Just How Free Is Free Trade

The Evening Bulletin ^ | February 20, 2007 | Joe Murray

[Publius Valerius]

Economics IS largely mathematics. While it does predict human behavior to some point, it is about making decisions based on mathematical outcomes.

The field of economics of 2007 is light-years beyond economics in the late 18th Century. Wealth of Nations was only published in 1776 and Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage--clearly one of the most fundamental principals underlying ALL economic trade in the 21st century--wasn't even published until 1817, long after Hamilton was being eaten by worms.

As long as we're looking to the Founders for scientific advice, how about a return to blood-letting? After all, George Washington thought it was a great idea and practiced it fairly regularly.

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Not only does it pay more than service industries,

Really? How much does Pat make? Or does he consider his job to be manufacturing newspaper columns?

[The Pack Knight]

I have long advocated the ending of the income taxes, and switching to a national sales tax, together with a "free market" access tax that foreigners would have to pay. I.e., a uniform revenue tariff that rewards moving production into the U.S. or keeping it there. Then with select allied countries negotiating mutual reductions of those tariffs..."reciprocity" is the traditional Republican policy.

I actually agree with you, to an extent. First of all, I of course agree that tax and regulatory restructuring is first step in making the US more competitive. Imagine if the US was not only the world's biggest consumer market, but ALSO a tax haven! Another impact few people talk about is that switching to consumption-based taxation would greatly encourage saving and investing, and that alone would put a big dent in the trade deficit. When Americans spend all their money while other people in other countries save and invest a lot of theirs, it should be no surprise when the US imports more than it exports.

As for using tariffs of our own in order to help negotiate the lowering of foreign tariffs... It could work, as long as we realize that by themselves the tariffs do nothing good for American workers or consumers. They raise prices here, and in the long run, they make US companies less competitive globally.

Everything I'm hearing about the Chinese now, I remember hearing about the Japanese 20 years ago. You won't be able to buy an American car, the Japanese will own everything, the Yen will be the world's reserve currency, etc. etc. Well, it didn't happen. Japan had a massive economic downturn in the 90s that they've only now recovered from. It happened precisely because their government tried to be the "man behind the curtain" and micromanage one of the world's largest economies. Sure, they're opening factories in the United States now, but is that a bad thing?

Mercantilist trade policies only work in the short run, as the Chinese are about to learn to their sorrow. There's no reason it'll work any better for them than it did for the Japanese. There's even less reason for us to emulate them with trade barriers and subsidies of our own.

[joe fonebone]

I could....started out on the plant floor, talked my employer into paying for my schooling..worked 10 hours a day, 6 days a week, went to school for 4 hours a day after work, while being married and having 2 little kids to feed. I get so damn sick and tired of listening to those who REFUSE to better themselves bitching about those that have. If you are not happy in your situation, get the hell off your butt and do something about it...and in closing, running a nutrunner, feeding parts into a machine, yes, anyone could do it. Now, the skilled trades are another story, and not part of my rant. An apprenticeship is equal to a degree, in my book anyway.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let us all move to service sector jobs before we remember service sector jobs require manufactured goods to exist.

Thank goodness we still manufacture a little in America, right?

[ClaireSolt]

Would you think the proper measure of a manufacturing base would be the output or the number of employees? If output remains strong, but the number of employees declines through attrition, then productivity and wages should go up. Only a professional whiner would object to that.

[Toddsterpatriot]

A vast understatement would be that, if you support socialism, we are never going to see eye to eye on this.

You haven't dealt with A. Pole before. He thinks socialism is great. He thinks we need more.

[1rudeboy]

Clearly though, the advocates for the phoney [[sic] version wouldn't know true free trade if it bit them in the rear end.

ROTFLMAO Perhaps the advocates of free trade need a protectionist to explain it to them?

[Toddsterpatriot]

What is called 'free trade' is actually thousands and thousands of pages written in 'government to government' deals made by lobbyists.

So you like fewer barriers to trade and lower tariffs, you just don't like it when they waste paper?

[1rudeboy]

Here's the lobbyist: "If you cut your tariff to 0%, I'll cut my tariff to 0%." So easy, even a caveman can do it.

[lucysmom]

Are you trying to tell me that a person working a manual labor job is worth the same amount of compensation as an individual with a coupla masters degrees, leading a multi million (or billion) dollar, publically owned corporation?

Certainly a person who works with his hands can't do as much damage to a business that a Carly Fiorina can.

No, I didn't say that. Odd that you would translate decent wages for a manual laborer into earning as much as a guy with a coupla of masters degrees.

A winner take all while the bulk of the population must share a few crumbs from the table economy, will not survive long.

If you don't like unions, then take a careful look at the conditions that created them.

If you want to earn more cash, GET A DEGREE........

And Marie said, "Let them eat cake." Thanks for proving my point.

[mikemc282002]

talked my employer into paying for my schooling

Opps, looks like you got a very expensive benefit. Didn't you feel overpaid? Why didn't you give up your job for the benefit the one world economy you love? You know, give back what you've taken out. Or is that just for people like me who are so lazy we paid our own way through college only to see our jobs eliminated in the name of quarterly earnings bonuses?

[The Pack Knight]

He thinks socialism is great. He thinks we need more.

This puts something I said on another thread in a whole new light.

"I swear, some of these people would vote for Trotsky if he promised to overturn Roe v. Wade."

Suddenly seems like less of a stretch.

[William Terrell]

Thank goodness we still manufacture a little in America, right?

And that little is vanishing apace. It is what we manufacture, my friend. How important are clothes? How important are components that are engines of war and national defense depend on?

Read the tags on the next batch of necessities you buy. Note where they are made. If we manufacture the statute from steel, but others manufacture his ankles from clay, what use are our efforts?

There seem to be two kinds of thought supporting what we are calling free trade. That which is enlarging itself off the inequity and that which is too stupid to twig on what's going on.

[Toddsterpatriot]

So easy, even a caveman can do it.

PJB is against it.

[Toddsterpatriot]

And that little is vanishing apace.

Little? $1.79 trillion? Vanishing? LOL!

[1rudeboy]

I've always wanted to ask this question: if your job was eliminated in the name of a quarterly earnings bonus, what makes you think it wouldn't be if your job/company/industry was placed behind a barrier of tariffs or other protectionist policies?

I mean, that executive who pulled the trigger on your job? Is he going to turn around and say, "what the heck, mike, you can stay--the Schumer-Graham bill passed."

[joe fonebone]

Yes, I did get a very expensive benefit. My education also benefited the company. As I gained education, my employer promoted me to fill openings. But, because he was paying my schooling, I was making considerably less money than the other guys who already had the degree. It was the price I paid for my education benefit. And no, I did not bitch or complain about my lower wages. So, my employer got back what he put into me, and more. If your job got eliminated for quarterly profits, perhaps you should evaluate your performance. An employer who is interested in making money usually lets the poorer employees go first, ya know, the ones that cost more than they produce.....also, they will eliminate the ones with bad attitudes...

[1rudeboy]

Did you notice that this column went immediately from quoting Pat, to lamenting the sorry state that DaimlerChrysler finds itself in, to suggesting that the problems of DaimlerChrysler are representative of our entire manufacturing economy, to Alexander Hamilton?

Add a bunch of statists barking like Pavlov's dogs, and you have a FR econ thread.