Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: WilliamofCarmichael
How would you grow the market for any industry without growing globally? The US market is very stagnent and the foriegn markets are necessary for our manufacturers growth. Can you address this issue without growing the infrastructure of foriegn lands?

I am asking this seriously, not trying to take a dig. I am hoping someone can make suggestions that I can learn from.
63 posted on 03/10/2004 5:45:01 AM PST by CSM (Theft is immoral, taxation is government endorsed theft!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: CSM
How would you grow the market for any industry without growing globally?

That's the wrong question...That's not the scenario...The industry that's offshoring/moving to China, Indonesia, etc., is not growing globally in the sense that it's products/services are being dispersed thu-out the world...Industry is moving to cheap labor countries to sell back to the US...Nike for example could not sell it's shoes to the Chinese for the same price we have to pay for them...Nike and Levi's made a profit by manufacturing and selling in the US but they are now making a killing based in China and selling to the US...

102 posted on 03/10/2004 6:13:31 AM PST by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

To: CSM
How would you grow the market for any industry without growing globally? The US market is very stagnent and the foriegn markets are necessary for our manufacturers growth.
Can you address this issue without growing the infrastructure of foreign lands?

If Michael Dell (for example) wants to make computers for Indians, I have no problem with him setting up a factory in India to manufacture them. If he wants to sell me a computer, I'd prefer it be made here in the USofA.

I'd back a corporate tax on companies that would amount to 110% of the money they save by off-shoring jobs.

265 posted on 03/10/2004 9:21:56 AM PST by night reader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

To: CSM
RE: "grow the market"

Yes, that is what free global trade should be about. IMO it's worked for decades mostly in Europe where most of our investments are. In other words we export to Europe or offshore jobs to Europe to manufacture and sell to Europeans.

IMO sending our technology, manufacturing, and IT-enabled services to India and China is not growing the market because the goods and services are imported from there to the U.S.

I am more concerned with China than India. The Chi-coms are not living up to their WTO agreement is the short answer.

IMO what is happening now, especially with India and China, is simply jobs chasing cheap labor. That's fine. I just wish the "free" traders would acknowledge that offshoring brings immediate (and temporary?) hardships for many Americans and benefits (cheap goods) for most.

Frankly, it seems that most "free" traders simply don't care about the few -- some seem to enjoy gawking at wrecked middle class lives.

320 posted on 03/10/2004 4:40:40 PM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (Benedict Arnold was a hero for both sides in the same war, too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

To: CSM
Just finished reading the first 150 comments. I'd like to add a little to my first reply to you.

As others have pointed out we have true (more or less) free trade with a number of countries. It's worked out pretty well. India and China are different. It's that "comparative advantage" thing. The other countries have it, India and China don't.

I read your #136.

My short argument against "improving these countries [India and China] infrastructure" by "offshoring/moving to [to them]" is we've done enough already. To wit, see

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1093820/posts

There are only 26 replies on the thread but pay attention to posts by hedgetrimmer.

If by infrastructure you mean a consumer class again I say no!

Suggesting that we distribute our wealth (that's how I read your position and it's how I see "free" trade vis-a-vis India and China) is exactly why I draw a parallel between China/India "free" trade and Kyoto.

Kyoto seeks to redistribute wealth from developed nations to "developing nations". No! Let India and China develop their "comparative advantages" and earn the benefit from trade the old fashion way.

BTW, I agree that dogbyte12 (#109) had some very good points.

322 posted on 03/10/2004 6:14:35 PM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (Benedict Arnold was a hero for both sides in the same war, too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson