Clarifications on the Case for Free Trade

There are some assumption (or definition) problems in this article. If labor is freely mobile (as implied in this article) then there is no such thing as a "country."

Capital has always been mobile between countries for centuries; it always goes where it is treated best. Labor generally has not been very mobile. It is held in check by "citizenship".

Also, this argument goes back to the issue of deductive logic versus inductive. Many recent (inductive) studies show that increasing economic freedom results in higher GDPs per Capita. By choosing to be the most economically free country in the world, Hong Kong moved from one of the lowest GDPs per person to one of the richest ones -- exceeding the GDP per Person of the U.K.

I am a proponent of economic freedom and also believe in a "country." Therefore, assuming we still have "citizenship" (no illegal aliens) there is (or should be) no such thing as inter-country mobile labor (as described or implied in this article).

The authors are trying to make "offshoring" appear as mobile labor, when it is a one time shift of Communist countries suddenly waking up to capitalism.

The US is not the most economic free country in the world, but fortunately it's in the top 15 or so. The managed economic freedom implied by the article is a lot like forcing students to become voluntary workers: loss of freedom is always a step backwards. Keep the borders, but maximize political and economic freedom; reduce government interference; don't increase taxes on consumers by raising tariffs; encourage labor rates within the country to be flexible and movement of jobs between states to be free; maximize choice. The inductive studies have already shown the way to wealth for all citizens. A rising tide floats all boats.

How long have we been making these points almost verbatim - to deaf ears.. We've been sold out by these profit at any cost addicts. One-worlders are exploiting this blindness to accomplish their ends. In the end, the US loses as it is sold down the river. This is why free trade is viewed largely as a matter not unlike treason. One cannot afford to treat these profit at any cost addicts in the same fashion one would treat a cocaine or Meth addict. One cannot wait for the eventual ruin of the addict to dictate a new course being needed. Their ruin is ours. What is the answer? To me it is simple, it's an about face that involves legal strictures to stop Good produced here for this market from being produced elsewhere for this market.
Capital and wages must exist for this market before this market has resources to enable it to consume imports. Addiction to "higher" profits by subversive activity has blinded many and made them propagandists defending their profits with nonsense.

It's time to make multinationals go the "clean and sober" route by force of law. And politicians owned by corporate interests will not be willing to do this as recent history has exemplified. The same has been shown re illegal immigration. Force had to be applied to move the hand of the collective corporatist politicians. If they understand that citizens will act in the absence of action from their elected representatives, they will move. But action here is not as easy as with illegal immigration and may tend toward
revolutionary activities. If that is the case, and I believe it to be so, then the shake up over this will get pretty nasty before it gets better. And it may well result in a constitutional convention.

One thing is certain, people cannot continue living middle class lives on lower class incomes. In my community, the flow of high wage jobs is outward, not inward. And the same is true all around us. Jobs that once paid very good, high incomes are seeing adjustments downard for newhires. That means that the cunsumption within communities of local low wage services is falling due to inability to afford said services.

A strong man can remain strong if he keeps up his training routine. If he stops his regime of weights and good diet, he will remain strong for a while; but, not indefinitely. Muscle gives way to flab without use and training as any bodybuilder can tell you. So saying the economy is strong while it sits on it's laurels belies the fact of where it is headed. In relative terms, the economy is strong. In real terms it is weakening and getting weaker by the day. Free trade is the degenerative disorder driving it.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.