Posted on 03/17/2016 8:04:48 AM PDT by Trumpinator
Cramer: Listen to Donald Trump
Abigail Stevenson | @A_StevensonCNBC
16 Hours Ago
Jim Cramer is tired of the horse race. He is sick of hearing whether John Kasich can be a comer because he won his home state, or if Ted Cruz can win enough delegates. For once, Cramer would rather go over what Donald Trump is actually saying, and what he would do if elected President.
"Trump has real things to say. They may not be what you think, and they often seem like wishful thinking. But you need to know his views, not just how he is doing coming around the far turn," the "Mad Money" host said. (Tweet This)
In Cramer's perspective the U.S. has been crushed on almost every single trade deal it has done, going all the way back to Nafta. And every time Cramer has asked an official of either party to name a deal that was signed in the last decade that has given the U.S. a trade surplus, no one could come up with an answer.
For years those who have questioned any of the trade deals has been dismissed as foolish. Now that Trump has said that the U.S. government has been horrendous at negotiating these deals, Cramer has no beef with it.
"Say what you will about Trump, I agree with him about these trade deals," Cramer said.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
The American People have given “free trade” a thirty year test ride. The elites could not have asked for more.
But the verdict is in, and the answer is nyet.
Wow! If the liberal Cramer can see this, maybe some of the Cruzys can see it also.
ultimately it’s about a mindset the entire US Government that now it seems for years has a mindset that’s really not working for the benefit of the American people
it usually works for a small minority of powerful interest or it has a globalist view its working for
but for the vast majority of working Americans in the middle they don’t seem to give a rat’s ass about
you’re either an elite few what they care about or some globalist vision they care about...
Middle America middle class can drop dead as far as they’re concerned and they’re trying to kill him off... and guess who Trump new(real old) majority is
A strange way to judge a trade deal: “Did it give us a trade surplus?”
Free trade turned into a global redistribution of wealth.
It was good for foreign nations and corporate executives.
No it is not the same (and I am hardly a Cramer fan) Glenn Beck is like a religious kook with those sandwich signs.
The American People have given “free trade” a thirty year test ride. The elites could not have asked for more.
But the verdict is in, and the answer is nyet.
...
It’s not just “free trade.” It’s immigration and other bad policies, too. The federal government has been actively crushing the middle class for the last 50 years. Funny how Trump is on top of these issues and it’s making the Ruling Class angry.
Yeah, I guess you're right. Cramer is a huckster, but at least he hasn't threatened to stab anyone yet!
Side note for your consideration: Donald Trump/Allen West 2016
I’m 100% onboard the Trump train, but it’s been obvious all along that he has picked issues that are surrounded by a lot of emotion (e.g. the Carrier move) and uses them as examples for how he would work to change the choices made by US-based companies. I know others take every word he says literally and I don’t, no more than I believe everything Rush Limbaugh or Ted Cruz say. They are painting with broad strokes in order to communicate a vision more than create an iron-tight case. While some changes would require legislative support, I only need to point to Obamacare and the Porkulus to show how quickly and dramatically Congress can rise to support a President’s legislative demands when the are motivated to do so.
Three questions I would as would ask: 1) Did the U.S. have a trade surplus with the countries that are part of the trade deal before it was signed?; 2) If not, the have our exports to them gone up or down?; and 3) If they have gone up then have they gone up at the same rate our imports from them went up?
Except he doesn't say how he would change those decisions. Tariffs? Higher taxes?
A trade deficit isn't a 'bad thing', if trade partners choose to invest in our companies with the proceeds of trade instead of purchase goods that ultimately increases our productivity, and thereby allows our wages to grow. The problem is trade deficits combined with government deficits. If the proceeds of foreign trade go to funding our profligate government it just ultimately feeds consumption, not investment. THAT is the problem, not the trade itself. Throwing up barriers to trade won't fix that problem either, it will just end our ability to export our government's inflation, and that will result in declining purchasing power and living standards for our people.
tl;dr - if we address the federal deficits our trade balances don't matter.
------
Nonsense - trade deficits cause jobs losses. Jobs that can't be outsourced or exported have not filled in the gap either in quantity of jobs available or in wages.
Why would anyone invest in US manufacturing when it can be off shored tomorrow?
When unions were in power here they forced the cost of manufacturing up. It used to be we had an advantage because of education now we don't, the rest of the world, at least much of it is passing us up because of what liberals have done in our schools.
With full employment, that does not mean having 93 million Americans sitting on their hands drawing a check from the government, but people working making money will be able to pay the higher prices that American manufacturing would cause. If we could get competition in education again then we would be able to modernize our manufacturing so that our manufacturing costs would still be the least expensive in the world and we could then compete fairly. If we would get rid of all business tax then again we would remove 35% of the cost of an item produced in the US and we could compete fairly. It seems that our government has done everything it could to kill American manufacturing.
Getting rid of business tax that business doesn't pay but consumers pay and then getting rid of repatriation taxes would within less than 4 years give us full employment. When you have true full employment then manufacturers compete for employees by offering them good salaries and benefits.
We gotta get rid of liberal think.
Watching you country die economically is a pretty emotional issue.
But Trump has a tax plan, (it will lower taxes across the board) and Trump plans to improve the regulation situation. You have probably heard that he is not a believer in global warming. He would allow coal plants for a time, not clear what environmental limits would be, but I believe that we have developed policies that result in clean air and water and we can still support fossil fuel as we also develop the renewable resources too.
As far as tariffs, he would threaten high tariffs as a starting point and end with a deal. What would be the end point? Depends on whether the companies can be persuaded to keep jobs here?
BTW, I know what I am talking about here, my company (Lockheed) moved some jobs to Mexico as part of Nafta. The product was made so badly (low quality) that the contracts had to be cancelled and the jobs moved back to the Bay Area. What is important here is that there are often many factors involved in moving on operation somewhere else. Maybe cross boarder is not the best option. Maybe just moving to a non-union state is enough. But Trump has the right idea. What we have now is no consideration being given to the work that will be lost. That has to be entered into the trade off.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.