Trade deficits soar to record levels

[southernhybrid]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/06/us/politics/us-trade-deficit.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

WASHINGTON — The United States trade deficit in goods ballooned to its largest level in history, reaching $891.3 billion in 2018, despite President Trump’s repeated promise to reduce that figure.

The gap between the goods that the United States sells to China and what China sells to America rose to a record $419 billion, the Commerce Department said Wednesday. That gap has been a particular source of ire for Mr. Trump, who has imposed steep tariffs on Chinese goods to try and slow imports into America.

In December, the overall goods and services deficit rose to $59.8 billion, up 19 percent from the previous month. It was the highest monthly trade deficit in a decade.

The trade deficit, or the gap between value of goods and services imported into the country and exported out of it, expanded mainly because of the strong American economy, which allowed Americans to purchase more from abroad. A strong dollar, which weighed on American exports, and a continued shortfall in American savings also helped to buoy the metric.

You're doing a heck of a job there Donnie!

Mr. Trump’s $1.5 trillion tax cut also helped widen the trade deficit. To pay for the tax cuts, the government needed to borrow more dollars, some of which came from foreign investors. Foreigners got those dollars by selling more goods and services to Americans, which will widen the trade gap.

On Tuesday, Treasury Department figures showed the budget deficit is also widening, and is on track to top $1 trillion this year.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, that doesn't sound good. Perhaps you should try giving more tax cuts to billionaires in order to deal with this.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'd get worked up if this was actually as big a problem as Trump claims it is. At least the Chinese are paying us tariffs (they aren't) to help make up for this trade deficit.

 

[Horatio Parker]

All surpluses require deficits somewhere else and vice versa. A trade deficit means our trading partners want to save dollars.

The world wants dollars, so they want us to buy their stuff. We get stuff, they get data at the Fed.

Trump wants things as they were in the '50s. Ain't gonna happen. And anyway, why should we make our own stuff when others do it cheaper. Give our people something hung better to do.

 

[southernhybrid]

I don't think that trade deficits are necessarily bad, but Trump acts like they are the worst thing in the world, well other than immigrants and liberals.

Trump also doesn't seem to realize that tariffs end up being paid by the consumer.

My only point is that his stupid trade war and stupid tax cuts have done more harm than good.

 

[dismal]

I don't think that trade deficits are necessarily bad, but Trump acts like they are the worst thing in the world, well other than immigrants and liberals.

Trump also doesn't seem to realize that tariffs end up being paid by the consumer.

My only point is that his stupid trade war and stupid tax cuts have done more harm than good.

Sounds like you should have started an "Orange Man Bad" thread in the Trump Derangement Subforum.

 

[Elixir]

I don't think that trade deficits are necessarily bad, but Trump acts like they are the worst thing in the world, well other than immigrants and liberals.

Trump also doesn't seem to realize that tariffs end up being paid by the consumer.

My only point is that his stupid trade war and stupid tax cuts have done more harm than good.

Sounds like you should have started an "Orange Man Bad" thread in the Trump Derangement Subforum.

Why not show us how trump's stupid trade war and stupid tax cuts have done more good than harm? I suspect you are unable to do so.

 

[dismal]

I don't think that trade deficits are necessarily bad, but Trump acts like they are the worst thing in the world, well other than immigrants and liberals.

Trump also doesn't seem to realize that tariffs end up being paid by the consumer.

My only point is that his stupid trade war and stupid tax cuts have done more harm than good.

Sounds like you should have started an "Orange Man Bad" thread in the Trump Derangement Subforum.

Why not show us how trump's stupid trade war and stupid tax cuts have done more good than harm? I suspect you are unable to do so.

I've been a pretty consistent advocate of free trade the whole time I have been here.

I didn't realize you were a big free trade guy too. What are we going to do to get these other fools who constantly applaud the government meddling in the economy into line?

 

[Elixir]

I didn't realize you were a big free trade guy too.

Whn you respond to "My only point is that his stupid trade war and stupid tax cuts have done more harm than good" with "Sounds like you should have started an "Orange Man Bad" thread in the Trump Derangement Subforum", you don't exactly paint yourself as a "free trade guy".

 

[dismal]

I didn't realize you were a big free trade guy too.

Whn you respond to "My only point is that his stupid trade war and stupid tax cuts have done more harm than good" with "Sounds like you should have started an "Orange Man Bad" thread in the Trump Derangement Subforum", you don't exactly paint yourself as a "free trade guy".

I said that because his whole point seemed to be about Trump being bad, not about trade.

Like when he said: "I don't think that trade deficits are necessarily bad" I took that as him not actually caring about the trade deficit that much.

And when he said: "Trump acts like they are the worst thing in the world, well other than immigrants and liberals." that seemed to be mostly along the lines of "Orange Man Bad".

Looking back, I'm comfortable that my interpretation is reasonable.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I didn't realize you were a big free trade guy too.

I supported TPP. Global trade is toothpaste that will never go back in the tube. Oddly enough, you have been virtually silent regarding any criticism of the extremely unconservative anti-trade policies Trump has enacted. Instead, you seem quite happy just making cheap shots.

 

[dismal]

I didn't realize you were a big free trade guy too.

I supported TPP. Global trade is toothpaste that will never go back in the tube. Oddly enough, you have been virtually silent regarding any criticism of the extremely unconservative anti-trade policies Trump has enacted. Instead, you seem quite happy just making cheap shots.

I criticize Trump's trade policies when I'm not among the Orange Man Bad crowd.

So you wouldn't have seen it.

 

[ZiprHead]

I didn't realize you were a big free trade guy too.

