The Bush Legacy Continues - U.S. Trade Deficit Hits All-Time High

[MacDaddyPlaya]

The U.S. trade deficit soared to an all-time high of $725.8 billion in 2005

critics say the rising trade deficit is a major factor in the loss of nearly 3 million manufacturing jobs since mid-2000 as U.S. companies moved production overseas to lower-waged nations.

"Such a huge trade gap undercuts domestic manufacturing and destroys good U.S. jobs," said Richard Trumka, secretary-treasuer of labor's AFL-CIO. "America's gargantuan trade deficit is a weight around American workers' necks that is pulling them into a cycle of debt, bankruptcy and low-wage service jobs."

Sen. Byron Dorgan (news, bio, voting record), D-N.D., said the new deficit figure showed that "our trade policy is an unbelievable failure that is selling out American jobs and weakening our economy."

Complete Article

[Rochard]

While I'm still laughing that Bush is still in office, for me the money is coming in faster than ever. I have no complaints as long as people keep buying porn.

[Libertine]

Originally Posted by RocHard

While I'm still laughing that Bush is still in office, for me the money is coming in faster than ever. I have no complaints as long as people keep buying porn.

Deficits now can cause future economic damage, thereby possibly damaging your future profits. Furthermore, current deficits may, when proven unsustainable, be an indirect future cause of a worsening state of living conditions in the entire country.

[Splum]

That has nothing to do with Bush lol, this has been inevitable for many many years. But hey if it makes you feel better to blame it on Bush whatever lol.

[MacDaddyPlaya]

Originally Posted by Splum

That has nothing to do with Bush lol, this has been inevitable for many many years. But hey if it makes you feel better to blame it on Bush whatever lol.

Of course it has to do with Bush and his administrations policies. But hey if it makes you feel better to just displace the blame on someone else (who?), whatever.

[Splum]

http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/pas/tpa-002.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_deficit

[pornmonger]

Originally Posted by MacDaddyPlaya

Of course it has to do with Bush and his administrations policies. But hey if it makes you feel better to just displace the blame on someone else (who?), whatever.

Hey Fuckwad...the US has had a trade deficit since the 80's. It's just gotten worse in the last several years because some American made stuff is worth shit. Why do you think Ford & Chevy are losing billions a year? Do you blame Bush for Ford & Chevy for making shitty products?

Do you blame Bush because Sony makes better TVs than Zenith? Do you blame Bush that American's like to drive gas guzzling cars that require oil from the Middle East?

Do you blame Bush that American companies choose on their own to meet Wall Street expectations to move things offshore to become more profitable?

Many things have been moving as far as manufacturing since the early 90's with the signing of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) Which wasn't signed into law by Bush. Many things are also made in Mexico and Canada because of this.

Get an education before you open your mouth. It's one thing to be stupid but to be ignorant is unforgiveable.

Who's to blame? No one. Consumers ultimately choose and cause this trade deficit. Consumers are the ones that choose to buy domestic or imported goods. It has nothing to do with Bush. It's a free market economy.

The only thing a government can do is levy tariffs on certain products and stop price dumping.

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by Splum

That has nothing to do with Bush lol, this has been inevitable for many many years. But hey if it makes you feel better to blame it on Bush whatever lol.

Nothing can stick to the " teflon" president ...

- In no way does the tax cut to the higher income influenced the deficit..
- The 200 billion a year Iraq war also has no bearing at all
- The lower dollar also has nothing to do with that ..

In fact, I researched on FAUX news and saw the real responsible:

[jayeff]

Originally Posted by pornmonger

Who's to blame? No one. Consumers ultimately choose and cause this trade deficit. Consumers are the ones that choose to buy domestic or imported goods. It has nothing to do with Bush. It's a free market economy.

The only thing a government can do is levy tariffs on certain products and stop price dumping.

Up to a point...

