Posted on 10/04/2007 7:07:18 AM PDT by SJackson
I've seen a lot of opinion polling, but my jaw dropped when I saw this result from our special NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll of Republicans in advance of next week's presidential candidate debate sponsored by CNBC, MSNBC and the WSJ. By a nearly two-to-one margin, Republican voters believe free trade is bad for the U.S. economy, a shift in opinion that mirrors Democratic views and suggests trade deals could face high hurdles under a new president.
Six in 10 Republicans in the poll agreed with a statement that free trade has been bad for the U.S. and said they would agree with a Republican candidate who favored tougher regulations to limit foreign imports. That represents a challenge for Republican candidates who generally echo Mr. Bush’s calls for continued trade expansion, and reflects a substantial shift in sentiment from eight years ago.
"It’s a lot harder to sell the free-trade message to Republicans," said Republican pollster Neil Newhouse, who conducts the Journal/NBC poll with Democratic counterpart Peter Hart.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
“Great. I’ll continue to believe Friedman over Marx.”
Another pointless one-liner. I’ve said nothing about what I believe, only that there are economists with alternative beliefs and they’re definitely in play in the present political scene.
True. Where there is great wealth, it sometimes takes a long time for the Democrats to squander it, but eventually they do.
Allegheny County, the county surrounding P'burgh had a brief experiment with being run by Republicans in the late '90's, but since the Republicans were actually Republicrats, it didn't last long since the results were identical. The city of P'burgh last had a Republican mayor in the '20's, I believe, and since there really is no Republican party, the races are all settled with the Democrat primary.
Take away their domestic clients and what do you have?
Very few people in this world have the funds to use a American hospital or need a US law firm. And I just can't see Cleveland competing with London or Frankfurt is Capital management :^0
No, I mean since WWII. GATT was signed in 1947.
I dont see why it should be. Some very bright Freepers, all "experts" on economics, claimed in the pre-Bush years that by the year 2000 we wouldnt need ag and manufacturing because we would all be rich solely off of the IT based economy.
If you look back at my previous posts, you will see that is the reason I'm against illegal aliens. The government is subsidizing minimum wage jobs to eliminate the US workers that would do the jobs for more money. You can't import housing, but you can import workers. The average illegal costs the taxpayer $33k per year for their services. That means a builder can pay a worker $10 an hour, but the cost is actually much higher, it's just the taxpayer picks up the tab. If a builder had to pay an American $20 an hour, at least that worker would be supporting the economy instead of leeching off it.
One thing my dad taught me as a child was that if I was willing to work, I would always be able to make a living. People will always be willing to pay for things they don't want to do. A business just crying to get started here is trash collection. I live in a rural area with most of the residents outside the city. Anybody could buy a truck and charge people to pick up their trash here. We've had several here, but most are drunks, or don't show up on the promised days. At $10-$15 a month, you can see, with a few hundred customers, there is a good living to be made right here with a pickup truck. A high school grad should be able to do better than making shoes for minimum wage. I know plenty that are truck drivers, loggers, sawmill workers, etc that do fine. If you just can't find real work, there's alway the government. I think even trash collectors in my town make about $15 an hour with medical, and vacations.
“And, why do you think that free trade was devised to lower consumer prices when it fact it sole purpose is to increase corporate profits without regard for its impact on democracy?”
Yep, and the lower consumer prices are just the latest excuse/mask/misdirection used to disguise the fact which you state: it’s all about increasing corporate profits and the rest be damned.
In the past free trade was going to open up vast new markets for US goods and services. But what they have to show for that promise is an almost trillion dollar trade deficit and an ever mushrooming national debt.
Umm... You're going completely outside my analogy. You implied that just by shopping at the grocery store, it could lead to the loss of my job.
When I mentioned the grocery store, that was a limited analogy of my economic relationship with that store, nothing more. The store isn't the third world. They don't pay $0.05 an hour. I have a 100% negative "trade deficit" with that store.
The question is: is my trade relationship with that store a Bad Thing? Should I be angry at them or stop shopping there because of my negative "trade deficit" with them?
But then you already know that. “Free” trade will not be equal trade until we turn the US into a complete turd world shit hole. When we employ 9 year olds in garment factories on 16 hour shifts... then you can come back and talk logically about “free trade”.
Workers at the grocery store make about 25% of what I make. Should I stop shopping there because they make less than me?
