Posted on 10/04/2007 7:07:18 AM PDT by SJackson
I've seen a lot of opinion polling, but my jaw dropped when I saw this result from our special NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll of Republicans in advance of next week's presidential candidate debate sponsored by CNBC, MSNBC and the WSJ. By a nearly two-to-one margin, Republican voters believe free trade is bad for the U.S. economy, a shift in opinion that mirrors Democratic views and suggests trade deals could face high hurdles under a new president.
Six in 10 Republicans in the poll agreed with a statement that free trade has been bad for the U.S. and said they would agree with a Republican candidate who favored tougher regulations to limit foreign imports. That represents a challenge for Republican candidates who generally echo Mr. Bush’s calls for continued trade expansion, and reflects a substantial shift in sentiment from eight years ago.
"It’s a lot harder to sell the free-trade message to Republicans," said Republican pollster Neil Newhouse, who conducts the Journal/NBC poll with Democratic counterpart Peter Hart.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
Free trade would be great if there really was a level and fair playing field.
The problem is that in the US the American consumer has the money. His apatite for foreign made products and services are un-satisfyable, but abroad you’re dealing with consumers with lower disposable incomes in most the world; people who can’t afford expensive high end products. Then you have the nature of the American market, which is highly deregulated in areas that are in fact state run in many places; a deregulated airline, banking, even many city services etc. The “hands off” approach of our government is in stark contrast to others, who play games with pinning currencies, impose import restrictions based on bogus environmental, health, and other reasons, or who have hidden taxes on imports etc.; you don’t see these games being played by our government like elsewhere. Finally you have a very world open heterogeneous society that has no real preferences for US made products; the American consumer will buy what brings him the greatest bang for the buck at Wal-Mart or at a car dealership may that be a Hyundai or a TV made in China, while abroad you’ll see much more loyalty to nationally produced products.
The US has a sound infrastructure; we have a highly skilled labor force and indeed in some areas are number one in skill sets (IT, biomedicine, aerospace). We have a low tax burden, productivity is among the highest, labor laws are generally favorable to business, and the US has a culture that is Judeo-Christian (ethics/time sensitive etc.), yet we loose out in trade because it is frankly impossible to overcome the obstacles placed in front of US business abroad all awhile Americans want to continue to consume foreign made products. The Boeing-Airbus issue is a classic example of this. You have American private airlines buying an Airbus because they see a good deal and greater profit margins for them if they buy the Airbus, yet a Boeing product that beats out the Airbus product in Europe gets passed over because the state run airlines will buy the state built airplane, no matter what. Like the boarder and greater immigration issue in this country, trade and the problems associated with it are not new. Trade is generally positive and a win-win situation like immigration if done correctly. However, like the illegal immigration issue, where our government has failed the people and nation, the trade issues we face today are largely because of administrations past and present that do nothing to correct a large problem that is not pretty to fix, so the answer is to ignore it, like the illegal alien problems facing us.
Also 4.6% unemployment and a $13.5 trillion GDP.
“Do I have a horrible “trade deficit” with the grocery store because I spend hundreds of dollars there every month without them buying a single thing from me?”
You forgot to credit Milton Friedman for that silly quote.
In phony “services.”
Do you mean that we have 25% unemployment, people in bread lines everywhere, falling housing prices, and tent cities? I understand, you are talking about Michigan with the protectionist and monopolist unions.
Dynamic economies with less regulated trade are a bumpy ride. On balance, however, less regulated trade makes everyone wealthier in the long run. You do raise a good point about military power. Less regulated trade has enriched China, enabling them to pour money into military spending. As long as China does not make war on us or others, I do not see a problem if they want modernize their armed forces.
I agree that we should enact policies that make us more competitive by reducing wasteful regulations, lowering corporate taxes, enacting market driven energy policies, retioinalizing litigation policies, and so on. Unfortunately, we seem to be heading in the opposite direction of competitiveness if the dims grab control in 2008. Less regulated trade with anti competitive policies is a very bad combination.
The DOW looks great, if you are a multi-National. Looks like arse if you are a small player trying to gain market share or a middle income worker trying to find a job.
>> Goolsbee graduated from Yale &etc
Yes, the man has impeccable credentials. And lots of em.
I recall that Anita Hill also had the Yale pedigree. But when she opened her mouth, she said things about Justice Thomas that I didn’t (and don’t) believe.
I don’t believe Goolsbee either. I don’t believe you can point to the unproductive class (government workers) and the service class (auto repairmen, dentists) and draw meaningful conclusions about whether or not trade policy is good or bad for the economy. That’s just a dumb argument, IMO.
I make my own mind up, free of the need to agree with him just because he has lots of degrees from places where other smart people have lots of degrees.
