GDP Hits 4.1 %! In Second Quarter

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Just ask the POTUS.

Yeah, he’ll tell you that the best way to not waste money is to STIFF YOUR CONTRACTORS!

Great role model you picked there, LLiarMan.

Did he grab your Pusey?

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

you are correct, the trade imbalance is decades in the making, and initially needed post WWII via in part the Marshall Plan. problem is, it was allowed to continue far too long. by the 1960's, it should have been addressed. it wasn't now we have a mess to deal with.

Your history is shaky. The US didn't start running an annual trade deficit until 1976. Prior to that we still had a surplus. And the Marshall Plan was a huge boon for our trade with the rest of the world. It loaned money to the countries whose production capacity had been destroyed by WWII, allowing them to buy our exports and start to rebuild. So the Marshall Plan made our trade surplus with the rest of the world even bigger at the time. The recipients of aid under the Marshall Plan recovered, repaid every penny to us, and became a bulwark against communist expansion in Europe. That's what I call smart foreign policy! And a win-win!

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

i'll ask this question that i never got a chance to address in another thread that was posited by Tiny. so i'll do it here. Tiny claims that if there was no deficit, unfair trade wouldn't matter. i say BS. that's like saying you are so rich you can waste money foolishly and still be rich. smart rich people don't waste money. ask Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Bezos on that and see what they say.

I can't speak for Tiny, but I think he meant if there wasn't a trade deficit we probably wouldn't be flirting with protectionism. As for your point, any industry in the US that is harmed by unfair import competition can apply for relief (anti-dumping duties, etc.) from the Commerce Dept. It doesn't matter if every other US industry is in the black or running a trade surplus, if YOUR industry is hurt you can seek remedies.

By the way, did you know that even today we enjoy a surplus with 6 out of our top 15 trading partners?



https://www.businessinsider.com/us-t...tariffs-2018-3

[LexusLover]

I do not believe anyone is actually "flirting" with "Protectionism," any more than I believe anyone is "flirting" with a nuclear war with another country. The disparity in the sale of our goods and products on the international market has as much to do with our labor costs to produce and/or manufacture the items we export than it does anything else.

In some industries the stuff we purchase domestically is sold for less on the international markets. Pharmaceuticals come to mind. Whether the items are "subsidized" at our port or theirs the result is the same.

[MT Pockets]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

.

Slick Willie the Perjuring Sexual Predator's fingerprints are all over the economic mess, M T Brain Socket, no matter how much you try to spin it.

So now you want to throw Bill in the mix. Typical Repub, just shotgun it LOL!
You're the clown that isn't following the line connecting the dots, M T Brain Socket. New info regarding Bruce Ohr as the intermediary between Odumbo's girl Sally Yates - Strzok - Steele - Simpson - hildebeest emerged yesterday, M T Brain Socket. Pull your head out of Madcow's ass a smell some real facts, M T Brain Socket.

I do not connect dots to make a picture, I draw my own. You adding every name you can find to the mix just proves my point.
Neither McCain nor Romney organized a de facto Resistance movement and put people in the streets rioting: destroying public and private property, and attacking law enforcement personnel because they lost an election, M T Brain Socket, you lying piece of shit.
Why would they there was already one in place. Your ilk has been inciting riots ever since Obama took office.
You're a dip-shit fucking cock-sucker, M T Brain Socket, if you don't think hildebeest profited off the sale of 20% of the United States' strategic uranium reserves.
Since she didn't make 20% off the sale, you are just grasping at straws. She did get a donation from a guy that once owned a small percentage of that company, and by the way he was Canadian. LOL!

[MT Pockets]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

i'm in this game for me and no one else.

For once you are not lying. You have proven that point on nearly every post. Even Lusty has had enough of your shit. LOL!

[MT Pockets]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

I assume you don't have a wife or children?

You know dam well he doesn't have sex with anything that he could impregnate. Those farmers have learned a few tricks over the years.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Slick Willie the Perjuring Sexual Predator's fingerprints are all over the economic mess, M T Brain Socket, no matter how much you try to spin it.

So now you want to throw Bill in the mix. Typical Repub, just shotgun it LOL!
You're the clown that isn't following the line connecting the dots, M T Brain Socket. New info regarding Bruce Ohr as the intermediary between Odumbo's girl Sally Yates - Strzok - Steele - Simpson - hildebeest emerged yesterday, M T Brain Socket. Pull your head out of Madcow's ass a smell some real facts, M T Brain Socket.

I do not connect dots to make a picture, I draw my own. You adding every name you can find to the mix just proves my point.
Neither McCain nor Romney organized a de facto Resistance movement and put people in the streets rioting: destroying public and private property, and attacking law enforcement personnel because they lost an election, M T Brain Socket, you lying piece of shit.
Why would they there was already one in place. Your ilk has been inciting riots ever since Obama took office.
You're a dip-shit fucking cock-sucker, M T Brain Socket, if you don't think hildebeest profited off the sale of 20% of the United States' strategic uranium reserves.
Since she didn't make 20% off the sale, you are just grasping at straws. She did get a donation from a guy that once owned a small percentage of that company, and by the way he was Canadian. LOL!

