Why FREE TRADE was never the answer.

self | 7/28/03 | RaceBannon

[Cacophonous]

BTW, are you at Fort Lewis?

[RockyMtnMan]

If they didn't at least businesses could put pressure on the fed to raise tariffs before they go for higher taxes. Call it a relief valve for now.

Until we reduce spending they will always collect more, at least with tariffs it will come out of other countries pockets instead of ours.

[dogbyte12]

I have nothing against the next spunky industrial, hard working foreigner at all.

I am more than happy to compete against that person. Except we really aren't. Our capital and equipment is being moved to that worker. It isn't like a spunky shoe company in Vietnam was producing some kick ass work, and Nike came in and said, we like your moxy, partner with us.

Another example of how unfair trade is, is Mexico and Canada. They refuse to pay market value for medicine. That's ok. We subsidize them, by paying much more than they do, to make sure the drug companies remain profitable.

How is that fair competition? Free competition. If a mexican company actually offers drug benefits, they have an advantage before a single unit of labor is done. It is not the american worker's fault that we allow drug costs to be born on america's back.

We also subsidize Mexico by educating, providing health care, etc to their citizens. The companies pay higher taxes in order to pay for this benefit, and is it any wonder why they relocate to Mexico?

Severely disabled kids get basically squat for treatment in Mexico. So, the parents, being logical, dump them here in L.A. and we pay the bill. Then, Joe six pack is told to compete with all these extraneous factors, even before salary rate is even discussed.

I have no problem with us competing without tariffs with japan, england, germany, singapore, belgium etc. It is competition. Third world is not competition. If a bowl of rice, and a shack are considered good benefits, we will never compete with that.

[Missouri]

buchanan and his Mercedes...it sure was.

It's amazing how so many of the America firsters don't practise what they preach (for others).

This is a bad comparison. Germen auto-workers are probably more unionized than the auto-workers here in the U.S. and to compare trade with Germany to China and other third-world labor forces is not realistic.

Buchanan did admit that he was wrong for preaching "buy American" while buying German (For status, I guess) but the damage had been done.

[Cacophonous]

For status, or maybe he just likes the way it drives. Doesn't matter. Damage was done.

[FITZ]

Here's something else we didn't have back then --- tens of thousands of "displaced NAFTA workers" suing for more welfare benefits and suing the federal government for discrimination because it offered English language as part of job retraining. With free trade we gave away these unskilled jobs but we kept the laid off workers who we will now have to support for the rest of their nonworking lives which can be another 40 to 50 years or more. Why is it so great to have this new unemployable group of people? This group came from Mexico in the first place but not only won't you see them going back to follow their jobs, we're taking in millions of more ---the Mexican displaced NAFTA worker who no longer has a job in Mexico who must now find welfare in the USA in order to live.

http://www.tradeobservatory.org/news/index.cfm?ID=4476

[Cacophonous]

Good point. Thanks for posting that.

[CWOJackson]

So you believe it would be okay for Boeing to have a government protected monopoly in this country? You're not worried that Boeing Executive's wouldn't convince key Congress people to make import tariffs higher and higher on Airbus so they could keep jacking up their own prices?

[CWOJackson]

"...at least with tariffs it will come out of other countries pockets instead of ours."

Not at all, it comes from my pocket because that tariff is passed on to me.

[Missouri]

Airbus is subsidized by the government of France (and, I think, Italy and Germany

Excellent point. (4 countries subsidize Airbus, France, Spain, and two others).

Boeing would have been in big trouble right now if they had not merged with McDonnell-Douglas thus getting a hold of those defense dollars.

[CWOJackson]

So free trade with German is okay but not with other nation?

[CWOJackson]

Sounds like an immigration issue not a trade issue.

[FITZ]

There seems to be two industries doing fairly well in the current "free" trade economy. The healthcare industry and agriculture ----- both are very heavily subsidized by the federal government.

[niki]

It's a no-brainer what is going on. What our rulers are doing is "suicidal trade". The end game is global socialism. No more wars, social harmony, global integration, sustainable development, etc. "Free Trade" isn't about economics.

No nation will be able to survive without the other (except China because they aren't buying in). Just think how wonderful the world will be when America is dependent on other countries for military equipment.

No more middle class- the elite and the commoners. Global Utopia.

[CWOJackson]

So your answer is to give Boeing a government sponsored monopoly and trust that they won't "fix" tariffs through Congress to boost profits.

[Missouri]

What I was getting at is that FREE Trade between Germany and the the USA would be more FAIR than that with the 3rd world.

And yes Buchanan was damaged.

[FITZ]

The ones suing are older immigrants ---most have been amnestied during the 80's, some have lived here 30 years or more. It's a trade issue because when we set up NAFTA, their jobs went south ---but they did not ---they easily could return to Mexico, few have "assimilated" into US culture except for the welfare part. In this area there are huge numbers on welfare and double digit unemployment but the unemployed from Mexico are also pouring in. NAFTA wiped out the jobs they used to have there.

[CWOJackson]

Still sounds like more of an immigration and welfare reform issue.

[Cacophonous]

Imposing import tariffs does not create a monopoly for Boeing; it does just the opposite.

With tariffs on imports from unfair competitors, nothing stops Ford or Douglas-Curtis or "CWOJackson Air" or "Cacophonous Airframes" from making airplanes. Preventing unfair competition would ENCOURAGE domestic competition, lowering prices. Boeing could press Congress all they want; if they get undersold by "Two Guys and A Crescent Wrench Manufacturing" in Kiron, Iowa, all the lobbying in the world won't save them.

Then, of course, Airbus would see that is was losing business and start to play fair. Or go out of business because they can't outsell "Redneck Aeroplanes" of Montvale, Virginia. Either way is OK.

What Airbus already has is an effective monopoly because they are protected from going out of business (and hence from bad business practices, etc.).

[FITZ]

It sounds like the designers of NAFTA didn't take those issues into account. Or maybe they did.