Trump to try to reinvent the American Economy Through Trade

33 posts / 0 new
Last post
pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Trump to try to reinvent the American Economy Through Trade

It has been announced that the President will be visiting Asia in an attempt to reverse the course of the U. S. economy that his predecessors so eagerly started destroying over the past 50 years. Not only will he come back empty handed because he has nothing to trade, but his failure will confirm that the ultimate bankruptcy of our economy is closer than we have been led to believe.

Foreign governments do not need us, we need them. We give them arms to insure they can control their own populations in exchange for fealty to do our bidding, which they don't. We buy their products which now include just about every manufactured item in the lexicon of manufactured goods. They purchase aircraft and certain other capital goods because it is cheaper to do so because of the high capital costs and they are doing it with our own money. They restrain themselves from the production of motor cars in defense of what they have seen happen to us in the way of traffic congestion and consumption of gasoline they all must import. What they really want, particularly China is the grain surplus that we have to actually subsidize in order to sell and still give away an enormous quantity to feed the world's refugee population.

Better he should stay home and allow the American public to continue to believe we have the world's strongest economy. By the way, as measured in the fuel value of the food that sustains life and our very existence, the United States has never been at the top.

johnw
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 03/11/2009 - 10:06am
Pmconusa......If the rest off

Pmconusa......If the rest off the world put an absolutely leak proof trade embargo on the USA, exactly what is it we couldn't grow , pump ,mine,catch in the ocean,harvest from our forests,generate in our waterways,that the rest of the work has we need ? Bananas,cheap clothes and immigrant labor????Maybe it would be the best thing that ever happened to us.....if we had to reopen the closed factories , mines,oil fields , defend our 200 mile territorial boundary,.....put people back to work.....

Melvin Udall
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 40 min ago
Joined: 05/01/2002 - 12:01am
Note to editor: something

Note to editor: something chopped off 80% of pmcon's opening post.

Mainelion
Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 7 min ago
Joined: 08/11/2005 - 12:01am
That's a feature, not a bug

That's a feature, not a bug Mel.

Vikingstar
Offline
Last seen: 18 hours 34 min ago
Joined: 01/04/2003 - 1:01am
There are certain strategic

There are certain strategic resources (such as those known as "rare earth" metals) that we do import from other countries. The United States can't be 100% self-reliant in terms of resources.

I've often wondered why we as a country never just say, "if you allow us to export to your country without tariffs, we will put no tariffs on your imports. If you place tariffs on our imports, we will put exactly the same measure of tariffs on your products." It seems to me that we would soon have a level playing field, but maybe this is too simplistic.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Johnw: We tried that once

Johnw: We tried that once with the tariffs that were imposed when producers complained of dumping and below cost sales in order to protect American manufacturers. We removed the tariffs in trade agreements like GATT and NAFTA only to lose millions of manufacturing jobs because those who were benefiting from the tariffs wanted it both ways; jobs and cheap products. Well low and behold we found we couldn't in a free economy and now we want to put the Genie back in the bottle. He has escaped never to be returned.

We still grow enough to feed our people but arable land and the water supply have limited it to the extent we have to subsidize farmers of nearly every commodity when there is more money but less energy in fruits and vegetables, a large quantity of which we now import because our labor costs, protected by laws are higher than other countries. What we don't realize is it is the banks who own the farms and they need the subsidies in order to keep collecting the debt. To keep this system going we have developed the largest welfare economy the world has ever seen. We cannot keep this up forever and it is now possible to actually estimate when it will all come to a screeching halt when we consume all the energy we grow. It is based on the continued growth of the population the banks need to perpetuate the system. More customers and new borrowers.

This is happening around the world at an alarming rate and we fail to recognize why there are civil wars going on in Africa and the Middle East and millions of people are migrating to where they can obtain enough to sustain life. Only France, Germany and England grow and can buy enough to feed the whole of continental Europe and China has for years imported food and only recently had to subsidize their rice and grain farmers because they operate on the same economic system.

Trump is going to build a wall on the Mexican border to keep out the invaders (migrants) who in desperation are fleeing to the United States because they can so easily and be welcomed by the idiots who fail to realize it is their own future they are destroying. The idiocy of this action compares to building a fence on only one side of your yard to keep the neighbors dog at bay. Europe has no fences and the desperate use the land bridge through Turkey or boats from the African coast to flee to Europe.

Some on this blog have decried my fear mongering, mocked me and tried even to silence me. That the predictions I've made and the vision I've tried to portray of the future is just now beginning to be recognized. It has hit home where we can see it, particularly in the cities where people are farther removed from the remaining source of our strength, our food supply. Just yesterday I hear that New York has over 28,000 homeless living in the city. Ask yourself, who went around and counted them?

