Note: I'm not taking a position on this issue, I honestly don't have a strong opinion about it. I can see both sides. But I think it's important that everyone have accurate information about history.
PRAISE JESUS!!
What I personally loathe is when people describe choosing to surrender in a one-sided trade war as ‘free trade.’
the good old days
“Free Trade” Deals like NAFTA and TPP are Government Managed Trade, not “Free Trade.”
Norman Rockwell. Social justice warrior circa 1917.
Who-hoo! A Century! Seems we haven’t exported much since then anyway. Might as well try something new, like putting America and Americans first!
They define the phrase "crazy left."
free trade was seen as a key principle of the Republican Party.
NO IT WAS NOT, it was and always as been the wet dream of cultural marxists pushing for a one world government.
Trump’s trade policy has gotten commitments for billions of investments totaling over 60,000 jobs, including two billion dollar car plants that the wise pundits proclaimed were “never coming back”. And he’s not even in office yet. The GOP-e never gave a damn about American workers.
Many people do not realize that “Free trade” was the slogan of the British East India Company seeking too maintain its sales of opium into China against the will of the Chinese government.
Two Opium Wars were fought over this, and it still has repercussions today, because China has a long memory.
They tried to pay back America by creating a million heroin addicts in Vietnam.
Now they are a crucial supplier of many of the raw materials for heroin, speed and ecstasy as well as a primary shipping conduit for all hard drugs to America.
Free trade is nice but a fully employed work force is better!
What good is having low cost goods when no one can still afford them!
As Trump has indicated, free trade does not necessarily mean win / win deals.
Well, whatever it takes to MAGA.
“Note: I’m not taking a position on this issue, I honestly don’t have a strong opinion about it.”
I agree...free trade has its benefits to consumers with well paying jobs - if trade wars materialize, look for prices to double (at least) for most things at Walmart and Amazon, for example. This will bite people hard further down the economic ladder.
On the other hand, the economy will adjust and well-paying jobs by the millions will be created here, so lots more people can move up.
The key variable is WHAT ELSE will be done. If you do nothing about the state of regulations in this country and the power of labor unions, then people here will suffer BIG TIME as they lose access to foreign-made goods. Thankfully Trump appears to understand that, so he’s going to work that angle too. It’s important for people on our side to understand that the reason so many US companies off-shore is NOT to get exotic trips to China...that’s the last thing executives want to be wasting their time with, not to mention the risks of being arrested due to business partner’s complaint over there (in China) or being kidnapped (Mexico and elsewhere). They ONLY go there because they cannot afford to build things here, given the costs from regulations and unions...so hopefully that all gets fixed.
On the balance, I kind of get concerned when we cannot run our tractors to harvest our crops without spare parts (electronics and probably other stuff) from China, or cannot replace a large power transformer, without transformers from China, and likely cannot build war ships, battle tanks, or fighter jets without foreign parts...so we DEFINITELY need to at least get that capability back home.
Our freedom and survival of our nation is the goal. Trade is a tool. I do not support any trade policy that works to make American liberty subverted to foreigners.
The Republican Party has been hampering and hog-tieing free trade for decades, maybe since its inception. These trade deals are NOT free trade. They are heavily regulated and directed Managed Trade more akin to Mercantilism than to any sort of Free Trade. It the Republicans wanted Free Trade and the rapidly rising prosperity for all of America that goes with it, then they would simply push to take off all the restrictions and taxes that hamper trade. Industry would flood back to the USA and jobs with it. NAFTA is not about Free Trade nor is the Pacific Agreement. Anything that calls for government or other agencies, national or international to manage trade and issue rules is NOT Free Trade. Too many people think it all is because these things are all termed Free Trade but they are as much Free Trade as XY George is a woman just because he calls himself one and wears a dress.
This chart pretty well illustrates the issue we're facing:
The program was stable when there were more than 3 workers per beneficiary. However, future projections indicate that the ratio will continue to fall from two workers to one, at which point the program in its current structure becomes financially unsustainable.
Yeah! A hundred years ago was when Americans worked and had jobs.
We reaffirm our belief in the protective tariff to extend needed protection to our productive industries. We believe in protection as a national policy, with due and equal regard to all sections and to all classes. It is only by adherence to such a policy that the well being of the consumers can be safeguarded that there can be assured to American agriculture, to American labor and to American manufacturers a return to perpetrate American standards of life. A protective tariff is designed to support the high American economic level of life for the average family and to prevent a lowering to the levels of economic life prevailing in other lands.
In the history of the nation the protective tariff system has ever justified itself by restoring confidence, promoting industrial activity and employment, enormously increasing our purchasing power and bringing increased prosperity to all our people.
The tariff protection to our industry works for increased consumption of domestic agricultural products by an employed population instead of one unable to purchase the necessities of life. Without the strict maintenance of the tariff principle our farmers will need always to compete with cheap lands and cheap labor abroad and with lower standards of living.
The enormous value of the protective principle has once more been demonstrated by the emergency tariff act of 1921 and the tariff act of 1922.
We assert our belief in the elastic provision adopted by congress in the tariff act of 1922 providing for a method of readjusting the tariff rates and the classifications in order to meet changing economic conditions when such changed conditions are brought to the attention of the president by complaint or application.
We believe that the power to increase or decrease any rate of duty provided in the tariff furnishes a safeguard on the one hand against excessive taxes and on the other hand against too high customs charges.
The wise provisions of this section of the tariff act afford ample opportunity for tariff duties to be adjusted after a hearing in order that they may cover the actual differences in the cost of production in the United States and the principal competing countries of the world.
We also believe that the application of this provision of the tariff act will contribute to business stability by making unnecessary general disturbances which are usually incident to general tariff revisions.
