• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Agman, are you mis-informed?

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Agman said:

For starters Mike, one must consider how trade is accounted for. We are increasingly becoming a service economy. Are services counted??? How are billion dollar consulting agreements accounted for-they are not counted.

Are you sure services aren't counted also? I was just looking at some trade deficit figures that are for: "Goods and Services". :???:

The U.S. Department of Commerce today reported that the merchandise trade deficit reached a record level of $666.2 billion in the 2004, a 21.7% increase since 2003.

The aggregate U.S. trade deficit, which includes both goods and services, was $617.7 billion, a 24% increase over 2003. The real goods and services deficit as a share of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) increased to an unprecedented 5.8%in the fourth quarter of 2004. Growth in the deficit reflects surging imports and a continued, rapid decline in the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing industries. The U.S. had a $37 billion trade deficit in advanced technology products (ATPs) in 2004, an increase of 38% since 2003.

Imports of high-tech goods from China were responsible for $36 billion of the $37 billion U.S. deficit in ATPs in 2004 (see EPI Working Paper #270). The growth of the ATP deficit was responsible for 13.5% of the increase in the non-petroleum goods trade deficit. While advanced technology goods were responsible for 19% of the growth in imports, they generated 24% of the growth in non-petroleum exports in 2004, which demonstrates that this sector has significant potential for growth in the future.

Total U.S. imports last year were $1.764 trillion, 54% more than the $1.146 trillion in exports. To keep the trade deficit from widening, the growth rate of exports must exceed the growth rate of imports by 54%. Last year, import growth (16.3%) exceeded export growth (12.3%), and imports expanded by $247 billion, almost twice as much as the increase in exports of $126 billion. If imports continue to grow at a 16% rate, the trade deficit will decline only if exports grow faster than 24.6%. In the absence of a dramatic and sustained slowdown in U.S. growth, exports can grow more than half again as fast as imports only with a substantial reduction in the U.S. dollar.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Sandhusker said:
Mike, are you doing research on your own? Shame, shame! :lol:

Absolutely not!!!!!!!!! When we do our own research and bring the other side of an argument, we are labeled conspirators. :roll:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Mike said:
Sandhusker said:
Mike, are you doing research on your own? Shame, shame! :lol:

Absolutely not!!!!!!!!! When we do our own research and bring the other side of an argument, we are labeled conspirators. :roll:

Don't forget whiners, blamers, isolationists.... :lol:
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Mike said:
Agman said:

For starters Mike, one must consider how trade is accounted for. We are increasingly becoming a service economy. Are services counted??? How are billion dollar consulting agreements accounted for-they are not counted.

Are you sure services aren't counted also? I was just looking at some trade deficit figures that are for: "Goods and Services". :???:

The U.S. Department of Commerce today reported that the merchandise trade deficit reached a record level of $666.2 billion in the 2004, a 21.7% increase since 2003.

The aggregate U.S. trade deficit, which includes both goods and services, was $617.7 billion, a 24% increase over 2003. The real goods and services deficit as a share of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) increased to an unprecedented 5.8%in the fourth quarter of 2004. Growth in the deficit reflects surging imports and a continued, rapid decline in the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing industries. The U.S. had a $37 billion trade deficit in advanced technology products (ATPs) in 2004, an increase of 38% since 2003.

Imports of high-tech goods from China were responsible for $36 billion of the $37 billion U.S. deficit in ATPs in 2004 (see EPI Working Paper #270). The growth of the ATP deficit was responsible for 13.5% of the increase in the non-petroleum goods trade deficit. While advanced technology goods were responsible for 19% of the growth in imports, they generated 24% of the growth in non-petroleum exports in 2004, which demonstrates that this sector has significant potential for growth in the future.

Total U.S. imports last year were $1.764 trillion, 54% more than the $1.146 trillion in exports. To keep the trade deficit from widening, the growth rate of exports must exceed the growth rate of imports by 54%. Last year, import growth (16.3%) exceeded export growth (12.3%), and imports expanded by $247 billion, almost twice as much as the increase in exports of $126 billion. If imports continue to grow at a 16% rate, the trade deficit will decline only if exports grow faster than 24.6%. In the absence of a dramatic and sustained slowdown in U.S. growth, exports can grow more than half again as fast as imports only with a substantial reduction in the U.S. dollar.

I beleive you need to get a clarification on what they count as services!!!
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
agman said:
Mike said:
Agman said:

For starters Mike, one must consider how trade is accounted for. We are increasingly becoming a service economy. Are services counted??? How are billion dollar consulting agreements accounted for-they are not counted.

Are you sure services aren't counted also? I was just looking at some trade deficit figures that are for: "Goods and Services". :???:

The U.S. Department of Commerce today reported that the merchandise trade deficit reached a record level of $666.2 billion in the 2004, a 21.7% increase since 2003.

The aggregate U.S. trade deficit, which includes both goods and services, was $617.7 billion, a 24% increase over 2003. The real goods and services deficit as a share of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) increased to an unprecedented 5.8%in the fourth quarter of 2004. Growth in the deficit reflects surging imports and a continued, rapid decline in the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing industries. The U.S. had a $37 billion trade deficit in advanced technology products (ATPs) in 2004, an increase of 38% since 2003.