As I write this post I see a notice citing Mainers to march for climate change. How on earth can people think there is anything anyone can do about it except make money from schemes that put others out of work. We can't even make it rain, not that we haven't had those who tried.

Continue at your own peril. I have tried to resist the urge to repeat my message and have resorted now to only explain the futility of the actions of our government that are solely intended to maintain the growing imbalance of the distribution our nation's wealth because they are the ones who have been given the power to do so.

johnw
Offline
Last seen: 8 hours 20 min ago
Joined: 03/11/2009 - 10:06am
pmconusa There is not a bit

pmconusa There is not a bit of doubt in my mind that the earths resources are limited , that there is a finite number of people that the planet can sustain and remain a healthy place to live...... How do you explain that to people who just keep producing more people they can't feed or there is no work for?? India is a great example... 700+ million people and the vast majority living in poverty and the population is growing, why?..... Personally I think you can't fool mother nature and along comes a bug.... that restores the balance.....or if you are of a cynical nature along comes the one worlders with a bug that......

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Johnw: All you have to do is

Johnw: All you have to do is look at India's imports. They are predominately food they can now buy because quite a few of their population are earning dollars doing jobs that have been shifted there by English speaking businesses. They still make some items that are bought by even poorer neighboring countries that also earns them foreign exchange.

If all of the Indians who had left the country since the days of their independence from Britain and produced progeny returned the population would likely double. Our neighbor Cuba is a classic example. Those who benefited from keeping Castro in power remained and hundreds of thousands fled and will never return because the country is the same basket case that is India, teetering on a limb.

Thomas Malthus predicted over 300 years ago that increases in population would ultimately be the downfall of the species. His warnings went unheeded as they continue to be because to reign in inflation and maintain a customer base, the banks, who own just about everything need population increase however it can be had, immigration or natural multiplication.

We copied the model of the British and punish those who can afford to have progeny and subsidize those who should not, but do because we reward them with welfare. How many intelligent young people do you know who won't have children because they cannot afford them. Contrarily, there are many poor who would remain poor if they didn't have children that qualifies them for welfare?

Our economic system requires you work in order to survive but the government decides who gets to work, at what and for how much. This is not a system where a family who has no one working can survive without government welfare. Those who work at jobs that escape the government regulated system will soon find that the devaluing dollars they earn will not buy them food, let alone clothing and shelter. Those who escape the system and do not work can now be seen on the streets of every big city and they are coming to rural America in desperation because cash handouts are rapidly disappearing as the country converts to a cashless society. Willie Sutton, when asked why he robbed banks is quoted as saying, "its where the money is". You go to a bank today and there is very little cash laying around and extremely difficult to get at in broad daylight.

Now that you can see it happening close to home you still can do nothing about it because the system is so entrenched and has been around for so long people begin to think overthrowing the government and devaluing the currency is the answer. The Brazilians have tried it several times and the only thing preventing their collapse is they grow enough to feed their population even though some of them have to retrieve it from the garbage of others. In desperation they are now clearing the jungle in desperation because their population have nowhere else to go where it is better. The Japanese have tried it and have learned how to remain in the game by capping the growth of their population. The Chinese have tried a similar tack without success because the system they employ like ours, mandates to you produce progeny to take care of you when you can no longer work to earn or grow a living.

My calculations show that we grow enough food to feed about 670 million people but import enough to feed nearly 50 million of those. At current production and import rates we actually feed a population of nearly 470 million, 135 million more than the government census shows, but it can be easily proven the census is wrong. Just look at the number of estimated illegals that are in the country. If we continue to grow our population at current rates by about the year 2100 the current the current food production rate, that is actually declining, will reach a point where consumption and production will be equal.

This is conjectural because before we reach that point the current government will be forced into collapse and the people might get the opportunity change the system because if we don't, our demise will come sooner than it will otherwise.

If there was life on other planets in the universe and there is no reason to believe that since we exist that there wasn't, it is no longer there. There has been no life similar to ours existing on all of the universe we have been able to explore with our telescopes and probes. Even if there was it would be farther than we could travel to escape our fate and chances are chances are they are in the same shape we are.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 16 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
Does your calculation factor

Does your calculation factor in the inefficiency of our food production?

I love steak as much as the next guy, but it's a terribly inefficient use of resources. I don't know what the numbers are but I know you could feed an order of magnitude more people by feeding them grains instead of cows. (Whether such a world is worth living in is debatable.)

