Economic Rivals Given “Go-Ahead” to Destroy Rest of Domestic Manufacturing by Bush’s Stand on Trade

Trade Alert.us ^ | 1/30/04 | William Hawkins

[ClintonBeGone]

Do you think that bankruptcy is a good substitute for prudent trade policy? If so, you have a lot of company.

I think the free market, not a bunch of government employees (and elected officals in Washinton DC) are the best judge of whether a business can compete.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

The whole country will eventually go bankrupt at this rate. Nice.

[NoControllingLegalAuthority]

Of course the essence of this piece is there is no such thing as free and fair trade and there has never been such a thing. Countries employ every predatory and ruthless tactic known to mankind to steal trade and manufacturing from other countries. Only leaders of the United States pretend everyone is gonna play fair and nice when it comes to trade.

[sarcasm]

[WayneM]

Free trade is the only government action that will result in net job creation.

I don't believe this statement has any sort of factual basis and I invite you to back it up with something other than another statement from yourself.

Lots of people worked, built homes and consumer goods and factories and infrastructure, and enjoyed the world's highest standard of living here in the USA under a system that didn't even remotely resemble free trade.

I believe free trade has more benefits for the business that "win" in the process, but that our citizens and our society suffer in an all-out free trade situation.

Citizens and consumers benefit most from a system of selective free trade, which considers the needs of entities other than business.

[Batrachian]

Is it a free market when other nations flood our markets with their products and then refuse to buy from us? That's what causes trade deficits. These other nations are protectionist to the core and we stupidly pretend that there is a free market. This is a myth foisted on the ignorant by politicians that have a vested interest in the status quo. We've been running trade deficits with Japan for decades. Where is the free trade there? If you want slogans then I have one for you: Fair trade.

[ClintonBeGone]

Is it a free market when other nations flood our markets with their products and then refuse to buy from us?

Sure is. I don't care whether they buy or can even afford to buy a Ford from the US. As long as my Nikes and televisions are cheap, who cares?

[ClintonBeGone]

Citizens and consumers benefit most from a system of selective free trade, which considers the needs of entities other than business.

You can't be serious. What other rational and fair system can you devise to determine winners and losers?

[ClintonBeGone]

I believe free trade has more benefits for the business that "win" in the process, but that our citizens and our society suffer in an all-out free trade situation.

What business is it of the citizens whether a particular company or industry wins or loses? What gives you the right to determine anything to do with a company or industry?

[WayneM]

I didn't say I could devise it, but it was done for years until free trade mania gained the upper hand.

Ask yourself - if completely free trade is such a great thing, how did the USA grow to be the great land that it was when there were restrictions on free trade.

In a similar manner... I believe in freedom. Freedom is a great thing - yet there must be some restraints on freedom. That is why most here at this forum would state that someone with purely libertarian belief was somewhat of an idealistic idiot.

[ClintonBeGone]

I didn't say I could devise it, but it was done for years until free trade mania gained the upper hand.

Ok then, can you explain it? Its not black/white, or on/off. Its a gradient of evil. I'm trying to see where you think the goodness starts, if that makes sense.

[WayneM]

Whether or not you agree, citizens do have rights that are not given to businesses. If you ponder this for a minute you may be able to think of one. OK. I'll tell you. How about voting?

I'm beginning to suspect you are a rabidly, all-out free trader. Are you by chance a libertarian, also?

[ClintonBeGone]

Whether or not you agree, citizens do have rights that are not given to businesses. If you ponder this for a minute you may be able to think of one. OK. I'll tell you. How about voting?

What in the world does this statement have to do with you explaining to me what the system of trade regulation is or should be?

[WayneM]

It's like trying to define the point at which personal freedom should be encumbered or restrained.

[ClintonBeGone]

I'm beginning to suspect you are a rabidly, all-out free trader. Are you by chance a libertarian, also?

LOL, yeah, I am VERY rabid about free trade. I've yet to hear from you one single justification for anyone besides the owner of a company determining who he should trade with and how much he should trade? And no, I am not a libertarian. I think they're idiots for their obsession with drugs.

[ClintonBeGone]

Ask yourself - if completely free trade is such a great thing, how did the USA grow to be the great land that it was when there were restrictions on free trade.

Where you from Wayne? This country was founded on trade. Trade with the indians, trade with Canada, trade with Europe. The dutch, the West Indies, even the British had trading companies here. Ever here of The NorthWest Trading Company? Established in 1779. You think they gave a damn about protecting some union thugs assembly line job?

[ClintonBeGone]

It's like trying to define the point at which personal freedom should be encumbered or restrained.

You've stated it perfectly. Now, the next question, who do you entrust to do that with or for YOUR life?

[WayneM]

I've yet to hear from you one single justification for anyone besides the owner of a company determining who he should trade with and how much he should trade? And no, I am not a libertarian. I think they're idiots for their obsession with drugs.

But don't you see that the same principle is at work here. You feel that you, and society as a whole, has the right to interfere with someone's personal freedom. In this case, the right to do drugs.

Yet you would deny society the right to interfere with the right of a business owner to conduct free trade.

I'm simply saying that society has a right to restrain the freedom of both individuals and businesses. In both cases the society has the right to do so, based on what is in the best interest of that society.

As a businessman you may not like any restraint on your freedom. That is to be expected. As an individual, I may not like paying taxes. I may not like being forced to adhere to traffic laws. I may not like zoning requirements or building codes. I may not like a lot of things. I still have to conform, and most of the time my society has decided that I should be made to conform.

Is this all wrong? Maybe so. But probably not. I can say this because I realize all freedoms have limits.

[AuntB]

I worked in credit/collections for 20 years. People just do not understand how truly scary this is. But then most people are in debt up to their eyeballs and don't see how close that is to going over their heads.

[Euro-American Scum]

For now. It's probably going to take millions more lost jobs and billions in tax revenues before we see any meaningful changes.

By then it will be too late. By the time that happens, the US will be a third-world backwash with India-China as the new world economic and military power.

That's right. Military as well as economic. We can't offshore manufacturing and high tech without there being consequences of exactly this sort.