FAST TRACK FIASCO, But Who Owns It?

The free trade debate is really about two questions: Capitalism, has it failed because we have slipped into an era of crony capitalism? Representative democracy, has it failed because it is no longer representative?

To set the context: Most conservatives and most economists indeed most Americans, agree that fair trade is economically beneficial. By the Milton Friedman analysis, those who efficiently produce goods do so and trade them for goods made by people who make other goods more efficiently. Everybody wins. As a theoretical and even practical analysis this is something we conservatives obviously favor but it is not something leftists favor or will even tolerate. They abhor such an economic state of nature and insist on tilting the playing field.

Once they search out relative inequality generated by the Darwinian nature of free trade and, of course, capitalism, the left will demagogue those signs of inequality and begin to regulate the marketplace in order to "equalize" it. In doing so they inevitably become members of an elite class but in the process they also create a class of dependents from whom they garner votes. Meanwhile, the economics of the playing field become distorted by government as the process ever extends and never retracts. Entrepreneurs learn, often from bitter experience, that they can make more money farming the government than competing in the free market. Indeed, they learn that if they do not hire illegal immigrants or go offshore they simply cannot compete with those who do.

In time, the pure capitalist entrepreneur is defeated by the crony capitalist. The survival of the fittest becomes a game of lobbying the government. In that game the well-connected and the well-heeled prevail. The more they prevail, the more they can and do combine with government to distort the playing field. The distortions, the dislocations, the joblessness and the pain are created or at least amplified by government interventions and government re-interventions to cure the unintended dislocations consequent to the last intervention.

Enter a demagogue like Barack Obama who sees his opportunity and takes it by cutting deals with crony capitalists to fund election campaigns in which he demagogues the very inequalities his policies create. Obama pretends to make war on Wall Street while selling the country out. Venal beings like John Boehner and Mitch McConnell watch this game and decide they too can play and profit. But Obama is in the game for more than mere personal aggrandizement, he is an ideologue who wants to change the world according to a radical socialist norm and he is quite eager to distort the Constitution, just as his policies distort the free market, to advance his aims.

Obama's methods are now applied to trade. Obama is negotiating an agreement which will enable the executive to sidestep the Constitution, sidestep the Congress, sidestep American sovereignty and move the world closer to his goal. The Democrat party, ever arrogant, believed that it could cure the dislocations trade deals created with more socialism, that is, by providing a system of government paid benefits to dislocated workers. Demonstrating once again Nathan Bedford's maxim that failed socialism is invariably reformed with more socialism. This time, however, the Democrats fooled Nathan and balked at deploying their usual nostrums of federal entitlement payments as compensation for the dislocations inevitably created by more trade, especially unfair or exploitative trade. Shockingly, they just chose the very bill which would authorize these payments as the tool with which to scuttle the whole trade deal. Why?

Democrats just violated Nathan Bedford's Maxim yet they are certainly not moved by distortions of the Constitution and Democrats certainly have nothing against distorting the market with government subsidies, so the question must be repeated, why?

Enter Elizabeth Warren. The Senator is saying that the dislocations afflicting the middle-class are the result of rogue capitalists on Wall Street who are gaming the system and should be restrained by government. She applies this analysis to the trade deals and concludes that the same pattern is at work. She wants a radical redistribution of income and, while she is at it, a radical redistribution of wealth because the system is unfair. It produces inequality between classes. She actually seeks more than redistribution, she wants to redesign the system from the ground up. Elizabeth Warren has been blessed with double the sources of ego, she is an academic as well as an elected politician who wants to preserve the "reforms" she has advocated especially reforms such as Dodd-Frank. As an academic and as a Democrat, she is fully aware of the tried-and-true left-wing tactic of moving the venue until the left finds a forum where it can prevail. Typically, the left seeks to move away from the ballot box to the courts, seeks to move away from the local to the federal, seeks to move away from the domestic to the international, seeks to move away from Congress to unelected bureaucracies both domestically and internationally. Elizabeth Warren immediately recognized that is the game being played here by Obama and she wants to protect her babies, especially Wall Street regulations like Dodd-Frank. She recognizes the threat accompanying awarding jurisdiction to international tribunals that can undo her reforms.

