What is the difference between a country running a large trade surplus with another country and

[RDANGELO]

invading that country and stealing their resources. The only difference is the bloodshed. Once a nation has established a large surplus with another one, their is no incentive for them to change policy, unless they are countered with reciprocation or at least a threat of it. The reason that we continue to let countries like China run large trade surpluses on us it that it benefits the people at the top of the economy. The corporations make bigger profits on cheaper labor, while the average workers see downward pressure on wages.

[Proserpina]

1. There are sincere people who believe that a nation that doesn't trade is sick or poor

They are more to be pitied than censured, because they are mentally ill. They are terminally greedy, to be specific.

Trading "just because" (not as a necessity for goods that cannot be produced locally, or resources that aren't available at home) is a great way to skim.

The "traders" are taking a cut on every item that crosses the border, even before a government gets anything. It wastes resources, shuffling that stuff across oceans, polluting as they go.

And when the purpose of all this border-crossing trade is to grind worker's wages into poverty, it reaches the level of crime against the nation.

[Hoyt]

2. Yeah, we've run a trade deficit with Japan and China since we bought the

Last edited Sun Jan 3, 2016, 08:14 PM - Edit history (1)

first Chinese finger traps and transistor radios. Fact is, people here want those cheap, and often superior, goods. We need to compete with all products and especially the things we do best. To the extent there are "excess" profits from world trade, corporations should be taxed and proceeds put to use for society. We will not achieve a better society trading among ourselves, unless we could turn the clock back and be satisfied with outhouses, horses and rivers for transportation, etc. I could, but doubt it will appeal to masses.

[RDANGELO]

3. Yes, if the goods are made here instead of China they will be more expensive, but the workers will

have more money. The only real difference is the jobs will be here instead of China. Letting the cheaper goods in forces wages down here, and affects income inequality.

[Hoyt]

4. If we were self-sufficient and there weren't 5.6 billion other people who think they deserve part of

the wealth too, we might be better off for a very short period.

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. There's a huge difference. It's like comparing apples and boot polish

If you run a trade surplus with a country, it means there's a net flow of goods and services to that country, and a net flow of money from it. Stealing resources means there's a net flow of goods from that country.

Then, of course, you trade with many countries at once. You may have a trade surplus with one country, a deficit with another, and they may have a surplus and deficit with each other. It will depend on the goods and services. Different countries have different resources - mineral, agricultural, and industrial or commercial skills.

Trade is also not forced. A trade surplus or deficit is not established, or continued, with a 'policy'. It's trade. Individuals, or corporations, or governments, buy and sell to entities in other countries by mutual agreement. Run a deficit with a country, and you get goods and services out of it. Those are, well, 'good', and do you a 'service'. The money you pay for it may have come from earlier surpluses your country ran, or assets you own abroad on in your own country, that you wish to exchange for the goods and services.

Germany has, for instance, run a trade surplus with the USA since at least 1985: https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c4280.html . Did you feel that Germany forced that on the USA somehow?

A government could, if you want, restrict trade to protect jobs in industries in its country. But that would mean more expensive goods. On the whole, the cheap goods benefit more people in a country than the extra jobs would, so it spreads the benefit.

[Nye Bevan]

6. What's the difference between me selling more stuff to my next-door neighbor than he sells to me,

and breaking into his house and stealing his stuff?