Krauthammer: A ‘no’ to free trade is a ‘yes’ to China

The Albuquerque Journal ^ | May 15, 2015 | Dr. Charles Krauthammer

[2ndDivisionVet]

That free trade is advantageous to both sides is the rarest of political propositions – provable, indeed mathematically. David Ricardo did so in 1817.

The Law of Comparative Advantage has held up nicely for 198 years.

Nor is this abstract theory. We’ve lived it. The free-trade regime created after World War II precipitated the most astonishing advance of global welfare and prosperity the world has ever seen.

And that regime was created, overseen, guaranteed and presided over by the United States.

That era might be coming to a close, however, as Democratic congressional opposition to free trade continues to grow.

On Tuesday, every Democrat in the Senate (but one) voted to block trade promotion – aka fast-track – authority for President Obama, which would have given him the power to conclude the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a trade deal being hammered out with 11 other countries, including such key allies as Japan, Australia and Singapore.

Fast-track authority allows an administration to negotiate the details of a trade agreement and then come to Congress for a non-amendable up-or-down vote.

In various forms, that has been granted to every president since Franklin Roosevelt. For good reason. If the complex, detailed horse trading that is required to nail down an agreement is carried out in the open – especially with multiple parties – the deal never gets done.

Like all modern presidents, Obama wants a deal. But he has utterly failed to bring his party along.

It’s not just because for six years he’s treated all of Congress with disdain and prefers insult to argument when confronted with opposition, this time from Democrats like Elizabeth Warren. It’s also because he’s expended practically no political capital on the issue. He says it’s a top priority. Has he given even a single televised address?(continued)

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Just saying.

Last year we had a 342 billion dollar trade deficit with China. A new bad record, in a long history of ever-increasing terrible records with China.

This year, our trade deficit with China is getting worse, still.

[RC one]

It doesn’t really seem like free trade when there’s a $342 billion trade deficit. It seems more like getting bent over and ******.

[LegendHasIt]

Krauthamer is a fool.

Either he believes the lies put out by the corrupt politicians; that the deal is actually about free trade, and not about open borders and destruction of American Sovereignty,... or he knows what is really in it and likes the idea of a quick profit for his CofC and establishment political masters, at the expense of future generations.

If this deal is as good as 0bama says it is, why is it held as the deepest secret since the Manhattan Project, and so held secret by someone who everyone with half a brain knows is fully intent on turning the USA into a third world country.

If they will release the full and accurate text of this deal, and it IS all about free trade, then I’ll eat my words and all the crow anyone wants.

[gattaca]

I read a lot of newsletters about health issues. I found this interesting...

http://www.naturalnews.com/049682_TPP_trade_deal_government_secrecy_Republicans.html

[DesertRhino]

Think of this, its ONLY secret from the American people. The Chinese communists get to know every word in it.

Why?

[SpaceBar]

The ‘free trade’ after World War II he referes to, was heavily stacked in our favor. With much of European and east Asian manufacturing centers bombed out, post-war US industry was poised at best advantage to fill the vacuum. Those glory days are gone. Free trade now simply means doing it all in overseas sweatshops and forced labor camps far from the prying eyes of OSHA, the EPA, or extortionist labor unions.

[Mastador1]

It doesn’t really seem like free trade when there’s a $342 billion trade deficit. It seems more like getting bent over and ******.

And they are buying up American property like crazy, also having lots of woman vacationing here at the term of their pregnancies, I wonder why?

[nathanbedford]

To be sure, any trade deal, while a net plus overall, produces winners and losers.

And therein lies the rub. If Obama has sold out to Wall Street and the Republican establishment has sold out to Wall Street, only lunchpail Democrats (and Scott Walker?) are left to inquire after the interests of the middle-class. If we are shipping jobs abroad and importing illegal immigrants to fill jobs at home and neither Obama nor the Republican establishment is looking out for displaced American workers, that practice produces losers.

We see here the danger of accepting a general principle of failing to make room for the exceptions. Free trade implies a reasonably even playing field and if a free-trade society competes with the mercantilist society, dislocations in the former are inevitable because they are the whole point of the mercantilist policy. Now the fair trade country might believe that it is overall profiting by hollowing out a portion of its economy, for example the rust belt, to advance a different sector of its economy, for example artistic content spawned in Hollywood.

