Mainstream Economics Thread

[sonofdaxjones]

Dax, if the "implementation is not very smart", why are you defending it so hard?

Because we run massive trade deficits and our "partners" are NOT operating on the free market principles you guys allegedly support (when it fits your political narrative)

This makes you support dumb crap?

You are only affirming that you scream about the free market only when it fits your hyperpartisan view of the world.

I already knew that, but apparently you needed reminding (again)

Not a single #blueanongE'r has been able to explain why a trillion dollar plus annual trade deficit is good .  . besides "we're a rich country". 

[star seed 7]

Makes sense

[Justwin]

I just did.

Why are you avoiding the combination of high tariffs and VATS, and also avoiding the application of VATS across the whole sequence by our "partners" in many cases?

In addition, it is relatively easy for state and local markets to adjust or get rid of sales taxes.  Often times its a simply city council vote, or a single session of a state legislature. This isn't the rough ridin' EU debating on the same for 6 years. Come on dude 

The long and the short of it is that Value Added Taxes are not tariffs and do not disadvantage US exporters relative to domestic companies in foreign countries. The same holds true for sales taxes. Inasmuch as there might be a miniscule disadvantaging of domestic firms vs importers in the US, this would be due to the potential tax pyramiding of sales taxes since sales taxes are an inferior form of a consumption tax compared to value added taxes.

You're welcome to claim VATs are tariffs and accept the implications that has on your understanding of international trade.

[sonofdaxjones]

  I have consistently used "and" . . . Tarriffs AND VATS

I am also very welcome to this fact: The United States does not have a national Value Added Tax (VAT) system; instead, it relies on state-level sales and use taxes, which are administered independently by each state

In the vast majority of instances, states and local governments are far more nimble in adjusting sales and use taxes then any central government and far more nimble in exempting goods from sales taxes entirely and/or exempted goods from sales taxes at certain points in the supply chain process.

In the US we have multiple states that have no sales tax at all . . . in other states there is a strong movement towards removing or greatly reducing sales taxes on consumables with a very high level of imported products in the chain.

[Justwin]

I have consistently used "and" . . . Tarriffs AND VATS

I am also very welcome to this fact: The United States does not have a national Value Added Tax (VAT) system; instead, it relies on state-level sales and use taxes, which are administered independently by each state

In the vast majority of instances, states and local governments are far more nimble in adjusting sales and use taxes then any central government and far more nimble in exempting goods from sales taxes entirely and/or exempted goods from sales taxes at certain points in the supply chain process.

In the US we have multiple states that have no sales tax at all . . . in other states there is a strong movement towards removing or greatly reducing sales taxes on consumables with a very high level of imported products in the chain.

How do VATs disadvantage US firms and/or increase the trade deficit?

[sonofdaxjones]

I have consistently used "and" . . . Tarriffs AND VATS

I am also very welcome to this fact: The United States does not have a national Value Added Tax (VAT) system; instead, it relies on state-level sales and use taxes, which are administered independently by each state

In the vast majority of instances, states and local governments are far more nimble in adjusting sales and use taxes then any central government and far more nimble in exempting goods from sales taxes entirely and/or exempted goods from sales taxes at certain points in the supply chain process.

In the US we have multiple states that have no sales tax at all . . . in other states there is a strong movement towards removing or greatly reducing sales taxes on consumables with a very high level of imported products in the chain.

How do VATs disadvantage US firms and/or increase the trade deficit?

Why do you keep leaving out "and tariffs"?

The combination is important.

You have tariffs and then embedded VATS at every point in the chain. That's the disadvantage.

Again, it's immaterial if domestically produced items have the VATS, because they are not facing the "in addition to" tariff component.

You are apparently going to completely ignore the national vs state/local component.

There are also a whole other series of factors that could impact trade deficits.  I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that the US is a relatively easy place to do business in, as compared to many of our "trade partner" countries.

[Justwin]

I have consistently used "and" . . . Tarriffs AND VATS

I am also very welcome to this fact: The United States does not have a national Value Added Tax (VAT) system; instead, it relies on state-level sales and use taxes, which are administered independently by each state

In the vast majority of instances, states and local governments are far more nimble in adjusting sales and use taxes then any central government and far more nimble in exempting goods from sales taxes entirely and/or exempted goods from sales taxes at certain points in the supply chain process.

In the US we have multiple states that have no sales tax at all . . . in other states there is a strong movement towards removing or greatly reducing sales taxes on consumables with a very high level of imported products in the chain.

