Increasing economic output means more jobs and more taxpayers.But if you're just balancing out what could be gains, how are we improving anything? It sounds more like maintaining a status quo.
lol
And by far their largest market. Next in line is Vietnam with 4%
Dysfunctional Donald is playing Whack-A-Mole with fictitious reasons why Republicans are supposedly better at handling the economy.
Originally it was we had to kick the immigrants out of America because they were stealing the jobs of Americans, and lowering wages.
Immigrants were attacked and deported, but wages got no better.
Then it became "unfair trade," supposedly because our trade partners with lower labor rates were not buying as much from the US as we were from them. The problem with that idea is they don't have the economic base to buy more from the US because they pay such lower labor wages.
Now it is becoming apparent that adding tariffs to imports is not going to improve the US economy at all. Instead, it's causing inflation.
All of this is dancing around the real reason the US economy is not better than it is. Extreme wealth inequality.
The wealthy in America have been very successful at extracting the wealth of the 99%. The simple fact is that leads to the 99% having less wealth to spend. When consumers can't buy things there is less consumerism. That leads to a smaller economy.
If the wealthiest want consumers to buy more they are going to have to support policies that lead to consumers having more wealth.
The real problem for the richest Class is they already won the Class War but they don't know when to quit.
They have already extracted vast amounts of wealth from consumers and now they wonder why they can't extract more. They are having trouble grasping the simple fact that people are already buying everything they can afford to buy. If they don't have any more discretionary money they stop buying.
All of this is just window dressing for the one fact Republicans don't want to admit. The real reason they want control of the US government is to prevent it from taxing the rich more and promoting the general welfare.
I prefer the less circumspect headline, just for the lulz:
Markets Celebrate Total Trump Surrender on Signature Policy
The U.S. agreed to temporarily lower tariffs on Chinese products while the two sides negotiate.www.thedailybeast.com
It may very well be that American manufacturing is beyond saving but we need to try. As a reminder, China has much grander, more sophisticated, and far more subtle geopolitical designs than the United States. Defining quality of life by the American obsession with instant gratification and cheap goods is going to be the end of us sooner or later.Besides the niches that are of strategic national interest (health, defense, IP property), I have yet to see it demonstrated that free trade hurts Americans.
We American citizens enjoy one of the highest qualities of life on the planet, brought to us by free trade.
Besides the niches I referenced in my first sentence, to which we are willing to pay a premium, attempting to bring general manufacturing of various & sundry items back to America is a fool's errand. It will never happen. Attempts at the tax levels required to precipitate that would only impoverishing the American people.
Yes.
If you have a trade imbalance you are, by definition, spending more than you make.But it's okay to buy more than we sell. We don't need our trade to be balanced. There are plenty of ways to make money, other than by exporting manufactured goods.
We injected $361.1 billion into their economy last year, that accounts for more than 1/3 of their total trade surplus and could cover their entire military budget.
meh, this is good news...
we need more trade and less wars....
Trump says China will 'open up' to U.S. businesses, suspend trade barriers
By Kevin Breuninger
CNBC
3 hours ago
- President Donald Trump said China “agreed to open” after the two countries agreed to temporarily slash most of the tariffs on each other’s goods.
- Trump said that was “maybe the most important thing” to come out of trade talks with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, U.S. trade representative Jamieson Greer and their Chinese counterparts.
- The U.S. and Chinese officials said they struck an agreement to pause most tariffs and other trade barriers for 90 days.
Trump offered few details about that development, but said it was “maybe the most important thing” to come out of the high-level trade talks between the two superpowers in Geneva, Switzerland, over the weekend.
Whether and to what degree a tariff is paid by consumers (or even importers) is highly dependent on the price elasticity of the product. If exporters could simply get away with a 30% increase on the price of goods, don't you think they would have done so prior to any tariff?It might be fair to attempt to argue "tariffs serve a strategic purpose" or some other argument.
But tariffs are indeed a tax born by the citizens of the host country. Those taxes are paid domestically by the purchaser, upon receipt of the goods in Customs.
If you seriously want to revive American manufacturing, then you need to subsidize American industries with federal money, exactly like the Chinese are doing. You can't just raise tariffs and then hope for the best. That's not gonna work. You'll end up trashing the quality of life for working class Americans, in exchange for nothing at all.
I don't think a trade deficit is necessarily a bad thing, at least not for consumers. Imports are a good thing. Consumers WANT to have access to goods from around the world at affordable prices. We don't want or need to produce everything ourselves.
I appreciate your efforts in compiling the numbers. No idea if they're accurate, but I won't hold you to citation.
The arsonist wants credit for putting out a portion of the fire that he lit
There’s only 1 reason and that reason is rank hypocrisy at the expense of economic health and resiliency, national security, and geopolitical strategy.And we especially don't want things we produce inferiorly, at higher costs or poorer quantity.
Nor do we want things produced that harm our environment or our workforce.
There's many good reasons for overseas' consumption.
You can have imports while maintaining a healthy trade balance. A trade imbalance simply means you're buying more than you're selling.
Increasing economic output means more jobs and more taxpayers.
90 day pause. leaves tariffs on Chinese exports at 30% / US exports are 10%.. read the entire link for details
HONG KONG — The United States and China said Monday that they had agreed to a 90-day pause on most of the tariffs they have imposed on each other since last month, sending stocks soaring amid hopes of an easing trade war between the world's two largest economies.U.S. and China agree to slash reciprocal tariffs in major step toward easing trade war
The world’s two biggest economies agreed to a 90-day pause on most of their levies after a first round of trade talks in Switzerland over the weekend.www.nbcnews.com
Bessent rejected the suggestion that it might have been better to start with negotiations rather than announcing a series of tariffs that caused global financial turmoil, saying the U.S. had already tried to rebalance trade by working within the system and that “business as usual” would not have worked.
In an interview Monday morning on CNBC, Bessent said that the two countries now have "a mechanism to avoid the upward tariff pressure."
Actually, China blinked on April 24th when they started exempting US goods from tariffs after realizing they had no other source.Our guy blinked. He folded.
No, that is not correct (my head shaking so fast I am afraid of hurting myself). If your economy is making money, you will spend it internally and externally.If you have a trade imbalance you are, by definition, spending more than you make.
A trade deficit has nothing to do with debt (see above). Perhaps you should take an intro economics course at a local community college. I don't think you get any of this.... It might help your blood pressure and certainly improve your posts if you had at least a rudimentary understanding of economics...Yes, one of the benefits of a trade deficit is access to affordable goods. This is at the cost of debt accumulation and potential economic vulnerability. We saw that during Covid, which is why there is a global pullback from free trade.
More than anything, I think this is a reaction to the fact that free trade has led to the US financing the rapid growth of a rival nation. They benefit far more from the relationship than we do.What is it you expect to get out of a trade surplus? What accomplishment?
I ask this without animus.
Creating economic dependencies that are impossible to detangle is part of China’s geopolitical strategy. And they’re winning.More than anything, I think this is a reaction to the fact that free trade has led to the US financing the rapid growth of a rival nation. They benefit far more from the relationship than we do.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?