User talk:Supposn

Welcome!
Hello, Supposn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Balance of trade has not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been or will be removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. – S. Rich (talk) 20:35, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

June 2016
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Balance of trade, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. – S. Rich (talk) 03:58, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Help me!
Please help me with... Wikipedia has deleted my revised contribution to the “balance of trade” article. Entitled “Balance of trades effects upon their economies”.

I did revise it to cite some links but despite my revision the revision was deleted.

Referring to this, my latest and simplest proposed draft for a revision, why would this not be acceptable?

Similar to the “chicken and egg” quandary, we may question the which is cause and which is effect but there’s no doubt that a relationship does exist between a nation’s GDP and that of their jobs’ numbers and wage levels; they do have effects upon each other.

Respectfully, Supposn /////////////////////////

Balance of trades’ affects upon their nations’ GDPs.

Exports directly contribute to their nations’ balance of trade. Due to the trade balance being explicitly added to the calculation of their nation's gross domestic product using the expenditure method of calculating gross domestic production, (GDP). Trade surpluses directly increase their nation's GDP. Imports are considered as negative exports and they directly reduce their nations’ balance of trade; trade deficits indirectly reduce their nation's GDP. [Refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_...iture_approach or to Expenditure Method Definition | Investopedia ].

Trade deficits make no net contribution to their nations’ GDPs but annual trade surpluses’ are immediate and direct net addition to their nation's GDP. Nations with annual trade deficits have to some extent indirectly denied themselves of net benefits due to national production; among those benefits are having “on hand” the tools, facilities, and people with experienced familiarity of utilizing these all for increasing aggregate GDPs within their jurisdictions.

It’s axiomatic that the entire net economic differences between similar domestic and imported goods occur prior to the goods being under the importing nation’s jurisdiction or after domestic goods have reached their producers shipping dock. [There’s no justification to refute this axiom if no applicable and otherwise unexplainable contrary example has ever been encountered].

Drag upon GDP due to trade deficits consequentially are also drags upon their nation's numbers of jobs and their pay rates. This is particularly detrimental to employees, their dependents and any other entities that are significantly affected by lesser employment or pay rates; that describe our entire lower income, and almost our entire middle-income earners and all others to the extent that they're dependent upon enterprises that are themselves greatly affected by reduced circumstances of employees and their dependents.

Supposn Supposn (talk) 10:02, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately what you believe to be correct is unacceptable to Wikipedia. Your beliefs are considered to be original research which is not allowed in any article, even if you 'know' them to be accurate or even if you are qualified to write on the subject.  Although I am not making any accusation against you: there are too many instances of users pushing their own agenda against the best interests of the project even to the extent of falsely claiming to be qualified.  Any content added to any article must be supported by reliable and verifiable sources.  Any user is free to delete any added content that is not supported by sources that meet the above requirements - which is what has happened.  If you wish to contrubute material to the article in question, then you need to find sources that support it first.  Although I know sufficiently little of the subject to form a judgement on the reliability of Investopedia, I note that another user has declared it unreliable.  If you believe otherwise, then the proper place to discuss the matter is on the article talk page.  -- Elektrik  Fanne 14:27, 14 June 2016 (UTC)