Puts & Calls / NO on Cafta, say Kevin L. Kearns and Alan Tonelson, who warn it exploits the weak

The Post Gazette ^ | July 24, 2005 | Kevin L. Kearns and Alan Tonelson

[hedgetrimmer]

Puts & Calls / NO on Cafta, say Kevin L. Kearns and Alan Tonelson, who warn it exploits the weak Sunday, July 24, 2005

By Kevin L. Kearns and Alan Tonelson

China's attempt to take over the U.S. oil company Unocal is a major test for Congress on Sino-American relations. Congress' answer so far -- harsh but toothless resolutions, hearing after hearing, and a tight focus on the narrow complaints of the rival Unocal bidder, Chevron -- deserves an "incomplete" at best. The state-owned Chinese oil firm CNOOC's heavily subsidized bid for Unocal should be blocked, both to limit the Chinese government's role in an already heated global scramble for energy and raw materials, and to preserve free competition within the U.S. economy.

Yet anyone truly concerned about the implications of the CNOOC bid -- as opposed to grandstanding or serving Chevron's corporate agenda -- also needs a politically realistic strategy for changing the forces and decisions that made it possible, and that will produce more Chinese economic gambits and military adventurism in the future.

This means changing America's fundamental China trade and investment policies -- which are creating the massive Chinese trade surpluses and therefore the wherewithal to finance Beijing's often troubling ambitions. And given the Bush administration's stubborn support for the China trade status quo, Congress needs to force a change by making a major political statement -- namely, rejection by the House of Representatives of the Central America Free Trade Agreement, or Cafta....

....It is also a referendum on the Bush administration's claim that free trade dogma is all the China policy America needs -- that it will eventually turn the People's Republic into a docile, democratic trading partner.

[hedgetrimmer]

In particular, winning Cafta will strengthen the White House's conviction that for all their hue and cry, Congress and voters don't care much about outsourcing issues or the very real strategic threat posed by China.

An interesting take on CAFTA and "free trade"

[hedgetrimmer]

CAFTA and CHINA PING

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Anytime the left says our policies exploit the weak I know they must be good ideas.

[Rockitz]

At the risk of repeating my post from a prior thread....

Free trade isn't. Cheap goods at what cost? The US will continue to bleed jobs and the standard of living will decrease for workers because we have lost those jobs. Who makes out on free trade? Businessmen whose costs are suddenly reduced by a factor of 10 because they moved their plant across the border and left their former US employees without jobs. The playing field isn't level from many perspectives-environmental regulation is different, taxes and insurance are different, the cost of defending our way of life (US military) is vastly different, the infrastructure is different.

This country is bleeding capital and jobs and "free trade" will create an even greater difference between the classes. Unless you own a business that can take advantage of cheap labor, your standard of living will decrease. Very similar reasoning can be applied to illegal immigaration and why President Bush isn't doing anything about it. Once again the business owners who can profit from cheaper illegal labor make out. The rest of us get to buy $1 lettuce, but pay taxes to support healthcare, education, and infrastructure to support this cheap labor. I'd rather pay $4 for a head of lettuce if it were picked by an American. Why won't Americans take these jobs? Because we have an artificial floor in this country called welfare and the minimum wage. Both need to be eliminated- then Americans would take those jobs or be faced with an empty stomach and no place to live.

We're literally falling on our own swords and no one is doing anything about it. The wealthy grifters who own businesses will eventually leave with their gains only to look for the next opportunity.

I'm ashamed that Republicans were largely responsible for this ransacking of America. The unions probably needed to be busted when Reagan proposed free trade, but the pendulum has swung too far and I'm not sure this country will survive the class warfare that will develop from this. The workers are not retraining and are ill-prepared to do anything else. Maybe we can all become business owners and everything can be outsourced? Is that what they're thinking?

Possibly long term this will work out, but in the short term the workers of this country are going to be squeezed out. Is Holland a good model for how this is supposed to work long term? Seems like they became a country of business owners in centuries past.

Someone explain to me where I'm missing something here.

[staytrue]

from the article:

"This means changing America's fundamental China trade and investment policies "

I think you have been barking up the wrong tree about free trade. Tariffs are not the problem or solution. Notice the word "INVESTMENT", in the above quote.

US assets are more attractive to foreigners than vice versa because most foreign countries have extensive capital controls on US citizens owning their assets. While WTO has lifted trade barriers, there has been no attention paid to capital restrictions. So if china can buy US capital while the reverse is difficult, this will drive a corresponding US trade deficit with china.

I say that capital restrictions are artificially driving the US trade deficit. For example, if ABC country allows zero foreign investment, then any citizen of ABC country that invests in the US, MUST RUN A TRADE SURPLUS WITH THE US REGARDLESS OF ANY OTHER MARKET FORCES.

If you want a trade surplus, instead of erecting tariffs, you can simply impose capital controls instead. That is what the other countries have done to the US. Capital controls are defacto trade tariffs. I say, most of the world is in violation of trade laws by having capital restrictions. This must stop.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[antivenom]

Why won't Americans take these jobs? Because we have an artificial floor in this country called welfare and the minimum wage. Both need to be eliminated- then Americans would take those jobs or be faced with an empty stomach and no place to live.

