OK, please state what your position is on free trade as defined by the free dictionary.
Your unwillingness to acknowledge my opinion and statements as written, and your inability to have me agree with your statements, does not mean that I cannot get my position across. Sorry.
Your statements have been vague and argumentative. You give an answer that is ambiguous, and when asked for clarification you feign indignation. You are the reason no one understands your position, for you have not stated nor clarified your position.
If you take this as an attack on your intellect, you would be in error; if you take this as a statement about your inability to form a cogent position in this thread, you would be unequivocally correct.
Why the "free dictionary"?
The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001-07.free trade
in modern usage, trade or commerce carried on without such restrictions as import duties, export bounties, domestic production subsidies, trade quotas, or import licenses.
There are two definition from your link to free dictionary:
free trade
n.
Trade between nations without protective customs tariffs.free trade
Noun
international trade that is free of such government interference as protective tariffs and import quotas
My "position" is that those are pretty simplistic definitions given what we see characterized today as "free trade." I largely believe in the theory of free trade for non-essential items or non-critical industries (which would exclude basic food items, items/material required for national defense, etc.). But I don't believe that what we see today in FTAs represents "free trade" in the slightest.
Your statements have been vague and argumentative. You give an answer that is ambiguous, and when asked for clarification you feign indignation.
You didn't ask for clarification. You wanted me to agree with your statements. Next time, instead of posting "You therefore agree XYZ, correct?" try asking a question like "I don't understand what you mean by ABC." You'll get a much more welcome response.
If you take this as an attack on your intellect, you would be in error; if you take this as a statement about your inability to form a cogent position in this thread, you would be unequivocally correct.
You're an insulting little cuss, you know that? Was that "cogent" enough for you?