How do VATs disadvantage US firms and/or increase the trade deficit?

Why do you keep leaving out "and tariffs"?

The combination is important.

You have tariffs and then embedded VATS at every point in the chain. That's the disadvantage.

Again, it's immaterial if domestically produced items have the VATS, because they are not facing the "in addition to" tariff component.

You are apparently going to completely ignore the national vs state/local component.

There are also a whole other series of factors that could impact trade deficits.  I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that the US is a relatively easy place to do business in, as compared to many of our "trade partner" countries.

From my perspective, I can see how tariffs disadvantage US firms. I cannot see how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantage US firms. Please explain to me how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantages US firms. Also, how do VATs alone or in combination with tariffs impact the trade deficit?

What is the relevance of the national vs local/state component?

[steve dave]

https://x.com/del_corcoran/status/1907847837771247715

[sonofdaxjones]

Canada's unelected PM has spoken!

Meanwhile, they operate one the oldest (and tiny given their geographic size) fleet of fighters of any first world country, have an utterly ineffective navy relative to protecting their entire homeland's shores and if we have to go to war and IF they decide to help us, they always have to borrow a bunch of stuff from us .  . . and they are part of the Commonwealth of their parent, who has more admirals in their navy than fighting ships and who also cannot protect their homeland without the US Air Force housing interceptors in that country and manning the seas with ships that are very expensive to man and maintain.

Coupled with the fact, that for the most part, most trade with Canada is untouched and Don Trump wants to restart a pipeline to move Canadian oil.

[hjfklmor]

So while you are debating the impact of foreign tariffs and VAT, what about the thought that these "reciprocal tariffs" have zero to do with either of those things? They literally do not factor in to the made up numbers on the big chart presented by glorious leader, while discussing the old-fashioned term "groceries."

[sonofdaxjones]

I have consistently used "and" . . . Tarriffs AND VATS

I am also very welcome to this fact: The United States does not have a national Value Added Tax (VAT) system; instead, it relies on state-level sales and use taxes, which are administered independently by each state

In the vast majority of instances, states and local governments are far more nimble in adjusting sales and use taxes then any central government and far more nimble in exempting goods from sales taxes entirely and/or exempted goods from sales taxes at certain points in the supply chain process.

In the US we have multiple states that have no sales tax at all . . . in other states there is a strong movement towards removing or greatly reducing sales taxes on consumables with a very high level of imported products in the chain.

How do VATs disadvantage US firms and/or increase the trade deficit?

Why do you keep leaving out "and tariffs"?

The combination is important.

You have tariffs and then embedded VATS at every point in the chain. That's the disadvantage.

Again, it's immaterial if domestically produced items have the VATS, because they are not facing the "in addition to" tariff component.

You are apparently going to completely ignore the national vs state/local component.

There are also a whole other series of factors that could impact trade deficits.  I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that the US is a relatively easy place to do business in, as compared to many of our "trade partner" countries.

From my perspective, I can see how tariffs disadvantage US firms. I cannot see how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantage US firms. Please explain to me how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantages US firms. Also, how do VATs alone or in combination with tariffs impact the trade deficit?

What is the relevance of the national vs local/state component?

Am I being punked . . . is this the Matrix?


What is confusing you here. National VATS cover the entire supply chain and are automatic are they not?

My company just ordered thousands of dollars in equipment. By virtue of where the seller exists in the supply chain, where we sit in the supply chain and the type of end user and the state they reside in, there's no sales tax at any point in the transaction.  In a national VAT environment, the same scenario is highly unlikely be it known or hidden.

Thus the "AND".  Tarriffs and VATS.

Once again, I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that US state and local government are more nimble than Euro or Asian G20 central governments, with likely noted exceptions of course.

 





 

[star seed 7]

Wouldn't a vat (as described by dax) make a country's exports less competitive? A tariff on their own goods so to speak.

[Stupid Fitz]

Wouldn't a vat (as described by dax) make a country's exports less competitive? A tariff on their own goods so to speak.

don't forget about those rough ridin' penguins!!!!!!!!!!!!

[chum1]

We may be losing a lot of our world dominating soft power amassed over the last century, but in return we get to puff our chests and act like bullies.

[sonofdaxjones]

We may be losing a lot of our world dominating soft power amassed over the last century, but in return we get to puff our chests and act like bullies.

We've invaded many countries, overthrown governments and sanctioned/embargoed nations across the globe.

