trade policy

Some American farmers are not ready to vote for President Donald Trump in 2020 even after he said he was settling his trade war with China,
Trump is falsely claiming that tariffs on imports from China will pay for a new $15 billion dollar subsidy for struggling U.S. farmers.
This anti-trade rhetoric is alarming in the 21st century.
In my view, that would be a mistake. The fate of the United States and the fate of the world are really in our hands. If you are an independent, please do not sit out this election. It is much too important.
The major candidates in this year’s presidential race both believe that trade policies of foreign countries are unfair and
We have Trump offering quite specific policies, and taking extreme heat for them. Hillary Clinton's strategy is, apparently, not to be pinned down. In other words, she has adopted a political strategy, not a substantive one.
"Labor share of GDP" includes income for everyone - regular workers, as well as CEOs, the top 1%, .1% and .01%. Since the
However objectionable one might find Trump on other grounds, it is folly to dismiss out of hand his critique of global trade imbalances with their growth-subtracting U.S. trade deficits.  Throwing wage-insurance crumbs to disaffected non-college workers will not increase economic growth, foster competitive industrial/technological capabilities, and pay down the national  debt.
Pacts like the recently-signed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), currently sidelined without sufficient congressional support for passage, contain thousands of pages of enforceable rules that would fuel climate chaos and empower corporate polluters to challenge environmental laws across the globe.
It is not unusual that we lost sales in 2014. In fact, the last 50 years have been an almost unbroken string of trade deficits