Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage

[Supposn]

I'm not offering an opposing theory, I'm merely pointing out facts that directly contradict your theory.

Not according to the formula for calculating Gross Domestic Product:

Imports are subtracted since imported goods will be included in the terms G, I, or C, and must be deducted to avoid counting foreign supply as domestic.​

I thought you were just confused but it turns out you're simply dishonest.

GenSeneca,
I’m repeating my request that you try (if you’re able) to explain your own positions and not presume to modify the wording of mine.
If you bring errors to my attention, I'll rectify my own words.

Due to your confusion between causes and effects, the statistics you provide do not support your conclusions. Your conclusions are opinions not facts.

I’m not opposed to global trade. Trade deficits are ALWAYS detrimental to their nations’ GDPs and I’m opposed to USA’s annual global trade deficits.

We agree that within the calculation of gross domestic product, “imports are subtracted …………… and must be deducted to avoid counting foreign supply as domestic” (products).
I logically conclude that trade deficits (by the definition of GDP and the formulas) are detrimental to their nations’ GDPs.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Supposn]

Yeah man...$50 bucks and hour would be so cool. Just imagine, everyone working at the fast food factories would make that...and be able to afford all sorts of nice things...and make the economy really hum.
Ops...but then the fast food factory owners would have to raise their prices significantly to cover the much higher labor costs, which would put them out of business and all those employees would be unemployed.
Damn...why is it progressive ideas NEVER work???

Gipper, you’ve posted within the wrong thread; you meant to post within the discussion of minimum wage?

I did not advocate any explicit amount of minimum wage. I advocate the next time the minimum rate’s modified by act of the U.S. Congress it should thereafter be pegged to the annual cost of living index. The timing and amounts of the minimum rate’s modifications should be the determination of non-partisan statisticians rather than by politicians. There’s no reason for it being eternally debated in the U.S. Congress.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[GenSeneca]

GenSeneca,
I’m repeating my request that you try (if you’re able) to explain your own positions...

My position is that you're dishonest....

Due to your confusion between causes and effects, the statistics you provide do not support your conclusions. Your conclusions are opinions not facts.

English 101... For beginners.

Causal Words: a causal conjunction such as ‘because’ introduces a statement describing the cause of something.​

The words "highest" and "lowest" are not causal words, they are adjectives:

Adjectives are words that describe or modify another person or thing in the sentence. ​

Furthermore, the words "highest" and "lowest" are the superlative forms of the adjectives "high" and "low", and their only function is to describe or modify the noun, or subject, of the sentence - in this case they describe or modify the word "imports".

Lets look at the sentence without adjectives,

"Imports are during booms and they are during recessions"

Like your entire argument, that sentence doesn't make sense.

Trade deficits are ALWAYS detrimental to their nations’ GDPs

Not according to the formula for calculating Gross Domestic Product:

Imports are subtracted since imported goods will be included in the terms G, I, or C, and must be deducted to avoid counting foreign supply as domestic. ​

We agree that within the calculation of gross domestic product, “imports are subtracted …………… and must be deducted to avoid counting foreign supply as domestic” (products).
I logically conclude that trade deficits (by the definition of GDP and the formulas) are detrimental to their nations’ GDPs.

Non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow"), in formal logic, is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises.

 

[Supposn]

My position is that you're dishonest....


English 101... For beginners.

Causal Words: a causal conjunction such as ‘because’ introduces a statement describing the cause of something.​

The words "highest" and "lowest" are not causal words, they are adjectives:

Adjectives are words that describe or modify another person or thing in the sentence. ​

Furthermore, the words "highest" and "lowest" are the superlative forms of the adjectives "high" and "low", and their only function is to describe or modify the noun, or subject, of the sentence - in this case they describe or modify the word "imports". Lets look at the sentence without adjectives, "Imports are during booms and they are during recessions". Like your entire argument, that sentence doesn't make sense.

Not according to the formula for calculating Gross Domestic Product:

Imports are subtracted since imported goods will be included in the terms G, I, or C, and must be deducted to avoid counting foreign supply as domestic. ​

Non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow"), in formal logic, is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises.

GenSeneca,

With regard to describing your position and my veracity, you’re still are unable to differentiate between your opinions and what are facts.

You present "Imports are during booms and they are during recessions"; you offer instruction regarding logic and English grammar?
I certainly appreciate your sense of humor.

Trade deficits by the definition of GDP and the formulas are detrimental to their nations’ GDPs.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[GenSeneca]

With regard to describing your position and my veracity, you’re still are unable to differentiate between your opinions and what are facts.

Fact: Imports are highest during booms and they are lowest during recessions.

Recession’s Silver Lining: U.S. Trade Deficit Is Down the Most on Record. Historically, there has been a surge in imports when the American economy recovered from recession. - NY Times​

You present "Imports are during booms and they are during recessions"; you offer instruction regarding logic and English grammar?

Let's play fill in the blank...

"Imports are ______ during booms and they are _____ during recessions."

Since you think the words "highest" and "lowest" are causal conjunctions, rather than adjectives, and you believe using those words makes the statement an opinion, go ahead and fill in the blanks with the words you think would make it a "factual" statement.

I certainly appreciate your sense of humor.

I do not appreciate your dishonesty.

Trade deficits by the definition of GDP and the formulas are detrimental to their nations’ GDPs.

