View Poll Results: Free Trade or Protectionism?

Voters
47. You may not vote on this poll
  • Free Trade

    29 61.70%
  • Protectionism

    18 38.30%
Page 5 of 17 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 162

Thread: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"

  1. #41
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    It's only positive for the workers in the country that work has been outsourced to. 5,000 jobs in China or India probably means 3,500 less jobs here in the USA. THAT is my biggest problem with all of this.

    Considering the wages Chinese workers make.23-37 cents an hour and 80 hour work weeks,about 75-110 a month, that number is way higher than 5000 jobs in China. If these workers in American were making at least minimum wage that would be 10-17 Chinese workers gaining jobs per American that lost his or her job due to outsourcing.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  2. #42
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    You have still avoided the main point of my comment. Let me see if I can re-phrase it in a way that you'll understand.....

    When YOU lose YOUR job to oursourcing, what are YOU going to use to purchase all of those less expensive products, Kandahar?
    I would get another job, as outsourcing would create more jobs in productive niches. In any case, public economic policy should be focused on the aggregate effects on people, not how it affects some particular individual. That's an emotional and illogical way to handle public policy.

    The cost of a product is immaterial when you don't have the money to buy it, regardless of how expensive or cheap it is. 5,000 jobs going overseas in our current economy likely means a whole lot more mouths to feed from the Goverment trough.
    Even if that were true (which it's not), unemployment insurance is far less costly than creating protectionist barriers to trade.
    In reality, the US wouldn't have any jobs at all if free trade destroyed jobs. We've been engaging in international commerce for most of our nation's history.

    Thoste 5,000 people are not just walking in somewhere else and getting jobs the next day. They're out of work. What is your plan for THEM?
    If they don't get new jobs, then they'll sit on unemployment for a while. Meanwhile, 5,000 people who are already on unemployment will get jobs at some new business that owes its existence to international trade.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  3. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I would get another job, as outsourcing would create more jobs in productive niches. In any case, public economic policy should be focused on the aggregate effects on people, not how it affects some particular individual. That's an emotional and illogical way to handle public policy.
    How many of these people who are being outsourced can just walk into another job, Kandahar? Especially in the economy we're dealing with right now? I'm sorry but the benefit to AMERICAN WORKERS needs to be considered before anything else. It's definitely one of the things I look at when making a great deal of my purchases. It took me an extra three weeks to buy my new Chevy HHR in 2008 because almost none of them were manufactured in the US. It took that long to find one that had been, and I wasn't able to get the exact vehicle I really wanted; but it was worth it to ensure it was an AMERICAN CAR.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Even if that were true (which it's not), unemployment insurance is far less costly than creating protectionist barriers to trade. In reality, the US wouldn't have any jobs at all if free trade destroyed jobs. We've been engaging in international commerce for most of our nation's history.
    Unemployment insurance is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. We would have plenty of jobs without free trade. They'd just be different jobs than what many of us are doing now, and I'm totally fine with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    If they don't get new jobs, then they'll sit on unemployment for a while. Meanwhile, 5,000 people who are already on unemployment will get jobs at some new business that owes its existence to international trade.
    You and I both know that's a load of crap. We are not gaining back jobs at anywhere near the rate that we are losing them; regardless of whether they're skilled or unskilled positions. This outsourcing is putting people in the poorhouse because there are not sufficient opportunities for them to replace their jobs.

  4. #44
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigfoot 88 View Post
    Do you prefer a policy of "Free Trade", which means no tariffs on imports, or "Protectionism", which means tariffs are placed on imports.
    I believe that in countries of equivalent law, free trade should rule. However, those whom subvert the laws of the industrialized world may have levies placed against them in order to account for the environmental and labor laws present in the industrialized nations (i.e. the West).
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  5. #45
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,114

    Re: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    Please explain to me how the roughly 750 call center and IS/IT people my company has laid off in the last 9 months are going to be purchasing ANYTHING when they don't have an income? It doesn't matter whether the item costs $79.95 or $19.95 when all you have is $1.95 in your pocket.
    if high costs forced the company out of business and all of you were fired, would you as a group be buying more? or less?

  6. #46
    Advisor jpevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-17-12 @ 05:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    338

    Re: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"


    It's way cheeper & we can keep an eye on them.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Reminds me of the story about milton friedman touring a mass-line project in China. He asked why they weren't using bulldozers and modern equipment, instead of all those people with shovels. The guide, promptly proudly told him that in China they cared about the workers, and wanted to maximize jobs. Friedman thought for a minute and then asked "So why don't you use spoons?"

    I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now. Bob Dylan

  7. #47
    Advisor jpevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-17-12 @ 05:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    338

    Re: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"


    That's exactly what they are doing with solar colectors, Dumping. They have decimated the U.S. solar industry, which makes the R's cheer I suppose, because President Obama loses face when U.S. companies that he subsidized, can't compete.
    One could be temped to think that there was some colution beteen the R's & Chinese. Because I could never figure out why they would attack the pesident & not the Dumping of colectors? Coinsidence, better alert Issa!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Unless they're actually dumping (i.e. selling merchandise abroad at a loss), countries don't "artificially set a low price on export goods." If they did they wouldn't be able to make any money. They sell their goods for as much as they can and no more, just like US businesses do.



    These things are luxuries for wealthy nations. It's patronizing to assume that YOU know the wages and conditions a Chinese worker should have, better than he does.



    I could create opportunities for "job creators" and workers if I robbed you blind, and then used your money to start a business. That doesn't mean I would be justified in doing so. Your desire to steal from foreign workers in developing countries (who are much worse off than US workers) is sad. And in any case, it doesn't even work. Even if you don't care about the world outside of your own borders, free trade is STILL better. It increases the purchasing power of Americans by lowering the price of goods, and it creates jobs in more productive sectors.

    I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now. Bob Dylan

  8. #48
    Advisor jpevans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-17-12 @ 05:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    338

    Re: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"


    Or be Nationalized.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    China is a country of 1.3 billion people.It will be a long long long time before the demand for labor far exceeds the supply. And when it does those companies will pack their **** up and outsource to countries where they can still pay **** wages and exploit the fact there is little to no worker and environmental protection laws. Companies don't outsource to uplift other nations. They outsource in order to exploit the fact they can a worker next to nothing and not have to worry about any environmental and worker safety regulations.

    I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now. Bob Dylan

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    if high costs forced the company out of business and all of you were fired, would you as a group be buying more? or less?
    I work in a regulated industry. If this company goes out of business, we're ALL in a lot of trouble.... when's the last time you saw an electric utility company go out of business?

    I understand that a company has to maintain profitability; but at what point does that mean you need to run 1700 hard-working, long-term employees out the door? The company I work for did exactly that last year. You know why?.... Because they'd promised a certain profit level/dividend to their stock holders and when they LOST the vast majority of their rate cases (which the promise had been based on winning all of), they couldn't make that level. So, instead of telling the investors they'd screwed up, they cut 1/5th of the non-union workforce to reach that profit level. Nevermind whether they could continue to run the business without those people.

  10. #50
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,593

    Re: "Free Trade" OR "Protectionism"

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    i prefer free trade with partner nations which adopt OSHA-type worker protections and the environmental standards that US companies must comply with. those that don't should be subject to tariffs proportional to level of noncompliance.
    That looks good on paper, but ALWAYS leads to nonsense. On need only look at U.S. agricultural policy to see this in action. We subsidize corn, so HFCS gets very cheap, so we then must subsidize sugar cane/beets to keep them "viable" and so on. It also means that ANY U.S. compnay that makes a product will become the "standard", creating tariffs to FORCE foreign goods to that price level.

    We see this with U.S. cars, as we PRETEND that union labor rates (and their rediculous pension benefits) are needed, so we apply tariffs to make that the "standard" even going so far as to bail them out when they fail to compete. The best approach is to allow free (but fair) competition. The only time competition is really "unfair" is when gov'ts subsidize production, as the U.S. is want to do.

    When we give an industry a "tax break" for example, that lowers their cost of production, relative to any competition that does not receive that same tax break, the major problem with "enterprize" zones and other goofy market force tinkering. While it may seem unfair that Mexico or China can undercut U.S. prices, it does NO good to prop up a U.S. business that ONLY has a U.S. market (the rest of the world is going to buy the cheaper foreign product anyway); that usually just makes that product a "U.S. only" added expense, simply to protect that ONE maker.

    Paying more for the same product is not patriotic, it is idiotic, forcing ONLY U.S. consumers to waste money just to prop up an industry. Manufacturing is only 12% of U.S. GDP and only supplies 9% of the U.S. workforce with jobs. Trying to "grow" that is foolish, since the real way to make money, as a nation, is to EXPORT not to simply consume more internally.
    Last edited by ttwtt78640; 07-03-12 at 09:17 AM.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

Page 5 of 17 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •