Skip to comments.Obama trade dilemma: Scant support from Democrats
Posted on 06/16/2013 12:38:54 AM PDT by Olog-hai
As President Barack Obama pushes an ambitious agenda to liberalize global trading, political trade wars already are forming, and theyre with fellow Democrats rather than with Republicans, his usual antagonists.
Obama is promoting free-trade proposals with Europe and Asia that could affect up to two-thirds of all global trade.
Both deals generally have the support of U.S. businesses. But labor unions and human rights and environmental groupscore Democratic constituencieshave so far viewed them cynically.
These organizations, and Democrats in general, say that free-trade deals can cost American jobs and lead to environmental and workplace abuses that would not be tolerated in the U.S.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Remember NAFTA? A continuing disaster for middle-class Americans.
--and Obama ran in '08 on an anti-trade anti-business platform. My guess is that this is just another scam. Plenty of talk to distract us away from Bangazi, IRS, metadata, Pigford, etc. etc. and when it never goes anywhere he'll blame it on someone else. From the article:
Both deals generally have the support of U.S. businesses. But labor unions and human rights and environmental groups - core Democratic constituencies - have so far viewed them cynically.
Let's face it, the looney left loves their import taxes and will never let go. They may lie about it but tax-cuts are just not on.
1. Free trade in all its forms is contrary to Democrat goals and aspirations. A controlled populace is pure gold to them.
2. The GOP shouldn't get a pass. Because of their love of tariffs we have the 16th Amendment. When they had control why didn't they kill the sugar tariff, the one that benefits 3-5 families?
Both parties are political and seek political solutions that satisfy their elite constituencies. Conservatives need to lever the natural conflicts between the elites to attain our goals. That's the only historically proven path to victory.
Let’s face it. This isn’t free trade. Ever try shipping products to Canada? For some reason, shipping is quadruple what it would cost to ship across the US. Then the customer gets additional fees. These free trade agreements only benefit the globalists and hurt real Americans.
Lewinsky remembers being with Clinton on President's Day 1996, when he spoke to a Florida sugar grower named something like Fanuli. Phone logs show Clinton spoke to sugarbaron Alfonso Fanjul that day.
Time Magazine, September 21, 1998.
Obama is promoting free-trade proposals with Europe and Asia that could affect up to two-thirds of all global trade. ... Both deals generally have the support of U.S. businesses. But labor unions and human rights and environmental groups -- core Democratic constituencies -- have so far viewed them cynically.
So Obama has Statist Free Trader GOP supporting him, and not Statist Free Trader Dems?
The problem here is that we have a lot of Anti-American Liberal GOP siding with Obama on this
Absolutely stupid to sign a Free Trade deal with the poster child of Failed Free Trade....the EU.
Marx was a Free Trader, Obama is a Marxist. Therefore Obama is a Free Trader.
The 16th amendment compensated for the loss of income due to the lifting of import tariffs.
—and Obama ran in ‘08 on an anti-trade anti-business platform. My guess is that this is just another scam. Plenty of talk to distract us away from Bangazi, IRS, metadata, Pigford, etc. etc. and when it never goes anywhere he’ll blame it on someone else. From the article:
Most of the party elite Democrats are Free Traders...and this “opposition” may be a way to get more spending for their states and districts
Obama, Clintons, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore (the point man for passing NAFTA), Barbara Boxer, George Soros, the UN, John Kerry, and a whole bunch of liberal Dems are big supporters of Free Trade.
Liberal Dems love Free Trade because you always get more government spending to cover up the failures of Free Trade
So would you be in favor of Smith and Wesson, Colt and Ruger moving all of the manufacturing to China?
I’d rather move you to China. Where you could learn about Marx, maybe.
Answer the question you coward.
I'm not in favor of any manufacturer moving to China. At the same time, I don't expect the state to forbid a manufacturer from doing so. That's right up your alley, Marxist.
So all of our arms manufacturing moving off shore wouldn’t make you stop and give pause on your radical position? At all? You wouldn’t fight against that from happening? You really are an un-American POS. Worse than I thought. You’d sacrifice the life of my children on your alter of “Free Trade”.
See what I mean? I answer the question, and off you go down your personal slippery slope. I really don’t know what’s more amusing to watch—something like this, or you getting all hot and bothered when I don’t play along.
Government has three primary functions. It should provide for military defense of the nation. It should enforce contracts between individuals. It should protect citizens from crimes against themselves or their property. When government-- in pursuit of good intentions tries to rearrange the economy, legislate morality, or help special interests, the cost come in inefficiency, lack of motivation, and loss of freedom. Government should be a referee, not an active player.
