THE ERA OF TRUMP

[Heraclius]

Also interested in hearing what school of economics has a different interpretation of tariffs.

Perhaps the ever well-reputed Austrian school?

[Fife]

Also interested in hearing what school of economics has a different interpretation of tariffs.

Perhaps the ever well-reputed Austrian school?

What different "interpretation" do you think the Austrians have?

I'm really interested to see where the controversy exists among actual economists on this *extremely* mundane issue.

We're in Flat-Earther territory here.

[Speaker to Animals]

God, you're an idiot when it comes to economics. You do not even grasp the distinction between macro and micro demand and supply curves, and you possess no concept of the problem of trade deficits . You probably don't know how to calculate a GDP either based on your inability to grasp a core feature of the problem.

You have this one partisan neocon book, though, and fuck anybody who suggests you get an actual macroeconomics textbook so you don't look like such an idiot.

Imagine in a history thread somebody shows up with zero exposure to actual history other than reading The People's History of The United States, and proceeds to lecture those of us who took several courses in American history in college and, you know, actually bothered to read about differing perspectives on history rather than just that one Marxist book. You might call that guy an idiot, no?

But like the first day of any macroeconomics class will tell you “trade deficits don’t matter” about 5 times. What is the macroeconomics textbook you’re reading that suggests otherwise?

Uh.. no they do not. They tell you that it matters or does not, depending upon which school you are discussing.

[DBTrek]

If you realize a country has goods and services, and that services aren’t calculated into “trade deficits” while goods are - then a service oriented economy racking up a trade deficit is not something we necessarily need to panic about.

Unless you’re from the Mammon-cannibal/Trump school of economics, in which case tariff that demon deficit away!

[Speaker to Animals]

We already established you have no idea about macroeconomics if it's not in your Thomas Sowell book. We have all heard neocon talking points about globalism for twenty-five years and counting now. Thanks for your contribution, but consider economics is not a science, and you are essentially acting like a progressive who carries on as if democrat party politics is the proven political solution to everything, and anybody who disagrees does not understand "science".

Politics and economics are not actually sciences. There exist completely opposing schools of thought that do not agree, and they all make sense internally. Mind blowing. I am sure.

[Smitty-48]

If you realize a country has goods and services, and that services aren’t calculated into “trade deficits” while goods are - then a service oriented economy racking up a trade deficit is not something we necessarily need to panic about.

Unless you’re from the Mammon-cannibal/Trump school of economics, in which case tariff that demon deficit away!

Even if goods, the USA has a current account balance of -$389 billion, Russia has a current account balance of +$59 billion, are you running off to seek your fortune in Vladivostok?

ZOMG Negative Current Account balance is almost as big a fallacy as Hooray Tariffs.

[DBTrek]

We already established you have no idea about macroeconomics if it's not in your Thomas Sowell book. We have all heard neocon talking points about globalism for twenty-five years and counting now. Thanks for your contribution, but consider economics is not a science, and you are essentially acting like a progressive who carries on as if democrat party politics is the proven political solution to everything, and anybody who disagrees does not understand "science".

Politics and economics are not actually sciences. There exist completely opposing schools of thought that do not agree, and they all make sense internally. Mind blowing. I am sure.

And yet while acknowledging economics isn't a hard science you continue to rely on a college minor and nary a sensible economic idea articulated from your own mouth as some kind of immunity against my actual arguments

Appealing to your own authority where you've neither demonstrated any nor been certified as having any.
Impressive.

[Speaker to Animals]

I am sure you will get right on trying to actually understand the different schools of thought instead of lecturing us who reject neocon thought as simply "not understanding economics", even though you and Smitty seem to be the only people here who actually have not studied economics. It is really quite comical.

[Speaker to Animals]

Given that you are describing the "vast majority," show me a textbook that sets out your theory of tariffs. Any one of the basket-full from your minor or or your recreational reading will do.

There is no such thing, you dummy, and you fucking know it. There are several major schools of economics with completely different takes on how this shit works. Sowell wrote a book apparently describing neo-classical school economics to dumbasses as if it's the established facts, and all those people who disagree simply don't understand "economics". Then you have no shortage of dummies who read that one book, never bother to actually learn anything about economics other than this slanted description, and then lecture everybody else who doesn't agree with it.

Well, I agree that there is no such thing as a textbook that argues that tariffs do anything other than to fuck over the citizens of the governments that enact them for the benefit of corporations, foreigners, and union fatass bosses.

Otherwise, your jerking off about Sowell is pretty entertaining; especially considering how utterly mainstream and non-controversial Sowell is. You're an army of one; something to be said for that, I guess.

Okay Kathy Newman.

[Speaker to Animals]

We already established you have no idea about macroeconomics if it's not in your Thomas Sowell book. We have all heard neocon talking points about globalism for twenty-five years and counting now. Thanks for your contribution, but consider economics is not a science, and you are essentially acting like a progressive who carries on as if democrat party politics is the proven political solution to everything, and anybody who disagrees does not understand "science".

Politics and economics are not actually sciences. There exist completely opposing schools of thought that do not agree, and they all make sense internally. Mind blowing. I am sure.

And yet while acknowledging economics isn't a hard science you continue to rely on a college minor and nary a sensible economic idea articulated from your own mouth as some kind of immunity against my actual arguments

Appealing to your own authority where you've neither demonstrated any nor been certified as having any.
Impressive.

I don't have to appeal to my own authority to show you out as a fucking idiot.

You were just using macro and micro demand curves interchangeably, as if they have the same underlying mechanics (they do not). When one poster was talking about the impact of the lost jobs to macro demand, you started talking about it like it's a micro demand curve for a specific product. You obviously don't have any idea what the fuck you are talking about. You are over your head and you refuse to actually go read a textbook instead of these partisan propaganda books.

I don't know of any school of economics that disagrees about what exactly a macro demand curve is. That's not debatable. You just don't understand.