Although consumers can only choose among what is available and as you noted, Sony make better products than Zenith, etc. Walk into Wal-Mart and if you want a particular t-shirt or whatever, you either buy it or not, regardless of its source. Manufacturers and retailers are responsible, along with consumers, for increasing trade imbalances.

Politicians (although not exclusively) George Bush are responsible for creating tax laws and all kinds of other incentives which exaggerate the advantage of manufacturing in low-wage countries and for not attempting to discourage moves abroad.

It's also somewhat facile to write it all off as free-market economics, because although that statement is essentially correct, the term means different things in different places. For example, Japan is extremely good at protecting itself against imports while allowing its companies to operate freely. Come to that, the long-term outlook that most Japanese investors have (as opposed to Wall St investors' demand for increased profits year-on-year) also makes their "free market" function quite differently from ours.

[After Shock Media]

Originally Posted by pornmonger

Why do you think Ford & Chevy are losing billions a year? Do you blame Bush for Ford & Chevy for making shitty products?

You left out GM. Why do I think they are loosing billions a year. Simple answer is pensions. They do not necessarily make shitty products. Matter of fact the only trucks we will buy are fords. Back to pensions though, it is damn hard for the big three automakers to compete on a global scale when so much money goes into pension plans. Specially when the majority of companies worldwide bear no such costs.

Originally Posted by pornmonger

Do you blame Bush that Americans like to drive gas guzzling cars that require oil from the Middle East?

Only in one way do I blame Bush for that. He never really asked Americans to make any sort of sacrifice and asked the people to conserve gas during a war time administration. Not sure if this has anything to do with his oil buddies though.

Originally Posted by pornmonger

Get an education before you open your mouth.

Alas that would not help. Our educational system sucks. It will also continue to suck and we will fall further and further behind in the world as a country just producing cash register jockeys as a general workforce.
This element though can and should be blamed on many factors both republican and democrat. (flame suit on) The public school system needs to be abolished and the teachers union needs to be thrown or phased out.

[MacDaddyPlaya]

Originally Posted by pornmonger

Hey Fuckwad...the US has had a trade deficit since the 80's. It's just gotten worse in the last several years because some American made stuff is worth shit. Why do you think Ford & Chevy are losing billions a year? Do you blame Bush for Ford & Chevy for making shitty products?

Do you blame Bush because Sony makes better TVs than Zenith? Do you blame Bush that American's like to drive gas guzzling cars that require oil from the Middle East?

Do you blame Bush that American companies choose on their own to meet Wall Street expectations to move things offshore to become more profitable?

Many things have been moving as far as manufacturing since the early 90's with the signing of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) Which wasn't signed into law by Bush. Many things are also made in Mexico and Canada because of this.

Get an education before you open your mouth. It's one thing to be stupid but to be ignorant is unforgiveable.

Who's to blame? No one. Consumers ultimately choose and cause this trade deficit. Consumers are the ones that choose to buy domestic or imported goods. It has nothing to do with Bush. It's a free market economy.

The only thing a government can do is levy tariffs on certain products and stop price dumping.

Nice work spewing your shit, however, you are incorrect. The president and his policies can and do effect the trade deficit. No one is to blame? So your economic theory is that the trade deficit is uncontrolable and since it has been on the rise for the past 15 years just let is spiral to new records every year? There are no policies that can help narrow the gap with China?

I can tell the type of person you are by reply so I don't know why I even bother. Your narrowmind reveals itself in your childish personal attacks.

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by MacDaddyPlaya

Nice work spewing your shit, however, you are incorrect. The president and his policies can and do effect the trade deficit. No one is to blame? So your economic theory is that the trade deficit is uncontrolable and since it has been on the rise for the past 15 years just let is spiral to new records every year? There are no policies that can help narrow the gap with China?

I can tell the type of person you are by reply so I don't know why I even bother. Your narrowmind reveals itself in your childish personal attacks.

