Why America and the world need free trade

The Prometheus Institute ^ | 8/2/2006 | M. Harrison

[Luis Gonzalez]

"If you must have a multi-hundred page book outlining the agreement, then it ain't really Free Trade, is it?"

There is a difference between freedom and anarchy. The existence of our Constitution does not take away from our freedoms, but rather protects them from the dangers of anarchy.

[Luis Gonzalez]

There is also a difference between "liberty" and "license."

[hedgetrimmer]

The fact that the Constitution exists does nothing. When Americans and their elected politicians defend it and abide by its principles then it will mean something. As it is, "free traders" repress our Constitution and the freedoms it guarantees with their global agenda. Their "trade agreements", effectively unconstitutionally created treaties, implicitly undermine individual rights and the right to elected representation, and Congress's authority to regulate trade.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"As it is, "free traders" repress our Constitution..."

That's the most absurb comment on this subject yet.

How can freedom suppress?

You seem to equate government control to freedom...it's an upside down world you exist in.

[hedgetrimmer]

"free trade" harms individual rights. Its that simple.

BTW, I equate government protection of individual rights with freedom.

[Luis Gonzalez]

No, you are placing communal rights over individual rights.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"free trade" harms individual rights. Its that simple."

How so?

[hedgetrimmer]

I am afraid not.

You seem to be inventing corporate rights as a way to supress individual rights.

[1rudeboy]

Our colleague hedgetrimmer stands firmly for the belief that, in order to limit government, one must empower government.

[hedgetrimmer]

How so?

When our tax money is used to enrich communists. If my rights were protected, my money would not be used prop up a communist economy so that Americans have to compete against a communist labor force with inevitably uses slave labor.

This happens because "free traders" approve of communism. They make money off of it.

"I have no problem with CPM as long as it wants to open up the economy," [US assistant secretary of state for south and central Asian affairs Richard] Boucher said.

This man is shaming America, and defiling the memory of the Americans who established this country as a beacon of freedom.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"When our tax money is used to enrich communists."

Trading with countries who use "slave labor" isn't free trade, so you need to redefine your definitions before entering into this debate; free trade can only happen between free peoples.

What you have a problem with is the regulation of trade by the government, which in fact is the only way that your tax dollars can go anywhere at all!

Here you are bitching about government regulation of trade giving your tax dollars to "rich communists", and standing for further government interference with trade.

Don't you feel a little foolish?

Free traders approve of free trade, communists approve of total government control of trade, which is what you seem to want to define as freedom...again, your definitions seem to be upside down.

The people who established America as a beacon of freedom would laugh at your notion that more government interference with trade equals more freedom, and that free trade equals less freedom.

Your entire argument sounds way too Marxist for me.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Our colleague hedgetrimmer stands firmly for the belief that, in order to limit government, one must empower government."

I noticed that.

The guy is a Marxist and doesn't know it.

[hedgetrimmer]

Trading with countries who use "slave labor" isn't free trade

In practice, yes it is.

The CAFTA is a "free trade" agreement which includes the Dominican Republic, correct? The Dominican Republic happens to use slave laborers from Haiti in its sugar industry. Don't you feel foolish?

You have a problem with Constitutional government. Thats why you promote "free trade".

[1rudeboy]

The government must be given the power to limit itself. LOL

[Luis Gonzalez]

"The Dominican Republic happens to use slave laborers from Haiti in its sugar industry."

You're so full of s#it.

I happen to know the sugar industry in the DR intimately, AND I actually KNOW the definition of slavery...you know neither.

The workers in the DR come voluntarily, leave when they want to, earn wages, receive housing, and don't have to be there if they don't want to. They could stay in Haiti and do...nothing.

Hardly fits the definition of slavery.

Then again, you seem to communicate in empty sloganeering designed by communists.

You want to disguise bigger government control as freedom....that's Fidel's tune and I for one ain't buying it.

[hedgetrimmer]

I happen to know the sugar industry in the DR intimately

Really? How is that?

[Luis Gonzalez]

You have a problem with the government imposing too much control over trade, yet you want more government control of trade in order to eliminate the problems created by the government imposing too much control on trade.

[hedgetrimmer]

Why do you say you know the Dominican sugar industry intimately? If you do you would know what the State department says about it.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Because I do.

These Haitians have a choice...stay in Haiti, or not.

They make a conscious decision not to stay in Haiti, and instead enter another country illegally.

When you make a choice to put yourself in a situation that may be detrimental to your own well-being, the consequences of your decision can hardly be called slavery.

No one is buying them or selling them.

Once again you are defining excessive government control and abuse of power as free trade, and continue to advance the notion that more government control of trade, giving the government even more ability to abuse their power, as some sort of solution to already existing government abuse.

[hedgetrimmer]

So you claim they are volunteering to be a slaves? By your logic, Americans can make illegal aliens slaves too.