We've killed collectively millions in the process and displaced millions more in that same process.

Yet now you're worried about appearing like a bully?   

[Sandstone Outcropping]

Guys, I ran like a $10,000 trade deficit with my grocery store last year. I'm going to enact tariffs against them until they start buying parts of my baseball card collection from me. I'm not letting them screw me any more.

[Justwin]

Wouldn't a vat (as described by dax) make a country's exports less competitive? A tariff on their own goods so to speak.

Most, if not all, countries with a VAT give a rebate on the VAT for exports.

[Justwin]

I have consistently used "and" . . . Tarriffs AND VATS

I am also very welcome to this fact: The United States does not have a national Value Added Tax (VAT) system; instead, it relies on state-level sales and use taxes, which are administered independently by each state

In the vast majority of instances, states and local governments are far more nimble in adjusting sales and use taxes then any central government and far more nimble in exempting goods from sales taxes entirely and/or exempted goods from sales taxes at certain points in the supply chain process.

In the US we have multiple states that have no sales tax at all . . . in other states there is a strong movement towards removing or greatly reducing sales taxes on consumables with a very high level of imported products in the chain.

How do VATs disadvantage US firms and/or increase the trade deficit?

Why do you keep leaving out "and tariffs"?

The combination is important.

You have tariffs and then embedded VATS at every point in the chain. That's the disadvantage.

Again, it's immaterial if domestically produced items have the VATS, because they are not facing the "in addition to" tariff component.

You are apparently going to completely ignore the national vs state/local component.

There are also a whole other series of factors that could impact trade deficits.  I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that the US is a relatively easy place to do business in, as compared to many of our "trade partner" countries.

From my perspective, I can see how tariffs disadvantage US firms. I cannot see how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantage US firms. Please explain to me how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantages US firms. Also, how do VATs alone or in combination with tariffs impact the trade deficit?

What is the relevance of the national vs local/state component?

Am I being punked . . . is this the Matrix?


What is confusing you here. National VATS cover the entire supply chain and are automatic are they not?

My company just ordered thousands of dollars in equipment. By virtue of where the seller exists in the supply chain, where we sit in the supply chain and the type of end user and the state they reside in, there's no sales tax at any point in the transaction.  In a national VAT environment, the same scenario is highly unlikely be it known or hidden.

Thus the "AND".  Tarriffs and VATS.

Once again, I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that US state and local government are more nimble than Euro or Asian G20 central governments, with likely noted exceptions of course.

If a country imposes a VAT on their own domestic goods and imposes the same VAT on imports I don't see how that disadvantages foreign firms.

[sonofdaxjones]

I have consistently used "and" . . . Tarriffs AND VATS

I am also very welcome to this fact: The United States does not have a national Value Added Tax (VAT) system; instead, it relies on state-level sales and use taxes, which are administered independently by each state

In the vast majority of instances, states and local governments are far more nimble in adjusting sales and use taxes then any central government and far more nimble in exempting goods from sales taxes entirely and/or exempted goods from sales taxes at certain points in the supply chain process.

In the US we have multiple states that have no sales tax at all . . . in other states there is a strong movement towards removing or greatly reducing sales taxes on consumables with a very high level of imported products in the chain.

How do VATs disadvantage US firms and/or increase the trade deficit?

Why do you keep leaving out "and tariffs"?

The combination is important.

You have tariffs and then embedded VATS at every point in the chain. That's the disadvantage.

Again, it's immaterial if domestically produced items have the VATS, because they are not facing the "in addition to" tariff component.

You are apparently going to completely ignore the national vs state/local component.

There are also a whole other series of factors that could impact trade deficits.  I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that the US is a relatively easy place to do business in, as compared to many of our "trade partner" countries.

From my perspective, I can see how tariffs disadvantage US firms. I cannot see how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantage US firms. Please explain to me how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantages US firms. Also, how do VATs alone or in combination with tariffs impact the trade deficit?

What is the relevance of the national vs local/state component?

Am I being punked . . . is this the Matrix?


What is confusing you here. National VATS cover the entire supply chain and are automatic are they not?

My company just ordered thousands of dollars in equipment. By virtue of where the seller exists in the supply chain, where we sit in the supply chain and the type of end user and the state they reside in, there's no sales tax at any point in the transaction.  In a national VAT environment, the same scenario is highly unlikely be it known or hidden.

Thus the "AND".  Tarriffs and VATS.

Once again, I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that US state and local government are more nimble than Euro or Asian G20 central governments, with likely noted exceptions of course.

