Posted on 04/18/2005 6:37:40 AM PDT by A. Pole
Pitchfork Brigade bump!
Pat has a good pen!
It amazes me how freepers have rejected globalist liberal tax theory, but completely embrace, unquestioningly, global trade theory.
It is truly amazing that Buchanon rails against anyone who opposes tariffs, but doesn't seem to comprehend that that would only mask a tax system which, at its core and its foundation, confers a tax advantage on foreign producers above and beyond our own.
Trying to compensate for that with tariffs is like trying to put lipstick on a pig. We should enact the FairTax sooner, rather than later, so that US producers will no longer be handicapped by their own government's tax system. This would tremendously improve our balance of trade and, unlike discriminatory tariffs, would not invoke the wrath of the WTO and our trading partners.
Wow. Great article. I don't support everything Buchanan preaches, but his views on free trade are spot-on. Free trade = subsidizng Nazi China.
And before anyone asks: yes, I am more than willing to pay more for the things I buy in order to keep manufacturing jobs here. I think of it as the price of national security. A nation with no ability to make anything is a colony of those that can.
Karl Marx loved the idea of Free trade. Anything Marx was for, I'm against.
If all the countries were approximately equal in social and economic status, then free trade would be great, much as it is among the 50 states. But as we know, many (most?) third world countries are dictatorships or corrupt democracies that exploit the people.
I disagree with him more than I agree with him. But, when he's on target, well . . .
House Republicans who enjoy sporting Adam Smith ties should read a little more Adam Smith. In at least four cases, the father of free trade wrote, it must be "advantageous to lay some burden upon foreign (imports)," i.e., impose tariffs. Among Smith's reasons were "the defense of the country," "for the encouragement of domestic industry," for "revenge" and "retaliation" on nations that impose tariffs on one's own exports -- and to break open foreign markets.
Today, tariffs and taxes on U.S. exports entering China average around 30 percent. If the GOP were true to Smith, it would strip China of MFN and impose on Beijing the same tariff levels Beijing imposes on us -- both as retaliation, and to crack open the Chinese market to U.S. farmers and manufacturers. In 1997, we sold China a pathetic $13 billion worth of goods -- less than we sold to Singapore -- while we bought some 7 percent of China's entire GDP.
The thing is, they might be sending the raft over the falls, but they sure as heck ain't on it. Kemp and his cronies are well taken care of, no matter what the future holds.
Free trade dogma.
Buchanan cites facts, phil_will1 falls back on failed intentions and free trade theory.
We should enact the FairTax sooner, rather than later, so that US producers will no longer be handicapped by their own government's tax system.
Free trade subsidizes socialist economies. Tariffs and protectionism leaves them to twist in the wind, or rely on their own struggling economies for sustanance.
The US market is the market to be in for American producers or foreign producers. A NRST taxes American made goods at the same rate as socialist imports. The globalists still get their way.
I think one important point left out is not free trade but fair trade. Free trade works well when the living standard and business costs are of the same magnitude. Canada-U.S. free trade would fit in this example. Both are industrialized nations with not too dissimilar business and living environments. The playing field is level. Introduce Mexico and problems erupt. Mexican policies on salaries (very low and a maximum wage for foreign owned companies), banning foriegn real estate ownership, lower standards, etc., leads to an imbalance. Same with China. Free trade, with a level playing field, works by expanding the size of the market. Unlevel free trade, like with China or Mexico causes problems with employment, trade imbalances, etc. For example, how many U.S. companies are shipping goods to Mexico for Mexican consumers? If Mexico could grow their economy, then their citizens could be consumers of U.S. goods rather than cheap producers of U.S. goods for export since the producers can't afford the very goods they produce.
Precisely right! Good post, IMHO.
More free trade dogma.
While FDR did a lot of damage to the US, do you really think the US is as socialized as Canada? Free trade with Canada subsidizes their socialist economy just like free trade with the rest of the world's socialist economies subsidizes them.
Unlevel free trade, like with China or Mexico causes problems with employment, trade imbalances, etc. For example, how many U.S. companies are shipping goods to Mexico for Mexican consumers?
This is a point most free traders like to ignore and illustrates that the US market is the market to be in for the dreaded American producers, too, not just enlightened foreign socialist countries.
Communists view economics as a zero-sum game (nobody gets wealthy except at the expense of others) which is precisely the same view that protectionists have.
"Karl Marx loved the idea of Free trade. Anything Marx was for, I'm against."
Karl Marx was also a strong believer in a graduated (or progressive) income tax.
Kemp and his ilk are utopian radicals like many before them and to our bane with many more to follow. Their rhetoric always begins with utopian premises, and only if you press them do they attempt to answer specifics as it relates to real people other than their conspirators (think tank whores and their financial pimps). FTR I do think we need a better tax system that does not punish American based industry for investments here.
Just plain old BS from Pat..
So if we stop trading with China, they will become more politically free? Its worked great in Cuba, that's for sure.
Alexander Hamilton rose up from his grave, read your post, scratched his head, and scowled, "what's wrong with you, son?" :-)
The founding pops were mercantilists, remember? Nor were the early American economists to follow believers in tariff-free trade.
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.