U.S., S. Korea reach free-trade deal

The Washington Post ^ | December 4, 2010 | Howard Schneider

[1rudeboy]

U.S. and South Korean negotiators agreed Friday to a free-trade deal that the Obama administration hopes will increase American exports by billions of dollars annually and create momentum for a broader push on free trade in 2011.

The pact is the administration's first major foray into the arena of free-trade politics, and officials said it may be followed by efforts to have Congress approve pending deals with Panama and Colombia, and reinvigorate the larger Doha round of global trade talks.

The deal marks a victory for President Obama, who was widely criticized after failing to secure the pact during his Asia trip after last month's midterm elections.

"Today's agreement is an integral part of my administration's efforts to open foreign markets to U.S. goods and services, create jobs for American workers, farmers and businesses, and achieve our goal of doubling of U.S. exports over five years," Obama said in a statement Friday night.

The South Korea agreement was first negotiated by the George W. Bush administration, but during follow-up negotiations the Obama administration won further concessions considered important to American automakers. Those include a slower reduction of U.S. tariffs on imported South Korean vehicles and a provision under which South Korea will exempt up to 25,000 of any American company's cars from its strict safety standards, as long as they meet similar U.S. regulations.

[1rudeboy]

ping

[expat_panama]

So what we got here is Obama wants to cut import taxes, let us spend our own money as we want, and he wants to help our allies that stand up to Marxist thugs.

ok....

[rbg81]

Has the United States EVER had a net gain (in either jobs or exports) from ANY of these free trade deals? Color me skeptical.

[1rudeboy]

Well, you could look at the size of the workforce in, say, the year 1800 and compare.

[rbg81]

Funny. But you didn’t answer the question.

[1rudeboy]

I wasn’t aware that you are looking for a serious answer. In any case, you asked about “net gain,” and I responded.

[Aevery_Freeman]

Well, at least SoKo threw us a bone for all the blood and treasure our military and taxpayers have donated to them over the last half-century,

What a shrewd camel-trader Obama is.

[WVKayaker]

How rude...

I'm a free trader. I think anybody should be able to buy anything from anywhere. With that statement, I must also say that in our original papers, we see the intent for imports to provide the tax base!!! Tariffs are a natural funding source and should be strictly enforced.

As for jobs in America, all we need is a Marshall Plan instead of a continuous bank bail-out. Spend the money on people, not yachts and offshore bank accounts. There are also lots of people who should go to jail, but instead will be rewarded.

[DugwayDuke]

Actually, the only ‘bone’ involved forcing you to pay higher prices for Korean cars.

[1rudeboy]

Tariffs are a funding source, yes (and "natural," according to the Constitution). But they are also anti-competitive . . . for example, it is difficult to find an economic justification for hamstringing U.S. producers in favor of those located in the E.U. When S. Korea signed its free-trade agreement with the E.U., it placed our companies at a competitive disadvantage.

The idea should be to find a way to make tariffs a funding source and an advantage.

[elpadre]

I favor free trade - it has always been the one-way “not so free trade” that has bothered me. We trade - they tax our stuff, we don't tax their’s.

[expat_panama]

What a shrewd camel-trader Obama is.

--which brings to mind why they're called 'the ship of the desert'.

[1rudeboy]

I think of Obama as more of a fainting goat.

[expat_panama]

Tariffs are a natural funding source

Agreed, and if we want more revenue we have to lower the rates.  People that use tariffs to control trade have to raise rates, and when they stop unwanted trade there's no imports for taxing.

[expat_panama]

No, you misunderstood.  Those are feinting goats, they pretend to faint in order to make the owners carry them around.

[struwwelpeter]

Curious.

First they embarrass Obama in front of the world by saying 'no deal', then they get backed into a corner with the mad dogs to the north and now sign on the dotted line.

Does Wikileaks have any new cables? Might be interesting...

[devere]

Free trade is a bad idea. In the long run free trade will not work without a common government.

A better idea is a revenue tariff to make international trade a revenue-neutral event for the government.
The government collects income taxes on goods and services produced in the USA, so they should collect an equivalent amount in tariff on imported goods and services (maybe 22% ?).
And then let foreign countries do whatever they want. There would be no more need for trade negotiations or free-trade agreements.

[NonValueAdded]

The deal marks a victory for President Obama, who was widely criticized after failing to secure the pact during his Asia trip after last month's midterm elections.

Exactly how? I wonder if the agreement was due to Obama backing off all the carp he attached to the Bush deal. Seems like a Bush win / Obama Fail to me.

[FromLori]

You hit the nail on the head with that first they make so many rules/regulations/taxes here at home that the company’s want to leave and take the jobs with them then they give an unfair advantage to other countries on taxes you would almost think they are purposely destroying our economy and with it our country.

It leaves me wondering why would they want to do that bring Americans down to the living standards of these third world hell holes?