Replies

All you need to do is to read Friedman to know that he would not be supportive of massive government bureacracies that have been established in the name of the mislabled "free trade" that we are seeing today. It goes against everything he ever preached. Show me where he ever said "managed trade is a good thing and we should have more of it."

I favor trade, with as few impediments as possible. That doesn't mean that I think we need 2000 page documents and huge government bureacracies regulating it. It doesn't mean that I support taxpayers subsidizing the import of foreign goods. It doesn't mean that US businesses should have the full protection of the US government and US taxpayer if they choose to establish a business in a foreign country. The lame attempts on this thread to label anyone a "protectionist" who does not favor the current "free trade" framework is absurd as I have not seen anyone promote tariffs for the sole purpose of protecting US businesses or equalizing prices.

Correct, on that we completely agree, and I never meant to argue counter! In fact, Friedman called for the unilateral lowering or elimination of ALL tariffs! I join him in that call, do you?

So you are in favor of free trade, not the managed trade we have today. You would be in favor of simply dropping all tariffs charged, unilaterally?

And you appear to make some assumptions on my part, too! I have never defended the current framework of trade; far from it, I believe it is too complex. There should be ZERO tariffs on import/export activity of these United States; there should be ZERO taxation of overseas income. That is counter to what you claim I hold.

But if what you write above is true, then I should be able to state the following, without offense to you:

You are in favor of free trade and the elimination of tariffs, not the current Governmental intrusion we have.

Is that correct?