That is a QUICK "root cause anaylysis" but dig a bit deeper...we now have the Nitendo generation coming out of college and DEMANDING that their first job pay 50k or higher! They aren't intetrested in "entry level" jobs.

Think of the countless numbers of families that have allowed an over 21 year old (or older) kid to STILL live with mommy and daddy. Or better yet allowed an older child to come back after a marriage has failed? Even better have a former child come back brining their kids? The excuses will be many...well he/she needs to get some savings, get back on their feet, pay off bills, get a car, blah blah blah...bottom line is free loaders are freeloaders...all shapes and all sizes. Differnt backgrounds, differnt education levels...THOSE that rise to the top do so out of hard work and determination, not blaming the system or pointing fingers and or making excuses.

This country has lost its work ethic...everyone expect something for nothing and looking for the quick way out.

It isn't "JUST" the lazy and stupid to blame...the very educated and spoiled are contributing too.

BTW if it wasn't for illegal aliens there wouldn't be one roof in Texas and or any paved roads.

Don't see how society down here could survive without either.

[hedgetrimmer]

free trade dogma is all the China policy America needs -- that it will eventually turn the People's Republic into a docile, democratic trading partner

I think its the conservatives, not the left, who understand that flooding china with money so they can become a military superpower is a dangerous side effect to the "free trade" system the global socialists are implementing.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

I agree that flooding China with money is dangerous but I think it is the free market, supply side conservatives who support free trade, not the left. Economic globalization is not the same as a political one world government, as advocated and schemed for by the left. The left does favor free trade with China because it helps them generally and militarily in particular. The left likes that but otherwise they are against free trade because it helps us so much.

I am a free trader because it an example of a rising tide lifts all ships.

China wasn't the threat she now is when Nixon opened the door to China and we later freed up trade with them. Clinton greatly accelerated the threat we now face but by then shutting down trade would hurt us badly, too.

Increasing trade in our own region through CAFTA, NAFTA, etc., is a good hedge against China.

[hedgetrimmer]

There is nothing conservative about decimating a domestic industry to "lift all the ships".

"Lifing the ship" of another country this way, is welfare. The person most hurt by the welfare policies that the "free traders" are pushing are the paycheck to paycheck wage earner who see the taxes withheld from his salary going to these third world countries for "trade capacity building", who really don't deserve it. Ironically, by "building capacity" in these countries, the taxpayer is funding the demise of his own job, as these countries come onto the market, not with a level playing field of wages and regulations, but undercutting the industry in this country because they don't have to conform to the same rules we do.

And by supporting these policies, the "free traders" who claim to be American are ignoring the American ideal that you stand by your neighbor. Your neighbor might be one of these paycheck earning taxpayers. Stick up for him and he will stick up for you when you need it.

Besides,if these countries were producing high quality sought after products, they'd be selling in the global market in the first place. By creating a welfare system of countries so they can participate, they will always expect welfare and always be the victims of the "rich" countries.

Economic globalization is not the same as a political one world government,

I disagree, simply because the system is set up to be a 'global government'.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

"Lifting the ship" of another country this way, is welfare.

Please explain.

Please explain, also, why our economy is doing so well despite the outsourcing and cheap goods from abroad. Why are we basically at full employment despite the above plus the human wave of illegal immigrants year after year?

....as these countries come onto the market, not with a level playing field of wages and regulations, but undercutting the industry in this country because they don't have to conform to the same rules we do.

Instead of spending all your time and energy fighting competition by hiding behind government rules, why don't you fight to eliminate the rules and regulations that are making us noncompetitive rather than strapping others with the same burdens?

And by supporting these policies, the "free traders" who claim to be American are ignoring the American ideal that you stand by your neighbor. Your neighbor might be one of these paycheck earning taxpayers. Stick up for him and he will stick up for you when you need it.

Before the government decided to take care of everyone, neighbor did take care of neighbor, and it was appreciated and not abused. Now an anonymous stranger takes one neighbor's money, deducts most of it for himself, and gives what's left to the other neighbor. No appreciation and lots of abuse, and now you want more help from that same group?

Besides,if these countries were producing high quality sought after products, they'd be selling in the global market in the first place. By creating a welfare system of countries so they can participate, they will always expect welfare and always be the victims of the "rich" countries.

After WWII the Japanese were flat. With a little help and freedom they now produce the best cars in the world, far better than those made in the U.S.

Sorry, I can't seem to find any evidence to support your point of view.

[A. Pole]

Because we have an artificial floor in this country called welfare and the minimum wage. Both need to be eliminated- then Americans would take those jobs or be faced with an empty stomach and no place to live.

But if you remove the state asistance and minimum wage will the workers paid below this "floor" be able to afford place to live, food, clothers, medical expenses, car (if no public transportation is available), family etc ...?

[hedgetrimmer]

why our economy is doing so well despite the outsourcing and cheap goods from abroad.

For sure the "cheap good" help to create the illusion that there is no inflation. It suits the internationalists to ignore the cost of energy and housing.

Outsourcing shows our economy is doing well? In what way?

[hedgetrimmer]

why don't you fight to eliminate the rules and regulations that are making us noncompetitive

Why don't you, instead of forcing phony trade agreements on the citizens of this country barely disguised as foreign aid and corporate welfare.

[hedgetrimmer]

No appreciation and lots of abuse, and now you want more help from that same group?

You just slandered America, my friend.