screech wrote:Yea, no kidding. All Trump has to do is say things that make no sense and he has people falling all over themselves to defend him and explain what he is “really” trying to say/do. Wink, wink. It’s more like a religion than an information based position, they feel and believe it’s going to be good for ‘Mercia because, Trump!!!
People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people, Jeremy.- Super Hans
We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.- H. L. Mencken
What I think you’re missing is the impact on consumers, which is all of us. If you think of economics as a competitive game among nations, who wins? The winner is the nation that provides the most goods and services to its citizens. A trade deficit with China means we end up with more goods and services than they do. We win.
They end up with more currency, but you can’t eat currency or build stuff with it.
In the Steel example, by importing steel, we end up with more steel than if we made it ourselves. That means we can make more of the stuff that needs steel. That results in additional jobs in those sectors. It also means that product made with steel are cheaper for everyone.
By focusing only on jobs in the steel industry, you’re missing out on the whole picture.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
What I think you’re missing is the impact on consumers, which is all of us. If you think of economics as a competitive game among nations, who wins? The winner is the nation that provides the most goods and services to its citizens. A trade deficit with China means we end up with more goods and services than they do. We win.
They end up with more currency, but you can’t eat currency or build stuff with it.
In the Steel example, by importing steel, we end up with more steel than if we made it ourselves. That means we can make more of the stuff that needs steel. That results in additional jobs in those sectors. It also means that product made with steel are cheaper for everyone.
By focusing only on jobs in the steel industry, you’re missing out on the whole picture.
I am not focusing only on jobs in the steel industry, I used that as an example.
If having a trade deficit is good, why are those nations we are threatening with tariffs, to even the playing field, fighting it?
I understand it will hurt some more than others before it gets better, and maybe it won't get better in that it is too late?
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"
What I think you’re missing is the impact on consumers, which is all of us. If you think of economics as a competitive game among nations, who wins? The winner is the nation that provides the most goods and services to its citizens. A trade deficit with China means we end up with more goods and services than they do. We win.
They end up with more currency, but you can’t eat currency or build stuff with it.
In the Steel example, by importing steel, we end up with more steel than if we made it ourselves. That means we can make more of the stuff that needs steel. That results in additional jobs in those sectors. It also means that product made with steel are cheaper for everyone.
By focusing only on jobs in the steel industry, you’re missing out on the whole picture.
I am not focusing only on jobs in the steel industry, I used that as an example.
If having a trade deficit is good, why are those nations we are threatening with tariffs, to even the playing field, fighting it?
I understand it will hurt some more than others before it gets better, and maybe it won't get better in that it is too late?
Either you didn’t bother to read what he (and everyone else) said in this thread or your reading comprehension is absolutely abysmal. Dude, just stop, admit you have no idea what you are talking about since you can’t even formulate a reasonable thought or question on trade policy and go back to telling us how sucky you think California is. At least that was entertaining, this is just sad.
"your reasoning that children should be experimented upon to justify a political agenda..is tantamount to the Nazi justification for experimenting on human beings."-SUBgenius on gay parents "I've stated over and over again on this forum and fully accept that I'm a bigot..." - ldsfaqs
They end up with more currency, but you can’t eat currency or build stuff with it.
What about the fact that the borrower essentially becomes a slave to the lender? I always thought the object of the game was to consume as little as you could and save/invest as much as you can. Under normal market rules saving is rewarded.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
They end up with more currency, but you can’t eat currency or build stuff with it.
What about the fact that the borrower essentially becomes a slave to the lender? I always thought the object of the game was to consume as little as you could and save/invest as much as you can. Under normal market rules saving is rewarded.
You think the nation that, say, starves its people and has them live in huts while accumulating pieces of paper wins?
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
You think the nation that, say, starves its people and has them live in huts while accumulating pieces of paper wins?
Perhaps some of them will starve but not all. And I think currency is more than pieces of paper. It represents lifetimes of work and sacrifice. Do you disagree that the borrower becomes the servant of the lender?
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Once again, I'll remind Ajax that no matter what system he finds himself in there are always a servile class. Additionally, the current system in which we find ourselves serves his interests far more than it otherwise would. Why he would complain about it just demonstrates a complete and utter lack of understanding how subsisting on a gold standard or a barter system would impoverish not only his clientele, but he'd suffer too since his business as a healthcare provider would be decimated under the system those he votes for would implement.
He hasn't, ever, made a good argument how he'd be better off under an alternative system.
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
He hasn't, ever, made a good argument how he'd be better off under an alternative system.
I don't think you're answering my question. Do you want our children to be in debt to Chinese owners because of our consumption? Is that really a good thing?
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
You think the nation that, say, starves its people and has them live in huts while accumulating pieces of paper wins?
Perhaps some of them will starve but not all. And I think currency is more than pieces of paper. It represents lifetimes of work and sacrifice. Do you disagree that the borrower becomes the servant of the lender?
Yes, I disagree.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
