President Trump

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

This war of words between Trump, and Navarro, and Trudeau needs to stop, or at least get out of the public view. As is always the case, the "leaders" don't work out such matters. The negotiations, the details, are handled by "staff." So, both Trump and Trudeau need to issue a statement reiterating the great relationship between the US and Canada, and then both shut up and allow their staffs, and reps from the Department of Commerce, to roll up their sleeves and work this out. As I mentioned, this is NOT the first time we've gotten sideways with Canada on trade. It's happened many times before, and will happen again. But, it doesn't help matters to engage in tit for tat "statements."

Trump is right. He's right that our trade deals, including with our closest allies, disadvantage the US, and Americans!! As a nation we lose $500 billion of wealth EVERY year to these unfair trade deals. This hits the pocketbooks of average Americans too. It is NOT unreasonable to want to change those deals to keep more of our nation's wealth. But… there are better ways than Tweeting, to get that message across to our trade partners.

---

We have a 12.5 billion trade surplus with Canada.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

We have a 12.5 billion trade surplus with Canada.

---

So by that logic, we are absolutely justified in slapping high sanctions on products from on any nation we have a negative trade imbalance with?

Or have you become a Canada bot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow

So by that logic, we are absolutely justified in slapping high sanctions on products from on any nation we have a negative trade imbalance with?

Or have you become a Canada bot?

---

I didn’t advocate tariffs of any sort. I am persuadable in the issue of food tariffs, but certainly am not a religious advocate for them.

My point was that picking a trade fight with Canada makes no sense. Trump just looks like an irrational whiny bitch for hitting them with tariffs and then acting like it is “dishonest” “weak” for Canada to retaliate or that there should be a “special place in hell” for a leader of Canada that would respond in kind to a tariff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow

So by that logic, we are absolutely justified in slapping high sanctions on products from on any nation we have a negative trade imbalance with?

Or have you become a Canada bot?

---

And I was specifically responding to Dawg80s line of argument that our trade deals with our closest allies are “disadvantageous” to America and cost us billions. That doesn’t seem to be the case with Canada.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow

So by that logic, we are absolutely justified in slapping high sanctions on products from on any nation we have a negative trade imbalance with?

Or have you become a Canada bot?

---

Yes I would agree if it matches their's.

Trump proposed to all nations to eliminate all tariffs worldwide, which I thought was a great idea. Off course those countries making a killing off America didn't want that at all. They will probably regret making that decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS

Yes I would agree if it matches their's.

Trump proposed to all nations to eliminate all tariffs worldwide, which I thought was a great idea. Off course those countries making a killing off America didn't want that at all. They will probably regret making that decision.

---

How globalist of him!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

We have a 12.5 billion trade surplus with Canada.

---

You really are daft!

I can't find a reliable source that supports that $12.5 billion number. But, let's accept it for argument's sake. IT SHOULD BE MORE!!!!!!!!! You either really are that stupid, or are deliberately being deceitful. And it probably stems from your demented view that it is okay to win, just as long as you don't win too much, then it becomes unfair. A very socialist view point.

Back to your weak-azz argument. Again, accepting that $12.5 billion figure, the OVERALL score sheet of one nation's trade with another, does not account for real trade imbalances in given sectors/industries. Just to make up some numbers to illustrate the point, let's say trade looks this way:

The US has a $15.5 billion trade surplus in food products (with Canada), a $2 billion surplus in technology, and a $5 billion dollar trade deficit in steel.

+ 15.5
+ 2.0
- 5.0

= +12.5

So! what's the problem, eh! The problem is we should not have such a deficit in steel, it should be closer to zero, or maybe even a surplus. (and I just made up those numbers to make a point). But, that is the problem. That overall $500 billion loss of wealth annually, is not all to those nations who enjoy an overall trade surplus with us. And these losses are not because of some natural competitive advantage some nation enjoys over us, although there is some of that, of course. Which is NOT what Trump or any of us, are concerned about. It's the UNFAIR terms of trade agreements where we, the US, unilaterally gave away the farm...I guess to be "good" global neighbors.

So again, to try to be clear, I do NOT like the manner in which Trump approaches these things. I have posted before about his bombastic approach to "diplomacy," his adversarial (sp?) tendency to create opponents, where none existed, or to inflame such opponents. But, Trump is right in the details, as a "policy-wonk."

Our overall trade scoresheet with Canada is + $12.5 billion? If it should be a + $20 billion, and it's not solely because of some goofy trade agreement, then I support rewriting the agreement.

Have to laugh at myself...which I am big enough to do.

Isn't it ironic I blast Trump for his "colorful" approach to communication, while being right in the policy details, then I resort to that same use of "colorful" language in my posts. The irony is not lost on me, I assure you.

:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

You really are daft!

I can't find a reliable source that supports that $12.5 billion number. But, let's accept it for argument's sake. IT SHOULD BE MORE!!!!!!!!! You either really are that stupid, or are deliberately being deceitful. And it probably stems from your demented view that it is okay to win, just as long as you don't win too much, then it becomes unfair. A very socialist view point.

