Posted on 11/23/2005 10:35:06 AM PST by BransonRevival
If "free trade" means allowing the UN's despot controled agencies to decide for the US what is and is not acceptable
then count me as a non-free trader.
I don't think it is.
They want and like the benefits of free trade.
They just don't want to admit it.
Bill Clinton made his support of free trade proof that he was a different kind of democrat, and no "protectionist" has been elected since Hoover.
In 2004 senate elections, the 7 new senators including a couple of southern states, were clear and pro-free trade.
John Thune did vote against Cafta, but according to him, it was to send a message about the airbase, not anything relating to free trade.
Bottom line, free traders do win elections, while mercantilist/protectionists poll well but lose.
Which is more beneficial to a worker, a raise of $1000 or $1000 in lower prices?
Not America
NGO are now controlling America
$1000 raise, they may not wan the cheap chicom crap being sold. They can spend it, invest, save as they choose.
$1000 raise is better than $1000 savings on a good old American built car?
This sounds like a job for
Corin Stormhands!!!!!
They're even forcing us to import Canadian softwood. Where will it end?
Yes, I have the choose to spend on not spend as I like.
I hope they don't force us to buy foreign sugar. I enjoy paying more than double the price for basic commodities.
The $1000 savings in lower prices is worth about $1100 here in Chicago when sales tax is taken into account.
Hmmmmm.....$1100 versus $673.50. You want to change your answer?
I'm told that makes us true patriots and real Conservatives. Some folks just don't understand that we need to pay higher prices now to protect us from having to pay higher prices later.
No, I want the cash. $1000 on something I may or may not want versus money in pocket. I choose money in pocket.
Good for you. I'm sure your boss will be happy to give you a $1000 raise that will give you $673.50 in your pocket. Meanwhile the rest of America will continue to choose lower prices.
Good luck with your campaign slogan, "Vote for me, I'll raise your prices".
In a July 1995 issue of Business Week, sorry do not remember the exact week. They postulated that with so many good paying jobs going overseas that we would reach a point where now one would be able to afford the product these companies were importing. No matter how cheap they are. I think we are getting close to that point. If I can find the article I will post it.
"Bottom line, free traders do win elections, while mercantilist/protectionists poll well but lose."
Maybe you are right. The WSJ, however, says free trade is running out of gas at this point in time. We barely got CAFTA and apparently hope for a larger South American deal is now gone.
Granted, NAFTA was a huge victory for free trade. I am not quite as confident as you are about this issue, but I appreciate your positive attitude. To me, anti-free trade sentiment is a bit like brushfires in in California in the summertime. It is always cropping up here and there, and there are always some very passionate advocates, namely, people who may lose their jobs to international competition (and those who exploit their fears).
On the surface, protectionism seems easier to understand than Free Trade. The majority of people are not so confident in their ability to make a living that they easily accept the notion that an open, free trading economy is healthier and constantly creates jobs to replace those that were lost.
In addition, it does not seem that free traders can easily prove that NAFTA has had a positive effect on the American economy. Arguments are made on both sides. The fact is, you can prove that NAFTA has caused the loss of certain specific jobs. In the nature of things, it is harder to prove that NAFTA has created certain specific jobs.
Jobs are central to people's lives. Fear is central to people's psychology. I'm not trying to be negative and pessimistic and hopeless here, though it may seem that way. I'm just saying it seems that we must continually fight to sell and re-sell the idea of free trade, and that sometimes, possibly now being one of those times, it may be impossible to advance free trade any further.
So if all the good jobs left then incomes must have dropped since 1995. Maybe you can show us how far our wages have fallen? And if we couldn't afford to buy foreign products imports should have fallen.
ABOUT THE UN GLOBAL COMPACT:
Launched by United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 2000, the UN Global Compact brings business together with UN agencies, labor, civil society and governments to advance universal principles in the areas of human rights, labor, environment and anti-corruption. With over 2300 participating companies from more than 80 countries, it is the world's largest voluntary corporate citizenship initiative. For more information, please visit www.unglobalcompact.org.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.