Posted on 01/14/2017 7:14:50 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
If the Roman emperors ruled by edict, President-elect Donald Trump appears poised to rule by tweet. Even before taking office, Trump has discovered he can move the worlds largest global corporations with simple, 140-character tweets. And though his aggressive approach is winning politically, good politics doesnt necessarily mean good economics.
Voters see Trump fulfilling his campaign promises to close Americas borders and bring jobs back home. He is using the bully pulpit to stand up for workers by taking on the most powerful American companies, including Ford (F, +0.32%), General Motors (GM, -0.45%), Toyota (TM, +0.14%), Boeing (BA, +0.34%), Lockheed Martin (LMT, +0.76%), and United Technologies (UTX, -0.54%)/Carrier.
Thus far, no CEOs have had the courage to stand up to Trump. General Motors CEO Mary Barra has said the companys small-car production will remain in Mexico, but it could only be a matter of time before shes forced to change course. Trumps sudden tweets likely worry many CEOs who fear they may be his next target. Right now, most have just tried to stay out of his way. Some, like SoftBanks Masayoshi Son and Fiats Sergio Marchionne, have put forth peace offerings to invest more in the U.S.
(Excerpt) Read more at fortune.com ...
I thank you for making me dig that up. I, too, am keeping that link for reference.
You need to read it.
Of course trade creates losers as well as winners. Nothing I have written says otherwise. In a world with trade, compared with a world without trade (autarky), the gains of the winners exceed the losses of the losers. This leads to an opportunity for the winners to compensate the losers for their losses. Now, this compensation most often does not occur in the real world. This is a failure of the political system, and of policymakers’ creativity, not a failure of trade itself. Workers displaced via trade in the textile or automobile industries, for example, could receive compensation in the form of retraining and relocation assistance and maybe extended unemployment compensation. In my opinion , the latter should take the form of an upfront, lump-sum payment rather than a weekly check for a fixed period of time.
So it is better to pay off "displaced" workers, destroy communities, lives, property values, the nations industrial infrastructure, technical know how, national security and peoples self respect in the name of "free Trade"? I say bull shiitake to that. You may want to carry out Marx's grand plan but I for one won't be a "useful idiot" for the leftists.
So, I now have transformed in your mind from a Nazi to a Marxist. That’s quite a trick.
There have been many policies that create both winners and losers, but that doesn’t mean they should not have been implemented. Deregulation of industries like trucking, energy, and the airlines disrupted many workers’ careers, but the gains to consumers outweighed the losses of those workers. The challenge for policy is to find creative and humane ways to use these gains to make the “victims” whole.
I guess you are not familiar with Marx's opinions and discussions about free trade. They are quite extensive. Google that sometime.
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.