i think i'm catching a hold of something, here.

it seems to be that people think that trump threatened to stop trading with china. i don't know if there were specific articles floating around, or if the clinton people may have helped in the confusion. but, i take it that there's this perception that trump was threatening a trade war and, ultimately, a reduction in trade. i guess this comes out of the intuitive view that the obvious way to close a trade deficit is to decrease imports. or, maybe it's just a naive and ignorant reaction to what is perceived as conflict: if trump is saying things about the trading relationship with china, he doesn't like china (maybe he's even racist!) and therefore doesn't want to trade with china. as though a criticism implies he wants a boycott. i guess that's the logic of a moralizing fundamentalist, which so much of the contemporary pseudo-left really is at heart.

but, decreasing imports doesn't create jobs, necessarily. it might. a surer way that you create jobs is by increasing exports. and, the way that you close a trade deficit without decreasing gdp (and who wants that....) is that you increase exports.

what is a trade deficit? now, let me start by saying that i'm not really concerned about trade deficits so much as i'm concerned about self-sufficiency, food sovereignty, climate change and workers' rights. trade deficits are kind of irrelevant to me.

but, what is it?

a trade deficit is just when you import more from a country than you export. that's all it means. so, when the talking heads on the news say that america has a trade deficit with china, all it means is that china imports more goods into the united states than it accepts from the united states in return.

now, if that's the case, then maybe chinese workers are making things that american workers might make, and perhaps used to make. but, it also means that american manufacturers are being shut out of the chinese market. so, if you're looking to reduce the trade deficit, you want to do these two things, in some capacity:

1) decrease the amount of goods entering the country
2) increase the amount of goods exiting the country.

but, the first thing is just meaningless without the second. if you cut imports without increasing production, you just end up without goods on the shelves. so, what you want to do is increase exports, and then hope that the local production competes well against the foreign production.

in a situation where this is impossible - and mexico is closer to this than china - you may have to cut off open trade altogether and instead retreat to very managed trade. and, that's what he's doing in mexico, too.

all this aside, i should point out the bernie actually threatened to cut trade relations with china. and, maybe trump inaccurately absorbed bernie's position on this, in the minds of many. but, trump just didn't do that. what he was concerned about was reducing the deficit. and, what that always clearly meant was increasing exports.

if you're upset about this, you need to stop listening to democrats and democratic party propaganda. how many times does the actual left have to tell you this? they're just as dishonest and misleading as the republicans are. and, you'll end up just as clueless.

the last time i remember this happening like this was with obama and war. a lot of people thought obama was an anti-war candidate. but, he never said anything of the sort. and, he was one of the most violent presidents, in the end.

the media is dangerous. you need to be vigilant. you need to question. you need to verify. and, the internet exists.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.