Skip to comments.
Republican Shocker: Free Trade's Not So Good After All
CNBC ^
| 10-4-07
| John Harwood
Posted on 10/04/2007 7:07:18 AM PDT by SJackson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500, 501-520, 521-540 ... 641-656 next last
To: Toddsterpatriot
If we have to ask a third party to enforce something, or if another country can ‘legally’ block us in the WTO - both scenarios are true - than that is a loss of sovereignty.
501
posted on
10/05/2007 5:53:40 PM PDT
by
pissant
(Duncan Hunter: Warrior, Statesman, Conservative)
To: 1rudeboy; dennisw; Paul Ross
Actually, I probably could have sourced the raw materials from other suppliers, I’m pretty sure I know what’s in those things. What I was lacking for this application was the manufacturing infrastructure and know-how to fabricate the raw materials into the finished product in a way that it would perform in the manner I required. Believe me, I looked around, all over the world. The Chinese supplier I found had bought their capability from firms in this country who sold out and then auctioned off in the international marketplace. The bottom line is that we are lacking a strategic capability that may cost us a crucial role in advanced technology. But some CEO somewhere is probably richer for their thirty pieces of silver. But the rest of us are poorer.
502
posted on
10/05/2007 6:02:54 PM PDT
by
chimera
To: zerosix
ding ding ding Knock out first round! I couldn't have said it better myself.
503
posted on
10/05/2007 6:03:54 PM PDT
by
SwankyC
To: narby
g_w: But the banks DID sell the packages of mortgages to a number of foreign banks, especially in Europe, some in Asia; so in a sense the sub-prime problem loans WERE enabled by free trade.n: I'm supposed to worry about that? Worry that foreign investors have a stake in maintaining our economy in good shape?
My line above, underlined, was a summary of a long-winded answer to your question,
The 1% that have Sub-prime problem loans are because of "free trade"? Did they import that house from China or something?
In other words, "free trade" (this time, in financial derivatives) *did* in fact influence the sub-prime housing market in the U.S.
Cheers!
504
posted on
10/05/2007 6:07:25 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: Toddsterpatriot
It's bad for America when China's currency is too low? It's bad for America when the dollar is too low? I'm noticing a contradiction here. Maybe you guys can clear it up for me? These aren't necessarily contradictions; there are different risks inherent to each condition.
If China's currency gets too low, they face inflation and high unemployment, if it has been held artificially low for too long.
Jim Jubak on msn.com has a good article on this, btw.
And a low dollar is good for our large corporations who export overseas, but not for most of the employees.
Cheers!
505
posted on
10/05/2007 6:11:23 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: dennisw; Toddsterpatriot
Plus no one adopts hands off policies in their personal lives. That libertarian bullshit gets thrown to the wayside. Example being toddster's foreign currency investments. He's hedged himself against the idiot (government) laissez faire trade policies he advocates on Free Republic Looks suspiciously like someone with a vested interest, at least on the outside.
If Toddster would present a cogent argument from first principles to back up his views, it would tend to increase the credibility of his position.
Cheers!
506
posted on
10/05/2007 6:14:15 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: 1rudeboy
Moreover, it's the statists who think that government's role be expanded and individual liberty curtailed in the name of some amorphous good. In other words, one's rational self-interest should be determined by someone else. That's BS. That would be true except for two things.
1) People often pursue irrational self-interest such as smoking, not wearing seatbelts, going through life 40 pounds or more overweight, etc. (I choose these examples because they are not controversial in the context of this thread.)
2) The societal costs of irrational self interest does affect other people considerable, giving them incentive and in some cases the duty to react.
Libertarianism is based on an idealized version of human interactions.
Cheers!
507
posted on
10/05/2007 6:23:47 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: Kevmo
I agree that the model can be changed especially with financial incentives. Students have different needs for personal contact and interaction in learning. The time is now for change but I do not see a champion for change. Everything that the existing education establishment touches leads to even higher prices. For example, online courses cost more than traditional classes at most universities.
Here are my principles to radically lower cost and improve quality of the higher education product:
- Commoditize the knowledge and skills
- Unbundle services
- Eliminate or reduce unnecessary requirements
- Provide standardized assessments of student outcomes
- Use communications technology to reduce labor costs and physical plant requirements
To: dennisw
Such as lowering our trade deficit to avoid a dollar crash. But instead the Feds are doing all kinds of other things they shouldn't. I am wondering if either they are in effect playing "chicken" with the Chinese over the peg of the yuan to the dollar and the limited float, or deliberately doing this in order to instill problems in China when the yuan suddenly *does* have to revalue.
