General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFree trade makes countries specialize at what they do best. Jobs are lost to the sometimes medium
Last edited Thu Mar 21, 2013, 11:25 PM - Edit history (3)
sized corporations that are not the world's best. Fewer corporations in a country mean fewer people profiting as mid managers, stockholders, paid workers in a plant. Another reason why the rich get richer and the middle class gets smaller. Another reason why we need to have the discussion about how the country is going to share the wealth these huge winning corporations make by replacing humans with robots, outsourcing, free trade competition, etc. Because, like it or not, governments around the world have provided the environment for the best corporations to get bigger and richer. If not now, when do we have the discussion of large corporations place in OUR world. The right has done a good job of shutting that discussion up in the USA. That discussion has taken place in places like Singapore or Germany where there are partnerships between workers, government and business. If the right can keep us debating government's role in the economy, or free trade, they can keep us from discussing new relationships and how to slice up the pie more equitably. The debates on free trade and whether government is evil are mis-direction.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)applegrove
(118,642 posts)relationships that the government has fostered. Why? Am I so wrong? Is the West not marching towards free trade everywhere no matter how progressives feel? Is the USA not doing the business/government/worker partnership thing going on outside of north America? We never say to corporations "YOU GOT YOURS NOW HOW DO WE BENEFIT" because we don't want to say the free trade debate is over and the left lost.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)out at me was the Singapore thing. My information on Singapore is pretty antiquated, so please enlighten me. Last I knew, it was a fairly totalitarian environment combined with what I would describe as laissez faire capitalism, something I would normally oppose.
applegrove
(118,642 posts)Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)Too many externalities, plus it doesn't take into account the lobbying muscle and the oligarch's ability to "make" a country competitive or uncompetitive via manipulation of policy.
"Free Trade" makes plutocrats rich(er) If it didn't, they wouldn't give a fiddler's fuck about the rest of the world's development.