Reduce USA's trade deficit, increase our GDP and median wage.

Carlitos Bam-Bam, we all pretend to be logical and objective; but I suspect more often than not we first determine our preferences and goals then rationalize those preferences are correct. Did I objectively determine that the purchasing power of the median wage is the superior gauge of a nations’ middle income earners’ financial condition?
During my upbringing, our family’s financial survival was always critically vulnerable; but I do believe my appreciation of median wage’s economic significance is due to my objective and correct analysis.

I have complete confidence the enactment of Warren Buffett’s concept of Import Certificates, (ICs) would (more than otherwise) be a significantly net benefit to our nation’s gross domestic product, (GDP) due to its method of reducing our trade deficit of goods.
It acts as an indirect but effective subsidy of our exports and more than otherwise and increases both USA’s sum of aggregate imported plus exported goods, and that of our GDP. All of this in turn would be reflect upon USA’s median wage.

Assessing the approximate value of goods in USA harbors, expressed in U.S. dollars is a technical rather than a policy determination. The IC policy grants no policy discretion to any entities, (not even governments). It is not pure free trade but it is absolutely pure free enterprise. No single entity could corner, control or direct our global trade and our aggregate assessed imports could never exceed our exports of such goods. Because all net expenses are paid by USA purchasers of foreign goods, this proposal could not divert government revenues from any other programs that would be of benefit to our nation.

Google wikipedia import certificate
or refer to:
http://www.democratichub.com/posts/5816/reduce-the-trade-deficit-increase-gdp-m...

Respectfully, Supposn

Cupid Dave, is your message regarding recession, minimum wage and our labor supply in response to my discussion of USA’s trade deficit? It’s a “stretch” to associate these factors with our trade deficit.

I don’t have any remedy that significantly could promise to mend our nation’s educational ills; more than any other facet of our federal and state governments, any significant educational improvement would be equally reflected with an economic upswing of the greatest extent.

Our nation has been unable to concur upon which tax loop holes to eliminate, which expenditures to reduce and the disposition of the resulting net budget savings.

Aside from libertarians, across all major segments of the political spectrum, the registered party members are not aligned with their party leadership with regard to pure free global trade. Across all party lines there is a general opinion that the great proportion of imported goods within our domestic markets is contrary to our best interests.

I am fully confident this Import Certificate proposal for USA’s global trade would certainly be of significant economic benefit to our nation. It requires no net expenditures and thus would not deny resources from any other programs to improve our nation.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Regarding your responding message’s reference to minimum wage, refer to “Consequences of repealing minimum wage rates” posted @ 4:53, April 4, 2012.

Within that post I advocated annually cost of living adjusting the federal minimum wage rate. I believe this would be economically beneficial to our wage and salary earners and particularly to the lower quarter of those income earners who are in the greatest need of relief.

Our nation has never experienced a significant and sustained economic improvement that did not commence or very soon include a significant increase of the median wage’s purchasing power.

Annual cost of living adjusted minimum wage will not provide an extremely significant economic benefit but it would of no direct cost within our federal budget. Similar to my grandmother’s chicken soup, it makes things better. Anyone that ate my grandmother’s soup for 100 years would be guaranteed a long life.

Respectfully, Supposn

Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage

Warren Buffett’s concept to significantly reduce USA’s trade deficit.

It is not our global trade but our trade deficits’ that are a significant net detriment to our economy.  Trade deficits’ are ALWAYS detrimental to their nations’ GDPs.

I’m a proponent of a proposal to reduce USA’s trade deficit of goods that was first introduced to the Senate in 2006.  The market driven proposal does not favor or discriminate between foreign nations, or between manufactured, agricultural or any other industries’ products. It is self funding; eventually all expenses are borne by U.S. purchasers of foreign goods.

The basic concept is for exporters who choose to pay the federal fees to acquire TRANSFERABLE IMPORT CERTIFICATES, (ICs) for the assessed value of their goods leaving the USA.  The fees defray all direct federal expenses due to this proposed policy.

Importers would be required to surrender ICs for the assessed value of their goods entering the USA. Surrendered certificates are cancelled.
These transferable Import Certificates may seem as a boon to exporters of USA goods but it’s actually an indirect and effective export subsidy.

