Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Transferable Import Certificates

Warren Buffett wrote of a proposal to eliminate USA’s trade deficit of goods. The article, “Squanderville” was published in 2003 by Fortune magazine. I'm a propnent of a proposal based upon his concept.
This proposal would increase our aggregate sum of USA’s imports and exports and induce our GDP and median wage (adjusted to the dollar’s purchasing power), to be more than otherwise.

U.S. purchasers of foreign goods eventually pay all net federal expenses due to this proposal.  It is not a net sourcwe of federal revenue. This market, (not government) driven proposal is restricted rather than “pure” free trade and is certainly pure free enterprise.
The proposal grants government no discretion of policy.(Assessing the value of goods is a technical, not a policy decision). It will increase rather than decrease USA's agregate imports plus exports.

Jim Hightower said "We should keep our factories here and import our CEO's. They'll perform the same tasks for less money ".

From the CIA Fact book, (2004), a United States Government publication:“(USA’s economic) Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups”.

Further information is provided within this site's additional posts.  None of the messages are more than a page in length Only message #8, “Assessment adjustments” differ materially from Mr. Buffett’s original proposal.

References:

Warren Buffett's proposal was published in Fortune Magazine, October 26, 2003.
http://www.pbs.org/wsw/news/fortunearticle_20031026_03.html

The bill(S.109-3899) baseb upon his cocept was introduced ro the U.S. Senate on September 14, 2006.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.3899:

Excerpted from the post entitled "Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage"
within USA-trade-Deficit.Blogspot.Com :

The basic concept is exporters of USA goods may request to have their goods assessed and they will pay the federal fees. The fees defray all direct net federal expenses due to this proposal. Exporters are motivated to acquire Import Certificates; (ICs) are issued for the assessed values of their goods departing the USA.
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 are an indirect but effective subsidy of exported USA goods.

I’m a proponent of a version of IC policy that excludes the values of precious or scarce mineral materials integral to goods’ assessments.

This market driven 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 increased domestic production would be reflected within an increasing 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.

Unlike a tariff, this proposal's an indirect but effective susidyy of USA exported goods.  This market, (not government) driven proposal is restricted rather than “pure” free trade and is certainly pure free enterprise.

The proposal grants government no discretion of policy.(Assessing the value of goods is a technical, not a policy decision). It will increase rather than decrease USA's agregate imports plus exports. Depending upon how it’s drafted, the proposal is mostly or fully self funding. Eliminating USA's trade deficit would increase our GDP and median wage.

No other trade proposal would halt and reverse our deindustrialization with less government intervention or increased prices of imported goods. USA would still enjoy cheap, (but not the absolute cheapest) imported goods. The proposal’s simple logic is irrefutable.

Jim Hightower said "We should keep our factories here and import our CEO's. They'll perform the same tasks for less money ".

From the CIA Fact book, (2004), a United States Government publication:“(USA’s economic) Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups”.

All of this site’s other messages further explain and support this first message. The next message is simply a list of 7 other subtopics that should hopefully answer your questions and concerns. None of the messages are more than a page in length Only message #8, “Assessment adjustments” differ materially from Mr. Buffett’s original proposal.


References:
Warren Buffett's proposal was published in Fortune Magazine, October 26, 2003.
http://www.pbs.org/wsw/news/fortunearticle_20031026_03.html

The bill(S.109-3899) baseb upon his cocept was introduced ro the U.S. Senate on September 14, 2006.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.3899:

Please post your comments regarding this blog.
Respectfully, Supposn

Labels: , , , ,

2 Comments:

Blogger supposn said...

Years ago Warren Buffett has written of our trade deficit’s harm to the USA economy. Buffett wrote of a concept very similar to this proposal.

Since then he and Bill Gates are involved with world betterment. He no longer devotes any effort to this concept.

I regret that they do not believe that world improvement should start at home. (My wife and children are similarly disappointed with me).

Respectfully, Supposn

7:00 AM  
Blogger adam brown said...

Hello I just entered before I have to leave to the airport, it's been very nice to meet you, if you want here is the site I told you about where I type some stuff and make good money (I work from home): here it is

6:48 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home