Should everyone make the same wage, regardless of where they live or the work that they do?
now what presidential candidate is MOST inline with this American Majority opinion....
***B4DH
Also chalk up his stance on immigration, right to Life, WOT as in line with American Majority Opinion.
How old are you?
When American companies run to China to take advantage of the cheap labor is the savings in labor cost passed on to the consumers in the form of lower product costs or does the cost of the product remain the same and business gets more profit
Anybody have facts and figures
No kidding...
lol
But the fat cats that enjoy low wage peasant labor love it.
usa had real traiffs in 1947, gatt 1947 was toothless.
“So we should be just like them and restrict the freedom of our citizens by forcing them to accept fewer choices at higher prices.”
Your entire long post is based on this belief: that the lowest prices obtainable should be the determining factor in trade/economic policy.
A consumer’s choice has more than that one factor. Choice also involves how much buying power one has and what one can afford. We still have inflation in this country. Cheap imported consumer goods have not offset all inflation, but the loss of many jobs has cut the buying power of many Americans. Some things are cheaper, others things aren’t. Consumers also need homes to buy or rent. Are they cheap now?
If the lowest possible prices are your only value, then that’s how it is for you. But that’s not how it is for many other Americans. There other components, not just economic theories, whether you purists like it or not.
“Those who don’t invest in stocks can invest in themselves and learn a more valuable skill or trade. Education makes you more valuable, regardless of outsourcing.”
Yeah, those losers with Computer Science and Engineering degrees, what were they thinking!!
Yeah, you’ll be ok, but your neighbors and kids are on their own.
Nice.
Not sure if this applies in all cases. My brother-in-law worked in R&D for H-P for over 20 years, a top of the line Ph.D. in EE, and he had his job offshored to Malaysia when Carly Fiorina decided she needed a few more pennies on the bottom line to get a better private jet. Of course, she made up for that by posting a job for stewardess on her private jet. So what was that again about education?
No, I'm not engaging in any "shoulds" for the nation as a whole. I'm acknowledging that the choices of individuals are not within the control of, nor any of the business of government policy.
Personally, I think people should stay out of debt as much as possible. I try to keep my personal debt to my mortgage and sometimes a car payment. I'm not always there, but I'm usually pretty close.
Your response does not demonstrate a careful analysis of higher education. The cost of higher education is high because of the competitive structure of the industry. In its current structure, you cannot outsource faculty. There are many foreign faculty especially in the sciences, medicine, engineering, and business. Foreign faculty do not work for any less than domestic faculty.
The only way to reduce higher education costs is for a new player to focus on lowering costs and improving quality. I am not sure who this new player would be because it would take a good deal of startup capital. Higher education should a service for consumers (students, parents, and employers). Here are a few ways that a new player could reduce costs and improve quality:
- Commoditize knowledge through master professors and communications technology
- Unbundle services so that consumers pay just for the services needed.
- Develop online learning centers to support the interactivity required for higher education
- Emphasize exit examinations and learning portfolios to depict the quality of graduates
- Restructure degree offerings to eliminate general courses when students can demonstrate basic education knowledge and skills
Yeah, and this free trade thing we've been doing is going to bankrupt the United States too. ...any day now. ...still waiting. ...just around the corner.
“If you look back at my previous posts, you will see that is the reason I’m against illegal aliens. The government is subsidizing minimum wage jobs to eliminate the US workers that would do the jobs for more money. You can’t import housing, but you can import workers. The average illegal costs the taxpayer $33k per year for their services. That means a builder can pay a worker $10 an hour, but the cost is actually much higher, it’s just the taxpayer picks up the tab. If a builder had to pay an American $20 an hour, at least that worker would be supporting the economy instead of leeching off it.”
Great analysis, and the same thing applies to Americans who’ve lost higher paying jobs to cheap foreign labor.
Former factory workers who once made $15 - $20 per hour, or more, but are now making $10 or less, put some of the same demands on the taxpayer, and those with kids often qualify for $3000 or more in Earned Income Credits. Of course, some lost wages are even greater than my example.
But it’s the same deal: higher profits for the transnational that exported jobs, and higher tax burden for the taxpayers who must provide government benefits workers did not qualify for with higher paying jobs that were exported.
Such scenarios contribute to both our national debt and trade deficit.
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.