Someone doesnt understand there is more than 1 kind of deficit. Hmmm now who signed nafta again? *scratches head*

[DaddyHalbucks]

Of course someone had to pickup the tab after the "feel good" Clinton years when our economy boomed, but our foreign policy languished.

We felt the big jolt on 9/11.

I blame Slick Willy.

[MacDaddyPlaya]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerzdotnet

Someone doesnt understand there is more than 1 kind of deficit.

What leads you to that conclusion? We are talking about the trade deficit. There has been no mention about the budget deficit. What are you referring to?

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerzdotnet

Someone doesnt understand there is more than 1 kind of deficit. Hmmm now who signed nafta again? *scratches head*

I posted the picture abnove .. I knew it would come to that.

So you guys have a trade problem with Canada and/or Mexico ... That is the source of the problem ???

So if so ( ), why is your Bush trying to expand it to include All Central , South America and the Caraibs ... I

Is he also a masochist ...

I know, it everybody else's fault.

[MacDaddyPlaya]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Of course someone had to pickup the tab after the "feel good" Clinton years when our economy boomed, but our foreign policy languished.

We felt the big jolt on 9/11.

I blame Slick Willy.

Slick Willy had some great foreign policy. There is a lot more to the trade deficit than foreign policy and trade policies.

[Brujah]

The U.S. budget registered a surprisingly big surplus of $20.99 billion in January as strong receipts outweighed spending, a Treasury Department report showed.

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsar...CKS.xml&rpc=23

[MacDaddyPlaya]

Originally Posted by Brujah

The U.S. budget registered a surprisingly big surplus of $20.99 billion in January as strong receipts outweighed spending, a Treasury Department report showed.

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsar...CKS.xml&rpc=23

Good news, but still won't take us below the $8 trillion mark

[Probono]

I would love to blame bUsH for the trade deficit but it is American Spending habits and "addiction to oil" that causes this issue. There are lots of other things to fault bUsH for:
1. Former head of FEMA is talking about his issues
2. Scooter Libby is spilling the beans on Cheney
and more http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/

[Libertine]

It's important to note the causes of the current trade deficit to understand why it is problematic. A trade deficit isn't a problem if it is caused by excess wealth being invested abroad in structurally valuable assets.

However, the current trade deficit is largely caused by huge spendings in oil and Americans rapidly spending their savings and, worse, creating debts. Since this spending is just spending, not investing, it does not offer any long term benefits.

Now, as for the role the Bush administration has played in this, that should be quite clear. It has encouraged and participated in wasteful spending through its tax policy and fiscal policies and it has done very little to slow down oil usage.

[pornmonger]

Originally Posted by jayeff

Up to a point...

Although consumers can only choose among what is available and as you noted, Sony make better products than Zenith, etc. Walk into Wal-Mart and if you want a particular t-shirt or whatever, you either buy it or not, regardless of its source. Manufacturers and retailers are responsible, along with consumers, for increasing trade imbalances.

Politicians (although not exclusively) George Bush are responsible for creating tax laws and all kinds of other incentives which exaggerate the advantage of manufacturing in low-wage countries and for not attempting to discourage moves abroad.

It's also somewhat facile to write it all off as free-market economics, because although that statement is essentially correct, the term means different things in different places. For example, Japan is extremely good at protecting itself against imports while allowing its companies to operate freely. Come to that, the long-term outlook that most Japanese investors have (as opposed to Wall St investors' demand for increased profits year-on-year) also makes their "free market" function quite differently from ours.

Yes the Japanese market protects its product very well. But unfortunately for that protectionism, it's economy has been in a recession for over 6 years. It's banking system nearly collapsed without help of the government bailing it out.

Bust can't discourage moves from moving manufacturing of anything to lower wage countries. NAFTA was signed before he entered office. There is a catch-22 with imposing tariffs on products. If the US imposes tariffs on let's say textile goods from China, China will in turn place tariffs on American goods. That won't help us and just cause a bigger trade deficit with China.

