior service when we bring a car to our repair shop because we know what may be a less advisable repair or the less preferable method. Many things we don’t want to do ourselves if a car’s under warranty. Similarly we don’t want to “shop” for auto services because if something goes wrong we don’t want service providers pointing to each other.

Unlike our medical care, we are not completely dependent upon blind faith. We have some knowledge of the procedures to be performed. We have for many years well recouped the value of time spent and continue to spend learning about our vehicles. Knowledge and experience has real value.

You don’t simply suggest but rather foolishly presume to know with certainly that our individual family has made “poor economic choices”.
(I believe political jurisdictions have economies. Individual families, enterprises and persons have financial conditions). I think in the cases of caring for our homes and vehicles, are family has generally made the correct financial decisions. 

Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn

04-01-2013, 08:13 PM

...Free trade is the better plan because it allows specialization that enhances all parties...

Fj1200, the Import Certificate proposal is not pure free trade but it is pure free enterprise.

If entrepreneurs seek to maximize their profits, why would you expect that within an IC policy the USA would import goods more inferior or less superior to USA’s goods?
The IC policy prevents USA the assessed value of our imported goods from exceeding our exports.

It behaves as an indirect but effective subsidy of our exports and “caps” the loss of jobs to lower wage nations to the extent of our volume of exports. All direct net federal expenses of this policy are entirely paid for by USA purchasers of foreign goods.

Assessment of USA good’s approximate dollar values is a technical rather than a policy determination. All critical decisions regarding individual transactions are determined by entrepreneurs.

Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn

04-01-2013, 08:31 PM

FJ1200 please explain this:

...Germany is at an advantage because it has a superior trade policy to our own. And why would you attempt to pin a position on me that a) is not at the heart of the question, and b) incorrect?

Respectfully, Supposn

fj1200

04-01-2013, 08:38 PM

You don’t simply suggest but rather foolishly presume to know with certainly that our individual family has made “poor economic choices”.

I don't presume to know, I do know. How? You told me.

I spent many too long hours repairing or trying to repair my cars and my homes. The money, aggravation and time spent on too many of those projects were unjustified by their cost-savings; but if I didn’t go through that learning process, I wouldn’t have benefit from similar later projects.

Nevertheless, you're analogy is a poor one. There is vast work in behavioral economics that suggests that consumers make poor choices in how they handle their finances and decision making.

Fj1200, the Import Certificate proposal is not pure free trade but it is pure free enterprise.

If entrepreneurs seek to maximize their profits, why would you expect that within an IC policy the USA would import goods more inferior or less superior to USA’s goods?
The IC policy prevents USA the assessed value of our imported goods from exceeding our exports.

It behaves as an indirect but effective subsidy of our exports and “caps” the loss of jobs to lower wage nations to the extent of our volume of exports. All direct net federal expenses of this policy are entirely paid for by USA purchasers of foreign goods.

Assessment of USA good’s approximate dollar values is a technical rather than a policy determination. All critical decisions regarding individual transactions are determined by entrepreneurs.

Your error is in assuming that just because that it is free enterprise just because you say so. Free enterprise needs to work in the governmental environment in which it exists, creating a new trade regime doesn't mean that things will still work in the best manner, those things will merely adjust to the new environment. Profit would presumably be maximized within the regime but not be maximized overall.

All of that still ignores the essential problem in what you propose; That your premise is flawed and you still have contributed nothing more than "foundationless rhetoric." ;)

fj1200

04-01-2013, 08:41 PM

FJ1200 please explain this:

Respectfully, Supposn

Explain why Germany has a better trade position in that it doesn't tax corporations offshore earnings in the manner that we do (and we are alone in our tax policy among the OECD iirc)? That it has a lower statutory corporate rate than we do? That it rebates VAT taxes on exports? Or why you ask questions of my position that I have not expressed before?

Supposn

04-01-2013, 09:03 PM

What you miss is that this nation is harmed by import taxes other countries charge. You need to address their penchant for taxing our exporters. ...

Robert A, Whit, many nations have a sales tax. The most superior sales tax method is the value added tax, (VAT). I t would be easy to enact such a tax in the USA by granting a per capita tax credit within our individual income tax forms that would be annually updated to stay abreast with the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar. The per capita is for each taxpayer And each of their dependents.

Currently importers of foreign goods pay no sales tax to the federal government. Importers of USA and other nations’ goods pay the VAT for goods entering VAT nations. 

