Political Forums  

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


Thanks Tree14Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 28th, 2018, 08:54 AM   #41
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 29,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
RNG, No, it's not the same as dumping, But I don't doubt the WTO and most member nations would be opposed to USA adopting an Import Certificate policy. It's a unilateral policy that doesn't require international approval.

I'm an advocate of international agreements' “most favored nation” clauses. Those clauses require participants to grant all other participants any advantages they grant to any other foreign nation; (but They may not necessarily be drafted to prohibit favoring entities within your own nation).

USA trade agreements such as those with the WTO and the NATA are not treaties approved by a 2/3 vote of the U.S. Senate. Only a tenth of our government's international agreements and none of our trade agreements have the CONSTITUTIONAL status of “treaties”.

All USA’s trade agreements are later subject to mutually agreed modifications among the participating nations.
If agreement participants cannot concur upon modifications, there are provisions within all of those trade agreements for participants granting six months’ notice of their intention to withdraw from the agreement.

Respectfully, Supposn
The WTO can and does rule on unfair government subsidies. This system would "give" exporters money allowing them to sell their product to other countries at a lower cost. The fact that a convoluted way of getting that subsidy is introduced doesn't change that fact.

It is in effect no different than if they charged a tariff on imports and used that money to subsidise exports. It's just that they use the importers as the tariff charging agent in the case of the certificates.
RNG is offline  
Old January 28th, 2018, 12:12 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
The WTO can and does rule on unfair government subsidies. This system would "give" exporters money allowing them to sell their product to other countries at a lower cost. The fact that a convoluted way of getting that subsidy is introduced doesn't change that fact.

It is in effect no different than if they charged a tariff on imports and used that money to subsidise exports. It's just that they use the importers as the tariff charging agent in the case of the certificates.
RNG, I don't doubt that the WTO and the majority of NAFTA nations would take that position, but it doesn't require a constitutional amendment or a super-majority for the U.S. Congress to pass an Import Certificates Act.

If the WTO or NAFTA could not accept USA's change of policy, their alternative would be, (as those agreements were drafted), to accept USA's notice of intention to resign from the agreement. All participants of trade agreements the USA has participated within, have that same option.

Respectfully, Supposn
Supposn is offline  
Old January 28th, 2018, 12:30 PM   #43
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 29,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
RNG, I don't doubt that the WTO and the majority of NAFTA nations would take that position, but it doesn't require a constitutional amendment or a super-majority for the U.S. Congress to pass an Import Certificates Act.

If the WTO or NAFTA could not accept USA's change of policy, their alternative would be, (as those agreements were drafted), to accept USA's notice of intention to resign from the agreement. All participants of trade agreements the USA has participated within, have that same option.

Respectfully, Supposn
Wouldn't it be simpler to just pull out of the agreements? And if you think that's a good idea all I can say is that the majority of economists and businessmen disagree.
RNG is offline  
Old January 28th, 2018, 01:18 PM   #44
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
I'm among the proponents of a trade policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. The Import Certificate trade policy would have no problem with USA's new tax laws.
Respectfully, Supposn

Excerpted from:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/08/b...e=sectionfront

Tax law may send factories and jobs abroad

Under the new law, income made by American companies’ overseas subsidiaries will face United States taxes that are half the rate applied to their domestic income, 10.5 percent compared with the new top corporate rate of 21 percent.
THE TAX LAW !!!may!!! SEND FACTORIES AND JOBS ABROAD....MAY, not a fact...
If it does end up like that I want to know....
Thanks from TNVolunteer73
urbrother is offline  
Old January 28th, 2018, 07:27 PM   #45
I'm debt free
 
TNVolunteer73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lebanon, TN
Posts: 35,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Wouldn't it be simpler to just pull out of the agreements? And if you think that's a good idea all I can say is that the majority of economists and businessmen disagree.
And once again we here from the Canadian peanut gallery.

TRUMP does not want out of Agreements he wants them RENEGOTIATED.