The version of this policy I advocate is completely market driven, funded by U.S. purchasers of foreign good and excludes values of specifically listed scarce or precious minerals integral to goods being assessed.

This trade policy would significantly decrease USA’s trade deficit of goods and increase the aggregate sum of USA’s imports plus exports and our GDP more than otherwise.  The GDP bolsters the median wage.

Wage earning families benefit from cheaper imported goods but every day of every year they’re dependent upon their U.S. wages.  Regardless of how small the additions to imports’ prices due to Import Certificates, (unlike tariffs) USA’s assessed imports could never exceed that of our exports.  USA consumers will be able to purchase cheap, (but not the absolute cheapest) imported goods.  We cannot afford the absolute cheapest.
 
Refer to: www.USA-Trade-Deficit.Blogspot.com
or Google: “wikipedia, import certificates “.

Respectfully, Supposn

Consequences of repealing minimum wage rates.

If there were no minimum wage many additional lower wage jobs would be created.
The vast majority of those newly induced jobs would be what we now describe as sub-minimal wage paying jobs that do not justify the current $7.25/Hr. federal minimum wage rate.

It’s not inconceivable that the market price for such “sub-minimum” tasks may be as low as a half dollar per hour.  How much can we pay for someone to straighten salvaged carpenter nails for reuse?  We could reduce the price of transportation by replacing many NY City cabs and drivers with young men operating rickshaws.

[U.S. railroads have been in disrepair for over a quarter of a century.  Our trains run at 50MPH but in Asia and Europe they’re running trains at 200 to 300 MPH.  They have much fewer automobiles and consume less petroleum per capita but their public transportation is generally more wide spread and effective].

Do you think enabling rickshaws to be financially viable by eliminating our minimum wage regulations would decrease our transportation, energy and pollution problems?]

There are many job tasks that do not justify the minimum rate but they now exist because their performance is necessary to our public or private enterprises.  Those jobs will continue to exist but their wage levels will plunge down to sub-minimum rates.

Sub-minimum jobs will be the vast majority of additional jobs created and (because many of those qualified to perform sub-minimum tasks were previously not qualified for employment at minimum wage rates), we’ll have a pool of eligible labor that will far exceed the number of those additional jobs.

The affect of those extremely poor paying jobs will ripple throughout our entire labor market.  All labor compensation will be somewhat affected but the general extent of the effect upon a task’s wage rate will be inversely related to the difference between the purchasing power of the eliminated minimum wage rate and the job’s rate; (i.e. the more you’re earning, the less you’re hurting.  That’s the meaning of minimum wage rate’s inverse affect upon all jobs’ rates).

Lower wage earners will all then be paid in wages of extremely poor purchasing power.  Prior to the elimination of the minimum wage rate, many of those now earning the lesser purchasing powered wages will have been unemployed or not worked steadily but they will be joined by those who already had been the working poor and some who were previously getting by slightly better.  There’ll be net increased needs for public assistance and our states can’t now handle the present needs.
That’s a scenario of increased national poverty.

I ‘m a proponent of an annually cost of living adjusted minimum wage rate similar to the annually COLA’d Social Security benefits.

Respectfully, Supposn

Regarding offshoring:, refer to the topic:
“Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage”, posted at 2:17PM, March 17, 2012.               
Respectfully, Supposn

Calitos Bam-bam, in response to your message of 12:18PM, March 18, 2012:

I read Warren Mosler’s discussion of trade deficits within his 7 deadly frauds” and remain in agreement with what I believe to be the majority global majority opinion of economists.

We believe there’s NO economic benefit due to a trade deficit’s; their detrimental effect's under-employment.
[Under-employment is the driving down of the median wage and wage scales.  Unemployment is the extreme case of under-employment].
Reduction of under-employment is the primary justification for the transferable Import Certificate, (IC) proposal.

The proposal would significantly reduce USA’s trade deficit of goods.  Importers would be required to surrender ICs with sufficient face values to cover the assessed value of their goods.  That requirement is would not nullify any other legal restrictions upon U.S. imported goods.

I would prefer that any proposed non-economic additions or modifications of imports be handled in a separate legislative bill.  I wouldn’t want to jeopardize passage of this proposal.

Respectfully, Supposn