I supported TPP. Global trade is toothpaste that will never go back in the tube. Oddly enough, you have been virtually silent regarding any criticism of the extremely unconservative anti-trade policies Trump has enacted. Instead, you seem quite happy just making cheap shots.

I criticize Trump's trade policies when I'm not among the Orange Man Bad crowd.

So you wouldn't have seen it.

So, cheap shots it is then.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I criticize Trump's trade policies when I'm not among the Orange Man Bad crowd.

So you wouldn't have seen it.

Well good for you then. *gives dismal a gold sticker*

 

[dismal]

I criticize Trump's trade policies when I'm not among the Orange Man Bad crowd.

So you wouldn't have seen it.

So, cheap shots it is then.

Why is that a cheap shot? Why would I want to have a serious trade discussion with someone whose well-considered opinion on the subject is 'Orange Man Bad"?

Case and point: I entered this thread thinking it might be about trade policy based on the title and quickly saw it was an Orange Man Bad thread. Hence I didn't discuss trade policy in it.

Now I guess it's also a "let's discuss dismal's posting habits" thread. This, at least, can be avoided by posting Orange Man Bad threads in the Trump Derangement Subforum. I tend not to venture in there.

 

[Elixir]

Looking back, I'm comfortable that my interpretation is reasonable.

Your comfort with your own interpretation is important - to you, just as each of ours is to ourselves. And worthless to anyone else.
What makes a difference is presentation. I don't oppose your critique of anyone else's presentation, I only wish that such critique was accompanied by substantive discussion of the issues raised in the post under criticism. Are trade deficits good, bad or indifferent, and why? What about other deficits? Or, if you wish to focus myopically on the fact that many here think the orange man IS bad, tell us why you either think orange man is GOOD or why saying he's bad constitutes some sort of derangement.
Thanks.

 

[dismal]

Looking back, I'm comfortable that my interpretation is reasonable.

Your comfort with your own interpretation is important - to you, just as each of ours is to ourselves. And worthless to anyone else.
What makes a difference is presentation. I don't oppose your critique of anyone else's presentation, I only wish that such critique was accompanied by substantive discussion of the issues raised in the post under criticism. Are trade deficits good, bad or indifferent, and why? What about other deficits? Or, if you wish to focus myopically on the fact that many here think the orange man IS bad, tell us why you either think orange man is GOOD or why saying he's bad constitutes some sort of derangement.
Thanks.

Where do you think my analysis was off? He pretty much said he didn't care very much about the trade deficit, just wanted to bash Trump. Is English not your first language?

 

[Elixir]

Looking back, I'm comfortable that my interpretation is reasonable.

Your comfort with your own interpretation is important - to you, just as each of ours is to ourselves. And worthless to anyone else.
What makes a difference is presentation. I don't oppose your critique of anyone else's presentation, I only wish that such critique was accompanied by substantive discussion of the issues raised in the post under criticism. Are trade deficits good, bad or indifferent, and why? What about other deficits? Or, if you wish to focus myopically on the fact that many here think the orange man IS bad, tell us why you either think orange man is GOOD or why saying he's bad constitutes some sort of derangement.
Thanks.

Where do you think my analysis was off? He pretty much said he didn't care very much about the trade deficit, just wanted to bash Trump. Is English not your first language?

Do you really have a problem with my English? Please be specific, so I can work on it as needed.
I am saying that you have failed to iterate any policy for which you are advocating, and that it is futile and childish to imply that people are deranged for disliking Trump. I hate the fucker myself, and am not reticent to call those who cleave unto him "trumpsuckers" and the like. But I try to accompany such epithets with some rational point supporting my view of why I think that trumpsuckers are deluded or deranged. You seem to think that the cuteness of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" confers some kind of meaning unto it, and therefore suffices to rebut every point being made about why "orange man bad". The way you use it, it's just a vacuous stand-alone insult with no substance.

 

[dismal]

Where do you think my analysis was off? He pretty much said he didn't care very much about the trade deficit, just wanted to bash Trump. Is English not your first language?

Do you really have a problem with my English? Please be specific, so I can work on it as needed.
I am saying that you have failed to iterate any policy for which you are advocating, and that it is futile and childish to imply that people are deranged for disliking Trump. I hate the fucker myself, and am not reticent to call those who cleave unto him "trumpsuckers" and the like. But I try to accompany such epithets with some rational point supporting my view of why I think that trumpsuckers are deluded or deranged. You seem to think that the cuteness of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" confers some kind of meaning unto it, and therefore suffices to rebut every point being made about why "orange man bad". The way you use it, it's just a vacuous stand-alone insult with no substance.

No, I have a problem with your failing to comprehend my interpretation of southernhybrid's English. I feel like my analysis was pretty spot on.

 

[laughing dog]

Where do you think my analysis was off? He pretty much said he didn't care very much about the trade deficit, just wanted to bash Trump. Is English not your first language?

Do you really have a problem with my English? Please be specific, so I can work on it as needed.
I am saying that you have failed to iterate any policy for which you are advocating, and that it is futile and childish to imply that people are deranged for disliking Trump. I hate the fucker myself, and am not reticent to call those who cleave unto him "trumpsuckers" and the like. But I try to accompany such epithets with some rational point supporting my view of why I think that trumpsuckers are deluded or deranged. You seem to think that the cuteness of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" confers some kind of meaning unto it, and therefore suffices to rebut every point being made about why "orange man bad". The way you use it, it's just a vacuous stand-alone insult with no substance.

No, I have a problem with your failing to comprehend my interpretation of southernhybrid's English. I feel like my analysis was pretty spot on.

That explains the issue. Rational thought indicates your analysis was completely off. It resembles a response of a kneejerk Trumpsucker, instead of an ardent free trader or even free thinker.