Off shoring and dumping. The effects of which are being covered up with massive debt because in reality the majority of Americans cannot truly afford the lifestyle they live.
What did Perot say about wages?
The American people gave it a fair shot, free trade hasn’t produced what the proponents promised
Which promises did not work out?
Your categories are not mutually exclusive. They are more like Venn diagrams, because everyone falls into category one. There may be some people that are also in category two, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t also reap benefits from free trade, too.
Yeah, I tried to spend some phony service dollars the other day and the clerk wouldn't accept them. LOL!
Damn Mind Control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I miss the good old days when over 50% of our workforce was in manufacturing.
“The term “trade deficit” is deceptive, because it’s not a deficit at all, any more than my fiscal relationship with the grocery store is.”
Your analysis is terribly flawed. First of all, the grocery store isn’t accumulating wealth and buying weaponry with it that it may one day use against you. The grocery store doesn’t have ideological differences with you that it will press at every turn. The grocery store doesn’t employ people doing jobs, to the exclusion of those in your household.
There is more to the equation, does our GDP support the trade deficit, in a similar manner to your household income supporting your grocery shopping. If the GDP doesn’t support the deficit, bad things can happen, just as if you use your credit card for groceries and don’t have the cash to back it up, you won’t like the result.
The manufacturing base is dead. Doesn't mean the city is dead. Cleveland is a rust belt city, no? Headquartered in Cleveland is one of the largest law firms in the world (Jones Day), one of the largest banks in the country (Key Bank) and one of the best hospitals in the country (Cleveland Clinic).
While Cleveland certainly has its share of problems, the city is by no means dead. Just because a transition is difficult doesn't mean it isn't worthwhile.
Go ahead. Post the numbers again. They don’t mean jack.
The Bush economic expansion, during which we’ve had the most “free trade” going on of any time in our history, is the most below-trend job growth economic recovery in American history. American companies are reaping profits from free trade, while Joe Lunchbucket isn’t.
The Free Trade Propagandists said that only low-wage jobs would be sent offshore. Then we saw large swathes of technology jobs sent off-shore. The free trade people obviously lied.
Another concern about free trade was product quality - would the third world nations producing our goods exhibit the same safety, quality and other standards that US companies did. The Free Trade Propagandists said “Suuuuure... the free market will take care of that!”
As we’ve seen in the last year, no, the free market doesn’t take care of that. The FTP’s lied yet again. And as we’re seeing even now, the Chinese won’t admit culpability for product defects and lack of safety standards, much less *fix* them. So the idea that the “free market” would remedy these problems is yet another FTP lie.
Here’s what the Free Trade Propagandists don’t and won’t admit: facts. They trot out economic theory this, and economists’ studies that.
All of it theory. Ever American knows that if you get three economists into a room, you can hear five sides of any issue you put before them. Economists are people who can’t even come up with correct numbers for GDP, job growth, etc in any given month. Their metrics for “sold” homes have to be wildly revised every month.
And you’re denigrating people for not believing them? Riiiight.
What Joe Lunchbucket knows about “free trade” is this:
1. He has to worry about his job like he never did before.
2. His wages haven’t increased the way they did in the past.
3. He has illegal aliens coming into the country to take his job, and management trying to figure out how to take the whole job out of the country.
4. And now, he has to worry about “what is in my food, toothpaste, dog food, etc?” and wonder if it is going to kill him.
Against that, all the theoretical mental masturbation of free-trade economists won’t do squat. That’s airy-fairy theory. Airy-fairy theory won’t displace what the American citizen accepts as single-point facts: Chinese dog food has killed dogs. Chinese toothpaste could kill humans - and has killed people in other countries. The Chinese are counterfeiting everything from toothpaste to Leupold rifle scopes.
There’s lead in children’s toys. Microsoft is being sued, Boeing is being sued and gamed behind the scenes in international markets. 30 to 40% of the guys swinging hammers down at the local building sites aren’t even citizens.
That’s what many Americans see as a result of “free trade.”
It has nothing to do with socialism, which is yet another grand economic theory - just like free trade.
Want to convince Americans of the benefits of free trade?
Get some people who aren’t economists to be proponents of same. Or put up an economist who will LOSE HIS JOB if he’s wrong as a proponent of free trade.
Then folks might listen.
“It’s like the socialized medicine argument, all of the emotion is on one side of the equation and you have to argue uphill everytime it comes up.”
If you wouldn’t be so emotional, it wouldn’t be a problem.
>> Don’t confuse category three (i.e., government workers and the service economy) with category one.
Trust me, I don’t.
I can’t figure out why you are lecturing me on that point. But I will admit that your lecture was a good one!
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.