Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FREE TRADE IS A BAD IDEA
Bob Lonsberry ^ | 11/25/2002 | Bob Lonsberry

Posted on 11/25/2002 8:15:37 AM PST by SAMWolf

I hope they don't kick me out of the Republican Party for this.

But free trade is a bad idea.

For years it hasn't set right with me, and I've tried to figure out why. And now I know. It's because it violates a simple principle of life.

And that is self-reliance.

International free trade, while certainly necessary and useful to an extent, can easily be overemphasized to such a degree that it jeopardizes a country's economic self-interest and national security.

The United States is a good example.

But first, let's look at Mexico.

Under the North American Free Trade Agreement, all Mexican protections against American or Canadian agricultural imports are about to disappear. That means cheaper Canadian and American farm products are going to flood Mexico.

And Mexican farms are going to close down. The impact on Mexican agriculture is going to be immense.

Which means Mexico is going to be less capable of supplying its own needs. And it means a ton of farm workers are going to be out of work and headed north. And that's not good for anybody.

Just like it's no good that the United States has a dramatic trade deficit, that it buys far more from overseas than it sells. And that there are entire sections of the American economy which are dependent on foreign goods. For whole product lines, there simply are no American manufacturers anymore. From electronic goods to clothing to steel, we don't make things anymore.

And American corporations are closing domestic factories to shift manufacturing overseas.

All of which fits perfectly into the world of free trade.

And all of which screws us royally.

Because independence is good and interdependence is bad. Because interdependence is the same as reliance and that is the opposite of self-reliance.

And history teaches that -- without exception -- prosperity and security require national self-reliance. Americans should eat American agricultural products and use American manufactured products and channel their income back into the economy that produced it -- the American economy. When a nation becomes reliant on foreign products -- as the United States clearly is -- its comfort and peace are held hostage by the producers of those foreign products.

If a nation cannot produce what it needs -- as the United States now cannot -- it is in a precarious position that weakens and enslaves it.

We will be weakened as we exchange our prosperity -- hard currency -- for foreign products, and we will be enslaved as our national policy inevitably must be tailored to preserve our access to foreign goods. These are truths which have been understood and implemented around the world for centuries. To abandon them now is to abandon national self-interest and to doom the United States to premature but certain decline.

And it is to bring the same fate to many nations of the world.

In developing countries, lingering poverty and delayed development are tied directly to a failure to be nationally self-reliant. When nations feed themselves, they do not starve. When they manufacture their own goods, they don't go without.

When they understand that their consumer dollars must be recycled into their own economies, they do not long linger in recession or unemployment.

Free trade serves a very few at the top of international corporations, but it does not serve the average American. Rather, it takes away his job and his nation's strength.

Certainly, the flow of goods and produce around the globe is needful and beneficial, but so is protection, and buttering your own bread first. The sense of national economic identity must not be lost, and neither should the commitment to protecting American prosperity -- even at the cost of limiting free trade.

Our first obligation is to feed, house, clothe and prosper American families. Every thing else comes second. That must be our attitude. Just as Mexico and every other nation must have the same attitude about its people and its economy.

Independence is good, interdependence is bad.

Self-reliance is the key to prosperity -- for individuals and nations.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: freetrade; globalism; oneworlders
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 321 next last
Comment #141 Removed by Moderator

To: Texaggie79
So, in order to maintain our economy, we need to refuse to grow in technology and capabilities and stick with status quo? That ought to ensure our security in our economy..... sure.

--------------------------

What revelence does that have to anything I said? To put it bluntly, you are a combination of stupid, irrational, or uneducated. Weight the variables yourself.

142 posted on 11/25/2002 11:29:56 AM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
Yeah, sitting at a desk offering consultation, or coming up with software to solve a problem is FAR worse than standing on some factory line drilling holes.

Manufactuing offers the ability for those without skills and education to earn a reasonable salary. All that is required is good hard work. The work done in the manufacturing sector adds more to the value of the product than say, flipping a burger.

When we lose our manufacturing base, we cut the first rung off of the upward mobility ladder.

143 posted on 11/25/2002 11:31:58 AM PST by NY.SS-Bar9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RLK
No, I did't jest sit down and make it up, spoiled idiot child.

Hey, I can call names with you if you like. Look what you wrote and guess who the idiot is.

Go make up some more definitions goofy.

144 posted on 11/25/2002 11:33:02 AM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

Comment #145 Removed by Moderator

To: NY.SS-Bar9
When we lose our manufacturing base, we cut the first rung off of the upward mobility ladder.

The problem is that most here keep blaming free trade when they should be blaming the real cause of the above problem. Bad government policies which make it unprofitable or less profitable to do business at home. Blame the coersion of government and their bastard child, labor unions.

146 posted on 11/25/2002 11:35:49 AM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

Comment #147 Removed by Moderator

To: BrowningBAR
I give thanks to God and the Founders of this nation for our liberty.

The very liberty you seek to undermine with government control of private arragements. The founders would puke if they saw you equate what we have today with the freedom they envisioned.

You of course ignored the question about geography and God.

148 posted on 11/25/2002 11:39:05 AM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: RLK
The lack of education is showing on your side, I am afraid.

Sure, to a 10 year old, it would make sense that it's better to keep your job. After a college education, one realizes the benefit of supply and demand.

149 posted on 11/25/2002 11:40:18 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: NY.SS-Bar9
Manufactuing offers the ability for those without skills and education to earn a reasonable salary.

Well, you can thank your government for taking the ability of unskilled workers to earn a living, by having a minimum wage.

However, having less unskilled labor jobs will motivate those unskilled workers to become skilled and get educated, thus raising our standards.

