• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. trade deficit soars to $64B, highest in 12 years

I’m being completely serious. “Trade deficits” don’t exist. The only way people can assert they do is by engaging in mercantilism and claiming that currency is a special magical thing rather than just being another thing of value to be traded along with goods and services.

In the mercantilist’s mind, we trade X value of goods and services to China and receive Y value back, without factoring in the movement of currency as well. The “goal”, like the mercantilists of Adam Smith’s day, is to minimize the outflow of “gold”, because gold/currency is a special beast.

In reality, we trade X value of goods, services, and currency to China and receive X value back. Trade with China is an aggregate of individual deals made by merchants. If those deals weren’t already equal (IE if the merchants involved weren’t getting what they considered an acceptable value for their trade), then the deals wouldn’t happen.

Quester, what you say is correct, but it fails to address the meaning of the term trade deficit and therefore you conclusion is not correct. A trade deficit is not the (im)balance between the goods and their value. Trade deficit is the imbalance of money going in and out of the country. And I guess, in reference to you stating that all goods and their value are in balance, that you can than also say that trade deficit is the imbalance of goods going in and out of the country. The way you are going about it you are giving new meaning to the term trade deficit and that is not correct.

Joey
 
And exactly because this is inevitable, several governments in Europe are already doing tests to see how this can be dealt with. We have dealt with this multiple times over in History. Always a lot of people who were angry and went on strike. Fortunately it has never stopped development. Here too a solution will be found. But I agree with you that unemployment would skyrocket if a solution is not found.

But do not be so naïve to think that it is not going to happen because of your fear.

And the bottom line is very simple. The technology is being developed. And if you have a lot of money you will rather buy a robot than to hire people. Cheaper, more reliable and not talking back to you. Most entrepreneurs is going be delighted to be able to run a company without hiring people. Ok, it won't be that black and white, but it is going to happen.

And regarding the latter concerns you expressed, I would just like to reference history itself. Like mentioned, people have always complained about new inventions out of fear that this may reduce jobs. The reality is of course that all these inventions have helped us to get a better life. Starting with one of the first issues back a couple of hundred years ago in Britain when we started to automate the production of fabric, people were furious. Can we today imagine a world without textile being mass produced? No. Did the fears projected at the time become realized? No. And did it stop anyone from doing any further inventions? No.

People are strange, funny and interesting. Most people do not like major changes in their life. They rather stick with what they have than to explore new options. Hence it always takes considerable time to implement new changes. Whether these are technological changes or legal changes, most people will always object first. Than they will start thinking and only after that they may consider changing their minds.

Joey

A challenge with changes is who the will reap the benefit. That globalization have had huge economical benefits but it mostly the wealthy elite that have reap the benefits. That countries have competed against each other about who can offer the biggest tax breaks and other perks to businesses. While it is possible to change it for example if countries for example work together to end tax havens and also that there are greater social and environmental demands on the products imported.

That it was also through unionization and organizations workers started to also reap the benefits of industrialization.

There it also through organization and that countries work together that not just the economic elite can reap the benefits of technological development.
 
Now you DO have to admit that Mr. Trump's divinely guided administration has resulted in a trade deficit that exceeds anything that the loser Barack HUSSEIN Obama managed to produce. I mean "Bigger is BETTER" - isn't it?

Besides, if you look at Mr. Trump's history of corporate management, going bankrupt is a "Good Thing" because when that happens the person who drove the operation into bankruptcy emerges with all of their gains intact but with all of their liabilities expunged. That means that <SARC>the "BEST" way of coping with America's national debt would be to drive the US into bankruptcy so that the US can write off the entirety of its outstanding debt (while keeping the benefits it gained by borrowing the money in the first place). Once that happens the US will be so solvent that the other countries in the world will be falling all over themselves to lend the US money </SARC>- right?

Trump owes more money to one creditor, Deutsche Bank, than he reportedly has stashed away.
 
Quester, what you say is correct, but it fails to address the meaning of the term trade deficit and therefore you conclusion is not correct. A trade deficit is not the (im)balance between the goods and their value. Trade deficit is the imbalance of money going in and out of the country. And I guess, in reference to you stating that all goods and their value are in balance, that you can than also say that trade deficit is the imbalance of goods going in and out of the country. The way you are going about it you are giving new meaning to the term trade deficit and that is not correct.

