What "Free Trade" Has Cost The World

[marmar]

via CommonDreams:




Published on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 by Campaign for America's Future
What "Free Trade" Has Cost The World

by Dave Johnson


If you take a job away from someone who is paid a reasonable wage because they enjoy the protections and prosperity of democratic government, move it across a border, and give it to someone living under a thugocracy, forced to work for pennies with no protections whatsoever, it should be just plain obvious that the worker on our side of the border and the worker on the other side of the border are not going to be better off. And when you do this on a massive scale it just stands to reason that most people on both sides of the border are going to be worse off.

But propaganda being what it is we were somehow convinced to try a worldwide experiment in taking good jobs from democracies and turning them into bad jobs in thugocracies. Now, of course, the experiment has run its course and we can see the results.

Worker Against Worker

Setting worker against worker enabled a few people to get really, really really wealthy and powerful and use that wealth to become even more wealthy and powerful. Our country is in decline, burdened by massive trade deficits because the ones with vested interests in cheap labor won't let us won't take on the mercantilists, burdened by budget deficits because those vested interests have bought low taxes and government subsidies, our infrastructure crumbles because multinational business leaders refuse to invest here, with no more need of us as workers, and the resulting hollowed-out middle class can't consume anymore. Other countries also suffer from similar stresses.

Out of this situation a new global elite has emerged, contemptuous of democracy and government and any power but the power of their own money. In country after country, these top few won't share the proceeds with their own, either, while they keep the world from approaching solutions. ............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/03/15-9

[xchrom]

1. Recommend

[OHdem10]

2. Repeat.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Populist_Prole]

4. Bookmarked for later. Thanks

[jacquelope]

5. So WTF do we do about it?

Why aren't anti-"free trade" activists organizing and making noise???

[blue97keet]

9. They are

March 11, 2010

CPA Members Advocate National Trade Strategy to 80 Congressional Offices

Members of Coalition for a Prosperous America (CPA) delivered a balanced trade message to over 80 House and Senate offices this week. On March 9 and 10, our members told Congress to refocus their efforts on developing a national trade strategy, passing a currency manipulation bill, and opposing a harmful trade agreement with Korea.

"We asked Congressmen across the country to agree on a pro-America trade and economic strategy," said Brian O'Shaughnessy, CPA's Chief Co-Chair and Chairman of Revere Copper Products. "Neither party is addressing the trade deficits that are gutting our economy. We can grow our economy and achieve full employment with a strategy to produce and invest here rather than offshore our industries."

CPA members asked Representatives and Senators to support a national trade and economic strategy that promotes investment and production in the United States. Key issues included foreign currency manipulation and border taxes. CPA members urged policy makers to pass The Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act of 2009 (H.R. 639 and S. 326) to address foreign currency manipulation. Massive foreign tariffs in the form of value added taxes are also harming our trade competitiveness. Unfortunately, many in the Administration and Congress are promoting a trade agreement with Korea which will cause more harm.

"Our agricultural products face a 35% currency tariff when selling to China," said Joe Logan, CPA Agriculture Co-Chair. "Congress should immediately pass the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act to neutralize this unfair barrier to America's farmers and ranchers."

"When my company exports copper or copper products, we must pay a 17% value added tax to foreign countries," said O'Shaughnessy. "The VAT is also used by trade rivals to provide massive subsidies when they ship products to the U.S. My company could grow and employ more people if Congress recognized this problem and addressed it effectively."

CPA members also oppose the Korea trade agreement which will further harm our trade competitiveness. "Government data shows that the Korea deal will not produce net exports or net job creation," said O'Shaughnessy. "The Korea deal also also has a 35% "rule of origin" provision which will incentivize Chinese exporters to use Korea as a profitable, low-tariff, trans-shipment portal into the U.S. market. Past bilateral trade agreements have stimulated a massive trade deficit. We need a new trade strategy for balanced trade and then negotiate trade agreements to carry out that strategy."

"CPA is a coalition of the people who make and grow things here," said Bob Baugh, CPA Labor Co-Chair. "We believe that America’s economic and national security is tied to a productive economy that creates good jobs. A vibrant American manufacturing economy is a bipartisan cause central to achieving that security. Congress must begin where it left off last year by taking action on currency legislation, a national manufacturing strategy and putting an end to bad trade deals."

"Our Coalition has persuaded many more members of Congress to support addressing currency manipulation, value added taxes, and a national trade strategy then ever before," said Dave Frengel, Chair of the CPA Pennsylvania Chapter, and Director of Government Affairs for Penn United Technologies in Saxonburg, PA. "U.S. manufacturers are globally competitive and ready to grow, but our government leaders must implement these solutions to leave the Great Recession behind us and create jobs."