As a politician, Elizabeth Warren has undeniable charisma and a very strong appeal to the American as well as the international left. She is smart enough to combine an academic argument with a populist appeal. In a speech recently delivered to the Democrats in California she came to the close of her remarks saying, "We believe America should not sign trade deals that benefit huge corporations and leave workers in the dirt." She combines a demagogic attack on bankers with a populist message for the sorely afflicted middle-class. It is the demonization of bankers as well as the appeal to the middle-class rather than the academic argument which resonates with Democrats, especially Reagan Democrats, and even with a large sections of the country such as the Rust Belt. She knows how to popularize her arguments were not in the cozy confines of the Harvard faculty lounge.

One would think that these divisions in the Democrat party between the un-American aspirations of Barack Obama and the anti-capitalists aspirations of Elizabeth Warren resulting in the fiasco of the fast track bill will leave the Democrat's divided and vulnerable on election day. But that is not necessarily the case.

Republicans are nothing if not determined to justify their name. The Stupid Party is contriving to offend friend as well as foe. It offends its own base by supporting Obama with his unconstitutional assault on American sovereignty and its offends the beleaguered middle-class by failing to defend them against the hollowing out of our economy. Republicans who want more trade are disappointed and Republicans who want a real fair trade system also lost. The Republicans are seen increasingly as a political party willing to sell out its own base and the middle-class in order to appease crony capitalists and keep the campaign contributions rolling in. Compare this to how the Democrats come off, the party that rejected its own President to "save your job."

When will the Republican Party understand that defending the middle-class against misguided leftist policies is not wrong but the essence of pure conservatism? When will the Republican Party find a way to articulate that crony capitalism is killing the middle-class, hollowing out our manufacturing sector, distorting our economy, corrupting our elections, degrading America's place in the world, and impoverishing us in the face of our enemies? When will the Republican Party learn that he can win elections, restore the Reagan Democrats to the fold, improve the lives of millions, and maybe even save the Republic from disintegration if it will only adhere to true conservative free-market principles?

Sorry for the double post.

The only PPROxh to "free' or "fair' trade that promises to bring prosperity and a rapidly expanding American economy is to drop all barriers to trade, that is, for the government to get out of the business of regulating business including dropping almost all regulation and all taxes save, possibly for a uniform LOW tax on profits that matches a LOW national income tax(9% or so) with no double taxation such as Cap Gains and no minimum wage combined with a rock stable dollar, a gold dollar, for instance. Restrictions on trade should have to do with strictly such things ashave military significance. Given those conditions America can and would out produce and outsell the rest of the world altogether.

Politicians cannot do this because they cannot see beyond a day or two into the future and cannot conceive of dynamic scoring of things economic even though they can use the term and even know what it means. They cannot accept that %5 tomorrow is worth more than $.50 today.

To me, ownership comes down to the people that created it and the people that pushed it. Dem, Republican or otherwise. Cruz and other actual conservative screwed the pooch royally on this. And need to be held responsible for their choices and their part in it. I say that as a Cruz supporter.

Blame should be applied most severely to the leadership of the parties. Namely Obama, Bhoner and Mitch. All the lesser evils would not have had the chance to stray had not the leaders forced this on America. When a child screws up with wide ranging consequences, the parents must also be held responsible for their failure as a parent. So too here.

A fish rots from the head down.

Thank you for the post. The GOP has sold us out again!

Pretty much every candidate in the race has supported it in some way and now we’re going to eat an even worse deal because now Obama has the opportunity to buy all the democrat votes he needs.

Who owns it? The stupefied, the stupid, the scammers, the national socialists, the international socialists, the scumbags, the CONgre$$ and PO$OTU$. There, that just about covers it.

Great post, nathanbedford. Thanks.

To my mind it all centers on campaign financing. The more money an entity gives to a political party or candidate the more that entity is going to get what it wants when the “business” of law making takes place.

In turn campaign spending culminates the media’s narrative to the expressions of the biggest spenders. Sort of the loudest voices in the crowd being the only ones heard effect.

limits need to be placed on political financing. Such as only legally registered voters can donate. And those donations limited to what the average voter can comfortably afford within one year. And perhaps limiting a campaigns donations strictly to the district to be represented.

This would make politicians beholden to those they claim to represent and perhaps put a lid on wild out of control spending.

As an academic and as a Democrat, she is fully aware of the tried-and-true left-wing tactic of moving the venue until the left finds a forum where it can prevail. Typically, the left seeks to move away from the ballot box to the courts, seeks to move away from the local to the federal, seeks to move away from the domestic to the international, seeks to move away from Congress to unelected bureaucracies both domestically and internationally.