Joey

Why give flying **** about money going in or out of a country? Trade is trade. Adam Smith proved that 300 years ago.
 
I’m being completely serious. “Trade deficits” don’t exist. The only way people can assert they do is by engaging in mercantilism and claiming that currency is a special magical thing rather than just being another thing of value to be traded along with goods and services.

In the mercantilist’s mind, we trade X value of goods and services to China and receive Y value back, without factoring in the movement of currency as well. The “goal”, like the mercantilists of Adam Smith’s day, is to minimize the outflow of “gold”, because gold/currency is a special beast.

In reality, we trade X value of goods, services, and currency to China and receive X value back. Trade with China is an aggregate of individual deals made by merchants. If those deals weren’t already equal (IE if the merchants involved weren’t getting what they considered an acceptable value for their trade), then the deals wouldn’t happen.

On a good day, I'd take that a post like that to be uninformed.

On a normal day, I'd take that a post like that as being from someone who is totally divorced from reality.

Today is a good day.
 
Trump owes more money to one creditor, Deutsche Bank, than he reportedly has stashed away.

Ahhhh!

But if you wipe out the debt then he would still have the money that he has stashed away and that means that it's "smart" to drive the country into bankruptcy - right?
 
On a good day, I'd take that a post like that to be uninformed.

On a normal day, I'd take that a post like that as being from someone who is totally divorced from reality.

Today is a good day.

What's uninformed about it? Why should the movement of money be treated any different than the movement of anything else of value?
 
What's uninformed about it? Why should the movement of money be treated any different than the movement of anything else of value?

Your position is that it should be totally ignored since it is the movement of money that is used to determine whether or not there is a "trade deficit".

If there is no such thing as a "trade deficit" then, it must "logically" follow that there is no such thing as "movement of money".

PS - "Money" is NOT a "thing of value". "Money" is a way of recording value and that's it.
 
Your position is that it should be totally ignored since it is the movement of money that is used to determine whether or not there is a "trade deficit".

If there is no such thing as a "trade deficit" then, it must "logically" follow that there is no such thing as "movement of money".

PS - "Money" is NOT a "thing of value". "Money" is a way of recording value and that's it.

Currency is a store of value. That's one of its key defining characteristics.
 
Interesting concept, but how are you going to cope with a REAL unemployment rate of over 75%?

Would that be time to introduce a "Basis Living Supplement" that would be paid to every American? Would that include legal immigrants who are not yet citizens?

Sounds to me like you are also a huge fan of the FAIR TAX proposed law. You get that basis living supplement in the plan.
 
Sounds to me like you are also a huge fan of the FAIR TAX proposed law. You get that basis living supplement in the plan.

There have actually been studies done of similar proposals.

Unfortunately the people who advocate for a flat tax MASSIVELY underestimate the level of taxation required.

From a rough study that I was a part of many years ago (adjusted for inflation), the level required to meet the financial needs of the US government (once you have calculated in the level of payments on a per capita basis needed to ensure that more than 50% of the population isn't living in poverty) comes to roughly 50% of GROSS income (from ALL sources).

Yes, I do like the CONCEPT but, unfortunately, it simply won't work so I'm rather strongly against attempting to actually IMPLEMENT it.
 
Currency is a store of value. That's one of its key defining characteristics.

Currency is simply printed paper and has absolutely no intrinsic value beyond the value of the paper for recycling.
 
Currency is simply printed paper and has absolutely no intrinsic value beyond the value of the paper for recycling.

Currency is a lot more than "simply printed paper" and if you think it is, then you are WAY too ignorant to be commenting on this topic.
 
I have absolutely no idea whether or not someone is standing over you and forcing you to post.

Nor will you ever. It is better that people like you keep wondering and never figure out anything while talking non-sensical all the way through. We need people like you to provide us the laughter all people need a daily dose of.

Joey
 
A challenge with changes is who the will reap the benefit. That globalization have had huge economical benefits but it mostly the wealthy elite that have reap the benefits. That countries have competed against each other about who can offer the biggest tax breaks and other perks to businesses. While it is possible to change it for example if countries for example work together to end tax havens and also that there are greater social and environmental demands on the products imported.

That it was also through unionization and organizations workers started to also reap the benefits of industrialization.

