Traders Are Not Traitors (Outsourcing is good for America--and the world.)

The Weekly Standard ^ | March 29, 2004 | Cesar Conda and Stuart Anderson

[neutrino]

(Call the $10 fine a tariff, if it makes you feel better.) :o)

I'd call it M'lord Mayor of London if it would help fight offshoring!

[AM2000]

No it hasn't. And this isn't whining, this is pointing out the fact that our "leaders" have been entering into trade agreements that are completely unfair to the American worker. Other countries still keep safeguards to protect their people, when is our country going to start doing the same? Why does the American worker have to get the shaft every time for the sake of multinationals that are "American" in name only?

[SupplySider]

The Internet has changed the economic equation radically.

Yes, indeed. It has dramatically reduced the cost of transferring information. By what principle is it wrong that businesses should exploit that?

Innovation leads to change.As painful as the change can be, this is how progress under capitalism works. I don't see how government forcing consumers to use higher cost alternatives provides a net benefit to America.

[SupplySider]

Contrary to Friedman, being dependent on heavy trade only encourages terrorists. They can cause major problems by attacking the transportation system, or by destabilizing fringe countries along the trade routes.

Is all trade bad? Where would you draw the line? 100% tariff on all imports? Terrorists could disrupt domestic transportation, too. Shoud every man grow his own food and makes his own clothes?

[ARCADIA]

Is all trade bad?

No, revenue generating exports are good and the importation of some items is essential.

Where would you draw the line? 100% tariff on all imports?

100%, 1000%, or an outright ban. Tariffs are there to protect the local economy. There is no need to import anything that can be produced at home.

Terrorists could disrupt domestic transportation, too.

It is much harder to disrupt an economy that is virile and broadbased, then it is to choke off a few ports. International trade only facilitates terrorist activities.

Shoud every man grow his own food and makes his own clothes?

We are all free to do so. If it makes sense for you then by all means go ahead.

[Lael]

I think most informed Freepers ask the Question...How did a relatively minor change in the Fordney-McCumber Tariff precipitate the Great Depression...why are Smoot and Hawley being "scapegoated"??? Answer...to deflect attention from the Institution that really turned a minor downturn into a full fleged Depression, namely, the Federal Reserve through its manipulation of bank Reserve Requirements.

The commercial banks called in the business loans to such an extent, that tens of thousands of businesses went insolvent, fired their employees, and closed their doors.

Once again, I repeat my remarks about the Scapegoating of Smoot-Hawley and the REVISIONIST HISTORY vis a vis the FEDERAL RESERVE!!!In the early 1940's, people KNEW the FEDERAL RESERVE had done them in!!!

Tariffs...Shamiriffs...

Calling the LOANS on the BULK of small to Mid-size Business...EVERYONE KNEW!!!

The problem today is almost ALL so called BUSHBOTS have been willingly BRAINWASHED!!!

Of course, I had the "luxury" of learning "geography" and "HISTORY" for FIVE YEARS in grade school...we were TESTED on the CONTENT of the Smoot Hawley AND the FORDNEY-McCUMBER Tariffs...something you Public School survey...skim once over lightly...pupils swallowed...HOOK, LINE, and SINKER!!!

[A CA Guy]

A friend just told me his brother works now in Mexico regarding printing because they saved $60,000 in worker's comp alone.

I think it is a bottom dollar issue that moves these companies out.

We are too litigious!

[Lael]

grade school= Catholic School !!!

[RWR8189]

No, revenue generating exports are good and the importation of some items is essential.

Who is going to buy your exports when your taxing their imports at tremendous rates?

Tariffs are there to protect the local economy. There is no need to import anything that can be produced at home.

Does it really protect the local economy?  All tariffs do is have the government prop up failing and inefficient industries that cannot compete in the free market.  When domestic manufacturers have no real incentive to improve production techniques, they will not invest in new technology, nor will they find better and more efficient means of productions, because they have Uncle Sam propping them up and eliminating competition.

You also impede the creation of new jobs, and threaten jobs that rely on imports/exports to function.

In the end we all pay higher prices on all of our goods, imported and domestic, and any gains made in increased wages is eaten up by inflation

[SupplySider]

Is all trade bad?

No, revenue generating exports are good and the importation of some items is essential.

All exports are good but only essential imports are good? Are saying that we Americans are special and deserve better terms than other countries?

Where would you draw the line? 100% tariff on all imports?

100%, 1000%, or an outright ban. Tariffs are there to protect the local economy. There is no need to import anything that can be produced at home.

On the same principle, there is no need to import anything from another US state that can be produced in one's home state. Why not ban non-essential interstate commerce and protect Virginians, or Iowans, or whomever?

Terrorists could disrupt domestic transportation, too.

It is much harder to disrupt an economy that is virile and broadbased, then it is to choke off a few ports. International trade only facilitates terrorist activities.

I see your point here, but I think any reduced exposure to terrorism from limiting trade would have to be offset by the increased dangers of a world where no one trades. A poorer world is a less safe one, I believe.

Shoud every man grow his own food and makes his own clothes?

We are all free to do so. If it makes sense for you then by all means go ahead.

Indeed we are free to do so. But obviously most of us will live better if we produce some things and trade for the others. It wouldn't be easy to be one's own housebuilder, automaker, and plumber.

[Texasforever]

In the end we all pay higher prices on all of our goods, imported and domestic, and any gains made in increased wages is eaten up by inflation

The only effective "tariff" we can have is the one that we have now. A weak dollar.

[ARCADIA]

Who is going to buy your exports when your taxing their imports at tremendous rates?

We don't seem to have a problem buying Chinese exports; even when they tax US exports at 70%. If you have market leverage you can demand as much as you can get.

All tariffs do is have the government prop up failing and inefficient industries that cannot compete in the free market.

If a population of nearly 300 million can not generate a free market within its own borders, then the entire concept of a free market economy is wrong. On the contrary; it is by ensuring that the consequences of our regulatory actions impact our electorate, that we can promote a healthier market. The costs of our political choices should be reflected in the prices we pay. There is no better way to reduce the level of irresponsible legislation, litigation and torts, then by demonstrating that our products costs much more then they should because of it. Legislating our own industries to the brink while importing junk produced beyond our jurisdiction is an act of shear stupidity, and has nothing to do with the functioning of a free market.

[CrucifiedTruth]

Is all trade bad? Where would you draw the line?

First, who said all and when? Second, I draw the line called balanced trade. Very easy.

[CrucifiedTruth]

Terrorists could disrupt domestic transportation, too.

Much, much harder. Our own territory is much easier, much safer and much cheaper to defend. That's how nations appeared on the first place - to provide common protection of the territory.

Should every man grow his own food and makes his own clothes?

I answered this but there is more. In a sense the legislature should favor a reproductive structure of the economy. That is, there should be multiple internal suppliers of every essential good and machinery and they should not be all dependent on imports. If need be, the economy should be able to run on its own - may be at lower consumption rate but without interruption. So international trade is just augmenting the levels of consumption without holding the country hostage.

[CrucifiedTruth]

The only effective "tariff" we can have is the one that we have now. A weak dollar.

It's not effective though. The dollar is weak and the exports keep dropping! That should tell you that the economy is addicted to imports, we have lost reproductive ability, there're structural imbalances and we fail miserably at competition. All in all it's very hard and expensive to do business in US. The weak dollar ain't fixing it, don't be delusional. The legal environment favors monopolization, redistribution and predatory lawsuits. It goes much deeper than the dollar's value.

[Poohbah]

100%, 1000%, or an outright ban. Tariffs are there to protect the local economy. There is no need to import anything that can be produced at home.

You have no "need" to own an "assault weapon," or an SUV, or a home larger than 600 square feet, or more than two pairs of shoes...

Hey, let's just eliminate freedom, because it lets people make irresponsible choices. Once we execute enough people who disagree with you, I'm sure we'll have the glorious workers' paradise you seem to demand.

[ARCADIA]

You have no "need" to own an "assault weapon," or an SUV, or a home larger than 600 square feet

It not quite the same thing now is it? I used the word need in respect to the location of production. You are still free to buy, spend, and behaive as you please. But, it has to be produced here to protect your nation. I presume is something that you might care about; since it is the very mechanism that establishes your freedoms in the first place.

[Poohbah]

It not quite the same thing now is it? I used the word need in respect to the location of production.

SFW? It's the same mentality.

You are still free to buy, spend, and behaive as you please. But, it has to be produced here to protect your nation.

You contradicted yourself there.

And you're saying EVERYTHING has to be produced here?

OK. I take it you're willing to accept a substantially lower standard of living. Quite frankly, a lot of things that you insist on manufacturing here can't be sold profitably at the cost of doing business in this country. And a lot of other items will be demanding a larger share of your income, anyway.

Things like food, shelter, and clothing.

I presume is something that you might care about; since it is the very mechanism that establishes your freedoms in the first place.

Ah, the state establishes our freedoms.

You realize that's the Marxist mode of thought, right?

But that's not surprising. Your idea, after all, has been implemented by that economic powerhouse of the Pacific Rim, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

If that's what you want...well, feel free to learn Hangul and emigrate.

[SupplySider]

Is all trade bad? Where would you draw the line?

First, who said all and when? Second, I draw the line called balanced trade. Very easy.

I was asking if you thought all trade was bad because of your comment that 1000% tariffs or even a total ban would be OK. I think I misunderstood, and you were saying that a total ban just on non-essential imports was OK. I think this is what you meant by balanced trade. Please correct me if I am reading you wrong.

I still don't see, though, how we can take the position that all exports are good but only essential imports are good. Our trading partners would expect the same terms. That means international trade of only essential goods and services. But trade of non-essential goods benefits all parties enormously. That's what I was trying to highlight by asking if trade is, in princple, a good thing.

Are you saying that it's not the economics, but that the security risks to our country are so high that we should stop all non-essential trade? Cutting the world economic growth rate drastically is a high price to pay. I'd rather we get on the ball inspecting containers, etc. A poorer third world will be more dangerous to us, as the article was saying.

[SupplySider]

By the way, thanks for your comments. Your ideas got me thinking!