We can't afford that trade imbalance with China. You can talk about taxes all you want. The reason for that in particular trade imbalance is because they work for pennies on the dollar. Have no where near the Occupational Health and Safety Laws and will work for 8 hours without a pee break.

Tell me what you want to do specifically, and then let's look at the impact.

I only trade with people that enjoy our standard of living and have the same environmental standards as ours. That's the first paragraph in any trade treaty.

(02-22-2017 02:44 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-22-2017 02:26 PM)bullet Wrote:  https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-trade-def...rs-3306276
China was $347 billion of our net $502 billion trade deficit.
Other major deficits:
Japan $69 billion
Germany $65 billion
Mexico $63 billion
So we have a net surplus of 42 billion with everyone but these 4. China doesn't play on a level playing field. Mexico we can deal with. And we need to talk to Germany and Japan about policies that make outside products more difficult to get in. We have roughly 3 times the trade with Mexico that we do with German and Japan, but they have even larger deficits. China's trade is only a little higher than Mexico ($579 billion vs. $525 billion) but has a massively larger deficit.

But what are you going to do with China that comports with international law? That's one problem with tariffs and quotas and other protectionist measures. There's only so much you can do without violating treaties to which we are a signatory party. And anything we do invites retaliation which probably hurts strong US companies more than tariffs help weak ones. We could choose to disavow those treaties and become North Korea or 18th century Japan. But I don't think that's in our best interests.

We need to quit focusing on individual countries so much, and look at our policies across the board. Our advantages with resources and education and infrastructure allowed us to be competitive while paying higher wages and having stricter environmental standards 50-60 years ago. We aren't any more. Leveling the playing field with taxes and implementing a consumption tax would produce a huge swing our way. we would still be a net importer from China, although by a narrower margin, and we would probably become a net exporter to many places that we import from now.

Letting China in the WTO without more concessions was a huge mistake. In any event, protectionism with China hurts them vastly more than it hurts us. They don't play by the rules everyone else does. The Red Army controls most major companies. They manipulate their currency. They steal intellectual property. And as said, their environmental and safety standards are abysmal. I think anyone who uses Chinese products to make food is crazy.

(02-22-2017 02:50 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I only trade with people that enjoy our standard of living and have the same environmental standards as ours. That's the first paragraph in any trade treaty.

I agree with this. I wouldn't do business with China.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Machiavelli Wrote:
I only trade with people that enjoy our standard of living and have the same environmental standards as ours. That's the first paragraph in any trade treaty.
I agree with this. I wouldn't do business with China.



What is sad to me...... this should be just common sense? How in the hell have we let this happen?

(02-22-2017 02:55 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Machiavelli Wrote:
I only trade with people that enjoy our standard of living and have the same environmental standards as ours. That's the first paragraph in any trade treaty.
I agree with this. I wouldn't do business with China.



What is sad to me...... this should be just common sense? How in the hell have we let this happen?

globalism

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(02-22-2017 02:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  In any event, protectionism with China hurts them vastly more than it hurts us.

But here's the problem. It may hurt China more than it hurts us in dealing with China. But it probably hurts us more in dealing with every country in the world except China, and it probably helps them deal with those other countries.

I'm more favorably inclined toward things that help us deal with everybody. And a consumption tax plus world-class competitive corporate and individual tax rates improve our position relative to everyone.

I've waxed poetic on healthcare for years now... and this article only proves my contentions all along. Some of you agree and see it, some of you don't. Those that don't often can't/won't be convinced, no matter what is put in front of them.

Some people just don't get it.

The primary issues of healthcare is personal responsibility and living well. Americans by and large don't want to do that. We are a nation of extremism, not moderation. .. and we all want the freedom to do whatever we want with and to our bodies, without having to personally bear the responsibility for those choices.

People want to walk into the ER and walk out with a magic pill. They want to skip their PCP visits but then have their entire life story known by the ER doc in 5 minutes with 50 other patients he has to triage.

Healthcare is PRIMARILY about responsibility... and almost everyone wants to pass that buck.

Repealing Obamacare ISN'T enough. We need a 'come to Jesus' meeting about what healthcare and health insurance is.

I'd laugh my butt off at them if it wasn't so serious... but I smdh at those who want other people to pay more so that they can pay less (meaning they are 'profiting' off of others) and then those same people want insurance companies to be non-profit. Hypocrisy at its finest.

I don't know how you divide it but I do know I lived it. You have catastrophic care and you have the sniffles care. I have a weak immune system. I have a frame shift mutation on the 7th chromosome that I found out through my daughters troubles. I've gutted out many a cold. I'm to the point now that with knowledge of the situation that was really stupid on my part. I'll pay the piper, but the catastrophic care? That would bankrupt anyone.

Health care is not a Constitutional right.

(02-22-2017 02:50 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I only trade with people that enjoy our standard of living and have the same environmental standards as ours. That's the first paragraph in any trade treaty.

That knocks out almost everyone except Western Europe, Japan and Australia.

(02-22-2017 04:22 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I don't know how you divide it but I do know I lived it. You have catastrophic care and you have the sniffles care. I have a weak immune system. I have a frame shift mutation on the 7th chromosome that I found out through my daughters troubles. I've gutted out many a cold. I'm to the point now that with knowledge of the situation that was really stupid on my part. I'll pay the piper, but the catastrophic care? That would bankrupt anyone.

I agree 100% and have advocated such.
Owl models it after Bismarck which is fine (same concept)... I model it more after the high deductible plans we used to be allowed to have... though I add what amount to penalties for poor life choices/diseases (or injuries) of choice/negligence.

I think it far better to make someone who breaks their leg jumping their bmx bike off of their roof pay more for their own care than to make a healthy person who takes good care of their body pay more for no additional care for themselves so that someone else can get care pay more. Discourage bad choices... not 'being healthy'.

I also don't think that someone who has just started paying into Medicare should get the same coverage (without paying more) as someone who has paid in for 40 years. Its not Apples:Apples, but we need to be conscious of that

Here is a republican proposal that looks a lot like Bismarck. Instead of funneling money for non-insureds to local charity hospitals, set it up so that each state picks default plan and everybody in the state who doesn't pick a plan gets the default plan, and make the funding mechanism vouchers instead of tax credits, and you'd pretty much have Bismarck. And the plan includes the high deductible plans coupled with HSAs that my good friend Hambone likes.

And BTW the Sessions is the Texas Sessions, not Jeff.