Imports of high-tech goods from China were responsible for $36 billion of the $37 billion U.S. deficit in ATPs in 2004 (see EPI Working Paper #270). The growth of the ATP deficit was responsible for 13.5% of the increase in the non-petroleum goods trade deficit. While advanced technology goods were responsible for 19% of the growth in imports, they generated 24% of the growth in non-petroleum exports in 2004, which demonstrates that this sector has significant potential for growth in the future.

Total U.S. imports last year were $1.764 trillion, 54% more than the $1.146 trillion in exports. To keep the trade deficit from widening, the growth rate of exports must exceed the growth rate of imports by 54%. Last year, import growth (16.3%) exceeded export growth (12.3%), and imports expanded by $247 billion, almost twice as much as the increase in exports of $126 billion. If imports continue to grow at a 16% rate, the trade deficit will decline only if exports grow faster than 24.6%. In the absence of a dramatic and sustained slowdown in U.S. growth, exports can grow more than half again as fast as imports only with a substantial reduction in the U.S. dollar.

I beleive you need to get a clarification on what they count as services!!!

Well lets see, Insurances, Financial related fees, Construction. Looks like almost anytime a dollar is traded between us and them it is counted in the trade deficit.
Want to start over in telling us how the trade deficit is calculated?
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Mike said:
agman said:
Mike said:
Agman said:



Are you sure services aren't counted also? I was just looking at some trade deficit figures that are for: "Goods and Services". :???:

The U.S. Department of Commerce today reported that the merchandise trade deficit reached a record level of $666.2 billion in the 2004, a 21.7% increase since 2003.

The aggregate U.S. trade deficit, which includes both goods and services, was $617.7 billion, a 24% increase over 2003. The real goods and services deficit as a share of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) increased to an unprecedented 5.8%in the fourth quarter of 2004. Growth in the deficit reflects surging imports and a continued, rapid decline in the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing industries. The U.S. had a $37 billion trade deficit in advanced technology products (ATPs) in 2004, an increase of 38% since 2003.

Imports of high-tech goods from China were responsible for $36 billion of the $37 billion U.S. deficit in ATPs in 2004 (see EPI Working Paper #270). The growth of the ATP deficit was responsible for 13.5% of the increase in the non-petroleum goods trade deficit. While advanced technology goods were responsible for 19% of the growth in imports, they generated 24% of the growth in non-petroleum exports in 2004, which demonstrates that this sector has significant potential for growth in the future.

Total U.S. imports last year were $1.764 trillion, 54% more than the $1.146 trillion in exports. To keep the trade deficit from widening, the growth rate of exports must exceed the growth rate of imports by 54%. Last year, import growth (16.3%) exceeded export growth (12.3%), and imports expanded by $247 billion, almost twice as much as the increase in exports of $126 billion. If imports continue to grow at a 16% rate, the trade deficit will decline only if exports grow faster than 24.6%. In the absence of a dramatic and sustained slowdown in U.S. growth, exports can grow more than half again as fast as imports only with a substantial reduction in the U.S. dollar.

I beleive you need to get a clarification on what they count as services!!!

Well lets see, Insurances, Financial related fees, Construction. Looks like almost anytime a dollar is traded between us and them it is counted in the trade deficit.
Want to start over in telling us how the trade deficit is calculated?

You missed a few MIke..... Travel, passenger fares,Other Transportation, Royalties and License Fees, Other Private Services, Transfers Under U.S. Military Sales Contracts, U.S. Government Misc. Services

I know what is counted, can you tell me what is not counted? That is what is relevant. Not all dollars are counted as you suggest. Now do you want to start all over telling me what you think you know?

Your point is as lame as those who still cite the decline in the producers share of the retail dollar as evidence of packer control and manipualtion. What that data series does not tell you is many times more important than what R-Calfers think it tells them.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Agman,

You were the one who posted:

"Are services counted????????????" , then led us to believe that if services were included in the trade deficit, there might not be a deficit at all.

Look, I am trying to learn more about trade deficits and the impact on the economy. Quit throwing me curves and knuckleballs.

Answer this. If the U.S. Trade Deficit does not matter, then why are all the proponents of Cafta using it as a reason for passage?
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
Mike said:
Agman,

You were the one who posted:

"Are services counted????????????" , then led us to believe that if services were included in the trade deficit, there might not be a deficit at all.

Look, I am trying to learn more about trade deficits and the impact on the economy. Quit throwing me curves and knuckleballs.

Answer this. If the U.S. Trade Deficit does not matter, then why are all the proponents of Cafta using it as a reason for passage?

In the simplest terms Mike, trade benefits all parties involved. It won't be a perfect match all the time. The history of trade is very clear; the standard of living of those countries involved in trade increases. The history of protectionism is also very clear. Their standard of living goes down. The countries with the highest levels of protectionism are associated with the lowest standards of living.

To begin to understand what I am talking about you must first realize and acknowledge that our country has prospered with both fiscal and trade deficits. The historical and empirical evidence is overwhelming. I have not found any VALID data to contradict this - just empty rhetoric.