This is the very reason why the US and EU was walking on eggshells with dealing with textile imports from China for the very reason if 2.3 billion people in China can't buy something from the EU or US because of tariffs, the EU & US would lose out.

[Manowar]

god damn.

[pornmonger]

Originally Posted by After Shock Media

You left out GM. Why do I think they are loosing billions a year. Simple answer is pensions. They do not necessarily make shitty products. Matter of fact the only trucks we will buy are fords. Back to pensions though, it is damn hard for the big three automakers to compete on a global scale when so much money goes into pension plans. Specially when the majority of companies worldwide bear no such costs.



Only in one way do I blame Bush for that. He never really asked Americans to make any sort of sacrifice and asked the people to conserve gas during a war time administration. Not sure if this has anything to do with his oil buddies though.



Alas that would not help. Our educational system sucks. It will also continue to suck and we will fall further and further behind in the world as a country just producing cash register jockeys as a general workforce.
This element though can and should be blamed on many factors both republican and democrat. (flame suit on) The public school system needs to be abolished and the teachers union needs to be thrown or phased out.

Oil buddies? Not really. The most profitable are Exxon and Shell which are not related to any oil buddies of Bush's. The oil Bush and his buddies own are minimal compared to what we import from OPEC.

Chevy is GM. Yes I agree that unions in the US kill American business. That's why unions are illegal in Japan. Not only does the big 3 have to pay for retirees pensions but also those that are laid off. GM pays nearly $1.2 billion a year to employees that were laid off due to plant closure. These employees are paid 100% for life unless they quite or reasigned to another plant. What laid off employee would quit?

Same with US airlines. Pilots are overpaid. Yes their jobs are difficult but everything is pretty much done by computer. All they do is take off and land. Yet pilots make in the high 100,000s to mid 200,000s a year. And they work only like 20 hours a month.

Education system...blame the democratics. Bush wanted the voucher system which would give competition to public school and its teachers.

[Doctor Dre]

It has more to do then just Bush, but let's say the wars didn't help... sometimes I wonder if they are trying to bankrupt the country

[pornmonger]

Originally Posted by MacDaddyPlaya

Nice work spewing your shit, however, you are incorrect. The president and his policies can and do effect the trade deficit. No one is to blame? So your economic theory is that the trade deficit is uncontrolable and since it has been on the rise for the past 15 years just let is spiral to new records every year? There are no policies that can help narrow the gap with China?

I can tell the type of person you are by reply so I don't know why I even bother. Your narrowmind reveals itself in your childish personal attacks.

So if the President and his administration's policies can effect the trade deficit, then why has every President from Reagan on hasn't been able to control the trade deficit? I'm impartial to Bush but your statement is ignorant.

It spirals every year because oil prices go up. Yes it is difficult to narrow the gap with China because the US consumers have far more buying power. Although they have 2.1 billion people, the majority are in poverty. There is about 10% of its population with decent buying power yet still their buying power is 25% of that of their US counterpart.

America is a nation of materialistic consumers. That's why we are in a trade deficit.

[pornmonger]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

I posted the picture abnove .. I knew it would come to that.

So you guys have a trade problem with Canada and/or Mexico ... That is the source of the problem ???

So if so ( ), why is your Bush trying to expand it to include All Central , South America and the Caraibs ... I

Is he also a masochist ...

I know, it everybody else's fault.

He is trying to expand to South America so that instead of giving aid to them, we wants to expand trade so that the country becomes financially stable. Those countries that are not in poverty and financially stable will not resort to leftist movements such as Valenzuala and Bolvia.

[pornmonger]

Originally Posted by punkworld

It's important to note the causes of the current trade deficit to understand why it is problematic. A trade deficit isn't a problem if it is caused by excess wealth being invested abroad in structurally valuable assets.

However, the current trade deficit is largely caused by huge spendings in oil and Americans rapidly spending their savings and, worse, creating debts. Since this spending is just spending, not investing, it does not offer any long term benefits.