This is so accurate it needed to be posted twice. Very accurate and penetrating.

Nathan,

Thank you again for the views and writings.

This law, and ones similar like obamacare, are fruits of the 17th amendment, fertilized by the 16th amendment. We truly live in a democracy, no longer a republic.

The uniparty is taking care of its self interests on many levels.

I do believe the uniparty has 2 identified candidates, one R and one D, already chosen... when the voters poll differently, enter a new candidate to split the vote... I also think Cruz and Walker intentionally wounded their prospects by support the Trade agreement. Follow the money. Both will be set in 5 years or less.

What happened in the last Senator Election for Republican in NH is a smaller version of what is happening on a National scale... Enter Bob Smith, full up Tea party support... GOPe and Demoncrats pull out the knife.. we get Scott Brown... which equals 6 more years of the chosen one...Shitheen. Similar situation in the previous cycle with Jack Kimball Teaparty candidate the ran for Governor as Republican.. Former Republican party leaders, and Judd Gregg staffers started a Republicans for Lynch a -Democrat campaign! Of course Lynch won... Teaparty lost..

In time, conservatives will realize the Republican party does not care about them.. only uses them..ie Orin Hatch, Judd Gregg, etc...

Much like in Math, Physics and Engineering, the equation must balance or the formula must reduce and be equal.. Our Constitution is not in balance especially with the 17th Amendment. Our Founding Fathers knew well the greed in the human hearts, desires for power in the hands and the dark sins in a mans soul and took much care to ensure those evils would be checked so the average man and women could prosper.

Just an observation... Lefty or Conservative in politics... in the US there is clearly a shift away from large, corporate foods. The slow foods movement, farm to table restaurants, local food brands, beers, brandies, wines, etc. Local is better, I know those farmers/people..

I fully believe, if the 17th Amendment repeal is properly marketed to the public, it would take root and be done quickly... why? The Uniparty would fight it tooth and nail, thus exposing its true nature.. the public would be very afraid of it thus passing it.

A tax on profit that matches a national income tax doubles the income tax for the owners. The corporate income tax itself is a case of double taxation.

limits need to be placed on political financing

As a condition of FCC licensure, every candidate for public office gets 100 free hours of television time. Other than that, and in the public interest, campaign ads join cigarettes and hard liquor ads in the banned category.

Problem solved.

Your system would give far more power to the media.

Elizabeth is the shining light indicating why Massachusetts should be purged from the Union. The union is dragged down by her and the people she represents. No good ever emanates from the state

America was founded on crony capitalism from before day 1. It has always been and will continue to be so. There will always be inequality of wealth because there will always be inequality of brains and initiative.

Americans that cry over the spilled milk of jobs being filled by subcontractors off shore should remember that Massachuttes exists because the jobs in England migrated here because it was less expensive to make textiles along New England rivers than in England

Lastly and in an optimistic vein, I would encourage those that can read and want understanding, to read Forbes. Forbes has changed the way they report on business. The current thrust is on the seemingly endless numbers of young entrapraneurs that are in business working their butts off and making scads of money. They succeed and then fail and then succeed again. They look toward the future with relish

They are not constantly looking back and bitchin and moanin about how there must be reversion to the way it was

It is the demonization of bankers...

Prop trading desks without a loss in a year, describing your customers as Muppets etc., We're not talking Jimmy Stewart. It's Dimon and Heidi's boss Blankfein. Demonization is an easy job. Check out the career of Blythe Masters, who helped invent the toxic derivative. Now she's got a personal HFT operation.

I don't understand the love for these financial strip miners. These demons aren't about providing capital. They're about feeding on the carcass of capitalism.

You're right. Warren is dangerous. Her job is being made easier by Ryan and Cruz.

In time, conservatives will realize the Republican party does not care about them.. only uses them..ie Orin Hatch, Judd Gregg, etc...

Conservatives are the blacks of the Republican Party.

Campaign donations should be limited to corporations that are wholly owned by American citizens. Lobbying by any foreign entities should be banned.

Cooperation can not vote so should have no say in an activity that they can not participate in. It’s a way of weeding out the corruption.

I like your jive. The financialization has coincided with the vast increase of the debts[individual, national]; to offset such wage arbitrage associated with the fall of the middle class.