Refer to: http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?29055-Fair-tax (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?29055-Fair-tax)

Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn

04-01-2013, 09:19 PM

...Your document amounts to creating money such as is done using checks.

Robert A, Whit, an Import Certificate policy behaves as an indirect but effective subsidy of our exports and “caps” the loss of jobs to lower wage nations to the extent of our volume of exports. All direct net federal expenses of this policy are entirely paid for by USA purchasers of foreign goods.

Checks or tariffs cannot do all of this.

Respectfully, Supposn

fj1200

04-01-2013, 09:27 PM

Robert A, Whit, many nations have a sales tax. The most superior sales tax method is the value added tax, (VAT). I t would be easy to enact such a tax in the USA by granting a per capita tax credit within our individual income tax forms that would be annually updated to stay abreast with the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar. The per capita is for each taxpayer And each of their dependents.

:laugh: Surely you jest! You do know there is a difference between the FairTax and a VAT don't you?

Supposn

04-02-2013, 12:26 AM

...Free enterprise needs to work in the governmental environment in which it exists, creating a new trade regime doesn't mean that things will still work in the best manner, those things will merely adjust to the new environment. Profit would presumably be maximized within the regime but not be maximized overall. ...

FJ1200, under our present trade policy USA’s economy has not generally and is not now working the best manner.

I’m a populist and I do not gauge the economy by stock market prices or corporate profit; I gauge it by the GDP per capita and median wage. The GDP indicates nations’ production and the median wage indicates to what extent that wealth is dispersed throughout the population.

The median wage indicates the condition of a nations’ middle income earners. When a nations’ median wage is higher, corporate profits and the stock market also do better. When the median wage is lower, (regardless of higher corporate stock prices and profits), if the median wage is not similarly doing well, the better economy is not sustainable.

I’m among those that advocate the Import Certificate policy so USA’s economy can function in a significantly improved manner. 

Respectfully, Supposn

logroller

04-02-2013, 12:41 AM

Supposn

04-02-2013, 01:14 AM

:laugh: Surely you jest! You do know there is a difference between the FairTax and a VAT don't you?

FJ1200, surely you jest?

You must be aware proponents of the “fair tax” contend that a general sales tax is among the most equitable methods for government’s source of revenue if adequate concessions are made for the lowest income earners.
Value added tax, (i.e. VAT) is a superior method administering a sales tax.

Refer to:
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?40028-“Value-Added-Tax”-(i-e-VAT)-a-superior-method-of-sales-tax&p=628465#post628465

Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn

04-02-2013, 01:39 AM

Explain why Germany has a better trade position in that it doesn't tax corporations offshore earnings in the manner that we do (and we are alone in our tax policy among the OECD iirc)? That it has a lower statutory corporate rate than we do? That it rebates VAT taxes on exports? Or why you ask questions of my position that I have not expressed before?

FJ1200, I’m not very familiar with Germany’s tax policies. Suppose you provide us with a link to an authoritative source for explanation.

Also please explain your comment, “why you ask questions of my position that I have not expressed before?”.

Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn

04-02-2013, 02:40 AM

I don't presume to know, I do know. How? You told me.

Nevertheless, you're analogy is a poor one. There is vast work in behavioral economics that suggests that consumers make poor choices in how they handle their finances and decision making...

FJ1200, you inadvertently ignored the last words of the clause you quoted, “wouldn’t have benefit(ed) from similar later projects”.
Thus all of your presumptions and/or comprehensions are incorrect.

There is no analogy or application of behavioral economics. I was discussing a specific person and his family; me and mine. Statistics, logical analysis and conjectures are all that’s available if you lack more certain knowledge.

Are you so foolish as to presume to know more than I regarding myself and my family?

Respectfully, Supposn

fj1200

04-02-2013, 07:51 AM

FJ1200, under our present trade policy USA’s economy has not generally and is not now working the best manner.

I’m a populist and I do not gauge the economy by stock market prices or corporate profit; I gauge it by the GDP per capita and median wage. The GDP indicates nations’ production and the median wage indicates to what extent that wealth is dispersed throughout the population.

The median wage indicates the condition of a nations’ middle income earners. When a nations’ median wage is higher, corporate profits and the stock market also do better. When the median wage is lower, (regardless of higher corporate stock prices and profits), if the median wage is not similarly doing well, the better economy is not sustainable.

I’m among those that advocate the Import Certificate policy so USA’s economy can function in a significantly improved manner.

