First off the article doesn't seem correct in it's analysis. Maybe I missed it's point correctly.
Let me see if you can grasp it if I type more slowly, a trade deficit is not automatically a bad think (as Trump thinks because we all know he hate to lose) but can actually be seen as a good thin (as the Forbes article tries to point out).
Ok, maybe if I point you to a Right-Center source called the CATO Institute:
Are Trade Deficits Really Bad News?(it should be noted that the article is from 1998 so the numbers are out of date but economic theory hasn't changed in the last decade)America’s merchandise trade deficit could hit $250 billion in 1998, propelled to a record high by financial turmoil and plunging growth rates in the Far East. If the past is any guide, the widening trade gap will be reported almost universally as grim news. Critics of free trade will wave the deficit numbers as a rallying call to get tough with “unfair” trading partners.
But are trade deficits necessarily bad for the U.S. economy?
The answer is no. Trade deficits are not a sign of unfair trade practices or a lack of American “competitiveness.” Trade deficits are caused by factors in the macroeconomy that are not directly related to trade. To understand why, journalists should borrow a technique from investigative reporting and “follow the money.”
When Americans buy imports, foreigners must do something with the dollars they earn. They can either use the dollars to buy American exports or to invest in American assets, such as Treasury bills, stocks, real estate, and factories.
If the amount of investment capital entering the U.S. exceeds the amount flowing Out, the extra dollars entering the country can then be used by Americans to buy imports over and above the amount we could buy merely from what we earn by selling exports. So a current account deficit is simply the mirror image of a capital account surplus.
In the global economy, some countries, such as the United States, are net importers of capital and thus run a trade deficit. Others, such as Japan, are net capital exporters because domestic savings exceed domestic investment. The excess savings these capital exporters send abroad returns to their home market to purchase exports, creating a trade surplus.
--snip--
If a trade deficit is determined solely by rates of savings and investment, then the U.S. trade deficit will be impervious to a get-tough trade policy. Slapping higher tariffs on imports will only deprive foreigners of the dollars they would have earned by selling in the U.S. market.
This in turn will reduce the supply of dollars on the international currency market, raise the value of the dollar relative to other currencies, and make dollar-priced U.S. exports more expensive for foreign buyers, thus reducing demand for our exports. Eventually, the volume of exports will fall along with imports and the trade deficit will remain largely unchanged.
Nations do not trade with each other; people do. America’s trade deficit with the rest of the world is only the sum of the individual choices made by American citizens. Those choices, to buy an import or to sell an export, only take place if both parties to the transaction believe it will make them better off. In this way, the “balance of trade” is always positive.
The only reason the U.S. trade deficit is bad news is that so many people believe it is bad news.
So, think about the above...what part of trade deficits are not bad don't you understand? It's basic economics...Trump is a transactional win/loose sort of guy who simply doesn't understand economic theory and is simply parroting what the alt-right has been feeding him.
And if you think the CATO Institute is a left wing progressive conspiracy think tank, it's not...
From their web site:
About CATOThe Cato Institute is a public policy research organization — a think tank — dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peace. Its scholars and analysts conduct independent, nonpartisan research on a wide range of policy issues.
Founded in 1977, Cato owes its name to Cato’s Letters, a series of essays published in 18th- century England that presented a vision of society free from excessive government power. Those essays inspired the architects of the American Revolution. And the simple, timeless principles of that revolution — individual liberty, limited government, and free markets — turn out to be even more powerful in today’s world of global markets and unprecedented access to information than Jefferson or Madison could have imagined. Social and economic freedom is not just the best policy for a free people, it is the indispensable framework for the future.
It's the very hallmark of conservative republican principles...in fact, it was founded in 1974 in Wichita, Kansas as the
Charles Koch Foundation and initially funded by Charles Koch. Yes, that's the one half of the Koch brothers who basically funded the rise of the Tea Party and is a huge source of GOP funding...
So, why would I possibly be able to agree with a right wing conservative? Because he's right...it's to America's best interests to be able to run a trade deficit (within reason) and be funded by other countries.
That's why it's so friggin' stupid of Trump to listen to his alt-right America 1st nut balls that really don't have a clue.
Sorry to say it bud but if you and other Trump supporters understood economics better you wouldn't be so ready to assume Trump knows what he's doing...
