Really, everyone. And you say that with a straight face.:rolleyes:

American consumers.

I can say that with a couple of curved lines. :p

http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/defnw.png

So according to this chart, the more we can separate Net Worth from Trade Deficit the better.

What would happen if we had no Trade Deficit?

No, according to this chart, the trade deficit and net worth tend to move in the same direction. While that does not necessarily show a causal relation, it does show that trade deficits are not harmful to Americans, something that advocates of tariffs claim but cannot prove.

If we had no trade deficit, we would be paying higher prices for most of the manufactured products that we buy.

That looks very much like a temperature graph hcap posted last year! :confused::D

So while net household worth was going up while trade deficit has somewhat stabilized/decreased in the last 5 years, you summarize we should keep up a trade deficit?

What would actually happen if we had a trade deficit of lower numbers. Hell, even a net zero. What would happen?

Problem is, you don't know, and thus you keep proposing a trade deficit as being a "good thing" because it is what we have always done.

There really are no real world statistics to support either side, other than, this is what we have always done.

I did not say any of those things. I said that a trade deficit is not the evil that many claim, and that trying to "fix" it with tariffs will make things a lot worse.

I am not proposing anything other than letting the free market operate as best it can under the too many government regulations we already have. If that leads to a decrease in the trade deficit, fine. If it doesn't, that's fine too. Let the consumers decide.

But all indications are that at this time, a lower trade deficit would mean higher prices for the American consumer.

And thus a tariff we put on certain products imported in to America means you have no clue other than you hate it.

Sounds great.

Should we ban guns on those imports?

I said nothing like that. I said that tariffs are taxes typically imposed to protect selected industries from foreign competition and result in higher prices for consumers.

That means higher costs of living for Americans and it means the government is picking winners and losers in the market. And that is what I hate.

Bush tried the same thing with steel tariffs in 2002, and I certainly have a clue about that. Over 200,000 American jobs were lost and the tariffs were removed.

Vox, OMG. Maybe they will put him on double secret probation:pound:

Yes I do.

If I break this down to the ridiculous it becomes pretty easy to see. I work in the mortgage industry which honestly is a hilarious name "industry"...

I don't produce anything of real value outside the few coyote hides I shoot.

What I do is provide a service that in turn compensates me with dollars.

Using those dollars I purchase things from here, there, and everywhere.

Using myself as an example EVERYTHING I purchase that is imported adds to the trade deficit... literally every single dollar. Since I don't actually produce anything to export.

Free trade simply allows me to purchase goods that I deem the best value to myself regardless of where they come from. This allows me to keep and spend more of my dollars elsewhere.

The Dems should be all over this. This is straight out of the DNC playbook: tariffs to protect union jobs. Now they just have to figure out a way to take credit for it. :p

Upside down world...

The Dems are now more capitalist than the "republicans." :pound:

Except when they aren't.

It's all quite amazing actually.