More repetition of your unproven posit? At what point do you think people will just succumb to your rote arguments? Also, I'm unsure why anyone in the world would want to self-identify as a populist; Populists IMO are those with little understanding of the issues at hand and glom onto a solution merely because it is popular, or will appeal to the populous, and not because it is correct (your definition is likely different ;) ). You are also incorrect as to what the median wage and per capita GDP can indicate.

Nevertheless I would state that you are wrong about our trade policy; our trade policy and it's hopefully continued march toward FTAs with other countries and trade areas is as good as can be expected. Where our economy falls short is in its failure to adopt policies that make our domestic industries competitive on a global scale (see our corporate tax comparisons with other countries as example).

FJ1200, surely you jest?

You must be aware proponents of the “fair tax” contend that a general sales tax is among the most equitable methods for government’s source of revenue if adequate concessions are made for the lowest income earners.
Value added tax, (i.e. VAT) is a superior method administering a sales tax.

Refer to:

I am fully aware of the FairTax and am a support of it. A VAT is a bastard step child.

FJ1200, I’m not very familiar with Germany’s tax policies. Suppose you provide us with a link to an authoritative source for explanation.

Also please explain your comment, “why you ask questions of my position that I have not expressed before?”.

Google it.

FJ1200, you inadvertently ignored the last words of the clause you quoted, “wouldn’t have benefit(ed) from similar later projects”.
Thus all of your presumptions and/or comprehensions are incorrect.

There is no analogy or application of behavioral economics. I was discussing a specific person and his family; me and mine. Statistics, logical analysis and conjectures are all that’s available if you lack more certain knowledge.

Are you so foolish as to presume to know more than I regarding myself and my family?

Respectfully, Supposn

I didn't ignore anything which is why I included it in my quote. As I said I only went by what you told us yourself. Are you suggesting that you and yours are completely immune to the realities of behavior economics? That would be quite the statement. However I have no issue with how you work your home life and if you wish to tackle home projects for self-edification purposes, I do the same myself, I only take issue with your insistence that you use that experience as basis upon which to make national trade policy.

logroller

04-02-2013, 12:48 PM

Could you provide a time period that you view as testament to your claims?
Suppos'not.

logroller

04-02-2013, 12:57 PM

FYI: much of Germany's trade advantages stem from a supranational currency. They had extensive issues with corps dodging taxes too. In Lichtenstein iirc.

Robert A Whit

04-02-2013, 03:00 PM

FJ1200, I’m not opposed to global trade; I’m, opposed to the extent of USA’s trade deficit.
USA’s wage earning families benefit from cheaper imported goods but our trade deficit is net detrimental to their finances and our economy.

Due to trade deficits their nations’ GDPs are less and due to trade surpluses their GDPs are more than otherwise.
It is conceivable that annual trade deficits’ immediate detriment to their nations’ GDPs could be remedied in the future if that deficit was due to production supporting goods; but that’s not the case with regard to USA’s trade deficit.

You’re confusing cause and effect. Both domestic and imported goods are sold within our domestic markets. When our economy is robust, our sales volumes increase and when our economy slows down our sales volumes decrease. But domestic and imported goods are not hitched up in tandem and they do not tied to remain abreast with each other.

Within an Import Certificate trade policy we can continue to enjoy cheap but not the absolutely possible cheapest imported goods. We cannot afford the absolutely cheapest goods.

Refer to:
http//www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?39311-Trade-deficits-are-ALWAYS-detrimental-to-their-nation’s-GDPs&p=617943#post617943c
or http://wh.gov/dBww
or google: wikipedia import certificate

Respectfully, Supposn

Those of us involved in this topic understand what trade surplus means and what trade deficit means.
The real question is why either exists.

I am saying that when American prefer to purchase products and services from abroad, why would that be?

Creating a piece of paper does not solve the actual problem. I find no Google reference to trade certificates.
Nor is this term mentioned in my economics book. Surely some economist wrote on this?

Why would American prefer other nations products and goods?

Well, if it is supply and demand, and it is, then other nations supply Americans with products with more value.

The key to solving this problem is to reverse this path we have long been on. But in this country, unions and others persist on the idea workers must earn more, not because of merit (work harder or produce more or top quality) but out of this misguided notion of empathy.

A quick story. I once owned a machine shop. My goal was to pay workers a wage based on merit and not fool around and force them to ask for more money.