Not according to the formula for calculating Gross Domestic Product:

Imports are subtracted since imported goods will be included in the terms G, I, or C, and must be deducted to avoid counting foreign supply as domestic.​

There is nothing in the definition or formula for calculating GDP that suggests imports are detrimental to a nations GDP.

 

[kowalskil]

Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage

Warren Buffett’s concept to significantly reduce USA’s trade deficit.
It is not our global trade but our trade deficits’ that are a significant net detriment to our economy. Trade deficits’ amount of detriment to their nations’ GDPs are significantly larger than the deficits themselves.

I’m a proponent of a proposal to reduce USA’s trade deficit of goods that was first introduced to the Senate in 2006. This simple concept is not simplistic and is worthy of consideration.

The basic concept is for exporters who choose to pay the federal fees to acquire transferable IMPORT Certificates for the assessed value of their goods leaving the USA. Importers would be required to surrender IMPORT Certificates for the assessed value of their goods entering the USA. Surrendered certificates are cancelled.
This may seem as a boon to exporters of USA goods but it’s actually an indirect but effective export subsidy and the trade proposal’s entirely funded by U.S. purchasers of foreign goods.

The version of this trade policy I advocate would exclude values of specifically listed scarce or precious minerals integral to goods from goods assessed values.
This trade policy would significantly decrease USA’s trade deficit of goods and increase the aggregate sum of USA’s imports plus exports and our GDP more than otherwise. The GDP bolsters the median wage.

Wage earning families benefit from cheaper imported goods but every day of every year they’re dependent upon their U.S. wages. Regardless of how small the additions to imports’ prices due to Import Certificates, (unlike tariffs) USA’s assessed imports could never exceed that of our exports. U.S. wage earners can have cheap (but not the absolute cheapest) imported goods. We cannot afford the absolute cheapest.

Refer to: www.USA-Trade-Deficit.Blogspot.com
or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_Certificates
or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product
or Google: wikipedia, import certificates
or Google: wikipedia, gdp
And the discussion topic “Trade deficits are always detrimental to their nations’ GDPs”

Respectfully, Supposn

What is desirable is clear to most of us. The problem is to produce it.

Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)
.
.

 

[Dr.Who]

What is desirable is clear to most of us. The problem is to produce it.

Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)
.
.

If I get what you are saying...you are saying that the way to handle the trade deficit is to produce things rather than to regulate shopping.

 

[Supposn]

Originally posted by kowalskil: What is desirable is clear to most of us. The problem is to produce it.
Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)

If I get what you are saying...you are saying that the way to handle the trade deficit is to produce things rather than to regulate shopping.

Dr. Who, this is another difference of our opinions.

My interpretation is the identifying of problems are generally less difficult than accomplishing their solutions.

Respectfully Supposn

 

[Dr.Who]

Originally posted by kowalskil: What is desirable is clear to most of us. The problem is to produce it.
Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)



Dr. Who, this is another difference of our opinions.

My interpretation is the identifying of problems are generally less difficult than accomplishing their solutions.

Respectfully Supposn

Do you at least agree that the solutions should be accomplished without restricting rights as much as possible, and that when rights are restricted it must be for the good of all citizens and the benefits must justify the restriction.

 

[Supposn]

Do you at least agree that the solutions should be accomplished without restricting rights as much as possible, and that when rights are restricted it must be for the good of all citizens and the benefits must justify the restriction.

Dr. Who, I was browsing through old correspondence when I encountered your response to this thread. I don’t know how it slipped how or why I failed to answer your message.

In a single word, “yes”, I do agree with this quoted message.
Refer to message that follows.
Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Supposn]

Do you at least agree that the solutions should be accomplished without restricting rights as much as possible, and that when rights are restricted it must be for the good of all citizens and the benefits must justify the restriction.

Dr. Who, groups and individuals under every trade policy must function within some legal or customary restraints. Our concern should be the who, how and to what extent of restraint that differs between trade policies.

The U.S. government has been unwilling and/or unable to defend U.S. producers from foreign producers’ advantages. U.S. products are at disadvantage to foreign products both within and beyond our national borders. Too frequently U.S. negotiators have favored or discriminated between industries or traded away our economic interests for what they considered to be a greater good.

For every year of the previous half century our nation has had annual trade deficits of goods. Due to a nation’s trade deficit, regardless of the nation’s annual GDP amount, that amount is less than otherwise. A lesser GDP is in turn is detrimental to the median wage.
Trade deficits are ALWAYS detrimental (and trade surpluses ALWAYS contribute) to their nations’ GDPs; trade balance’s affect upon their GDPs are ALWAYS a significant multiple of the balance itself; (i.e. trade balance’s affect upon their nations' GDPs is significantly greater than the amount of the trade balance itself).

The transferable Import Certificate proposal would eliminate U.S. trade deficit of assessed goods. The policy is a unilateral, eliminates the trade deficit of aggregate assessed goods and it indirectly but effectively subsidizes U.S. exports. The proposal’s expected to increase USA’s sum of aggregate imports plus exports.

The federal government assessment of goods’ approximate market prices at U.S. ports in U.S. dollars is a technical rather than a policy determination; this is a market driven trade proposal. The only mandate is upon importers of goods into the USA. Importers must surrender transferable Import Certificates, (ICs) with face values sufficient to cover the assessed value of their goods. (Surrendered ICs are cancelled).

Exporters of U.S. goods are entitled to request their goods be assessed and to pay a fee to cover the government’s net expenses due to this proposal. Exporters are issued transferable ICs with face values equal to their goods assessed values. This is an indirect but effective export subsidy.

Respectfully, Supposn