150 posted on 11/25/2002 11:42:21 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
Although I'm clueless with regard to macroeconomics, I tend to agree. In any free market, the actual cost of labor always tends downward; since capital is always seeking the lowest labor cost possible, jobs will move to areas where labor is cheapest (the Third World) or low-wage workers will be imported to replace high-wage domestic labor (H1B visas). Eventually this race to the bottom ends; as the cost of labor approaches equity with the value of product manufactured, capital seeks "free" labor -- i.e. slavery or indentured servitude. Hence the explosion in prison industry in places like China; the "wage" paid to these workers is simply the cost of keeping them alive. Slavery is the ultimate minimum wage.

In societies that forbid slavery, the need for cheap labor instead drives the market for automation. In time, all jobs that can be performed by robots will be performed by robots, as consumers have repeatedly shown that they prefer lower prices even at the cost of a shoddier product or poorer service; most folks would rather pay a buck fifty for a crappy fast-food burger than $8.50 (plus tip) for a handmade sandwich; most people prefer to sweat out a cheapo airline fare instead of paying top dollar for an upgrade. Skilled labor and professions are resistant to automation, but in time even such high-skill jobs as airline piloting and tool-and-diemaking will be automated. In the end, only jobs that require human creativity (art, writing, cooking, design, etc.) will remain; all products will be manufactured by overseas prison labor or domestic machinery. The prices for goods will drop dramatically -- but without jobs and income, who will buy them?

I don't know the answer. I'm all for less taxes, less regulation, and the right to trade with anybody I please, but I see no end to the trend of lower wages, more automation, and fewer jobs. Perhaps automation and recycling technology will increase in sophistication to the point where it will be cheaper to simply give away most goods rather than to sell them; at that point, most people could simply "retire" and do what they wanted to all day rather than work. Yet that sounds suspiciously utopian -- if a thing seems too good to be true, it probably is.

So what's the answer to the global economic question? A return to feudalism of some sort? Autarky a la Francoist Spain? I'm hardly intelligent enough to even ask, let alone answer. All I know is that people need more than mere jobs; they need the satisfaction of doing something useful. "Man does not live by bread alone..."
151 posted on 11/25/2002 11:42:36 AM PST by B-Chan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

Comment #152 Removed by Moderator

To: Texaggie79
1) Becoming skilled / educated requires time and money and is often done over a couple of generations within a family. Doing "grunt" work, working overtime and learning a trade while you work is a viable means for upward mobility.

2) The minimum wage has little impact on manufacturing. Starting salaries are normally well above established minimums.
153 posted on 11/25/2002 11:53:54 AM PST by NY.SS-Bar9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: SAMWolf
Freedom; Bad Idea.)sarcasm

How about no free trade between states or even cities.
154 posted on 11/25/2002 11:54:14 AM PST by freeforall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BrowningBAR
Those damn foreigners!! We don't want em here, and we don't want to do business with them in their own countries either!!

Those are your words... not mine.

I never said they were. They are mine, I make them to point out that a prevailing opinion on this site is just that.

I only suggest that our business practices are not universally applied and accepted throughout the world. Free trade as advocated by Adam Smith is not on the agenda overseas.

I don't disagree, but what is the point?

I also point out the corporate America's abuse of the H1B system is causing native born citizens to be squeezed out of the job market.

You keep saying that but there is no evidence to support it. What there is evidence for is that the "native born" will not agree to the same terms of employment as theri competition. And being "native born" shouldn't be an issue.

For some reason, these comments are treated often with great hostility.

Not by me, which is not to say I agree.

155 posted on 11/25/2002 11:56:28 AM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Pylot
If shoes cost a dollar, what does that matter if you have not a dime in your pocket?? ...

...So, for all of you who so rabidly and blindly advocate total free trade post answers back to these questions:
1 - When nothing is made here any more, where will you work?
2 - When the majority of the country is unable to earn a living wage, who will you serve?
3 - What do you think constitutes a reasonable balance??
I don't know what the right answer is, but I do know that if we do not stand together, we will fall apart together...

Free markets simply put:

Necessity (need or want) is the mother of invention.
- If American workers are out of jobs, it is because those workers have fallen into the trap of thinking they can "coast". As in a previous example: If suddenly buggies are no longer needed, you MUST accept that life means change, and you then retrain yourself - new skills, or a new service. A large number (a majority???) of Americans have adopted the idea that life should be "safe", and thus will gravitate towards those who promise them a continuous saftey "net" to save them from life's little annoyances. In the end , like a spoiled child, having been given everything it wants, they are shocked and dismayed to find that the only one that gives a damn is the politician who says 'Follow me to the promised land of free milk and honey - I feel your pain and I will keep you safe'. Which really means keeping you from hurting yourself - doomed to never learning from your mistakes.

Supply & demand
- GREEDY corporations - or anyone for that matter - don't get rich unless they provide a good or service that someone else is willing to purchase. That is why Free Market Capitalism is the most moral of all economic systems - if the seller disrespects the buyer, the buyer will go somewhere else.

(Frustratingly)
I don't know how the early pioneers ever made it across the Great Plains without the Guvmint making sure they were treated fairly each step of the way...

Regards,

156 posted on 11/25/2002 11:58:39 AM PST by jonno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: NY.SS-Bar9
2) The minimum wage has little impact on manufacturing. Starting salaries are normally well above established minimums.

The minimum wage is the benchmark from which union scale is marked up in many cases, which is the reason for their support of it.

157 posted on 11/25/2002 11:59:22 AM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

Comment #158 Removed by Moderator

To: BrowningBAR
I answered your question.

Not MY question, you answered some other question.

I'll state it again. As a Christian, do you think God approves of treating people differently because of geographical location? Do you think he values "native born" people more than others?

159 posted on 11/25/2002 12:04:20 PM PST by Protagoras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

Comment #160 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 321 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson