Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: CutePuppy
For starters, the U.S has the largest economy in the world, 50 percent bigger than China's in nominal terms, roughly equal to that of a combined Europe and considerably larger than Japan's.

So how come we have an annual $500 Billion trade deficit with China....?

Could it be that their leaders are smarter than ours

3 posted on 03/15/2016 3:24:55 AM PDT by spokeshave (Somewhere there is a ceiling for Trump.....Yeah, it's called The Oval Office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: spokeshave

Exactly.

And who cares if our economy is “nominally bigger than China”?!? That’s NOT the point. We’re supposed to be bigger! They’re communists! BUT WE’RE HEADING THE WRONG DIRECTION!!

When they catch us economically and militarily at the same time, we’re screwed. Let’s not get there.


7 posted on 03/15/2016 3:32:33 AM PDT by Dr. Pritchett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: spokeshave; Doofer; urbanpovertylawcenter; fortheDeclaration; USS Alaska; Tucker39; econjack; ...
    So how come we have an annual $500 Billion trade deficit with China....?

We don't. We have about $30B trade deficit with China and we have less than $10B trade deficit with a few other trading partners. How come? Simple - we buy more goods from them than we sell to them. Just like you are running a "trade deficit" with grocery stores, Amazon, phone or cable company, Uber, etc. You want to declare a trade war on them? Good luck and let us know how it works out.

Could be, or may be not. If you look at their stimulus program (and the resulting GDP deficits, with ghost towns and busted shadow banking) - it was 4 times as large relative to the size of Chinese GDP than Obama's "shovel-ready" stimulus. It is covered in the article, did you read it? And in any case, in relatively free trade, this has nothing to do with the "leaders" — it's supply and demand between companies and consumers of each country. See, for example China's $500 billion mobile shopping mania and China's property market overheats in tier 1 cities, stagnates in lower tiers...

And overall trade deficit is getting smaller as percentage of GDP, as article noted. U.S. economy suffers not from [relatively] free trade, but from idiotic tax code and high rates and suffocating regulations, but Republicans are pretty much on the record to lower rates and reduce the regulations chokehold, while reducing the budget growth and budget deficits.

What about it? We have been importing disinflation (mostly from China but also from other Asian and East European countries) for a while, so the cost of living should have been lower than would be otherwise. Currently, robotics and workplace automation and mechanisation will be having similar effect. Also, free trade is exceptionally good at busting the unions, which also lowers the cost of living.

Ron Insana's real name is Ronald G. Insana.

Most nations are debtor nations, some have more debt to GDP than the U.S. (e.g., France and Japan), though under the "able" leadership of Obama, U.S. racked up a lot of debt without any benefit to the economy. What does it have to do with Trump, whose cut-and-paste "economic plan" will significantly increase the budget and the deficit?

Manufacturing / Industrial sector in the U.S. comprises 19%, Service sector is 80%, Agticulture is 1%. Taken alone, manufacturing in the United States would be the ninth-largest economy in the world. I don't think that's "producing nothing" but with a better tax code and relaxed regulations there would be less incentive to outsource some manufacturing. BTW, China is fast becoming expensive for off-shore outsourcers, with Vietnam being the main beneficiary for relocation and several other Southeast Asian countries not far behind.

What Ron Insana really said: It is true that we run trade deficits with several other countries, but as a percentage of GDP, the U.S. current account deficit with other nations, the broadest measure of trade, is at its lowest levels in decades, only 2.2 percent of GDP.

That's an issue of civilian leadership / CiC, and willingness to engage the right enemy (Iraq! Afghanistan!), not of military strength.

What Ron Insana really said: The U.S. is also winning militarily, but that's a separate argument. Suffice to say the U.S. spends more on defense than the next 8 countries combined. Can those dollars be better and more effectively spent? Sure. But no military on earth is as strong as our own.

What Ron Insana really said: On immigration, more illegal immigrants, Mexicans to be specific, have departed the country in the last five years than have entered. The greatest numbers of new immigrants are Asian and Indian, not Hispanic.

Actually if you'd look a little deeper than the word "collapse" in Wikipedia (which meant "financial collapse" / "credit crunch" / "liquidity crisis" rather than the collapse of his company) you would know that he closed his fund because he — as well as thousands of small fund managers — couldn't raise the money to make running the fund worthwhile for him and his investors. People who invested with Insana Capital Partners actually significantly outperformed the S&P (loss of 5% after fees and expenses, compared to loss of 15% for S&P index at the time of fund's closure) — which was no small feat in 2008, so it was a very decent thing to do for investors. See Running a Hedge Fund Is Harder Than It Looks on TV - NYT, by Andrew Ross Sorkin, 2008 August 18.

That compares quite favourably to Trump, who left a trail of bankruptcies and defaults in just about any Trump-branded business, while siphoning money from these businesses at the expense of investors. "Invest in Trump" and "In Trump we trust" has only been good for Trump himself and Trump Organization (which is a branding, marketing and name licensing company, not REIT / real estate building company). Not surprising for anyone who watched Trump's business activities and court shenanigans for many years. "Art of the Deal" means Trump wins, investors and creditors lose.

In Ego, Obama and Trump Are Two Of A Kind - FR, post #275, 2015 October 25

Trump declared bankruptcy four times, leaving his gullible creditors on the hook for his debts. - FR, post #44, 2015 September 21 (several supporting links included)

I think that if you read the article you'll find out that's what "this clown" is saying. How is Trump's position on the Obama's handling of the economy is different from other Republicans?

What does this have to do with the article or Trump? Or do you conclude that because Obama "gets everything wrong" then it means that Trump "gets everything right" and Trump is the only one who "gets it"? Trump and Obama do agree on many issues, including 9/11, Iraq, Afghanistan, so I guess it means that Trump is not always right? They are both wrong, of course.

Well, I guess it depends on how "interesting" the times are... And it's the Year of the Red/Fire Monkey. 1908 (R), 1920 (R), 1932 (D), 1944 (D), 1956 (R), 1968 (R), 1980 (R), 1992 (D), 2004 (R), 2016 (?)

You mean by this that I don't spend all my spare time (whenever such luxury exists) posting on FR? Let's see how the real "Manchurian" might sound like:

Or so you mean that if anyone posts a news article or editorial that may be critical of Trump and his say-one=thing-today-another-one-tomorrow is promptly moved into the Cheese-Moose-Sister topic that he is "Manchurian"?

No, not any. But then again, I don't have an army of tax lawyers.

45 posted on 03/15/2016 5:38:02 PM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson