The Perils of Protectionism

MSNBC (Newsweek) ^ | 21 March 2004 | George F. Will

[Lorianne]

Anti-globalization is the intellectual's Louis Vuitton luggage—a luxury for those living in societies with large social surpluses ....

Bob Kerrey, then Senator from Nebraska, sought the 1992 Democratic presidential nomination by advocating protectionism. In one ad, he stood by a hockey net, a trade goalie vigilant to block sinister imports. Voters were unimpressed because, Kerrey insouciantly says now, "they knew I was lying."

[tessalu]

USA is expected to police the world, feed the hungry, support Armies, and give hand outs around the world, and let them have our jobs too. Just how is this going to work out? Something is going to have to give.

[Esther Ruth]

If anti-globalism /protectionism has become the left's issue it is very hypocritical of them. Didn't they claim for so many months after 9/11, that the reason the terrorist hated us was because of our capitalism and wealth. If that be the case, then the left would and should want to export capitalism and wealth, so the rest of the world would not feel they only need resort to terrorism to express their hatred for us. This seems to be a cure for terrorism as far as the left's logic follows - we export capitalism, as a remedy for poverty and terrorism and they won't be angry at us and want to kill us.

[Lorianne]

Why are they "our jobs"?

How many Americans have bought products made in other countries?

[expat_panama]

Just how is this going to work out?

It's already worked out pretty well.  

Take NAFTA-- since '92 the US is better off with jobs, wages, output, in fact the main complaint is that it made other countries better off too (as if that's somehow 'bad').  Nevertheless, there are many who think that they're better off if they can convince us that they're victims so they can raise our taxes to protect them.  They're wrong.

[gawd]

USA is expected to police the world, feed the hungry, support Armies, and give hand outs around the world, and let them have our jobs too. Just how is this going to work out?

in a word, no. everything you've just said is false: none of those are expected from the US. BTW, "our jobs"? a job is something you earn from your employer/clients, lazyboy.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

RE If anti-globalism /protectionism has become the left's issue it is very hypocritical of them.

The left also supports Kyoto's goal of wealth redistribution. High taxes on our energy use with the funds going to "developing nations" to help them become developed nations.

It's mind boggling to see conservatives here supporting Kyoto's wealth redistribution objectives via "free" trade and dem Rat leftists opposing it. Go figure.

[Esther Ruth]

I am for free trade and globalism and exporting capitalism. The Left's socialist agenda and the right's exporting capitalism are exact opposites but supposedly with the same outcome, both have the same goal, with different means to get there, we can agree on that. Free trade is not wealth distribution - you misunderstood me - sorry. I agree with "The Perils of Protectionism". I was just pointing out the left's inconsistency - if they really want other nations to enjoy the wealth this nation has enjoyed they would agree to exporting capitalism, which is the only right way to bring other nations into the 21st century, and not by wealth redistribution. They claimed (wrongly) that lack of wealth and envy was the reason for 911.

[Nephi]

Globalist Republicans refuse to acknowledge that it was the historically protectionist policies of the Republican party that turned this infant nation into a world superpower in a short time, relative to world history.

The Republican party was consistantly protectionist until TR betrayed his nation and his party and split the party to run as a Bull Moose candidate, which got WW elected and marks the beginning of America's downfall. It is probably worth noting that when the Republican party was "Protectionist" it was beneficial for American companies trying to capture the growing American market. Now, anti-protectionist globalist policies allow companies to capture more profits by sending labor overseas.

One day, hopefully, conservatives will realize that globalism is the brainchild of communism.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

RE: you misunderstood me

I failed to make it clear that I was commenting in general.

But I will ask you, what does sending our technology, manufacturing, and IT-enabled services off shore and importing our goods and services from over there have to do with exporting capitalism?

It's jobs chasing cheap labor. Fine.

The Bush administration's US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick recently called India one of the most closed economies in the world. How are we benefiting beyond cheap labor? India is ranked more corrupt than even the corrupt government of Mexico.

I've practically begged pro-offshoring folks to provide valid sources supporting the benefits of transferring so much to Communist China. (Other than the cheap labor benefit.) I can find lots of disadvantages such as intellectual property theft (same problem in India) and technology transfers as a requirement for being allowed into the Chi-coms' "capitalist" zones.

We are just a few short years (about a lifetime) away from when governments began last century to murder at least 100 million of their own citizens. One of those governments is Communist China. IMO, the world ain't ready to enact a global social contract, a contract that requires free people to honor and respect. Most of the world is not free.

I am not for protectionism, more like, trust but be wary and verify. I absolutely believe that if other nations are to enjoy the wealth this nation has enjoyed some of them would rather take it from us than follow our footsteps. At least 100 million people murdered by their governments during my parents' lifetime and most of mine. One of those governments is a "valued" trading partner.

I am not looking to start something, :>) We just disagree on how far to go and how fast, I suppose.

[claptrap]

Excellent sumation, perhaps the globalists could site
exactly who benefits from our uncertain relationship with the Chi-Coms! Of course they cant use the trade balance figures they are rather one sided! Maybe a handful of millionaire business owners ( who buy their politicans rather than vote for them ) might testify to the wonderful
relationship they have with prison/country named China and
how well they have done in todays robust economy! No I suspect the globalists will soon be downplaying their previous delight for this new found global lovefest once
they have realized how the chinese have undermined our currency stolen our intellectual property and devalued the
work performed here in the U.S.. Another problem the
globalists will soon face will be selling their inevitable
world government to us lowly pedestrian conservativesAlso notice the globalists market their global agenda with platitudes and generalizations because the real facts and figures would show that the income generated by overseas
production stays overseas and encourages manufacturing
investment in places where forced labor is plentiful!

[claptrap]

Lorianne you arent suggesting that Kerry even cares about
the economy are you? His only interest is power, he has his
wealth he only needs more power now. Also are you a proponent of forced labor is that why you think dealing with
communists doesnt have a downside ? Are you in favor of a global centeralized government, that is the next logical step maybe you should rethink your unsupportable position!

[claptrap]

Why arent they our jobs, isnt this our country, isnt that our damn flag does everything go to the lowest damn bidder?
I hope whatever you're doing can be done offshore and your pink slip gets shoved right up your big fat nose and you can work at the stop n go for $7.00 an hour till you are 80 yrs old!

[claptrap]

Since 92 the Chinese have over 80% more nukes pointed in our direction exactly what has improved other than we
have cheaper crappier stuff to buy at the stinking Walmart?
Where are all these new jobs you trumpet? Why dont you break down output for us you know the details output of what
cars assembled out of plastic crap made in Mexico? Of course
you only can parrot generalities because you think your getting the bottom line from propagandists like Will. Open your eyes and look at where all the cheap and expensive stuff you have comes from! Remember corporations dont pay taxes their customers pay the taxes and gas prices dont rise the dollar looses value! If you think the prisoner/ chinese is better off because he made the crappy refrigerator parts you are using you need a brain surgeon!

[WilliamofCarmichael]

RE: the real facts and figures would show that the income generated by overseas production stays overseas and encourages manufacturing investment in places where forced labor is plentiful!

I remember a couple of years ago reading in the San Jose paper that silicon valley companies were trying desperately to get the Bush administration to let them 'repatriate' 80 billion (don't remember exactly). I guess the President said no and it just keeps on accumulatin' over there and the execs are still trying.

http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3321511

March 4, 2004, "Tech Execs Work Washington for Tax Help," By Roy Mark

Well, TechNet, "the 150-member exclusive network of CEOs and senior partners founded four years ago," is trying to make it all possible.

To wit, "Another key element of the TechNet platform is to build support for its two-year-old proposal to reduce the tax on foreign dividends from 35 percent to 5.25 percent for one year. Citing a J.P. Morgan study, Hock says the initiative would 'repatriate' more than $300 billion into the U.S. economy and create as many as a half million new jobs." [end excerpt]

300 billion dollars. Wow, that's almost as much as Morgan-Standley's Stephen Roach's estimate of 350 billion dollars a year we lose because offshoring just may be the chief reason that this recovery is not performing as classic recoveries performed in the past, in terms of creating jobs, and we are about seven or eight percent low on jobs.

But, hey! you can't git no catchy globalist platitudes out of figures like those.

[Esther Ruth]

Was sleeping their while the sun was down but now I'm up!
Globalism and exporting capitalism I believe are a win/win for all hopefully and prayerfully! I don't believe it is all about money - there are more than a few ways to bring freedom to countries who are communist and oppressed - and is very good way is by trading with them! Trickle down (freedom) works in commie china when we trade with them. ALL those people do not want to live in a commie country - they don't, their leaders want it communist but the oppressed don't have a say SO--- we export our material blessings at a price, and they export back to us, we're trading, their lives begin to change, they have industry, jobs, businesses etc and they gain power over the communist leaders, so much power that soon hopefully they will have enough power to change their government, it is happening - it is working - and we will help create a free China that will be able to put the communist and oppressors out of business because they are a majority. It is not always about the USA and it is NOT always about money. But in this case it is a win win for all. And in regards to the fact that it is unprecedented to do business with other countries like this, well of course it is - because of technology, look at the way the world has change in just 100 years!! We COULDN't do it back then if we wanted. Think horses, buggies etc as oppose to jets, huge cargo boats and info tech. This is a good thing - it really is. Think of the freedom we are bringing to other nations - not our losses, think of them. If we seek freedom for a neighbor across the street why not the one across the ocean. And the "game" will be played regardless - whether we are a main player or not a player at all.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

Again, I do not want to start a debate but I am compelled to respond to the rosy picture of Chinese on the way to freedom at last to pursue capitalist dreams. Truth is the Chi-coms permit "capitalism" in some areas of China. IMO it takes a social contract entered into by free people for capitalism to work. The answer I'm getting to the question "Who owns what in China" is, the Party owns everything.

To wit, Beijing Enterprises Holdings Ltd, an investment arm of the Beijing Municipal Government owns many companies including Beijing San Yuan Foods Co. Ltd., China's leading dairy product maker. They recently bought out China Kraft and plan global sales using Kraft product names if I recall a news item correctly. Who is going to stop them from infringing? Though San Yuan plans to "go public" with shares nevertheless, http://www.china.org.cn/english/DO-e/6794.htm reports that

"Following the move, San Yuan's current investors, Beijing Enterprises Holding Ltd. and Beijing General Co. Agriculture Industry & Commerce will become its major shareholders."

The Chi-coms know how to do Lenin's New Economic Plan (NEP) right. The Soviets in the 1920s made the mistake of actually giving the people (nepmen) the freedom to pursue capitalist dreams and then had to kill them when they became too successful and threatened the State.

[Lorianne]

The government shouldn't be in the business of telling businesses where to operate. If we don't like a certain businesse's practices, we can refuse to buy their products. How many people in the USA do you think have no foreign made products?

People who don't like offshoring or losing "our jobs" to workers overseas, should take a good long look at the products and services they buy.

Meanwhile, other countries are "offshoring" their work in America, for example, some Japanese and German auto manufacturer's. It works both ways.

[Lorianne]

In today's world protectionism is what is unsupportable. You either compete on the global scale, or you fail.

Look, if you don't like jobs going overseas, don't buy products from those companies who produce products offshore. Don't buy Nike products, etc.