Yes, start with insults, that's always a good way to prove that you have the intellectual high-ground
- I don't see the difference, how I start is irrelevant. The relevant factor here is your government provided education and it has done the job.
What happens to these goods after they have been produced and exchanged, if there is nobody to consume them.?
- the only way to consume something is to produce something of your own and to exchange for what you are interested in consuming. Thus the people who can actually consume something are those very people that produce. This should be obvious even to you with a simple example: a farmer produces and then consumes what he produced. Got it? A farmer can exchange with a tool maker if the tool maker provides farmer with the tools the farmer needs and the tool maker clearly needs to eat. Etc.
It's consumption of non-domestic products that cause a trade deficit, not consumption by itself.
- consumption by itself is irrelevant, you are correct however, it is consumption of goods that were *not paid for* that causes the trade deficit.
only a very small portion of what you pay for a Chinese-made product actually goes to the Chinese company
- really? Are you an accountant for one of the Chinese companies? I actually deal with Chinese manufacturers for GPS trackers and other electronics, you are incorrect.
I'm curious which school YOU went to, where you were taught that taxation is theft
- I deduced it from the first principles. If you are wondering though, I went to the most communist school of all, I was born in the USSR and attended the public education system there. I was happy to see the country collapse of-course since it only confirmed my understanding of economics.