But the workers in the rust belt will simply have to pay a price for the prosperity in Bel Air. If Hollywood is better organized to pour campaign contributions into Washington than are the workers in the rust belt, K St. representing Wall Street which invested in Hollywood, will get its way.

If the nations on the other side of the agreement from America are China and India, the purblind rigid etiquette of political correctness forces our legislators to ignore the human capital being produced in engineering schools in these lands and especially to publicly ignore the human surplus being created in our universities in African studies, women's studies, etc. In other words, we cannot rely on our displaced workers being able to transition from a Rust Belt economy to a cyber economy and riots in our inner cities are periodically producing stark evidence of this reality. Community organizers cannot succeed unless there is social pathology and our policies are creating this pathology and that includes our trade policies as well add the war on poverty.

If China is advancing its students according to a brutal merit based regime and we are advancing ours in order to make everyone feel good, the progression is inevitable and the more we progress in this direction the more difficult it will be to inflict the pain necessary to correct course.

Trade on an international level involving nations in various stages of democracy and development is extremely complex and fraught with winners and losers. To entrust these matters to a communist and to a bought and paid for Republican establishment is the act of supreme folly. It is equally an act of supreme political folly for Republicans to miss this opportunity to tear the Roosevelt coalition asunder and render conservatism a majority political force for a generation.

[make no mistake]

http://www.naturalnews.com/049682_TPP_trade_deal_government_secrecy_Republicans.html#ixzz3aBuRsWbl

“• Destroy the Second Amendment and restrict the sales of firearms and ammunition to the public, as warned by Gun Owners of America Executive Director Larry Pratt.”

This better not be true.

[libbylu]

That answer is in text above - multiple trading partners, all horse trading in the open, deal never gets done. Was it the dickie morris article that got people thinking all kinds of nefarious things in the bill?

[RC one]

free trade is great.

[Born to Conserve]

It’s only free trade if both side have the same tax and mandate burden. They don’t.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Free trade is only one direction.

China gets to free trade America.

America does not get to free trade China back. China protects it’s markets, and it’s now the largest export economy on the entire planet. Americans cannot export things to China, without going through a huge monstrosity of import restrictions, during which time China learns now to make the thing, at which point they make it themselves.

America we have been sold out, by the people making the decisions about global trade.

They do not have America’s best interests in mind, it seems.

At all.

Sadly the GOP is going right along with the sell-off.

If democrats are alone in standing up for America on the issue of America’s trade position, I fear the GOP will be completely destroyed.

I am not kidding.

Not one bit.

[lewislynn]

If free trade has to have an agreement with covenants, conditions and restrictions...it isn’t free trade.

[Ray76]

An excellent post.

[nathanbedford]

And you have an excellent about page.

[RKBA Democrat]

The uniparty spin machine is working overtime on this one. It must have some really juicy perks for the crony capitalists in it. So congress should just pass it so we can see what’s in it.

Note that this article doesn’t discuss the more salient aspects such as how it could allow virtually unlimited immigration. But of course such an article wouldn’t.

[Gaffer]

If the complex, detailed horse trading that is required to nail down an agreement is carried out in the open – especially with multiple parties – the deal never gets done

Hmmm....quaint. One would think this is referring to Obama's approach with government, particularly in dealing with his own Congress. He seems to prefer the way of the dictator, action-no apologies afterwards. "Horse Trading" with Obama is to decide in secret and then present the fait accompli in a series of news conference lies and speeches.

I don't know much about the TPP, granted. But I do know Obama. And, I am squarely against anything that he has done or wants to do, frankly. Further, if our quisling Senate gives him this, then they would give him "Fast Track" authority over other actions.

Anyone remember "We have to pass the bill before we can see what's in the bill."

[RKBA Democrat]

GOA is bitterly opposed to this due to the potential for hanky panky. I guess on guns it boils down to whether you trust dear leader and his extra double secret trade deal, or do you trust Larry Pratt?

I don’t really trust anyone in Washington. And while i have had my disagreements with Larry Pratt over strategy, if he tells you the sky is blue, you can take it to the bank that the sky is blue.