"We approached members of both parties with the core issue for economic recovery, which is balancing our trade deficit so we produce more goods, food, jobs and wealth in this country," said Adam Parr of the Steel Manufacturers Association, a CPA member who participated in the Fly In. "The CPA Fly In offered a real opporutnity for three diverse groups to come together and advocate for real solutions to the economic problems that we currently face."

The Coalition for a Prosperous America is a nonprofit organization representing the interests of 2.7 million households through our agricultural, manufacturing and labor members.

[jacquelope]

10. Ooh, link?

Where's this story at? I want to spread it.

And where can I sign up/donate? Thanks!

[loudsue]

23. Here you go

www.prosperousamerica.org

[smoalne]

6. the invisible social hand

I agree with you that the current state of the economy doesn't
provide the most fertile ground for worker revolt against big
business.  Unfortunately there seem to be fewer people holding
onto the majority of the money these days.  What can you or i
do about this ?  We can first go the classical route and write
to our representatives and let them know how we feel about
collective bargaining (for instance) among other things. 
Otherwise, we can try to organize but keep it limited to
social networks and places outside of the workplace so that
our employers can't do anything to limit or ban our ability to
organize.  I live in an "at will" employment state
which means that companies reserve the right to fire an
employee on a whim if they choose to and without having any
type of legitimate grudge.  Frankly I think that these rules
need to change in order to restore faith in the economy and
the government that attempts (at least) to regulate it.  Too
much focus has been put on big business concerns to the
detriment of the individual worker.  Why would i want to work
for some entity that has the power to pink-slip me for no
other reason than that they feel like it ?  Why would i want
to spend time looking out for and increasing the financial
gains of a corporation that can put me on the street on a
whim?  That doesn't inspire confidence in me at all and I
believe should be looked into.

[loudsue]

24. Welcome to DU, smoalne!

I live in a "right to work" state, also. Oh, they've looked into it, alright. But big businesses win that fight. The labor movement has not been aggressive enough nationwide to put some pressure on the other side of this argument in the "right to work" states. The heads of the Unions, it seems, got a little too friendly with the businesses they work for since the reagan loonacy took hold of our country. The labor unions really did nothing to push workers rights....to push the message out there, to air our side of the story, in the propaganda mix.

[Enthusiast]

7. Okay, why lend support for more

trade agreements? Why is the Obama Administration acting in support of new trade agreements when the American people are dead set against them? We know what happened since NAFTA. Their side has no legitimate argument. Perot was right on the money. And so-called free trade has eroded national sovereignty.

[Ed Suspicious]

8. But...

Every time I argue against NAFTA and point out the harm it's done to my country they call me an isolationist who isn't with the times. And remind of how cheap the cheaply made shit is at Walmart now.

[Enthusiast]

11. Of course. They always make the same argument.

They insist global trade is here to stay so we might as well get used to it. I say fuck them. Why should we have our manufacturing removed from the nation and have our standard of living suffer for the wishes of the globalistas. Advocates of more trade deals are my enemy, I don't care what their party affiliation is.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

14. The other bogus argument is "What do you have against Third World people having good jobs?"

This is bogus because no country has ever made its way to prosperity through the type of pure "free" trade that the Economist and others advocate.

India? Yes, it has a growing middle class and thousands upon thousands of engineers--as well as 40% illiteracy and poor people who are worse off than ever because they can't afford the new higher prices for necessities.

China? What China practices is not "free" trade. It has tariffs galore. It also has uneven development, not as uneven as in India, but a huge gap between the rich and poor.

Korea and Taiwan and Japan? They always stayed fully in charge of their own economies. They welcomed foreign investment but made it clear who was in charge. Japan led the way in the nineteenth century, when it invited a British company to build a railroad. The British company offered to stay on and run the railroad for them, but the Japanese government said, "Thanks but no thanks. We'd rather have you train some Japanese people to run it." That was the Japanese approach. "Thank you for your expertise. Now get out of our way."

Korea and Taiwan served as sources of cheap labor in the 1960s and 1970s, but they insisted that the foreign companies train locals for technical and management positions and transfer their technology to the host country.

Meanwhile, Mexico, supposedly the glorious poster child for "free" trade, with its much touted "growing middle class," is unable to provide enough jobs for its people, and the farmers are being driven off the land by cheap agricultural imports from the U.S., which only adds to the unemployment problem.

"Free" trade is a cult like Libertarian economics. It doesn't work in real life, but the devotees never let that stop them. If you challenge them, they tell you that trade isn't "free" enough.

