Posted on 07/09/2014 12:24:43 PM PDT by Kaslin
I have already argued how trade deficits are not the enemy as protectionists seem to think. I have also argued how the only thing being "protected" are special interest groups with very visible lobbies like certain manufacturing groups and trade unions at the expense of the average American consumer. Notice how Buchanan is blind to the economic effect of tariffs to the average consumer.
So as I've said, tariffs and protectionism does more harm than good. It temporarily and visibly seems to help certain manufacturers when in fact in the long run and not so visible, interference is hurting them because the government's subsidies allow and encourage subpar performance. It also as previously mentioned hurts the American consumer and the American economy with higher prices and fewer choices.
Another reason interference with trade does more harm than good is it allows government to increasingly interfere with our economy which has consistently brought disastrous results. There seems to be a whole segment of "conservatives" like Buchanan and you (apparently) who seem oblivious to the mega-threat big government poses to our economic as well as political freedoms.
Tariffs & trade restrictions impede economic growth
"Governmental measures constitute the major impediments to economic growth. Tariffs and other restrictions on international trade, high tax burdens and a complex and inequitable tax structure, regulatory commissions government price and wage fixing, and a host of other measures give individuals an incentive to misuse and misdirect resources, and distort the investment of new savings. What we urgently need, for both economic stability and growth, is a reduction of government intervention, not an increase."
Source: Capitalism and Freedom, by Milton Friedman, p. 38 , Nov 15, 1962
Interfering with trade is the road to authoritarianism
"Interferences with international trade appear innocuous; they can get the support of people who are otherwise apprehensive of interference by government into economic affairs; many a business man even regards them as part of the "American Way of Life"; yet there are few interferences which are capable of spreading so far and ultimately being so destructive of free enterprise. There is much experience to suggest that the most effective way to convert a market economy into an authoritarian economic society is to start by imposing direct controls on foreign exchange. This one step leads inevitably to the rationing of imports, to control over domestic production that uses imported products or that produces substitutes for imports, and so on in a never-ending spiral."
Source: Capitalism and Freedom, by Milton Friedman, p. 57 , Nov 15, 1962
I know you and Buchanan want to "protect" our country from those big bad forces out there that are out to destroy us. And there are forces out there who want to do just that. And that is why a strong military and intelligence community is a must. But what you and Pat and so many other "conservatives" don't seem to grasp is what history teaches us: the greatest threat to any citizenry isn't that of outside invaders, but rather the citizens' own government. Throughout modern history, more people have been killed by their own government than by any invading force.
The approach of "conservatives" like you and Pat is to pull the covers over your head or stick your head in the sand. The free economy and free trade has never been and is not now a threat to our country or livelihood. But the alternative you and Pat present of government interference is a very grave threat.
Patrick J. Buchanan – September 29, 2006
If Americans are the most efficient workers on earth and work longer hours than almost any other advanced nation, why are we getting our clocks cleaned? Answer: While American workers are world-class, our elites are mentally challenged. So rhapsodic are they about the Global Economy they have forgotten their own country. Europeans, Japanese, Canadians and Chinese sell us so much more than they buy from us because they have rigged the rules of world trade.
While the United States has a corporate income tax, our trade rivals use a value-added tax. At each level of production, a tax is imposed on the value added to the product. Under the rules of global trade, nations may rebate VAT levies on exports, and impose the equivalent of a VAT on imports. (snip)
This amounts to a foreign subsidy on exports to the United States and a foreign tax on imports from America. Uncle Sam gets hit coming and going. (snip)
Why do our politicians not level the playing field for U.S. companies?
First, ignorance of how world trade works. Second, ideology. These robotic free-traders recoil from any suggestion that they aid U.S. producers against unfair foreign tactics as interfering with Adam Smith’s “invisible hand,” which they equate with the hand of the Almighty.
Third, they are hauling water for transnational companies that want to move production overseas and shed their U.S. workers. (snip)
http://buchanan.org/blog/pjb-how-to-bring-manufacturing-back-home-109
His response has lots of inflammatory and demagoguery speech, but fails to provide a rational answer to his question - but I will. One reason: BIG GOVERNMENT. Government takes away our hard earned money in the form of taxes, oppressive regulations, and inflation-driving spending. Big taxes and big spending by a $4 trillion big government has, is, and always will be our economic undoing, as it is for any nation. Historical fact and current reality show us time and again that the free market creates wealth whereas big government creates poverty.
Other than that, I've answered every one of his points already. Are you going to get around to analyzing what's already been said and respond with a rationale of your own? Just mechanically posting his quotes, especially when they tend to repeat the points of the previous quotes, doesn't really help does it? It certainly makes whatever argument you are making (other than "whatever Pat says") look pretty weak. But the argument for government interference IS weak compared to the robust arguments for freedom. America itself, especially in the 1800's, is one of the most brilliant examples of that.
But what is most astonishing to me is I'm having to argue for freedom with a supposed "Right Wing Conservative." Not sure what that means any more. To me it used to mean, "those that believe in America and what America stands for." Well, America doesn't stand for anything if it doesn't stand for freedom and a lot of so-called "conservatives" seem to have rather acquiesced to the status quo of big government and less and less freedom. Sad picture, really.
Globalism vs. Americanism
September 15, 2009
Patrick J. Buchanan
Welcome to 21st century America, where globalism has replaced patriotism as the civil religion of our corporate elites.
As Thomas Jefferson reminded us, “Merchants have no country.”
You really have had no answers to my rebuttals of Pat's assertions and assumptions.
"Freedom always wins the debate in the forum of ideas" - PapaNew.
Free trade is the serial killer of American manufacturing and the Trojan Horse of World Government. It is the primrose path to the loss of economic independence and national sovereignty. Free trade is a bright shining lie.
- Patrick J. Buchanan
No, only special interest manufacturers and unions who don't want to deal with competitive forces. Tariffs, protectionism, and government economic interference are the serial killers of a vibrant, robust, and growing economy.
the Trojan Horse of World Government
There you go again, mixing economic with politics. They're two different animals.
You’re just repeating your free trade religious beliefs while you ignore Buchanan’s facts and figures.
Facts mean nothing to you; it’s clear to see.
What does that mean?
Facts mean nothing to you
What facts exactly? Buchanan's premise is that free trade hurts and tariffs help manufacturers. I haven't disagreed with that have I? But as Mark Twain said, there are lies, damnable lies, and statistics. Just looking at the benefit of tariffs to manufacturing special interests is and unions is tunnel vision and only tells part of the story - a half-truth becasue he don't include in his analysis the harm done to the average consumer from forced higher prices and fewer choices available.
I’d love to see some facts that prove free trade is beneficial to Americans.
Got any?
Well, what you’re asking is what benefit is the free market to people. After all, international free trade is an extension of a country’s own free market on a wider scale.
The simple, direct answer is you and I as consumers get the maximum number of choices of the best products for the cheapest price. It’s simple supply and demand in operation without government interference.
What you and I are use to is something most know nothing of. If you or I want something, we usually just go to the store to get it. Why is it there? Because of demand. Who put it there? Those who wanted to profit by supplying that demand. And nobody told anyone to do anything or prevented them. The free market and free trade is freedom at work.
The best example I can think of is a passage from Friedman’s 1980 Free To Choose series on PBS:
“The basic principles underlying the free market, as Adam Smith taught them to his students in this University, are really very simple. Look at this lead pencil, there is not a single person in the world who could make this pencil. Remarkable statement? Not at all.
The wood from which it’s made, for all I know, comes from a tree that was cut down in the State of Washington. To cut down that tree, it took a saw. To make the saw, it took steel. To make the steel, it took iron ore. This black center, we call it lead but it’s really compressed graphite, I am not sure where it comes from but I think it comes from some mines in South America. This red top up here, the eraser, a bit of rubber, probably comes from Malaya, where the rubber tree isn’t even native. It was imported from South America by some businessman with the help of the British government. This brass feral __ I haven’t the slightest idea where it came from or the yellow paint or the paint that made the black lines __ or the glue that holds it together.
Literally thousands of people cooperated to make this pencil. People who don’t speak the same language; who practice different religions; who might hate one another if they ever met. When you go down to the store and buy this pencil, you are, in effect, trading a few minutes of your time for a few seconds of the time of all of those thousands of people. What brought them together and induced them to cooperate to make this pencil? There was no Commissar sending out orders from some central office. It was the magic of the price system __ the impersonal operation of prices that brought them together and got them to cooperate to make this pencil so that you could have it for a trifling sum.
That is why the operation of the free market is so essential. Not only to promote productive efficiency, but even more, to foster harmony and peace among the peoples of the world.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1667407/posts
Buchanan has facts about jobs lost and factories closed that prove his position.
Where are your facts proving free trade is beneficial?
Here, Buchanan can answer for you:
01/23/2014
After having shifted production overseas and dramatically lowered costs, U.S. transnationals saw a surge in profits. These were used to push corporate salaries into the stratosphere, increase dividends to shareholders, and keep the Washington lobbyists working the Hill day and night for fast track and free trade.
And the lifestyle of our corporate elites changed.
Where their fathers walked sooty factory floors in smokestack towns in World War II, these masters of the universe fly Gulfstream Vs to Davos and Dubai to dine with titled Europeans, Saudi princes and Chinese billionaires.
http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/free-trade-far-from-free/
Why do you believe “facts” from statistics rather than economic, historical, and common sense facts? Why is the fact that free trade means lower prices for the consumer any less valid than aggregate statistics that may or may not tell the whole story or may mislead you as to causes?