Melvin Udall
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 40 min ago
Joined: 05/01/2002 - 12:01am
Post #3 is cancelled or

Post #3 is cancelled or withdrawn; take your pick.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Vikingstar: Tariffs were

Vikingstar: Tariffs were originally placed on imports to retire the debt incurred during the Revolution. The internal debt was bought up by the profiteers at 10 cents on the dollar, let by none other than Alexander Hamilton. The foreign debt was paid to insure we had credit with the foreign banks, French, Dutch and even Spanish. The tariffs were then employed to raise the revenue to run the government and were only on those items we did not produce and needed to import.

If you read the Constitution as it was intended to operate, the power to tax is the first because it was the omission in the Articles of Confederation that caused the Continental Congress to borrow in the first place because many states did not pony up their share and some contributed nothing. The second power given to the Congress was that of borrowing, just as the States had and that was for tax anticipation so they could pay current expenses before the taxes were collected.

It wasn't too long before the Congress was spending more than it was taking in and for fear of being tossed out on their ears they resorted to borrowing to pay current expenses and you know where that has led, $20 Trillion in debt and rising. The States can't print money so their profligate spending is financed by the national printing press. This debt will not and cannot be paid off because we are currently financing government out of cash flow that are the IOUs being added to the treasury each day. It is the natural effect of a system where the currency is never consumed but continues to amass in the form of digits in accounts and hence decreases in value with each new issue. I've explained this all in my book but those who benefit from this system don't want you to know how we have been scammed for years in the government version of the Ponzi scheme.

Some time ago we heard about the bankruptcy of California, then Detroit and most recently Puerto Rico. Why is it we have been told little or nothing of what became of their debt? The reason is the banks just cancelled it because it was all smoke in the first place and these entities can now continue their profligate ways and soon more will be added. It is the government's way of keeping the game going and it will continue until we reach total financial collapse I calculate to be early in the next century if we don't change the system.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Vikingstar: Tariffs were

Anonymous: If you took the time to think you would know that meat is high in calories because of the things that animals eat. If someone ate humans and few in the past did, you would know you can survive on them because we to eat to live. The problem is that most animals can consume and digest those parts of grains that humans don't eat because our systems are not designed to process them as food. Cows eat grass but we can't. If we didn't fatten them up in feed lots or pen them up in cages, like chickens and then feed them things that humans eat, they would not develop the fat that adds to the calories their bodies contain. A French fry for example contains 77 kcal per 100 grams as a potato but when you soak it in oil in a deep fry you nearly triple the amount of kcal by adding the oil, but then you wouldn't eat a raw stick of potato.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 16 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
@pmconusa: "Anonymous: If you

@pmconusa: "Anonymous: If you took the time to think you would know that meat is high in calories because of the things that animals eat. If someone ate humans and few in the past did, you would know you can survive on them because we to eat to live. The problem is that most animals can consume and digest those parts of grains that humans don't eat because our systems are not designed to process them as food. Cows eat grass but we can't. If we didn't fatten them up in feed lots or pen them up in cages, like chickens and then feed them things that humans eat, they would not develop the fat that adds to the calories their bodies contain. A French fry for example contains 77 kcal per 100 grams as a potato but when you soak it in oil in a deep fry you nearly triple the amount of kcal by adding the oil, but then you wouldn't eat a raw stick of potato."

Sorry if I wasn't clear - what I meant was that space that is used to grow corn to feed cows (most beef cows eat a weird starchy corn that has been engineered for feeding cows) were used to grow, say, soy beans or wheat, you could feed like 20x as many people with the amount of wheat you grew compared to the amount of beef.

Ugenetoo
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 24 min ago
Joined: 08/05/2011 - 12:32pm
"Weird starchy corn".

"Weird starchy corn".

Is that a scientific term?
More info please.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 16 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
The proper term is "dent corn

The proper term is "dent corn":
http://thinkbioenergy.com/did-you-know-there-were-6-different-types-of-c...

Sweet corn is what we normally think of as corn (i.e. corn on the cob). But 99% of all corn grown is tasteless starchy corn that is used as feed, making HFCS, and ethanol.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
Anonymous: What I meant by

Anonymous: What I meant by surmising that we will reach a point where we are consuming all the fuel we produce is that we can carry on but it will mean that those getting the bulk of nature's wealth will themselves have to change their ways. By that I mean stop feeding cattle food for humans and that means fewer steaks and pork chops and then ration what the rest of the population gets.