There it also through organization and that countries work together that not just the economic elite can reap the benefits of technological development.

Agreed, we should try to work together as much as possible. But not with all. Some countries do not deserve that.

But the concept of working together is obviously completely lost on the Trumpet. Hence, change is welcome.

Joey
 
Currency is a lot more than "simply printed paper" and if you think it is, then you are WAY too ignorant to be commenting on this topic.

When you learn the difference between "currency" and "money" feel free to get back to me.
 
When you learn the difference between "currency" and "money" feel free to get back to me.

In this debate, they are synonyms for all practical purposes. How much "printed paper" is used when I move money with my debit card?
 
From the CBC

U.S. trade deficit soars to $64B, highest in 12 years

The gap between what the United States buys from the rest of the world and what it sells widened to its highest level since 2008, as imports jumped by a record amount in July.

Data from the U.S. Department of Commerce released Thursday showed that the American trade gap reached $63.6 billion US during the month.

That's the highest figure since the same month 12 years ago, during the depths of the financial crisis.

The U.S. economy imported $231.7 billion worth of goods from the rest of the world during the month, the highest amount ever and a 10.9 per cent increase from June's level.

American exports also rose 8.1 per cent to $168.1 billion.

COMMENT:-

Expect a statement from Mr. Trump extolling the huge 8.1% jump in American exports (the highest jump in American history).

You do realize we are in the midst of a pandemic and forced shutdown of a large section of our economy, right? Using these numbers and ignoring the prosperous economy, as well as the growth of the economy since the start of the pandemic is dishonest if you are going to discuss the state of the economy and it's recovery rate. The unemployment rate is down to 8.7, which while high is a dramatic drop from a confirmed 14.7% and an estimated 16%. The unemployment rate was down to 3.8% at the first of the year.
 
You do realize we are in the midst of a pandemic and forced shutdown of a large section of our economy, right? Using these numbers and ignoring the prosperous economy, as well as the growth of the economy since the start of the pandemic is dishonest if you are going to discuss the state of the economy and it's recovery rate. The unemployment rate is down to 8.7, which while high is a dramatic drop from a confirmed 14.7% and an estimated 16%. The unemployment rate was down to 3.8% at the first of the year.

Yes the world has been experiencing a pandemic.

Did the US have a trade deficit before the pandemic?
The new jobs Trump has claimed lately are not new. They are people starting to return to work who were laid off from the pandemic.
Yes, the economy was doing well before the pandemic. Yet, The US National debt continues to grow.
 
In this debate, they are synonyms for all practical purposes. How much "printed paper" is used when I move money with my debit card?

You do NOT "move money" when you use your debit card, you make a series of accounting entries.
 
You do NOT "move money" when you use your debit card, you make a series of accounting entries.

That's semantic bull****. There is no functional difference between me buying something with money via a debit card and buying it with money via physical cash.
 
You do realize we are in the midst of a pandemic and forced shutdown of a large section of our economy, right? Using these numbers and ignoring the prosperous economy, as well as the growth of the economy since the start of the pandemic is dishonest if you are going to discuss the state of the economy and it's recovery rate. The unemployment rate is down to 8.7, which while high is a dramatic drop from a confirmed 14.7% and an estimated 16%. The unemployment rate was down to 3.8% at the first of the year.

If "X" is entitled to ALL of the credit when the economy improves (regardless of what they did or did not do), then "X" is entitled to ALL of the blame when the economy deteriorates (regardless of what they did or did not do).

The level of "shutdown" is directly related to the ineffectiveness of the measures taken to combat COVID-19 (e.g. When the ineffectiveness declines, then so too does the level of shutdown and when the ineffectiveness increases, then, so to, does the level of shutdown increase).

It is LEADERSHIP, FINANCIAL RESOURCES, AND MEDICAL RESOURCES which have the greatest impact on level of effectiveness of the measures intended to combat COVID-19.

The US DOES HAVE the FINANCIAL RESOURCES to perform outstandingly in combating COVID-19.

The US DOES HAVE the MEDICAL RESOURCES to perform outstandingly in combating COVID-19.

What the US DOES NOT HAVE is the LEADERSHIP required to perform outstandingly (some might even say adequately) in combating COVID-19.
 
Back
Top Bottom