Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Money and Finance > Economics


Thanks Tree76Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 2nd, 2016, 11:49 AM   #41
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 25,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by skews13 View Post
Walmart.
You're sure about that, are you?
Thanks from coke
RNG is offline  
Old July 2nd, 2016, 09:36 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
My question of Supposn: If there aren't enough exports to generate enough ICs to get all the imports there is a demand for, will not prices just skyrocket? ...
RNG, referring to Wikipedia's "Import Certificates" article:

The certificates’ global open market prices per U.S. dollar of face values determine the extent of the policies almost direct effect upon prices of foreign goods sold to USA purchasers and the indirect subsidy effect upon prices of USA products sold to foreign purchasers.
This trade proposal’s substantially market driven and would almost entirely or entirely eliminate USA’s chronic annual trade deficits of goods.

Exporters would be motivated to pay the federal fee rates (set and annually updated by law to defray all direct federal expenses due to this trade policy) because only the values of their shipments leaving the USA will otherwise not be assessed.
The fees are proportional to the shipments’ assessed values. After the goods have departed from the USA, their exports will receive transferable Import Certificates that enable importing goods into the USA. The “face value” of those certificates are the values of the USA exported goods that were assessed.

Importers cannot bring their goods into the USA unless they surrender Certificates of sufficient face values to cover the assessed values of the imported goods, thus the certificates global market values are greater than the fees paid by the exporters of USA goods. (Surrendered certificates are cancelled; they cannot be reused).

Exporters of USA goods would have revenue from the USA goods they sell to foreigners, and from trading or selling the transferable Import Certificates. Competition among exporters seeking customers for their USA exported goods and demands from foreign customers will encourage reducing the prices of USA exports. That’s in effect a subsidy of USA exported goods.

//////////////////////////////////////
Transferable Import Certificates expected price behavior in global competitive markets:

The federal fees are passed onto USA purchasers of foreign goods and that’s the reasonably expected minimum rate of the certificates’ global prices.
To any extent of USA consumers balking at paying more for foreign goods, that would limit the maximum rate of certificates’ global prices.

If the certificates’ global price rates should be insufficient, exporters of USA goods would not trouble to deal with them and fewer certificates will be issued.

If issued certificates do not satisfy USA consumers effective demands for foreign goods, the threat of shortfall would increase the global certificate markets' rates prices.

If certificate’s global price rate continue to increase due to USA consumers not balking, it enables exporter of USA goods to sell goods at less than their costs because of their increased revenues due to their acquiring the certificates. Thus more Import Certificates are issued.

The competitive markets work. This is a proposed remedy for competitive markets working too well. It’s preferable that it operates within the global markets for transferable Import Certificates rather than USA employees competing with the labor of lower wage rate nations.

Refer to Wikipedia’s article entitled “Import Certificates”.
Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from coke
Supposn is offline  
Old July 2nd, 2016, 10:10 PM   #43
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
... Plus I fear there is little more than hope to suggest that the increase in cost of living would be more than compensated for by an increase in domestic manufacturing.
RNG, I’m not a proponent of inflation but I’m opposed to USA employees competing with cheaper child labor or convict labor or slave labor or the employees in lower wage nations.
When people are more desperate to obtain jobs at wage rates of lesser purchasing powers, it tends to reduce prices of most goods and services.

Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from coke
Supposn is offline  
Old July 3rd, 2016, 12:13 AM   #44
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Your continued assumption that such an action wouldn't trigger retaliatory tariffs is the weakness of your argument. ...
RNG, I’m not opposed to people, enterprises, nations or any other entities acting in manners they believe to be in their own self interests providing they do not infringe upon the rights of others.

The EU banned USA chickens because of the manner in which we process them prior to shipment. I believe that ban is now partly or entirely lifted).
We may suspect that the ban was less due to health concerns and more due to protection of French chicken producers, but our government should not presume to intervene within another soveignty.

I’m a proponent of USA adopting the unilateral substantially market driven Import Certificate policy for the conduction of our global trade policy. It does not discriminate among foreign products but rather grants all foreign products and traders with equal consideration.
The concept of “most favored nation” does not preclude favoring your own nation but it does not tolerate discriminatory treatment of other foreign nations that are party to a “most favored nation agreement”.

Any nation or entity that attempts inflicting mischief upon a nation that has adopted an Import Certificate policy will experience greater harm to themselves. This would not be due to retaliation of the attacked nation but rather to the normal consequences of an Import Certificate nation’s global trade activities.

There are many examples within all levels of governments within the USA where legislatures outlawing what would otherwise be legal activity because (although the activity may be gainful to ALL of the individual practitioners), the practice was deemed to contrary to the society’s better interest.

Annual trade deficits are a drag upon their nation’s GDP, numbers of jobs and the purchasing powers of their jobs. That’s the justification for adopting an Import Certificate trade policy.

Respectfully, Supposn
Supposn is offline  
Old July 3rd, 2016, 03:49 AM   #45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 383
Refer to the thread “Compare Tariffs and Import Certificates”

compare Tariffs and Import Certificates

Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from coke
Supposn is offline  
Old July 3rd, 2016, 07:30 AM   #46
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 25,253
@Supposn: First, to to quote from the Wiki article you posted,

Quote:
The federal fees are passed onto USA purchasers of foreign goods ...
Further, doesn't
Quote:
To any extent of USA consumers balking at paying more for foreign goods, that would limit the maximum rate of certificates’ global prices.
basically mean that goods either get more expensive or won't be imported at all?

So the public loses there. Will they win enough more with assumed increased manufacturing to achieve a net benefit? I'm not so sure.

The other thing is in terms of retaliatory tariffs, your comments about how the US conducts itself are fine, but that has no impact on what other countries would do to you if you institute this type of a program.

Historically I am not aware of any trade limitation legislation helping the general population in the long term in the modern era. And I only limit it to the modern era because my knowledge of this history is weak.
Thanks from coke
RNG is offline  
Old July 3rd, 2016, 09:33 AM   #47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
@Supposn: First, to to quote from the Wiki article you posted,
Further, doesn't basically mean that goods either get more expensive or won't be imported at all?

So the public loses there. Will they win enough more with assumed increased manufacturing to achieve a net benefit? I'm not so sure. ...
RNG, no; that’s not what it means.

The Import Certificates sufficient increase of prices enable USA exporters to sell USA goods to foreigners at less than their costs because the marginal loss of their export transaction would (due to higher Import Certificate’s global market prices) act as indirect but effective subsidizers of USA exported goods’ prices. Higher certificate prices enable exporters of USA goods to net profit despite the marginal losses of their export transactions. That increases USA’s exports which increase the supply of import certificates.

[I.E. the Import Certificate policy limits USA's imports to the extent of our exports, HOWEVER higher certificate price rates which inhibit the supply of imports also indirctly promote USA exports which increases our supply of Certificates and reduces their market prices].

Consider that both USA production for export or for domestic use ALL contribute to USA’s gross domestic production, GDP).

Transferable Import Certificate trade policy is substantially market rather than government driven. It is highly dependent upon the concept of supply and effective demand.

Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from coke

Last edited by Supposn; July 3rd, 2016 at 09:35 AM.
Supposn is offline  
Old July 3rd, 2016, 09:40 AM   #48
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 25,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
RNG, no; that’s not what it means.

The Import Certificates sufficient increase of prices enable USA exporters to sell USA goods to foreigners at less than their costs because the marginal loss of their export transaction would (due to higher Import Certificate’s global market prices) act as indirect but effective subsidizers of USA exported goods’ prices. Higher certificate prices enable exporters of USA goods to net profit despite the marginal losses of their export transactions. That increases USA’s exports which increase the supply of import certificates.

[I.E. the Import Certificate policy limits USA's imports to the extent of our exports, HOWEVER higher certificate price rates which inhibit the supply of imports also indirctly promote USA exports which increases our supply of Certificates and reduces their market prices].

Consider that both USA production for export or for domestic use ALL contribute to USA’s gross domestic production, GDP).

Transferable Import Certificate trade policy is substantially market rather than government driven. It is highly dependent upon the concept of supply and effective demand.

Respectfully, Supposn
Where does that money to subsidize the manufacturing come from? From importers, who have to charge more to offset the cost of the certificates. Thus the public loses.
Thanks from coke
RNG is offline  
Old July 3rd, 2016, 09:56 AM   #49
Banned
 
coke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: nunya
Posts: 12,580
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
You're sure about that, are you?
When Skews went to daily kos to get his talking point, as soon as he searched for unfair imports walmart popped up
Thanks from Sabcat

Last edited by coke; July 3rd, 2016 at 10:04 AM.
coke is offline  
Old July 3rd, 2016, 10:29 AM   #50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
@Supposn: ...The other thing is in terms of retaliatory tariffs, your comments about how the US conducts itself are fine, but that has no impact on what other countries would do to you if you institute this type of a program.
RNG, I wish no ill will to any nation’s laborers but I’m unwilling that USA’s numbers of jobs and their purchasing power should be less than otherwise because other nations’ governments are unwilling and/or unable to better compensate their own workers.

USA’s Marshall Plan was both altruistic and served our foreign policy goals. Marshall Plan’s net costs effectively were entirely federal costs accounted for within our federal budgets and funded by federal debt and all federal taxpayers.
USA’s annual trade deficits are not direct causes of federal expenditures and do not appear in our annual federal budgets.

USA’s trade deficits economic detriments reduce the revenues of USA’s employees, their dependents and all others to any extent that they are dependent upon enterprises which are also detrimentally affected by the reduced circumstances of USA’s employees.

My greater concern is for USA’s net economy and our middle income earning segment of our population, rather than for foreign opinions and reactions to our trade policies.

Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from coke
Supposn is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Money and Finance > Economics

Tags
chronic, deficits, global trade, imports, jobs, trade, trade deficits, usa’s, wages



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trade deficits are always detrimental to their nations’ GDPs. Supposn Economics 10 May 13th, 2014 12:16 PM
A Chronic Case of Obamnesia Truth Detector Current Events 1 November 6th, 2012 07:40 AM
Chronic Fatigue Economy Truth Detector Current Events 1 November 1st, 2012 05:30 PM
Trade Deficits Are Always Detrimental To Their Nations’ Gdps. Supposn U.S. Federal Policy 0 March 28th, 2011 11:08 AM
Chronic Malnutrition in Gaza intangible child Crime and Punishment 0 November 18th, 2008 08:21 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.