[jacquelope]

16. TIP!!! How to silence this argument FOREVER.

Remind them of this and they'll have nothing to respond to. I posted this on the Straight Dope forum, a bastion of pro-offshoring idiocy, and they frothed at the mouth for days over it... but they had no answer.

For America to benefit from offshoring the people of India, Mexico and other countries must remain desperately poor.

When their wages go up the benefits of offshoring diminish. The companies that offshored jobs to them, then choose to go elsewhere. This is happening in China and India now (they're moving jobs to Africa and Vietnam).

Companies that engage in offshoring consume their resources, pollute their skies and water, and depend on paying them rock bottom wages. When globalism brings everyone else's wages up (while driving ours down), there'll be nowhere left for the companies to go. By then, of course, we'll be totally broke.

[Enthusiast]

18. Right on! nt

[Enthusiast]

17. Exactly.

"Free" trade is a cult like Libertarian economics." They worship free trade just like free market solutions. The rest of us suffer from their policies. NAFTA is a disaster. Free traders are my enemies.

[Tumbulu]

19. Beautifully stated ! (nt)

[jacquelope]

20. Oh, and Tip #2 that'll destroy this argument FOREVER. Redundantly.

So if America stops offshoring jobs using tariffs then we are penalizing the Chinese and other poor peoples of the world?

Well, Margaret Thatcher once said, there's only so far you can go with other people's money. If this is true then it also applies to free trade:

there's only so far you can go by taking other people's jobs. What happens to these poor nations when we run out of jobs to export?


You can also point out that offshoring increases the national debt:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/americas-trade-deficit-is_b_823785.html

When our debt gets too far out of control, guess what - our dollar depreciates. This creates a NATURAL TARIFF that makes all imports impossibly expensive. So tell 'em this:

So we can raise tariffs now and push for fair trade, or wait until the dollar collapses and completely close America to the entire world as an export market without any of the evil "protectionist nonsense". What'll it be? A few trade-balancing tariffs or the total shut down of us as an export market? Take your pick. Or please, show us option C.

Again, you'll get either froth-at-the-mouth madness or silence.

[freebrew]

12. The day that JFK was assassinated...

so went his vision for America. We prospered, nevertheless for a decade from his ideas.
Nixon gutted the military service act, cutting the education benefits in half. Minimum wage was set well below a livable wage. Fuel prices skyrocketed under a repub administration.

No longer did the rich act as if this country was built by the workers. New generations of rich and newly rich sought to make the peons believe that herd work got them where they were.

Unions seeking to level the playing field got caught up in the lies and settled for less than the workers deserved. Corporations followed suit and took on similar benefit programs.

A simple method of understanding why we are where we are...

A janitor, a production worker and an engineer all get the same percentage raise, bonus, etc.

After 30 years, the income gap grows large. Now think of the CEO et al. Larger income, same percentage way more $$$.

Whatever happened to this prosperous nation? Sold out by the rich so they can make more $$ and power.
It's all in the history books, for now. Probably not for long...

[swilton]

13. US Foreign Policy = Free Trade

Sadly too many public officials and politicians equate democracy with free trade.

[Diclotican]

15. marmar

marmar

Free and fair trade have never existed as the only thing the big coperations are after, is more and more profit.. Fair and free trade, based on what humans need and wanted, would end the big coperations, tearing it down to the last micro-macrons... And the big coperations are not willing to let that happend at any cost

ANd fair and free trade, would have been based on giving workers a decent living wage, based on what is seeing as right all over. It would also given a worker the same right, and duties as a CEO... Today a common worker, have the same "rights" and the same "duties as serfs in the middle ages... Even tho the workers of today on techical terms are free and can go to others who want to get them better sallaries and other goodies.... THe fact is, that workers today, have less power than we had 20-30 or 40 year ago...

Carl Marx creed to workers in the 1850s.. Workers unite is still valid, as it is one of the few ways the CEO's can't manage to let us down the road to legal serfdowns again... Serfdowns as in the Middle ages, was not happening from one day to another, it took houndred of years from the first edicts under Deocletian, to the legal serfdoms in the early middle ages was a fact of life for everyone!...

Workers Unite.... It was true when Marx and Engelsk was making the first Internationale.. And it is true today...

Diclotican

[Selena Harris]

21. Have you ever noticed

when the word "Free" is used,it winds up costing the taxpayer a" very pretty penny"?

[midnight]

22. This is an excellent explanation why free trade is not free.... It's very expensive and the

working people are picking up the tab....

[jacquelope]

26. The high cost of low prices. n/t

.

[defendandprotect]

25. kr