'One Free-Trade Ring To Rule Them All . . . .'

January 5, 2002 | adapted by Ironword

[Ironword]

THREE rings for the Republican-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Democrat-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal CEOs doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Communist China where the Shadows lie.
One Free-Trade Ring to rule them all, One Free-Trade Ring to find them,
One Free-Trade Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Communist China where the Shadows lie.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I think the problem lies when someone brings in US trade with the Chicom into a discussion about Free Trade.

You can't use trade with China to point out the evils of free trade, what we are doing with China is the opposite of free trade, to conduct "free trade" there has to be a free trader at each end of the exchange, that's not at all the case with China.

[IronJack]

The point here is that the Nixon-Kissinger policy of utterly delinked "free trade" toward the PRC has not brought about the social reforms promised -- in fact, the social situation grows worse under a prosperous CCP.

I'm glad you clarified that for the anti-protectionists. I'm not an advocate for trade protectionism either. Nor am I a hand-wringer over human rights; the United States doesn't have much in the way of moral high ground on THAT issue. But it's utter foolishness to arm your enemies. And make no mistake, every dime we spend in Beijing goes to buy rope for the People's Army. I'll leave it to you to figure out what they're going to use the rope for ...

This is far less an economic issue than one of national security. Yet we've laid down with the enemy, all in the name of cheap loungewear and overpriced athletic shoes.

[IronJack]

Few things in this world are absolute.

Except my vodka when Grey Goose is sold out.

And then, it's Absolut.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Actually, the slave trade did not almost destroy the US, the process of eliminating the slave trade almost destroyed the US.

The institution of slavery, in and of itself, is quite profitable; from the trade in humans, to their use as a cheap from of work force, there has always been quite a lot of money to be made.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Hey man! Happyu New Year!

[Torie]

This is far less an economic issue than one of national security

If so, then that would only involve a few products when it comes to trading with China. As to the balance, the trade might increase their standard of living a bit, as well as ours, but it is hardly an issue of national security. If we don't buy or sell from China, others will with the same goods at a slightly higher price, or transship ours.

The issue of trade with China is a prudential one, which turns on actual economic and political cause and effects. The devil is in the detail, not so overbroad sweeping nostrums of the kind that are so popular in this neighborhood.

Nice to see you back Arator. Don't tell anyone that I said that.

[Torie]

If we are going to bring up the matter of trading in slaves, we might as well add trading in anthrax and nukes. It is a non sequitor because the issue is not the trade, but that the product itself should not be in commerce.

[bimmer]

I kinda like your poem so I am gonna give it a J.R.R. Tolkien wannabe bump!

[Luis Gonzalez]

Until last month, the US did not trade with Cuba, officially. However, there is no lack of American products available to tourists in Cuban resorts, and the "special" stores for tourists. Goods are purchased in the US, and "bounced" off ports in nearly every Island in the Caribbean.

Several years ago, while I was in the export business, I sold three container loads of pool furniture to a resort in Grand Cayman through a Miami-based purchasing agency. I later found out that the containers merely changed ships in Grand Cayman, and continued on their way to Cuba.

[IronJack]

Happyu New Year to youu toou.

[Luis Gonzalez]

That's not the point I was addressing, my point is merely that I did not agree with the statement that slave trade nearly destroyed America.

[Luis Gonzalez]

LOL!

[Torie]

Speaking of Cuba, the university of which I am an alumnus is sponsoring a tour there this summer, lead by some sort of commie lib graduate student (Paul Ryer, doctoral candidate in cultural antropology). One of the events is attending some sort of communist party (Committee for the Defense of the Revolution) block party and dinner in Santiago. I am kind of tempted to go. What do you think?

[Arator]

The devil is in the detail, not so overbroad sweeping nostrums of the kind that are so popular in this neighborhood.

And would the name of that devil be Prescott Bush?

Nice to see you back Arator. Don't tell anyone that I said that.

Thanks, Torie. I'm not sure I'm quite welcome here yet by Jim Rob. If he asks me to go again, I will. But, he has to ask. Again. LOL.

[IronJack]

If so, then that would only involve a few products when it comes to trading with China.

Not so. Not when the trade deficit is used to fund an expansionist navy and purchases of advanced military technology. I'm not talking about us selling the PRC supercomputers or missile guidance systems. I'm talking about trade dollars going to purchase those things from Iraq, the Soviets, India, Israel, and anyone else who will sell it to them. If they don't have the money, they can't buy the tools of our destruction.

As to the balance ... it is hardly an issue of national security.

On the contrary. It is the ESSENCE of national security.

If we don't buy or sell from China, others will with the same goods at a slightly higher price, or transship ours.

A moral equivalency argument. We can't control what others do, nor are we responsible. But we have absolute control over ourselves, and a corresponding level of responsibility. I repeat, we are sowing the seeds of our own destruction, as well as living the ultimate hypocrisy where principles of democracy and human decency are concerned. Trade with China is unconscienable for any number of reasons, but principally because we are giving aid and comfort to the enemies of liberty.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"What do you think?"

The Moderator would have a nervous breakdown.

[Torie]

Actually the slave trade was the cancer, and it was touch and go for awhile as to whether the patient would survive in any recognizable form. Saying that it was profitable is to take a narrow view of what belongs on a balance sheet of assets and liabilities.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Prescott Bush?

[box221]

You are right that the American work force can't compete with made in China mainly due to our taxes and regulations plus our way of life, not counting $.25/hr wages for China. Such as; 40 hour work week, paid overtime, child labor laws, paid vacations, payroll taxes,health insurance, retirement plans, etc. The American worker pays more in taxes/hour then a worker in China makes/hour. Which wall and/or walls do you want build and/or tear down to level the playing field?

[Torie]

You miss the point I think that cutting off trade with China would give it little more than a common cold after a period of readjustment. The trading patterns would just change, that is all. The tread line of China's accretion of power would only be marginally affected, if at all. In the meantime, the world would become a more dangerous place. That is how I see it.