Free Trade Illusions: Why Free trade should not be a sacred doctrine among conservatives.

American Thinker ^ | 09/29/2015 | Norman Rogers

[central_va]

So now that Nabisco doesn’t have to pay that evil tariff on sugar do you think the retail price of Oreo’s will go down? What maroons Free Traitors™.

[Georgia Girl 2]

No I belong to club of I don’t care about you. :-)

[Hugin]

So you don’t care if Boeing closes plants in America and builds their planes in China?

The Chinese have exchanged manufactured goods for a large part of our industrial base. And the Chinese people are far more prosperous than they were when it started. So when does this impoverishing part kick in?

[DannyTN]

The sugar tariff benefits you by...

1. Keeping funds out of the hands of Cuban communists.
2. Keeping you from having to fight wars funded by those Cuban communists.
3. Keeping you from having to support even more people in Louisiana, Texas, Florida and Hawaii than you already do.
4. Keeping Agriculture, once designated as a militarily sensitive industry, in the U.S. and us from being dependent on foreign countries for food.
5. Keeping you from being fatter than you already are.
6. Keeping you from developing diabetes even faster than you already are/have.

The sugar tariff is an imperfect tariff, because the products that use sugar are not tariffed as well. Consequently it's put our candy manufacturers at a disadvantage to foreign producers.

Isolated examples like the sugar tariff is not good examples for general import tariffs which benefited our country greatly for 180 years.

NAFTA is undermining the sugar tariff because Mexico can ship sugar in tariff free.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

bookmark

[semimojo]

It isn't a matter of free trade being sacred or not, it's inevitable. The revolutions in communications and travel aren't going to be turned back, and the laws of economics aren't going to be repealed.

We need to maintain parity as to tariffs, work and environmental standards, and beyond that just compete and win.

[1010RD]

You cannot get your facts to fit your narrative:

1.Brazil: $9.5 billion (35.7% of total sugar exports)
2.Thailand: $2.7 billion (10.3%)
3.France: $1.3 billion (5%)
4.India: $1.1 billion (4.2%)
5.Guatemala: $952.2 million (3.6%)
6.Mexico: $907.3 million (3.4%)
7.Germany: $754.8 million (2.9%)
8.Belgium: $429.2 million (1.6%)
9.Cuba: $427.9 million (1.6%)

So the sugar tariff protects two billionaire Florida families from competition and me from saving my hard earned dollars. Those stinking isolated tariffs. If only they were more broad based then I’d lose even more money to domestic rent seekers.

You remind me of Plato where somewhere in heaven is a perfect tariff and all earthly tariffs are only poor replicas. Stop being so good to me Danny.

[1010RD]

Which explains your support of tariffs. If you cared about the little guy you’d want an open market because in an open market the consumer is king.

[1010RD]

Yes, all else being equal.

[1010RD]

I’ve never had a problem with foreign food. The safety reasons you cite are not obvious.

[DannyTN]

You are supporting over 100 million Americans on 15 different food support programs. I’d think you’d be more interested in putting Americans back to work than saving a few pennies on candy.

[DannyTN]

1. Brazil brazil-sugar-industry-receives-massive-government-subsidies
2. Thailand Brazil sugar producers eye trade case against India, Thailand
3. France French Farmers and EU Agricultural Subsidies
4. India Brazil sugar producers eye trade case against India, Thailand
5. Guatemala
6. Mexico commerce-dept-rules-that-mexican-sugar-subsidies-distorted-trade
7. ....

[Georgia Girl 2]

I don’t think you understand the true definition of free trade. You have had stupid trade pushed at you for too long.