Trump's tariffs

[Supposn]

Annual Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs.

I’m a proponent of the policy described within Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article.
Excluding values of materials that are explicit items within the list of scarce or precious minerals, the values of all goods passing through the Import certificate nation’s borders are subject to the nation’s Import Certificate regulations.

Tariffs are generally drafted to be applicable to fewer specific rather than to almost all imported goods. Within nations that have adopted a tariff policy, political entities usually jokey for their goods advantages over others; and usually some of those political schemes are successful. Among Import Certificate advantages over tariff policy is its drafted to (hopefully) remain general rather than applicable to specific goods.

It’s illogical to attempt protecting the nation’s steel industry from lower wage imports, unless you similarly protect the nation’s steel purchasing industries from such imports. Otherwise we’ve undermined our nation’s steel purchasers. If we’re going to protect domestic steel, we should protect it from imported substitutes for steel. Import Certificate policy does not discriminate among types of goods, enterprises, industries, or foreign nations. It doesn’t discriminate between agricultural or manufactured products but rather treats all products in an equitable manner.

Both tariffs and Import Certificate policy are dependent upon guide lines for goods’ assessed values. I’m among proponents that those assessment guide lines be determined and updated by civil servant statisticians rather than by politicians. Doing otherwise is a path to disaster. The three branches of our federal government do of course retain their full monitoring and oversite duties and jurisdictional powers.

Regardless of the variable free market prices of the nation’s Import certificates, (ICs) passed on to their purchasers of imported goods, the nation’s annual trade deficits of goods will be significantly reduced or eliminated.
Even if tariff rates reflected upon import prices passed on to their purchasers of imported goods are drastically high, imported goods price increases cannot assure reductions of annual trade deficits similar to the great reductions that Import Certificate policy would accomplish.


Respectfully, Supposn

[Jack]

"Sugar Import Program
Imports of sugar into the United States are governed by tariff-rate quotas (TRQs), which allow a certain quantity of sugar to enter the country under a low tariff. TRQs apply to imports of raw cane sugar, refined sugar, sugar syrups, specialty sugars and sugar-containing products. Import restrictions are intended to meet U.S. commitments under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture (which resulted in the creation of the World Trade Organization)."
https://www.fas.usda.gov/programs/sugar-import-program

How fucking important is it that we put Tariffs on Sugar?

[RB 60]

"Sugar Import Program
Imports of sugar into the United States are governed by tariff-rate quotas (TRQs), which allow a certain quantity of sugar to enter the country under a low tariff. TRQs apply to imports of raw cane sugar, refined sugar, sugar syrups, specialty sugars and sugar-containing products. Import restrictions are intended to meet U.S. commitments under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture (which resulted in the creation of the World Trade Organization)."
https://www.fas.usda.gov/programs/sugar-import-program

How fucking important is it that we put Tariffs on Sugar?

Because sugar is evil!!

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/jose-...b_7314848.html

[Jack]

Because sugar is evil!!

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/jose-...b_7314848.html

"n the American Diet, added sugar alone accounts for nearly 500 calories every day. Further, in any given week, the average American consumes 3 pounds of sugar each week or 3,550 pounds in an entire lifetime. That’s enough sugar to fill an industrialized dumpster!"
link from RB60.

Supposn made a Statement: "... political entities usually jokey for their goods advantages over others; and usually some of those political schemes are successful."
I was just making a Comment about how powerful the Sugar Lobby was in putting a Tariff/Quota on Imported Sugar.

[Jack]

"Why Americans Pay Triple the World Price for Sugar"

"Washington is once again massively screwing up the American sugar market. Because American farmers cannot compete with foreign sugar growers, the federal government has maintained an array of sugar import quotas and/or tariffs for most of the last 200 years. The regulatory regime has provided windfalls for generations of politicians and jobs for legions of bureaucrats while destroying more than a hundred thousand private, productive jobs."
https://fee.org/articles/why-america...ice-for-sugar/

It's ALL about 'Free Trade' ............. until the rubber meets the road, then it's about Protecting Local Interests from 'Unfair Trade Practices' (like, another country producing Sugar at half the cost).

[RB 60]

"n the American Diet, added sugar alone accounts for nearly 500 calories every day. Further, in any given week, the average American consumes 3 pounds of sugar each week or 3,550 pounds in an entire lifetime. That’s enough sugar to fill an industrialized dumpster!"
link from RB60.