It will never reach that point because before we are even close, those currently on the dole will not have enough of it because the dollar continues to lose purchasing power and when it gets down to food we will be seeing tens of thousands of homeless because the amount of currency they are being given will not be enough to pay for even the most meager shelter. Another, more important factor is the weather. If we had a drought in the bread basket like that of the 1930s thousands would actually starve because even now we are sending our surplus abroad. If you read about the Irish potato famine of the 1840s you will recognize that while those on a potato diet were migrating or starving, the rest of the Irish who lived on wheat were still exporting it and turning it in to alcohol. I suspect the Al Gore types will do exactly the same.

As I have said over and over again, Thomas Malthus predicted over 300 years ago, population explosion will be the end of the human race. No one listened to him then because it was so far fetched. Well, it is now closer than you think and you can actually project its start with a certain degree of accuracy and still those benefiting refuse to see it. You can actually prove the U. S. population is closer to 470 million than the 325 uncovered in the census. When it reaches 670 million and that is less than 100 years off and likely to grow faster as more and more people sneak into the country to take advantage of our welfare system.

Our fascist government now controls your life from before birth until after death on behalf of the owners of the country, the banks and Trump is not about to change it when both Republicans and Democrats are now in office to perpetuate this welfare state. They will be able to perpetuate it only for now a limited time.

Roger Ek
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 11/18/2002 - 1:01am
About 2/3 of American homes

About 2/3 of American homes are built with Canadian lumber. This is not the result of a lumber shortage in the USA. President Trump is exploring tariffs for Canadian lumber.

About time. American saw mills have to buy their logs. Canadian saw mills get free wood from "Crown land". Your brother-in-law is unemployed? The government will buy him a brand new Western Star truck with a chrome front bumper as big as a picnic table to haul that free wood to the saw mill where all the employees get free medical care. Hey, I worked up there for seven years. What a racket!

About 20 years ago many saw mills in the Northwest were shut down because of the spotted owl scam. We put a tariff on raw Canadian lumber. It took Canada about one day to stop making raw lumber and switch to "processed lumber" with no tariff. What's the difference? Processed 2 x 4s have a hole drilled 18 inches from one end. Electricians love them. So much for the tariffs. Canadian saw mills laughed all the way to the bank.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 16 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
"Anonymous: What I meant by

"Anonymous: What I meant by surmising that we will reach a point where we are consuming all the fuel we produce is that we can carry on but it will mean that those getting the bulk of nature's wealth will themselves have to change their ways. By that I mean stop feeding cattle food for humans and that means fewer steaks and pork chops and then ration what the rest of the population gets.

It will never reach that point because before we are even close, those currently on the dole will not have enough of it because the dollar continues to lose purchasing power and when it gets down to food we will be seeing tens of thousands of homeless because the amount of currency they are being given will not be enough to pay for even the most meager shelter. Another, more important factor is the weather. If we had a drought in the bread basket like that of the 1930s thousands would actually starve because even now we are sending our surplus abroad. If you read about the Irish potato famine of the 1840s you will recognize that while those on a potato diet were migrating or starving, the rest of the Irish who lived on wheat were still exporting it and turning it in to alcohol. I suspect the Al Gore types will do exactly the same."

Well to pick nits, the purchasing power of the dollar will decline but generally speaking, real wages for the working class have basically stayed stagnant.

As for the Ireland famine, it would be fair to say that exports happened during the famine because of the excessive poverty due to wide-scale rent seeking on the part of the landlords.

But your point still stands - as population increases, variances in wealth distribution result in famines/wars/populist uprisings.

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
The purchasing power of the

The purchasing power of the dollar continues to decline as a consequence of the fact that it accumulates and is never consumed. Every new issue deflates those previously in the system. The first dollar ever printed still exists even though it might just be a number in an account somewhere. The working-class wage is not stagnant except for those not covered by the minimum wage law and those are so small in number as to be insignificant because there are still those jobs seeking workers that must at least pay the minimum wage in order to attract them. The original minimum wage was, I believe, $0.75 cents per hour. In 1910, when the cost to mine gold equaled its imputed value a man making $0.22 per hour without any benefits, could support a family of 4 on his roughly $600/year wage. It was at this point the dollar began to mathematically lose value and it continues to this day.

The Irish elites kept exporting wheat because they were greedy and didn’t want to share their surplus. It was the same thing that happened nearly a century later with the Okies who lost their farms during the drought of the 1930s. Fortunately for many who got caught in the domino effect there were soup kitchens and employers who cut back on hours so their employees could weather the effects. Unfortunately, the government stepped in to HELP and did the worse things possible; guarantee the banks would no longer lose money and orgainized workers were given the power to extort money from their employers.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 16 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
So we got the problem - what

So we got the problem - what is your proposed solution?