(Recall that W. does hold a Harvard MBA.)
The communists haven't been through boom-and-busts yet, they don't know how to handle them.
Cheers!
509
posted on
10/05/2007 6:26:14 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: editor-surveyor
Those are true, but there are others--the elevating of net worth standards to qualify for loans is *because* the market for mortgage-backed-securities dried up, and also because the "margin of safety" built into the loans by ever-rising home prices was no longer there.
In other words, the risk of the bundled mortgages was defined in a time of slowly rising home prices with sensible loans; but over time the bundles reflected both highly rising prices and senseless loans.
Something had to give...
Cheers!
510
posted on
10/05/2007 6:34:26 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: Toddsterpatriot
I compared them to a grocery store since you were ridiculing me for their "small" profit margin.
And Wal-Mart sells food, too, including Chinese tilapia, for example.
Cheers!
511
posted on
10/05/2007 6:36:37 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: pissant
512
posted on
10/05/2007 6:38:18 PM PDT
by
Calpernia
(Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
To: zerosix
“That ugly reality has resulted in closed factories, shuttered up store fronts on Main Street and large big box stores selling cheap goods from third world countries using slave labor or worse yet, poisoned dog and cat foods, toys containing high lead contents that we don’t allow our manufacturers to use but mostly government regulations that strangle our manufacturing base while we make our enemies rich enough to be building up their military to challenge our military superiority one day.”
Oh, that was so well put. Bravo.
513
posted on
10/05/2007 6:42:36 PM PDT
by
flaglady47
(Thinking out loud while grinding teeth in political frustration)
To: grey_whiskers
I do find it interesting that some people complain about bureaucrats and bureaucracies, then turn around and claim
they know what's better for others.
As for people acting irrationally, in most cases they should have the liberty to do so as well. I'm not much of a libertarian . . . I'm a free-market conservative. Ronald Reagan observed that the two travel along the same path.
To: TChris
“As with most subject, it is ignorance which spawns fear. Too many do not understand the laws of economics, so they fear them instead. What makes prices go up and down is a mystery to them, so it’s treated like voodoo.”
You insult us all and make us to be a bunch of dummies. We aren’t. The theory of the laws of economics are not what is happening now in practice. We are being screwed daily by these trade agreements, and most of us know it. It’s unfair trade, not free trade, but you seem to miss that point. Maybe it’s you that is the dummy, while acting like an intellectual elitist.
515
posted on
10/05/2007 6:46:49 PM PDT
by
flaglady47
(Thinking out loud while grinding teeth in political frustration)
To: flaglady47
Thank you.
Quite frankly I'm tired of the "free traders (free for every country BUT us)as well as the "open (to all intruders) borders" crowd.
They are also some of the same people espousing freedom for everyone except the American people, American taxpayers and most of all American security and prosperity, at the expense of cheap goods and cheap labor (the cheap goods are being made by slaves and the cheap labor are our new underclass "residents.")
516
posted on
10/05/2007 6:49:16 PM PDT
by
zerosix
(Native Sunflower)
To: grey_whiskers
Libertarianism is based on an idealized version of human interactions.
If that ain't true nothing is. You can also say free trade and free markets are idealized versions
517
posted on
10/05/2007 6:51:48 PM PDT
by
dennisw
(France needs a new kind of immigrant — one who is "selected, not endured" - Nicholas Sarkozy)
To: All
I’m all for free trade as long as it is fair trade, i.e., not heavily manipulated by other governments to our disadvantage. As a former govt. weenie who worked in both Asia and Latin America I have seen plenty of the latter.
I also am not in favor of completely off-shoring critical manufacturing capability - the ability to feed the machine of war must be maintained in country.
518
posted on
10/05/2007 6:52:37 PM PDT
by
bluetone006
(The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise - Tacitus)
To: Toddsterpatriot
“Also 4.6% unemployment and a $13.5 trillion GDP.”
And a trillion dollar trade deficit.
519
posted on
10/05/2007 6:58:19 PM PDT
by
flaglady47
(Thinking out loud while grinding teeth in political frustration)
To: pissant
or if another country can legally block us in the WTO - both scenarios are true - than that is a loss of sovereignty. The WTO can't stop us from doing anything that we want to do.
520
posted on
10/05/2007 6:58:49 PM PDT
by
Toddsterpatriot
(Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500, 501-520, 521-540 ... 641-656 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson