Posted on 07/28/2003 6:36:40 PM PDT by RaceBannon
There has been a few threads on here where Free Trader enthusiasts have defended their view, and have been responded to by those who feel that Free Trade is not helping the American Economy, in fact, is part of the reason we are NOT going to see a great recovery any time soon.
I am one of the latter. The following is a cut and paste job, taken from my own comments on these threads, which I feel tell my side of the story.
Some of the points are repeatd, 3 and 4 times. That is because I feel they are the forgotten reasons and ideas why we are in what I believe are dire economic straits.
Feel free to comment.
Sit down and make a list of all the things the government spends money on that provide benefits to illegal aliens in some form or another (public schools, public hospitals, government-paid disability insurance claims, etc.). Then make a list of all those things that you don't think the government should be providing to illegal aliens.
Every item that you included on the second list should be eliminated immediately. Not just eliminated for illegal aliens -- eliminated for everyone. If you really want to see the U.S. become more competitive on a global scale, just imagine what we could do without the burdensome government costs to keep these things going.
If U.S. airlines buy subsidized aircraft from Airbus, then the French taxpayer is effectively subsidizing either the U.S. airlines directly (through reduced capital costs) or U.S. air passengers indirectly (through lower air fares than they would have had with "more expensive" Boeing aircraft). If I'm the French taxpayer, you can bet I'd be asking myself why I'm paying 50% of my salary in income taxes and $4 per gallon for gasoline just so Americans can fly to Disney World on a regular basis.
Please note that we do not live in the age of robber barons anymore. "Corporate executives" are hired by the shareholders of a company, and any profits that they make are also made by everyone in the company who owns any shares. The ultimate irony here is that union labor in the U.S. has reached the point where they don't even keep a straight face when it comes to their own interests. If you ask a UAW leader, he'll insist that we should all buy UAW-manufactured cars from Ford and General Motors. But if you look at his union's pension fund activity, you'll find that they are far more interested in a 15% return on Toyota (non-UAW) stock than in a 10% return on Ford or GM stock.
I agree with you that this country has a serious immigration (legal and illegal) issue to contend with. What most people don't realize, however, is that immigration is the only thing that is going to keep this country from sliding into a deflationary spiral similar to what Japan is going through right now and what Europe will be going through over the next 50 years. If there is any chance in hell that the Mexican immigrant sneaking across the border today is going to pay $400,000 for your house in 15 years, he's going to be permitted to sneak across the border. Because I've got some news for you -- if he isn't around to pay $400,000 for your house in 15 years, then there's a good chance that nobody will be paying that much for it.
Huh? Do you really believe that?
Can I get the U.S. government to finance my R&D costs, too?
Actually, then don't. I read a recent article about the myth of the superior quality of life in Western Europe compared to the United States. The research they did showed a surprising result: Something like 70% of Americans were happy with their lives, while only slightly more than 20% of Western Europeans were happy with theirs.
It turns out that 32-hour work weeks, six weeks of paid vacations, guaranteed lifetime unemployment benefits, etc. don't make for very happy people -- in fact, this kind of crap produces a nation of malcontents who get six weeks of paid vacation but complain that they deserve twelve.
Something to think about.
It IS government subsidization, however, when the government bails out an industry, like the airlines, or when it keeps a poorly run business afloat, such as Amtrak, especially when good business alternatives are available.
Airbus is federally subsidized by European governments. It was created specifically to compete in the US market, and committed itself to winning the market, even if it took losses (propped up by the European govs) to do it. It has lost money.
Just like Amtrak is artificially propped up because no self-respecting railroad can profitably run trains through every podunk village it runs across.
OK. So what does Airbus gain from all this? At its most basic level, this is no different than the guy who spends $5 to make a product and sells it on the street for $4. Any rational person would agree that this guy is a moron. And any person or government that feels a need to step in and pay him $1 to make up the difference is even dumber than that.
Probably.
Probably.
Most definitely, but only with the conditions described by Adam Smith (see post # 35).
It's not the same thing as subsidization, a guarantee to keep them in business.
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.