Try as you might you can't change history, and Slick Willie the Perjuring Sexual Predator's signature repealed Glass-Steagall, M T Brain Socket. Your inability to color within the lines is why your mommy took your crayons away, M T Brain Socket. And Slick Willie the Perjuring Sexual Predator and hildebeest did receive money from Russians, M T Brain Socket, not just Canadians. Rosatom is a Russian firm, M T Brain Socket. Rosatom controlled a part of Uranium One when it *donated* $9 million to hildebeest, M T Brain Socket.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Even Lusty has had enough of my shit. LOL!

Damn right, trailerboy.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

I do not believe anyone is actually "flirting" with "Protectionism," any more than I believe anyone is "flirting" with a nuclear war with another country. The disparity in the sale of our goods and products on the international market has as much to do with our labor costs to produce and/or manufacture the items we export than it does anything else.

In some industries the stuff we purchase domestically is sold for less on the international markets. Pharmaceuticals come to mind. Whether the items are "subsidized" at our port or theirs the result is the same.

Ok, I stand corrected. We're no longer "flirting" with protectionism; we're embracing it. Trump's tariff threats are actually kicking in now.

Relative labor costs are just part of the problem. Some industries are highly labor-intensive, while others are not. The higher the labor cost component, the more vulnerable an industry is to imports. Competition from imports forces many firms to invest in automated labor-saving equipment. This often results in more layoffs than outsourcing does.

Pharmaceuticals are a unique industry. Labor costs are not really a factor there since it costs virtually nothing to manufacture most drugs. All of the costs are from years and years of R&D and expensive trials to obtain FDA approval. The drug firms try to recoup those costs in the US while they have patent protection on each approved drug. Foreign countries won't let them charge as much, so they lower their prices in order to gain access to those non-US markets. The R&D is already spent and, as I said, it costs almost nothing to manufacture the drugs. So even at lower prices, drugmakers are still selling to foreigners at way above cost, and every marginal sale helps them to claw back their R&D costs. Of course, this also creates a two-tier market and explains why many of us buy our viagra from Canadian distributors lol.

This is not analagous to "dumping" - where firms sell excess products without patent protection at below cost. Foreign countries don't accuse US drug firms of dumping. In fact, they badly want to buy our drugs; they just don't want to pay as much for them. And they can't make the drugs themselves without violating our patent laws.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

[COLOR=blue]i'll ask this question that i never got a chance to address in another thread that was posited by Tiny. so i'll do it here. Tiny claims that if there was no deficit, unfair trade wouldn't matter. i say BS. that's like saying you are so rich you can waste money foolishly and still be rich. smart rich people don't waste money. ask Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Bezos on that and see what they say.

Liar, liar, pants on fire. Here's what I really wrote. It's consistent with, as you put it, "smart rich people don't waste money. ask Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Tiny on that and see what they say."

Originally Posted by Tiny

Waco, Answering your question, by Dilbert's first definition, no, I'm not OK with unfair trade, where Japan effectively prohibits rice and beef imports. With respect to [Dilbert's] second definition [of unfair trade], it would depend on the product. If it's advanced computer chips, I'm not OK with it. If it's something that involves thousands of women doing dull, repetitive, low skilled assembly line work to put some electronic gadget together, then I'm fine with a foreign government subsidizing that and us buying it at a low price. I'd rather Americans do higher skilled, higher paid work and leave the crap work to others. I'd rather pay less for what I buy.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Liar, liar, pants on fire. Here's what I really wrote. It's consistent with, as you put it, "smart rich people don't waste money. ask Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Tiny on that and see what they say."

answer the question i posted.

if there was no federal deficit, would you be ok with unfair trade?

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

answer the question i posted.

if there was no federal deficit, would you be ok with unfair trade?

I already did, twice. See my last post in this thread.

You wouldn't give your definition of "unfair trade", so I used Dilbert's definitions.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Tiny

I already did, twice. See my last post in this thread.

You wouldn't give your definition of "unfair trade", so I used Dilbert's definitions.

don't overthink this, it will melt your limited brain. some things can be expressed in yes or no terms.

just to let you defecate .. er deflect again ...

"if there was no federal deficit would you be ok with unfair trade?"

"Unfair trade is any trade that is unfair" - TWK

now answer the fucking question or stop being an obfuscated asshole

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

answer the question i posted.

if there was no federal deficit, would you be ok with unfair trade?

I think you mean if there was no trade deficit, right?

The trade deficit is the difference between US exports and imports.

The federal (budget) deficit is the difference between US federal tax revenues and federal spending.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by lustylad

I think you mean if there was no trade deficit, right?

The trade deficit is the difference between US exports and imports.

The federal (budget) deficit is the difference between US federal tax revenues and federal spending.

what i mean and tiny brain said is if there was no federal (budget) deficit then a trade deficit wouldn't matter.

so let's see if he will answer the rather simple question .. or not

"if there was no federal (budget) deficit i.e. no federal debt would you be ok with a trade imbalance"