Ugenetoo
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 24 min ago
Joined: 08/05/2011 - 12:32pm
You must be new here.

You must be new here.
Ya gotta read the BOOK.

Bruce Libby
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 40 min ago
Joined: 01/17/2006 - 7:08pm
Because itis in the book !

Because it is in the book !

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 16 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
I know, I know... I thought

I know, I know... I thought that right after I hit "Save" but figured I'd let him respond

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
You got your answer, its in

You got your answer, its in THE BOOK. In short, it is the equal distribution of nature's wealth, up front, to every living citizen. An agency responsible to the people would verify the country is producing enough fuel (food) to feed all of its citizens. Currency would then be distributed to everyone, parents for their dependent children, denominated in the fuel value of that food. It would then buy the time (fuel consumption) of others who could add to their upfront distribution by providing those services wanted and needed by others. The only tax that would be imposed would be on those who, through a monopoly position were able to acquire more than twice their distribution. That currency would become void at the end of each year and the process then repeated.

There are of course other rules such as everything depreciates and no one can profit from the resale of an item beyond what he paid for it. Insurance would not be necessary. The current monopolies such as the military complex and the medical profession and government employees, that are protected by the government would not be able to charge monopoly prices for their services and the only service of the government is the protection of the lives, liberties and property of the citizens. There would be no inflation of the currency because it would not be permitted to accumulate.

What we have now is the unequal distribution of wealth, conducted by the banks who own just about everything either directly or through liens and mortgages, through a corrupt government that gives them the legal cover to do so while destroying our freedom in the process.

THE BOOK describes what was done in excruciating detail. My next BOOK, to be published shortly, will tell you we did it to ourselves through the greed of a few.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 16 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
So isn't this just communism?

So isn't this just communism? What incentive do I have to make a bunch of food, if the government is going to distribute it to my lazy neighbors (my actual neighbors are not lazy, just trying to illustrate a point).

pmconusa
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 15 hours ago
Joined: 04/20/2000 - 12:01am
No, it is republicanism.. A

No, it is republicanism.. A political system where government does nothing but distribute nature's fuel supply equally to everyone and then protects our lives, our liberties and our property. It is the charter we gave government the power to do which they have never done. A Constitution is but the second part of the charter and is encapsulated in the words " the legislature shall have full power to make and establish all reasonable laws and regulations for the defence and benefit of the people of this State" This is the wording from the original Maine Constitution. Laws are prohibitions of actions and regulations are limitations on certain actions that restrict interactions with others so as not to infringe on their freedoms. The legislature is empowered to tax in order to enforce the law and administer the regulations. It is called the police power. Nothing in the Constitution enables government to take something from one and give to another.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 16 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
I don't understand. you say,

I don't understand. you say,
"Nothing in the Constitution enables government to take something from one and give to another."

But then you call upon the government to distribute "nature's fuel supply". But "Nature's fuel supply" doesn't exist without human effort to convert land, fixed nitrogen, water, and air into food.

Are you saying that the constitution is wrong and the government *should* redistribute food? Or are you saying that the government should just distribute land and be done with it?

Melvin Udall
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 40 min ago
Joined: 05/01/2002 - 12:01am
" In short, it is the equal

" In short, it is the equal distribution of nature's wealth, up front, to every living citizen. An agency responsible to the people would verify the country is producing enough fuel (food) to feed all of its citizens. Currency would then be distributed to everyone, parents for their dependent children, denominated in the fuel value of that food."

No problems here, other than deciding what the words 'equal', 'verify,' and 'enough' mean, and who would have the authority to make such determination. And how they would come into that authority. And how they would be constrained in that authority. And prevented from accumulating power and using it to favor those who back them holding that office. And their friends and family.

Not to mention the design of that 'agency' and what 'responsible to the people' would entail.

No problems there; it completely eliminates human nature from the equation, and resolves all the shortcomings of our current government.

If you don't believe him, show him where he's wrong.

anonymous_coward
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 16 hours ago
Joined: 10/21/2016 - 12:18pm
"If you don't believe him,

"If you don't believe him, show him where he's wrong."

Lol I need to understand him before I decide whether to believe him

Ugenetoo
Offline
Last seen: 14 hours 24 min ago
Joined: 08/05/2011 - 12:32pm
The BOOK , you fools !!!

The BOOK , you fools !!!
It's in the BOOK !!!

Mainelion
Offline
Last seen: 20 hours 7 min ago
Joined: 08/11/2005 - 12:01am
Sure sounds to me like the

Sure sounds to me like the only way this works is if we have a King appointed by God himself. Maybe we could all take turns trying to pull a sword from a stone.

Pages

Log in to post comments