Now, as for the role the Bush administration has played in this, that should be quite clear. It has encouraged and participated in wasteful spending through its tax policy and fiscal policies and it has done very little to slow down oil usage.

Bush needed to cut taxes to encourage spending to pull the economy out of recession due to Clinton's feel good policies and the burst of the internet bubble. Without those tax cuts, we would still be in a recession. Yes savings is down but that shouldn't be anything new. Although spending has increased considerably inflation has not spiralled out of control.

[GatorB]

Originally Posted by RocHard

While I'm still laughing that Bush is still in office, for me the money is coming in faster than ever. I have no complaints as long as people keep buying porn.

People buying porn and making you money has zilch to do with Bush. In fact if Bush had his way not only would you NOT be making any money doing what you do you'd be in prison. So please continue to suck the cock of a guy that wants you jailed.

[GatorB]

Originally Posted by pornmonger

Bush needed to cut taxes to encourage spending to pull the economy out of recession due to Clinton's feel good policies and the burst of the internet bubble. Without those tax cuts, we would still be in a recession. Yes savings is down but that shouldn't be anything new. Although spending has increased considerably inflation has not spiralled out of control.

Total BS. Since Bush's tax cuts states have RAISED taxes. FACT. So any saving from federal taxes have been takens away by states taxes. This way Bush can say he cut taxes when he didn't and blame any tax increase on the states.

[pornmonger]

Originally Posted by GatorB

Total BS. Since Bush's tax cuts states have RAISED taxes. FACT. So any saving from federal taxes have been takens away by states taxes. This way Bush can say he cut taxes when he didn't and blame any tax increase on the states.

State taxes are nominal. The highest are CA and NY. In California, the income tax ranges from 4-10%. While federal taxes have been cut as much as 10%.

[Paul Waters]

Look at the bright side: Haliburton is doing very, very well.

Normally trade deficits lead to a devaluation of your currency. Bush & Co are not keen on that because oil prices would go up even more.

So they don't react to China and Japan proping up the green back by buying it. Hundreads of billions of them.

With these green backs they are buying you. Slowing but surely, you are becomming owned.

Enjoy.

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by pornmonger

State taxes are nominal. The highest are CA and NY. In California, the income tax ranges from 4-10%. While federal taxes have been cut as much as 10%.

and the deficit is out of control ...


I can cut my payments too, rack it up as debt .. this doesn't make me successfull .... And cutting the taxes for the " high end " doesn't put the money back in the system .. They just buy stocls or tax shelters abroad ..

The " small people " make a difference. If you give them a tax break of 200.00 , that money goes right back in the system .. or maybe you think that they will buy stock or do tax shelters ...

Anyway, Bush is doing a great job ...

please repeat after me:

Bush is doing a great job

please repeat after me:

Bush is doing a great job

please repeat after me:

Bush is doing a great job

please repeat after me:

Bush is doing a great job

please repeat after me:

Bush is doing a great job

please repeat after me:

Bush is doing a great job

...

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by Paul Waters

Look at the bright side: Haliburton is doing very, very well.

Normally trade deficits lead to a devaluation of your currency. Bush & Co are not keen on that because oil prices would go up even more.

So they don't react to China and Japan proping up the green back by buying it. Hundreads of billions of them.

With these green backs they are buying you. Slowing but surely, you are becomming owned.

Enjoy.

Why do you hate AmeriKa ????

Bush budget would sell land to raise $1 billion
BLM would sell 120,000 acres, Forest Service up to 200,000 acres

from TODAY !!!

[stickyfingerz]

Why do non Americans need to post in this thread again.....

[pornguy]

Originally Posted by RocHard

While I'm still laughing that Bush is still in office, for me the money is coming in faster than ever. I have no complaints as long as people keep buying porn.

the problem is, that they wont buy it the deeper they get into debt, and the less money they have.

[pornguy]

Oh, and lets not forget that BUSH was the one that gave a tax cut to any business that outsourced the work out of the US.