I'm strongly considering a tariff on my Dentist. All money only flows one way. She has never purchased something from me. One problem with my Dentist tariff is that my spouse has decided it is income to be spent. Much like Congress
-
-
-
I already do this with my cell provider. Three weeks ago I sent them a cease and desist on billing me since I've paid them so much over the years. My phone isn't working now so I'm retroactively justified in my outrage.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You're a moron congressman. R you really representing the citizens of MI? Think of it this way. Let's say U go to toys R us to buy your favorite toy..you find it and at check out, before U R allowed to buy it, they require U to pay $100 just to buy the toy. That's fair to you?
-
You're describing a tariff
-
He seems to think that paying for the stuff you buy is bad somehow.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Only one of you is making a profit on the transaction - and it is not you.
-
In a voluntary exchange, either both parties benefit or the exchange doesn’t happen. They want his money more than their food, he wants their food more than his money. That’s the basis of trade.
-
On a single transaction, I absolutely agree! However, when the money flows one way more than the other (trade imbalance) you have a transfer of wealth. I would prefer the USA not transfer our wealth to other countries.
-
But money is not wealth; it’s just an accounting unit. Stuff is wealth. If anything, a trade imbalance means that the rest of the world is sending you more wealth than you send them. And all of these numbers simply aggregate large numbers of single transactions.
-
Profit is how you build wealth.
-
Profit means benefiting from trade, which I do (or at least expect to do) every time I buy something. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t buy it. Money isn’t anything unless you can exchange it for goods and services.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
as usual, you missed the point
@POTUS was making...surely you understand the difference between international trade and consumerism, but unfortunately, your followers probably don't#WiseUp#FalseInformation#InvalidComparison#Wrong -
He's exactly right - trade is trade, from an international level down to between two individual people. Focusing on deficits at any level is missing the point of trade in the first place - to get what you want at the most reasonable price.
-
focusing on the ridiculous deficit (the one with
#China not the red herring "deficit" that we supposedly have with every place we spend money) just a little bit should do our economy a world of good...watch and learn :-) -
Time for you to read "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt. http://www.hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf …
-
thanks, will it teach me how our buckeye neighbors to the south have lost over 100,000 jobs since y2k because of our trade deficit with
#China ? if not, then maybe you should re-read@realDonaldTrump 's "The Art of the Deal" so we can start making a real difference :-) -
Those jobs were lost because we all want better prices on whatever was being produced. Propping up industries where we cannot compete globally simply means higher prices for all Americans. The world is always changing - we need to move with it.
-
now it's my turn to give you some homework
#truthhttps://articles.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2017/02/ohio_lost_120000_jobs_due_to_u_1.amp … -
Now those jobs were lost between 2001 and 2015. You aren't saying it's been since like 2017 these jobs were lost are you. Let's hold all accountable.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.