Rand Paul

So really, the trade deficit going up has gone up in times of prosperity, and trade deficits go down in times of economic downturn. So it's really the opposite of what people think. And the reason is this. As I was saying previously, The United States doesn't trade with China. Individuals do.

So if a million people went and bought TVs at Walmart and they all came from, let's say, Korea, and they get their TV and they've gotten it because it was good quality and lower price and they saved money, all million, every person, every one of the million people are satisfied with their trade.

So if a million people went and bought TVs at Walmart and they all came from, let's say, Korea, and they get their TV and they've gotten it because it was good quality and lower price and they saved money, all million, every person, every one of the million people are satisfied with their trade.

So if a million people went and bought TVs at Walmart and they all came from, let's say, Korea, and they get their TV and they've gotten it because it was good quality and lower price and they saved money, all million, every person, every one of the million people are satisfied with their trade.

But then somebody comes and draws a circle around how much goes to China or how much goes to Korea, how much comes back, and they say, oh, well, we buy all this stuff from other countries and they don't buy it from us, so we have a deficit. But the fallacy is this. Every person who bought a TV was happy or they wouldn't have done it.

But then somebody comes and draws a circle around how much goes to China or how much goes to Korea, how much comes back, and they say, oh, well, we buy all this stuff from other countries and they don't buy it from us, so we have a deficit. But the fallacy is this. Every person who bought a TV was happy or they wouldn't have done it.

But then somebody comes and draws a circle around how much goes to China or how much goes to Korea, how much comes back, and they say, oh, well, we buy all this stuff from other countries and they don't buy it from us, so we have a deficit. But the fallacy is this. Every person who bought a TV was happy or they wouldn't have done it.

This is the definition of free trade or voluntary trade is as long as it's voluntary, it's always mutually beneficial or the trade doesn't occur. The only trades that occur in a voluntary free market are done because people want to trade.

This is the definition of free trade or voluntary trade is as long as it's voluntary, it's always mutually beneficial or the trade doesn't occur. The only trades that occur in a voluntary free market are done because people want to trade.

This is the definition of free trade or voluntary trade is as long as it's voluntary, it's always mutually beneficial or the trade doesn't occur. The only trades that occur in a voluntary free market are done because people want to trade.

So the fallacy is each individual of the million people who bought TVs were all happy, but then you draw a circle artificially between two countries and say, oh, we're being ripped off. Well, how can we be ripped off if all million customers were satisfied? It'd be the same way if we drew a circle around Kentucky and Ohio and said, well, we have a trade deficit with Ohio.

So the fallacy is each individual of the million people who bought TVs were all happy, but then you draw a circle artificially between two countries and say, oh, we're being ripped off. Well, how can we be ripped off if all million customers were satisfied? It'd be the same way if we drew a circle around Kentucky and Ohio and said, well, we have a trade deficit with Ohio.

So the fallacy is each individual of the million people who bought TVs were all happy, but then you draw a circle artificially between two countries and say, oh, we're being ripped off. Well, how can we be ripped off if all million customers were satisfied? It'd be the same way if we drew a circle around Kentucky and Ohio and said, well, we have a trade deficit with Ohio.

We've had it since the Civil War. What does that mean? Well, it means nothing. The other thing about trade deficits is think about the United States and Bangladesh. Do you think Bangladesh is ever going to be rich enough to buy as much stuff from us as we can buy from them? Rich people and rich countries have greater trade deficits.

We've had it since the Civil War. What does that mean? Well, it means nothing. The other thing about trade deficits is think about the United States and Bangladesh. Do you think Bangladesh is ever going to be rich enough to buy as much stuff from us as we can buy from them? Rich people and rich countries have greater trade deficits.

We've had it since the Civil War. What does that mean? Well, it means nothing. The other thing about trade deficits is think about the United States and Bangladesh. Do you think Bangladesh is ever going to be rich enough to buy as much stuff from us as we can buy from them? Rich people and rich countries have greater trade deficits.

So a major league baseball star that makes $25 million a year has a bigger trade deficit than your average teacher. with everybody because they buy a lot of stuff. They have so much money. So a trade deficit is just a meaningless accounting ledger domain. The second fallacy is that the middle class is being hollowed out. It's just frankly not true.

So a major league baseball star that makes $25 million a year has a bigger trade deficit than your average teacher. with everybody because they buy a lot of stuff. They have so much money. So a trade deficit is just a meaningless accounting ledger domain. The second fallacy is that the middle class is being hollowed out. It's just frankly not true.

So a major league baseball star that makes $25 million a year has a bigger trade deficit than your average teacher. with everybody because they buy a lot of stuff. They have so much money. So a trade deficit is just a meaningless accounting ledger domain. The second fallacy is that the middle class is being hollowed out. It's just frankly not true.

If you look at household income for the last 70 years, what you will find is that the lower income, below 50, and middle, 50 to 100, have gotten slightly smaller over time. But it's because they've all moved to the upper class. Over $100,000 in constant dollars has grown threefold while $50,000 to $100,000 is slightly smaller over 70 years. They migrated to the upper class.