Back to your weak-azz argument. Again, accepting that $12.5 billion figure, the OVERALL score sheet of one nation's trade with another, does not account for real trade imbalances in given sectors/industries. Just to make up some numbers to illustrate the point, let's say trade looks this way:

The US has a $15.5 billion trade surplus in food products (with Canada), a $2 billion surplus in technology, and a $5 billion dollar trade deficit in steel.

+ 15.5
+ 2.0
- 5.0

= +12.5

So! what's the problem, eh! The problem is we should not have such a deficit in steel, it should be closer to zero, or maybe even a surplus. (and I just made up those numbers to make a point). But, that is the problem. That overall $500 billion loss of wealth annually, is not all to those nations who enjoy an overall trade surplus with us. And these losses are not because of some natural competitive advantage some nation enjoys over us, although there is some of that, of course. Which is NOT what Trump or any of us, are concerned about. It's the UNFAIR terms of trade agreements where we, the US, unilaterally gave away the farm...I guess to be "good" global neighbors.

So again, to try to be clear, I do NOT like the manner in which Trump approaches these things. I have posted before about his bombastic approach to "diplomacy," his adversarial (sp?) tendency to create opponents, where none existed, or to inflame such opponents. But, Trump is right in the details, as a "policy-wonk."

Our overall trade scoresheet with Canada is + $12.5 billion? If it should be a + $20 billion, and it's not solely because of some goofy trade agreement, then I support rewriting the agreement.

---

Apparently you need to go back and study the section of Economics that discusses interdependence and gains from trade. The capitalist trade model is built on the idea that traders should specialize such that the low cost producer makes more of what they produce for cheaper and trades it to the trader that makes something else at lower cost. That is what makes the pie bigger for both traders.

http://fortune.com/2018/06/09/donald...ied-g7-speech/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

Have to laugh at myself...which I am big enough to do.

Isn't it ironic I blast Trump for his "colorful" approach to communication, while being right in the policy details, then I resort to that same use of "colorful" language in my posts. The irony is not lost on me, I assure you.

:D

---

You seem to be suggesting that Canada should buy everything from us and us nothing from them. That expectation only makes sense in Trumpland.

Here's what I posted:

And these losses are not because of some natural competitive advantage some nation enjoys over us, although there is some of that, of course. Which is NOT what Trump or any of us, are concerned about. It's the UNFAIR terms of trade agreements where we, the US, unilaterally gave away the farm...I guess to be "good" global neighbors.

CLEARLY!! I addressed the economic principle whereby goods/services produced efficiently (i.e. lowest cost) should be/will be the primary supplier of such products. I said that....I addressed that....I acknowledged that.... YET! goosey ignores the real point....the UNFAIR terms in trade agreements, and instead goes straight to a point I made.

Goosey could work for CNN/MSNBC! Classic example of "fake news."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dawg80

Here's what I posted:

And these losses are not because of some natural competitive advantage some nation enjoys over us, although there is some of that, of course. Which is NOT what Trump or any of us, are concerned about. It's the UNFAIR terms of trade agreements where we, the US, unilaterally gave away the farm...I guess to be "good" global neighbors.

CLEARLY!! I addressed the economic principle whereby goods/services produced efficiently (i.e. lowest cost) should be/will be the primary supplier of such products. I said that....I addressed that....I acknowledged that.... YET! goosey ignores the real point....the UNFAIR terms in trade agreements, and instead goes straight to a point I made.

Goosey could work for CNN/MSNBC! Classic example of "fake news."

---

What is unfair about our trade deal with Canada?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guisslapp

What is unfair about our trade deal with Canada?

---

http://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3...x-of-stupidity

Goosey claimed our trade surplus with Canada is $12.5 billion, this article says:

To begin with, U.S. merchandise and services trade with Canada, our second-largest trade partner after China, exceeded $675 billion in 2017, yielding a surplus of over $8.5 billion.

12.5? 8.5? it's all good, eh!

For the record, I do not agree with getting sideways with one of our closest allies and friends, Canada. That IS stupid! Trump and his staffers (Navarro and Wilbur Ross, in particular) need to tone down the rhetoric.

But, this does not mean that EVERYTHING is perfect between us and Canada in regards to trade. I have posted about the timber industry, as just one example of Canada's unfair practices that had a direct impact on the US timber (and wood products) industry and that cost American jobs. Canada enjoys other unfair advantages because of NAFTA, as does Mexico. So, while our relationship with Canada is great, and our trading arrangement(s) is mostly great, that does NOT mean there aren't some aspects that need to be tweaked.

BUT!!! we are such great friends and allies with Canada it is STUPID, and I mean STUPID, to air such minor concerns in the public like this. Those comments need to be walked back, and let's move on.

And Larry Kudlow needs to dial back his anti-Canada rhetoric too. I like Kudlow, and he is mostly right on economics, but this stuff has gotten stupid. Stop it!