Bush's Trade Policies Seen As Protectionist, Tied To 2004 Election

Investors Business Daily ^ | 11-20-03 | Jed Graham

[ninenot]

Chem, Bio, bio-chem, statistics, and just in case, a little surgery practice would be good.

THAT way, as health-field workers, we can all be employed by the Gummint when they take over healthcare in 2020.

[ninenot]

Lou Dobbs did a segment on this last night.

Once Company X closes, they and the State file w/Dept of Labor for retraining grants.

The grants generally arrive anywhere from 90-180 days after the plant closes.

Since its a Gummint program, you can guess all by yourself how many individuals actually replace their former income dollar-for-dollar....

[GOP_1900AD]

Bush is starting to get all of the border busting globalists into a snit. Good. It's a sign he's doing the right thing.

[ninenot]

Evidently as a Chicago exporter who has had labor relations background, you never took Econ 101, Rude: so here's the scoop:

A FALLING dollar is VERY GOOD for exporters. It makes the exported product CHEAPER in other markets.

THere. Sleep well tonight. Tomorrow there will be a test.

[ninenot]

And while you're imposing upon India and China: make the so-and-so's pay the same taxes and regulatory costs we do here--that's about 52% of national income, by the way.

Finally, send Ted Kennedy and Tom Daschle to help their Gummints understand how to REALLY screw workers.

Hell, if we have to put up with these guys, why shouldn't THEY?

[Cacophonous]

Yup. Good point.

[1rudeboy]

Actually, I advanced far beyond Econ 101. You neglected to explain why certain protectionists (such as the one to which I was responding), are so afraid of a falling dollar. I am not, and it is one way to correct our trade-imbalance (and drive the Chinese into the ground) without resorting to market-distorting protectionist schemes.

[Princeliberty]

The only thing wrong with this move is that is
not go nearly far enough.
Its really more show that substance.

[Princeliberty]

more show "than" substance I mean.

[Princeliberty]

China not in any position for a trade war with us
there economy's main engine of growth is
their exports to US. And they import very little,
the soybeans is one the few things they do.
And even there they would import a whole lot
more if they eased up their barriers.

We could easily get a lot more exports to
China if we got tough. China's economy
would collapse without us.

And to be frank, even if your worse case
played out and a trade war began
the votes Bush gained form workers and
fired up conservatives would offset
the soybean farmers very easily.

[Princeliberty]

Any increase in price would overall be more
than offset by the increase in American jobs
and increase in pay for those jobs.

The bottom line would be the standard of living
in this country would be improved.

Sure you can have you cheap imports form
China, but when you destroy the good jobs
at the same time the nation's standard of living
declines.

The current trade policy is good only for
a few fat cat CEOs and the thugs of Beijing.

[Cacophonous]

That's exactly right. And honestly, jobs, in my mind are only the second-most important consideration, and consumer prices is not a consideration at all. The most important is that we maintain the capacity to produce, and that we are not dependent on anyone else for anything. They should be coming to us.

[RiflemanSharpe]

The only thing wrong with this move is that is
not go nearly far enough.
Its really more show that substance.

I sadly fer you are right. We need to do more to press the President and Congress, I will be penning a letter tonight.