― Milton Friedman
Marx was Free Trader, 1rdudeboy is a Free Trader and Obama is a Free Trader. So what other Obama Regime policies do you agree with?
You forgot to add Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan, too. Both were Marxists, as well.
Wait you just said if Colt Manufacturing wanted to move its production to China you said the govt should step out of they way and let that happen. So something is disconnected in your position and Friedman's.
Is this the same Reagan that saved the US auto industry from total collapse by implementing import tariff quotas on imported cars in 1984?
The only area you are expert is in the landscape of the inside of your colon.
Import quotas, not “tariff quotas.” Please, if you intend to act like an economics professor, learn the terminology.
Yes they were import quotas not tariffs.
Say, how’s the U.S. auto industry been doing, recently?
Good to know. The U.S. Treasury might get all of its money back. As for the bondholders . . . well, about that . . . .
Hey guys, how about the idea that if someone makes a factory then it's his.
I say he can run it if he wants, or if he prefers he can move it to China. It's his business and not yours. OK, so I know some idiot's going to say aw yeah? well what about when it kills Americans huh? huh? Let's be clear. It's possible for a person to build, own, run, and move a factory without it being a bad thing. We already got laws for bad things and we need to enforce them; don't need new laws, taxes, and protection.
So would you be in favor of Smith and Wesson, Colt and Ruger moving all of the manufacturing to China?
If all of our arms manufacturers wanted to move offshore why we would we look at the free-trade position? Shouldn't we look at what is causing them to want to move in the first place? Like taxes and regulation?
Don’t be silly!
Absolutely. But you have to keep the patient alive for the medicine to work or even come at all. If a patient has cancer then death is a form of a cure.
Likewise If manufacturing is being overtaxed and over regulated moving it offshore is a cure but also a death of US manufacturing and security. Which is not a solution, just short sighted impatience.
One of the democrat techniques for surprising the opposition vote is to spread the idea on conservative forums that there's no difference between the parties so conservatives shouldn't bother voting. It got Obama reelected. My personal take is that there actually is a difference between the parties; I focus on policy; smaller gov't, lower taxes, moral virtues in society, etc. and I'm finding that there really is a difference in the policies being pushed.
-——labor unions and human rights and environmental groupscore Democratic constituencies
and many Brigadeer Freepers
One is not harder to do than the other. While I would never support a tariff of protectionism, if I did, I would still want to change the tax code and regulations before going for the protectionism. It would be just as quick.
Incidentally the day after the protectionist-in-chief made that 'you didn't build that' speech, he indignantly retorted how the "that" was referring to "roads and bridges". Right. You didn't build that roads and bridges even though you may have build those factory.
Right. And the Fordney-McCumber tariff compensated for the loss of what? Like all tariffs, it massively increased the cost of goods to all consumers, started a trade war, and, eventually, contributed to the depression. Good job, protectionists! Don't you guys live it when your unintended consequences some together?
I don't waste time fantasizing and bragging about what I would do about things I that don't, haven't, and won't do.
You and I have got no ability to say where Colt should be moved because we don't own it. Smith and Wesson does. We don't own Ruger because it's privately held. Right now one of the companies I own is B/E Aerospace Inc. (BEAV) and it sells this to the military--
I've already moved my company all over the world and if you don't like how I run my company then either learn to live with it or you can go get a company of your own so you can stick it wherever you want. The only other choice is to fantasize and brag about what you would do when you can't, haven't, and won't.
I take it back --RGR is public. Confusing it with Marlin, Browning, Beretta, Glock, Mossberg, H & K, Savage, Bushmaster, Remington, Winchester...
The Democrats propagandize about being for Americans workers and poorer Americans while they sabotage blue collar wages via immigration amnesties and mindless free trade. Disgusting liars but blame stupid Americans for buying their lies, being too lazy to look further
But at least the unions were saved. LOL!
Protecting US manufacturing has nothing to do with labor or unions. My position would be the same regardless if robots were the sole source of labor.
Send a message - End job exporting unbalanced trade deals - better to vote Third and lose than vote for the two perpetrators and lose.
If you look at the economic libertarians around here no wonder there is little hope for the USA. These so called Free Trade lovers justify their arguments because they look at economics in 2 dimensions supply and demand. There is a third inseparable dimension, politics. You cannot discuss economics without politics.