You seem to be a very smart person to be so clueless of reality.
TNVolunteer73 is offline  
Old January 28th, 2018, 08:29 PM   #46
Senior Member
 
roastpork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,630
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
The WTO can and does rule on unfair government subsidies. This system would "give" exporters money allowing them to sell their product to other countries at a lower cost. The fact that a convoluted way of getting that subsidy is introduced doesn't change that fact.

It is in effect no different than if they charged a tariff on imports and used that money to subsidise exports. It's just that they use the importers as the tariff charging agent in the case of the certificates.
It's the end result that matters, reduction of our national debt, more jobs for American workers, higher wages, more full time jobs, more money to spend on infrastructure, and more money for our great Southern Wall. Even the Democrats, as well as the Independents, are starting to feel good about President Trump. And even you can't deny his effects on the economy, though you probably will.
roastpork is offline  
Old January 28th, 2018, 08:37 PM   #47
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 29,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by roastpork View Post
It's the end result that matters, reduction of our national debt, more jobs for American workers, higher wages, more full time jobs, more money to spend on infrastructure, and more money for our great Southern Wall. Even the Democrats, as well as the Independents, are starting to feel good about President Trump. And even you can't deny his effects on the economy, though you probably will.
Can't you see that as soon as the US tries something like this, the countries you were hoping to export to are going to erect their own tariff walls.
RNG is offline  
Old January 28th, 2018, 08:38 PM   #48
I'm debt free
 
TNVolunteer73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lebanon, TN
Posts: 35,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Can't you see that as soon as the US tries something like this, the countries you were hoping to export to are going to erect their own tariff walls.
Actually most nations will negotiate to prevent Tarriffs because the US in most cases is their biggest customer.
TNVolunteer73 is offline  
Old January 28th, 2018, 09:52 PM   #49
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbrother View Post
THE TAX LAW !!!may!!! SEND FACTORIES AND JOBS ABROAD....MAY, not a fact...
If it does end up like that I want to know....
UrBrother, I suppose I should state it more emphatically.

It is extremely unlikely that taxing corporations' foreign earnings at almost half of the rate upon domestic earnings will not be a strong inducement for investing into and importing from foreign producing enterprises to the net detriment of USA's GDP and numbers of jobs.

If the USA adopted the trade policy described within Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article, I'd have no objection to the lesser rate of corporate taxes. The Import Certificate policy would increase our GDP and numbers of jobs more than otherwise.

Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nations' GDPs and numbers of jobs.

Respectfully, Supposn
Supposn is offline  
Old January 28th, 2018, 10:33 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Wouldn't it be simpler to just pull out of the agreements? And if you think that's a good idea all I can say is that the majority of economists and businessmen disagree.
RNG, I'm among the proponents of USA adopting the Import Certificate trade policy. We are not advocates of USA proactively seeking to resign from our existing trade agreements; however if others cannot accept our policies, that's an alternative. There's no reason to expect resignation from our now existing trade agreements would be the consequences of USA's new trade policy.

We have trade agreements with many individual and pacts of nations. All of those agreements have provisions for modification or if there's no agreement, individual nations can choose to resign from those agreements.

I would suppose that the regulations of our trade agreements drafted provisions to accept some favoritism among British Commonwealth nations, or among European Economic Union nations. Similarly, other nations will have to accept the favoritism the USA will provide for exporters of USA goods. (Let me point out that foreign enterprises or their agents can be exporters of USA goods).

Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from roastpork
Supposn is offline  
Reply

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

Tags
abroad, factories, gdp, imports, jobs, law, send, tax, trade deficit



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trump tells Black citizens he will protect their jobs and create new jobs johnwk Current Events 10 August 26th, 2016 04:10 AM
Venezuela crisis: Maduro threatens seizure of closed factories Sabcat Americas 15 May 21st, 2016 02:27 PM
Schools as Fearmongering Factories: The Case of Ahmed Mohamed LongWinded Philosophy 1 September 17th, 2015 09:29 PM
U.S. Funding Mosques Abroad Zack Middle East 1 December 25th, 2010 11:42 AM
Obama pokes fun at Americans abroad garysher Politicians 1 July 11th, 2008 09:27 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



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