For starters: We will just isolate the current cycle

1. Has the economic recovery slowed as a result of the current trade deficit? Yes or No

2. Have our exports increased? Yes or no Side note: Has China's imports increased dramatically? Yes or no

3. Has the economic recovery failed to develop because we have a fiscal deficit? Yes or No

4. Has employment increased or decreased? Yes or no

5. Have incomes increased? Yes or no

6. Is the fiscal deficit declining much faster than projected? Yes or no

7. With all our problems how many countries can you name that have posted a better record on income growth, employment growth and economic growth than the U.S? None, or any number from one to ten.

If you answered yes to all the above and "none" to the last question then you must come to realize that what you hear and read in the news is mostly incorrect or unimportant. What you don't hear or read is obviously more important than the headlines, thus the economy prospers. If not, you would have answered "no" to the stated questions and you would be wrong on every question.

Now the challenge to you is to search for facts as opposed to rhetoric. Don't say I am not trying to point you in the right direction. You have your hands on the steering wheel - it is your turn. Have a great day.
 

redriver

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
194
Reaction score
0
Location
se mb
If you morons would quit spending more than you make, and quit spending money on the military to illegally invade sovereign nations, and quit spending money on 'smart' weapons to kill innocent people, maybe you wouldn't have a deficit.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
redriver, I might be so bold to say that without the "rotten" United States at your doorstep (who invades soverign nations as you say), Canada might be just a tad bit vulnerable to other nations.

Just a thought for you to chew on, not that you care anyway.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,609
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
redriver said:
If you morons would quit spending more than you make, and quit spending money on the military to illegally invade sovereign nations, and quit spending money on 'smart' weapons to kill innocent people, maybe you wouldn't have a deficit.

And if not for US military might and policies of helping people threatened by dictators, Nazism, etc., maybe you would be speaking German or Japanese if your parents survived life in forced labor camps.

Grow up and stop complaining about the USA until you make your own country into a Utopia!

MRJ
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
redriver said:
If you morons would quit spending more than you make, and quit spending money on the military to illegally invade sovereign nations, and quit spending money on 'smart' weapons to kill innocent people, maybe you wouldn't have a deficit.

If we did all those things then an idiot like you would be in jail or six feet under for all the foolish statements you make. Many good people have died to give you that freedom-to make a fool out of yourself. Many people give and risk their lives daily to ensure that freedom in the future for all people, even people such as yourself.
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
redriver may have taken things to the max, however, are their not a majority of American's now questioning the motives behind the invasion of Iraq. I wonder if Saddam killed more people than have ben killed since the invasion?

Is their any thoughts of oil and greed on any of your minds, or is Iraq simply about George the saviour?
 

ocm

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
779
Reaction score
0
redriver may have taken things to the max, however, are their not a majority of American's now questioning the motives behind the invasion of Iraq. I wonder if Saddam killed more people than have ben killed since the invasion?

I can tell you've been watching CNN. tsk tsk tsk

I know people over in Iraq on the ground. What you say here doesn't match the truth. And don't take those CNN polls very seriously--it all depends on how they ask the question.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
agman said:
redriver said:
If you morons would quit spending more than you make, and quit spending money on the military to illegally invade sovereign nations, and quit spending money on 'smart' weapons to kill innocent people, maybe you wouldn't have a deficit.

If we did all those things then an idiot like you would be in jail or six feet under for all the foolish statements you make. Many good people have died to give you that freedom-to make a fool out of yourself. Many people give and risk their lives daily to ensure that freedom in the future for all people, even people such as yourself.

How many good people have died so that this country could retain it's sovereignity and US citizens would not have to be subject to foreign rule?
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
Enough that it makes your country a great place to live, with the amount of population increase, it only makes sense that you will have to import!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Murgen said:
Enough that it makes your country a great place to live, with the amount of population increase, it only makes sense that you will have to import!

We were importing before we ceded power to the WTO - same as you guys.
 

agman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,664
Reaction score
0
Location
Denver, CO
rkaiser said:
. I wonder if Saddam killed more people than have ben killed since the invasion?

Is their any thoughts of oil and greed on any of your minds, or is Iraq simply about George the saviour?

If you have to wonder about the death toll you are less informed than you appear most of the time. Are you so misguided and hateful that you cannot see the bigger issue. If you truly do not understand the relevance of this war and the benefits to all mankind with a positive outcome of this war then I truly feel sorry for you and yours.

What will you do if a bomb blows up tomorrow in Toronto and kills several hundred people? Does it become your war then or will you remain steadfast that it is a problem of the good old USA? Will you stand up for freedom and democracy for all or will you just lodge senseless complaints?
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
Oh I see the bigger picture all right Agman. Problem is you see nothing of the sort. Benefits to all mankind - what a joke.

I don't argue that sometimes, freedom must be gained by conflict. Some groups of folks on this earth are simply lost. Other are simply lost with greed and arrogance.

Don't try to make this a you and yours issue about America and Canada you looser.

My opinion vs. yours and that's that.
 

Latest posts

Top