Ted Cruz's plan to 'bring jobs back from China' better than Trump's

In the last GOP debate, Ted Cruz outlined his trade policies and how they would be superior to Donald Trump's.

First, Trump's plan is to impose tariffs of 45% on Chinese goods if they don't open up their markets.  Trump has denied this 45% figure, and he would also probably deny this audio of his own voice saying, in fact, "the tax should be 45%."

Here's the positive scenario: if China buckled to trade pressures, and opened up its market, the tax/tariff would not be imposed, and more jobs would be created in America.  But if instead China refused to open its market, and responded with tariffs of its own, our own exports ($120 billion) to China would be hurt, and Americans who work on export markets would lose their jobs.  Furthermore, with a 45% tariff, all the goods coming into America would become 45% more expensive.

Imagine if your car, your furniture, your clothing, your electronics, all cost 45% more.  For a billionaire with "New York values" and an income to match, that's nothing.  But for the struggling middle class and working poor, their buying power will be substantially reduced.  They will be impoverished.  So this is a tremendously risky course of action that could have tremendously negative effects on our economy.

Ted Cruz's plan, by contrast, would eliminate the business tax on goods produced for export.  As Cruz said:

Today, the U.S. taxes American producers that export goods, but it imposes no burden on imports. My business tax is border-adjusted, so exports are free of tax and imports pay the same business-flat-tax rate as U.S.-produced goods. By shifting to a territorial tax system that doesn’t tax income earned overseas twice, my plan will reverse the incentive for U.S. companies to relocate overseas. Instead, businesses will be relocating to America.

The advantages of this plan are fourfold.

First, American exports to China would no longer have to pay tax, making them tremendously more competitive to sell in China.  Remember that taxation is a cost, like the costs of goods or labor, and if you reduce the cost of producing goods, they can be sold less expensively.  That will make American goods more competitive in China.

Secondly, it will generally become more advantageous for companies to produce goods in America than abroad, given the tax advantages.  This tax change will "bring jobs back to America."

Thirdly, this plan will create jobs without sparking a trade war.  Since this plan will not pressure the Chinese to do anything, they will have no grounds to start a tariff war with us that could cost thousands of American jobs.

And lastly, this plan does not create the possibility that the most basic consumer goods will go up in cost by a whopping 45%.  This plan creates jobs while protecting the purchasing power of less wealthy consumers.

Given that, I believe that Cruz's trade plan is superior to Donald Trump's.

Let's make America great!  But without driving us all into a new economic depression!

This article was written by Ed Straker, senior writer of NewsMachete.com, the conservative news site.

In the last GOP debate, Ted Cruz outlined his trade policies and how they would be superior to Donald Trump's.

First, Trump's plan is to impose tariffs of 45% on Chinese goods if they don't open up their markets.  Trump has denied this 45% figure, and he would also probably deny this audio of his own voice saying, in fact, "the tax should be 45%."

Here's the positive scenario: if China buckled to trade pressures, and opened up its market, the tax/tariff would not be imposed, and more jobs would be created in America.  But if instead China refused to open its market, and responded with tariffs of its own, our own exports ($120 billion) to China would be hurt, and Americans who work on export markets would lose their jobs.  Furthermore, with a 45% tariff, all the goods coming into America would become 45% more expensive.

Imagine if your car, your furniture, your clothing, your electronics, all cost 45% more.  For a billionaire with "New York values" and an income to match, that's nothing.  But for the struggling middle class and working poor, their buying power will be substantially reduced.  They will be impoverished.  So this is a tremendously risky course of action that could have tremendously negative effects on our economy.

Ted Cruz's plan, by contrast, would eliminate the business tax on goods produced for export.  As Cruz said:

Today, the U.S. taxes American producers that export goods, but it imposes no burden on imports. My business tax is border-adjusted, so exports are free of tax and imports pay the same business-flat-tax rate as U.S.-produced goods. By shifting to a territorial tax system that doesn’t tax income earned overseas twice, my plan will reverse the incentive for U.S. companies to relocate overseas. Instead, businesses will be relocating to America.

The advantages of this plan are fourfold.

First, American exports to China would no longer have to pay tax, making them tremendously more competitive to sell in China.  Remember that taxation is a cost, like the costs of goods or labor, and if you reduce the cost of producing goods, they can be sold less expensively.  That will make American goods more competitive in China.

Secondly, it will generally become more advantageous for companies to produce goods in America than abroad, given the tax advantages.  This tax change will "bring jobs back to America."

Thirdly, this plan will create jobs without sparking a trade war.  Since this plan will not pressure the Chinese to do anything, they will have no grounds to start a tariff war with us that could cost thousands of American jobs.

And lastly, this plan does not create the possibility that the most basic consumer goods will go up in cost by a whopping 45%.  This plan creates jobs while protecting the purchasing power of less wealthy consumers.

Given that, I believe that Cruz's trade plan is superior to Donald Trump's.

Let's make America great!  But without driving us all into a new economic depression!

This article was written by Ed Straker, senior writer of NewsMachete.com, the conservative news site.