It’s very hard to isolate all the moving parts in an economy and know of a certainty what were the causes as well as the assumptions of aggregate statistics of lost jobs and factories Buchanan shows. For instance, how much of that was due to high taxes and union wages that priced our manufacturing goods out of the market?
You asked for facts about the benefits of free trade to the average person. I gave you economic (and common sense) facts that free trade translates into maximum choice and quality for minimum price. I gave you actual working facts about how you can go to the store and buy just about anything you want and how the free market allows that to happen with the example of the facts about how you are able to buy a simple pencil.
Nevertheless, here are some stats that indicate the favorable results of NAFTA since its inception in 1994 in GDP and employment. If the charts and graphs don’t show up on this post (still learning how to do that) you can find them on the link below.
“In his book The Common Market, Lawrence B. Krause states, “economic integration will supposedly have some immediate (static) effect upon the member countries and will also cause some changes over a long period of time (dynamic effect)” (Krause 8). The Heritage Foundation indicate that research and statistical evidences, like the graph below, suggest that among the various categories of economic integration, one that advocates more trade and market freedom are the ones that have sounder economic performance.
“The Static advantages that can be achieved through free trade are specialization and efficiency, labor and capital reallocation, and availability of goods and services at cheaper price. With the United State’s participation in free international trade, it is inevitable that established businesses will be closed down and people will suddenly find themselves unemployed. However, this is simply the process of the theory of comparative advantage rather than the end.
“Joseph Schumpeter, more than half a century ago, termed this process as creative destruction. When competing for customers, producers adopt new technologies, improve production methods, expand markets and introduce new and better products. His famous phrase captured the essence of capitalism: continuous change – out with the old, in with the new” (Cox and Koo 3).
“This would help us understand the federal government’s prediction of some job increases of accountants, special education positions, hazardous material removal specialists, creative computer software engineers, automotive technicians, veterinary technicians, and farm managers. Some of these specialized positions can possibly increase from 14 to as much as 27 percent through 2014 (Kingsburg 56).
Merchandise Export / GDP at 1990 Price, in Percent
Country Before NAFTA (1973) After NAFTA (2001)
United States 5.0 7.2
Canada 19.9 41.1
Mexico 2.2 28.7
Source: International Financial Management, Eun / Resnick (page 12, exhibit 1.3)
“The above table clearly indicates that all three nations gained in export after the inception of NAFTA and the liberalization of international trade throughout the world. Mexico drastically improved its export to GDP from 2.2% to a 28.7% high, and Canada increased by 21.2%. The United States also improved its export to GDP from a 5.0% to a 7.2%. While all the trade partners were better off, none of them where worse off from trade agreement. The North American Trade Agreement proved to be a voluntary contract that achieved Pareto Optimality.
“The graph below explicitly depicts the pattern of unemployment of the United States before and after the period of the inception and adaptation of the NAFTA. One can see that the unemployment rate in the 1980’s was extremely high.
“Even before the NAFTA was introduced, from 1989 to 1992, the unemployment rate was soaring high from 5.3% to 7.5%. However, unlike Ross Perot’s vision, after the NAFTA, the unemployment rate actually dropped from 7.5% to 4% in 2000; it is one of the lowest rates in the past half of the century. The rate climbed to 6.2% again in 2003, which could be blamed for the recession of November 2001. Ross Perot’s mercantilist perspective underestimated the benefits that international trade and trade agreement had in store for the domestic and global economy.”
From “Free Trade and Economic Prosperity” by Rijesh Shrestha
http://www.mckendree.edu/academics/scholars/issue7/shrestha.htm
So . . . you’ve got nothing.
No reasoning. No rationale. No evidentiary support. No engagement in the rudiments of the discussion. Nothing.
It doesn't speak well of those who favor government interference over freedom but can't defend or support their position for protectionism or reasonably counter those against such.
Comes under the heading of almost if not a total lack of good faith in this discussion.
We are not having a discussion because we have no point of contact.
Also, you have no facts to support your belief system.
You seem to be out of contact with this whole subject matter. It seems your only "point of contact" is Pat Buchanan. So you're following a man, not and idea.
You either haven't read or understood my last post or both. I gave you the "facts" you asked for but it appears you don't read or else don't understand anything longer than a paragraph.
So much for a bad-faith discussion. Nevertheless, I have answered every affirmation of protectionism and objection to free markets and free trade that you via Pat have offered.
This last failure to respond substantively to my long, detailed, and substantive post is like a default, like not showing up. Well then, game, set, and match to me because the other side defaulted.
Hasta la vista, baby.
Once again, freedom wins the debate in the forum of ideas.
Still no facts.
Reread ALL of post #52. Full of facts.
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.