Greg came to me hardly 20 years of age. I offered him pay of a medium grade machinist, only because I had him do some work and he was performing well. It was a few days into this that it hit me hard. I was not paying the man enough. He was by this point far outperforming to my expectations. I instantly told him he was to be paid top journeyman wages and his full pay was retroactive. He loved this.

Later, as the business grew and I hired more workers, I kept job records on each of them. I noticed patterns. With more workers, I had more yardsticks to use.

Jim came to me one day telling me he needed more pay. I sympathized with him so even though I kept on top of each workers performance, I pulled up records. I showed Jim that to do any of the jobs, Greg was so much better that it paid me to not let Jim do the more skilled jobs and hand those to Greg. I paid Greg more but earned more than off Jim. I told Jim the right way for him to get more pay is to be a better worker. I of course did not insult him or try to make him feel bad.

I simply offered him more pay if he got better and better.

Anyway what this story is about is that if this country wants more from our people, they must improve. When the public can purchase something made by other countries, it is just and because it is just, we have to step it up. We can't blame other countries for better products at cheaper prices when the solution is to look into the mirror and tell that person to do better.

To float what amounts to "currency" as you do, could perhaps put a bandage on this but even if it worked, and I doubt it can work, it would only be temporary at best.

How can our guys get better? Just as walking is not the be3st way to take a long vacation, and the auto is better, the solution lies in technology.

But one other problem we face is when other nations tax our products a lot more than we can tax theirs. They seek to shut us out of their market.

I do not promote a tax policy that burdens trade, rather I propose this country get very serious to solve the problem.

Now, back to my machine shop and I am done.

I dealt with many buyers. My job was to sell the shop services to other companies and they would have laughed me out of their offices had I told them I deserved higher prices.

Can you imagine a company doing what workers do and tell somebody the company deserves higher prices?

I decided that products from my business must look superior. They must always be easy to spot. This meant appearance meant a lot. Parts to be made must look like they had come off a grinder or have the appearance of chrome plate to the point it was possible. This technique I taught to my machinists and it paid off. We became able to have a lot more work and even price higher because we delivered quality.
So, this country also buys quality and price. It is not rocket science though other machine shops were content to merely meet minimum standards.

Supposn

04-02-2013, 10:42 PM

Could you provide a time period that you view as testament to your claims?

Log Roller, excerpted from my post within another forum:

Wry Catcher correctly described the consequences of the example that Ford set. Regardless of Ford’s motivation, greater purchasing power of the median wage is the defining characteristic of a robust middle income population segment.

I’m among those that believed the exorbitant concentration of wealth of the extremely fortunate few and the extremely slim segment of middle income earners of the 1920s’ heralded the poorer economic conditions that followed. I shudder when I consider that the NY Stock market is at historic high while the purchasing power of the median wage hardly increases and too often it has actually decreased.

The difference between the “roaring twenties” economy and that of today is the “New Deal” policies that were enacted during the great 1930’s depression. The excesses and the deliberate financial frauds of the “Roaring Twenties” that was rampant then is very similar to the saving and loan fiasco and the credit crunch that we’ve have witnessed. A major difference between then and now is the “New Deal” policies that were enacted during the great 1930’s depression. Due to those laws our economy is much better than otherwise.

It’s been 68 years since FDR was buried and the Republican Party is still trying to reverse history. There are always those confusing their own best interests and that of our nation’s economy. Consider if Wall Street political donors had succeeded to induce the privatization of Social Security system. Within normal cycles of commerce there are recessions. What if your retirement occurred simultaneously with a depression of stock market prices?

Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn

04-02-2013, 11:46 PM

...I am saying that when American prefer to purchase products and services from abroad, why would that be?

Creating a piece of paper does not solve the actual problem. I find no Google reference to trade certificates. ...

Robert A. Whit, we all prefer less expensive goods. Foreign nations have significantly lower wage scales and thus produce cheaper goods. In most cases the difference between an ordinary and a superior product is the extra labor time contributed to its production.

Maybe you cannot google import certificate because you’re googling “ trade certificate “ instead of “ wikipedia import certificate “.

Producing enterprises generally have production support from other enterprises. When the USA loses a producing enterprise, it reduces the production volume of that enterprises’ supporting enterprises. The loss of a factory, farm or ranch, due to importing foreign goods cost many more jobs than those of the producing enterprise in question.

I suppose that your machine shop does a great portion of work for construction or repair shop enterprises. I hope you do work for factories; but each year there’s less factories. I want USA to halt and reverse those loses.

Refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_Certificates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_Certificates)

Respectfully, Supposn

fj1200

04-03-2013, 07:38 AM

The difference between the “roaring twenties” economy and that of today is the “New Deal” policies that were enacted during the great 1930’s depression. The excesses and the deliberate financial frauds of the “Roaring Twenties” that was rampant then is very similar to the saving and loan fiasco and the credit crunch that we’ve have witnessed. A major difference between then and now is the “New Deal” policies that were enacted during the great 1930’s depression. Due to those laws our economy is much better than otherwise.

So in response to log's question you choose a time period of greater openness and trade freedoms to suggest that limiting openness and trade freedoms is a better path? :confused:

I'm sure you'll also reject the detrimental effects of the New Deal on the Great Depression.

fj1200

04-03-2013, 07:39 AM

Robert A. Whit, we all prefer less expensive goods. Foreign nations have significantly lower wage scales and thus produce cheaper goods. In most cases the difference between an ordinary and a superior product is the extra labor time contributed to its production.

The United States is a huge industrial producer; Why? Hint: Capital intensive vs. labor intensive.

Supposn

04-03-2013, 11:53 AM

So in response to log's question you choose a time period of greater openness and trade freedoms to suggest that limiting openness and trade freedoms is a better path? :confused:

I'm sure you'll also reject the detrimental effects of the New Deal on the Great Depression.

FJ1200, you are correct; I’ve been consistently contending that trade deficits’ are ALWAYS immediate detriments to their nations’ GDPs.

Within the subject of FDR’s “New Deal” administration your presumption is also correct; I do contend the legislation passed during FDR’s administration were of substantial net benefit to our nation’s society and economy.
Since you obviously contend otherwise, I’d be pleased if you initiated a discussion thread and explicitly stated your positions on this new topic. We then can further discuss our opposing positions.

Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn

04-03-2013, 12:34 PM

FJ1200, trade deficits’ are ALWAYS immediate detriments to their nations’ GDPs.

Refer to post #4 of this discussion thread or to:
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?39311-Trade-deficits-are-ALWAYS-detrimental-to-their-nation’s-GDPs&p=628733#post628733

Respectfully, Supposn

fj1200

04-03-2013, 12:38 PM

FJ1200, trade deficits’ are ALWAYS immediate detriments to their nations’ GDPs.

I know what you think, it just doesn't make it true. please refer to the links that I have already provided that counter your assertion.

FJ1200, you are correct; I’ve been consistently contending that trade deficits’ are ALWAYS immediate detriments to their nations’ GDPs.

Within the subject of FDR’s “New Deal” administration your presumption is also correct; I do contend the legislation passed during FDR’s administration were of substantial net benefit to our nation’s society and economy.
Since you obviously contend otherwise, I’d be pleased if you initiated a discussion thread and explicitly stated your positions on this new topic. We then can further discuss our opposing positions.

There is copious amounts of data that show the New Deal extending the Great Depression. FDR's presidency was saved by WWII.

Robert A Whit

04-03-2013, 04:28 PM

I started first grade during the depression. While the war did promote goods being produced, a lot of the goods were lost in the war. Men who should have been helping the economy were over waging war. It is very hard to spend money in the USA on goods and services when men are in Africa, Italy, France or so forth waging war. Many men died in war. Their wages came back to survivors thus the family spent the wages in the USA so that helped the economy.

I lived when we had frozen wages and frozen prices. FDR imposed that. My actual dad's answer to this was to go into his own business and the Government did not snoop into his affairs since they were tied up in combat. I don't know of any price structure on auto mechanics at that time but his gig was working on cars.

I also saw germany after it was destroyed but most of the still left standing destruction was in the then East Germany. The West had by the early 60s did a good job restoring the country. After WW 2 ended the reason it still helped the USA was we were one of the few places that had enormous factory capacity that quickly stopped making arms for war and made cars. Germany had no factories so they bought American. I saw many ford and buick autos when I was there. GM and Ford made a killing when Germany was able to buy autos.

Anyway, this nations economy is not made of armor plate steel. We are in danger.

We can recover and I hope we do. A lot of Americans lost maybe up to 50 percent of their net worth due to the housing crash. Bear in mind that those making the money off stocks are generally not middle class nor are they poor.
Obama's policies, despite his denials are helping the rich.

Here is something some of you may want to track. Track the American's savings rate.