If a country imposes a VAT on their own domestic goods and imposes the same VAT on imports I don't see how that disadvantages foreign firms.

Tariffs and VATS rolled into the pricing model of imported products seems to be a concept completely lost on you.


JW - What is the simple thing that this administration keeps saying will lower tariffs?

Again - I remain fascinated by #blueanongE who continually proclaim themselves as free market zealots, yet they clearly don't have a single problem with alleged trading partners not adhering to free market principles and thus #blueanongE weirdly thinks the the US should just sit and take it.

I am also still waiting for someone to explain to me how a $1.3 trillion dollar (all time record) trade deficit is good for the United States.  Oh, and don't be a total derp (which is hard for you guys I know) and say I am demanding there be no trade deficits.  But to look at the 2024 numbers and see (one example) the YoY $ increase in imports outpace the $ increase in exports by 2:1, even when building in inflation (which was and still is a thing, despite the protestations of #blueanongE) is concerning.

[Sandstone Outcropping]

These morons would have failed ECON101 at KSU so hard:

https://x.com/agraybee/status/1907883760114336025

[cfbandyman]

These morons would have failed ECON101 at KSU so hard:

https://x.com/agraybee/status/1907883760114336025

¡Avocados de Mexico!

[Justwin]

I have consistently used "and" . . . Tarriffs AND VATS

I am also very welcome to this fact: The United States does not have a national Value Added Tax (VAT) system; instead, it relies on state-level sales and use taxes, which are administered independently by each state

In the vast majority of instances, states and local governments are far more nimble in adjusting sales and use taxes then any central government and far more nimble in exempting goods from sales taxes entirely and/or exempted goods from sales taxes at certain points in the supply chain process.

In the US we have multiple states that have no sales tax at all . . . in other states there is a strong movement towards removing or greatly reducing sales taxes on consumables with a very high level of imported products in the chain.

How do VATs disadvantage US firms and/or increase the trade deficit?

Why do you keep leaving out "and tariffs"?

The combination is important.

You have tariffs and then embedded VATS at every point in the chain. That's the disadvantage.

Again, it's immaterial if domestically produced items have the VATS, because they are not facing the "in addition to" tariff component.

You are apparently going to completely ignore the national vs state/local component.

There are also a whole other series of factors that could impact trade deficits.  I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that the US is a relatively easy place to do business in, as compared to many of our "trade partner" countries.

From my perspective, I can see how tariffs disadvantage US firms. I cannot see how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantage US firms. Please explain to me how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantages US firms. Also, how do VATs alone or in combination with tariffs impact the trade deficit?

What is the relevance of the national vs local/state component?

Am I being punked . . . is this the Matrix?


What is confusing you here. National VATS cover the entire supply chain and are automatic are they not?

My company just ordered thousands of dollars in equipment. By virtue of where the seller exists in the supply chain, where we sit in the supply chain and the type of end user and the state they reside in, there's no sales tax at any point in the transaction.  In a national VAT environment, the same scenario is highly unlikely be it known or hidden.

Thus the "AND".  Tarriffs and VATS.

Once again, I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that US state and local government are more nimble than Euro or Asian G20 central governments, with likely noted exceptions of course.

If a country imposes a VAT on their own domestic goods and imposes the same VAT on imports I don't see how that disadvantages foreign firms.

Tariffs and VATS rolled into the pricing model of imported products seems to be a concept completely lost on you.


JW - What is the simple thing that this administration keeps saying will lower tariffs?

Again - I remain fascinated by #blueanongE who continually proclaim themselves as free market zealots, yet they clearly don't have a single problem with alleged treading partners not adhering to free market principles and thus #blueanongE weirdly thinks the the US should just sit and take it.

I am also still waiting for someone to explain to me how a $1.3 trillion dollar (all time record) trade deficit is good for the United States.  Oh, and don't be a total derp (which is hard for you guys I know) and say I am demanding there be no trade deficits.  But to look at the 2024 numbers and see (one example) the YoY $ increase in imports outpace the $ increase in exports by 2:1, even when building in inflation (which was and still is a thing, despite the protestations of #blueanongE) is concerning.

VATs are rolled into the pricing of domestic products as well, so there is no disadvantage to foreign firms.

I don't know what this administration keeps saying is the simple thing that will lower tariffs. Enlighten me.

I don't think I ever said that big of a trade deficit is a good thing. I said if we want to reduce the trade deficit, we should focus on reducing our budget deficit and the best place to start on that is the defense budget.

[CNS]

Come on Justwin, that man has a family sheesh.

Who he openly votes against the best interests of.

[sonofdaxjones]

I have consistently used "and" . . . Tarriffs AND VATS

I am also very welcome to this fact: The United States does not have a national Value Added Tax (VAT) system; instead, it relies on state-level sales and use taxes, which are administered independently by each state

In the vast majority of instances, states and local governments are far more nimble in adjusting sales and use taxes then any central government and far more nimble in exempting goods from sales taxes entirely and/or exempted goods from sales taxes at certain points in the supply chain process.

In the US we have multiple states that have no sales tax at all . . . in other states there is a strong movement towards removing or greatly reducing sales taxes on consumables with a very high level of imported products in the chain.

How do VATs disadvantage US firms and/or increase the trade deficit?

Why do you keep leaving out "and tariffs"?

The combination is important.

You have tariffs and then embedded VATS at every point in the chain. That's the disadvantage.

Again, it's immaterial if domestically produced items have the VATS, because they are not facing the "in addition to" tariff component.

You are apparently going to completely ignore the national vs state/local component.

There are also a whole other series of factors that could impact trade deficits.  I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that the US is a relatively easy place to do business in, as compared to many of our "trade partner" countries.

From my perspective, I can see how tariffs disadvantage US firms. I cannot see how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantage US firms. Please explain to me how VATs alone or in combination with tariffs disadvantages US firms. Also, how do VATs alone or in combination with tariffs impact the trade deficit?

What is the relevance of the national vs local/state component?

Am I being punked . . . is this the Matrix?


What is confusing you here. National VATS cover the entire supply chain and are automatic are they not?

My company just ordered thousands of dollars in equipment. By virtue of where the seller exists in the supply chain, where we sit in the supply chain and the type of end user and the state they reside in, there's no sales tax at any point in the transaction.  In a national VAT environment, the same scenario is highly unlikely be it known or hidden.

Thus the "AND".  Tarriffs and VATS.

Once again, I don't think I am going too far out on a limb here by saying that US state and local government are more nimble than Euro or Asian G20 central governments, with likely noted exceptions of course.

If a country imposes a VAT on their own domestic goods and imposes the same VAT on imports I don't see how that disadvantages foreign firms.

Tariffs and VATS rolled into the pricing model of imported products seems to be a concept completely lost on you.


JW - What is the simple thing that this administration keeps saying will lower tariffs?

Again - I remain fascinated by #blueanongE who continually proclaim themselves as free market zealots, yet they clearly don't have a single problem with alleged treading partners not adhering to free market principles and thus #blueanongE weirdly thinks the the US should just sit and take it.

I am also still waiting for someone to explain to me how a $1.3 trillion dollar (all time record) trade deficit is good for the United States.  Oh, and don't be a total derp (which is hard for you guys I know) and say I am demanding there be no trade deficits.  But to look at the 2024 numbers and see (one example) the YoY $ increase in imports outpace the $ increase in exports by 2:1, even when building in inflation (which was and still is a thing, despite the protestations of #blueanongE) is concerning.

VATs are rolled into the pricing of domestic products as well, so there is no disadvantage to foreign firms.

I don't know what this administration keeps saying is the simple thing that will lower tariffs. Enlighten me.

I don't think I ever said that big of a trade deficit is a good thing. I said if we want to reduce the trade deficit, we should focus on reducing our budget deficit and the best place to start on that is the defense budget.

Please point me to the United States Government's VAT table for domestically produced goods.

Our alleged trading partners - automatic embedded VAT's across all segments of the supply chain and tariffs, in many cases very high tariffs.  Sales taxes are an end point tax, multiple transactions within the chain are very very often exempt from sales taxation.  Some states have no sales tax, other states often reduce or eliminate sales taxes on certain products (and obviously increase them on other goods and services).  I just gave you an anecdotal example of 3 steps within a particular chain, in this case distributor-reseller-end user, where no party will pay sales taxes out of that trifecta.  The end user, like hundreds of thousands of end users - including the government is sales tax exempt.

The administration says if other countries lower their tariffs the US will do the same.

#blueanon clearly has no appetite for any reduction in Federal spending . . . they've made that abundantly clear.

[sonofdaxjones]

Come on Justwin, that man has a family sheesh.

Who he openly votes against the best interests of.

Only affirming that #blueanongE is in a perpetual state of DerpCon One