Supposn made a Statement: "... political entities usually jokey for their goods advantages over others; and usually some of those political schemes are successful."
I was just making a Comment about how powerful the Sugar Lobby was in putting a Tariff/Quota on Imported Sugar.

Although it is a fact that some Americans overindulge both salt and sugar, I was just making the comment that the left seemingly doesn't care about tariffs on sugar.
Hell Phila. put a tax on all sugary drinks, even fruit juices.

https://www.phila.gov/services/payme...-beverage-tax/

[Jack]

Although it is a fact that some Americans overindulge both salt and sugar, I was just making the comment that the left seemingly doesn't care about tariffs on sugar.
Hell Phila. put a tax on all sugary drinks, even fruit juices.

https://www.phila.gov/services/payme...-beverage-tax/

I'm pretty sure 'Tariffs' aren't a Left/Right issue. It's all about the Money. Who's constituency gets protected.

'Free Trade' ... sounds GREAT ... until it's YOUR Industry that gets affected.

[Lightbringer]

Annual Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs.

This is not necessarily true, there are many reasons a country may run a trade deficit some of which don't have anything at all to do with trade. In some cases a trade deficit is an indication you're growing faster than other nations in which case implementing a system to curb imports would be a bad thing, not a good thing.

The Wikipedia page has an interview with Buffett footnoted:

https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fort...2872/index.htm

In this interview Buffett gives an example in order to help people understand his reasoning behind his IC proposal. The problem is in his example Buffett is not describing a trade deficit, he is describing a budget deficit which is not the same thing as a trade deficit.

[Jack]

Guille
Lock Her Up!
This message is hidden because Guille is on your ignore list.

Even though this Poster keeps changing names, my ignore feature continues to function.

[Lightbringer]

Guille
Lock Her Up!
This message is hidden because Guille is on your ignore list.

Even though this Poster keeps changing names, my ignore feature continues to function.

This message is hidden because Jack sucks and blows at the same time.

[Jack]

I did get a 'Notification', so he must be able to 'Reply' to me.

[Supposn]

This is not necessarily true, there are many reasons a country may run a trade deficit some of which don't have anything at all to do with trade. In some cases a trade deficit is an indication you're growing faster than other nations in which case implementing a system to curb imports would be a bad thing, not a good thing.

The Wikipedia page has an interview with Buffett footnoted:

https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fort...2872/index.htm

In this interview Buffett gives an example in order to help people understand his reasoning behind his IC proposal. The problem is in his example Buffett is not describing a trade deficit, he is describing a budget deficit which is not the same thing as a trade deficit.

Guille, https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fort...2872/index.htm is a transcription of the Fortune magazine article published by Fortune magazine. The authors were Warren Buffett and Carol Loomis who was at the time an editor of the magazine.

[How can a nation's trade deficit not be due to their trade?]

The article describes the eventual currency inflation that’s among the consequences of the fictional Squanderville’s trade deficit of goods.
Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs.
Respectfully, Supposn

[Lightbringer]

Guille, https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fort...2872/index.htm is a transcription of the Fortune magazine article published by Fortune magazine. The authors were Warren Buffett and Carol Loomis who was at the time an editor of the magazine.

[How can a nation's trade deficit not be due to their trade?]

The article describes the eventual currency inflation that’s among the consequences of the fictional “Squandwerville’s trade deficit of goods.
Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and drag upon their numbers of jobs.
Respectfully, Supposn

That example does no such thing. A trade deficit has nothing to do with government debt. It was a bad example.

[Supposn]

That example does no such thing. A trade deficit has nothing to do with government debt. It was a bad example.

Guille, I specifically mentioned trade deficits, GDP, and numbers of jobs. I made no specific mention of government debt.
If any readers of this thread refer to your link, https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fort...2872/index.htm , I’ll leave the topic and meaning of the article to be a matter for their own determination.

Respectfully, Supposn

[Althea]

"Why Americans Pay Triple the World Price for Sugar"

"Washington is once again massively screwing up the American sugar market. Because American farmers cannot compete with foreign sugar growers, the federal government has maintained an array of sugar import quotas and/or tariffs for most of the last 200 years. The regulatory regime has provided windfalls for generations of politicians and jobs for legions of bureaucrats while destroying more than a hundred thousand private, productive jobs."
https://fee.org/articles/why-america...ice-for-sugar/

It's ALL about 'Free Trade' ............. until the rubber meets the road, then it's about Protecting Local Interests from 'Unfair Trade Practices' (like, another country producing Sugar at half the cost).

Which is why trump is clueless about trade policies. It's not a zero sum game.