Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

Should the United States fight global free trade, or embrace it?

In my opinion, fighting free trade is an exercise in futility. This is a quick and dirty run-down of my take on the issue, but take it for what it's worth.

If the workers in say Indonesia are willing to produce a widget for $1 and the workers in the U.S. are willing to produce the widget for $30, guess where the companies are going to set up their widget manufacturing facilities? If the U.S. government tries to persuade companies to manufacture the widgets in the United States through a variety of tax incentives etc., guess who is footing the bill for those tax incentives? The U.S. taxpayers, who will be subsidizing the production of goods that will be sold back to those taxpayers at less than ideal prices.

Moreover, the U.S. government can't stop foreign companies from manufacturing the widgets and exporting them to the U.S., unless they plan to erect various trade barriers. Guess who is hurt by trade barriers? The average consumer, who has to pay more for goods because there is less competition and/or there are more costs to companies exporting goods to the U.S. Trade barriers such as tariffs sound good when used against foreign companies, but they work both ways and hurt consumers by reducing product options and increasing prices to consumers.

I understand that some people have [I]legitimate[/I] problems with U.S. companies going abroad and exploiting workers. First, however, let me say what is not "exploitation." It is not per se exploitation to employ people to engage in somewhat unsafe labor for $1 per hour. Everything, including cash money, is relative. $1 is a small coffee at McDonalds to us, but can feed a large family for a day in many places. Second, if a job doesn't pay well and is unsafe in the view of a foreign laborer, that foreign laborer can take that into account and either not take the job or quit. The fact is that jobs with U.S. companies abroad are usually highly coveted. It's easy to say "those foreign workers shouldn't take those unsafe and low paying jobs with U.S. companies" when you live in Santa Barbara and not so easy when you live in a poor, rural province in China.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;425506]Should the United States fight global free trade, or embrace it?

In my opinion, fighting free trade is an exercise in futility. This is a quick and dirty run-down of my take on the issue, but take it for what it's worth.

If the workers in say Indonesia are willing to produce a widget for $1 and the workers in the U.S. are willing to produce the widget for $30, guess where the companies are going to set up their widget manufacturing facilities? If the U.S. government tries to persuade companies to manufacture the widgets in the United States through a variety of tax incentives etc., guess who is footing the bill for those tax incentives? The U.S. taxpayers, who will be subsidizing the production of goods that will be sold back to those taxpayers at less than ideal prices.

Moreover, the U.S. government can't stop foreign companies from manufacturing the widgets and exporting them to the U.S., unless they plan to erect various trade barriers. Guess who is hurt by trade barriers? The average consumer, who has to pay more for goods because there is less competition and/or there are more costs to companies exporting goods to the U.S. Trade barriers such as tariffs sound good when used against foreign companies, but they work both ways and hurt consumers by reducing product options and increasing prices to consumers.

I understand that some people have [I]legitimate[/I] problems with U.S. companies going abroad and exploiting workers. First, however, let me say what is not "exploitation." It is not per se exploitation to employ people to engage in somewhat unsafe labor for $1 per hour. Everything, including cash money, is relative. $1 is a small coffee at McDonalds to us, but can feed a large family for a day in many places. Second, if a job doesn't pay well and is unsafe in the view of a foreign laborer, that foreign laborer can take that into account and either not take the job or quit. The fact is that jobs with U.S. companies abroad are usually highly coveted. It's easy to say "those foreign workers shouldn't take those unsafe and low paying jobs with U.S. companies" when you live in Santa Barbara and not so easy when you live in a poor, rural province in China.[/quote]These are pretty much my sentiments exactly. I don't really think it's that big of an issue when we outsource our jobs, because with the capital that is created in doing so, it always seems like a job opportunity of a different sort is going to open back home. It makes sense. Capital and wealth breed innovation from the competition, and more elaborate projects are created that require more home grown workers.

I think one of the biggest economic myths is that the outsourcing of jobs increases unemployment. It doesn't really. It creates more jobs on the global level, and here in the U.S., it's essentially running in place.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

I'm a firm believer in trade but there is no such thing as free trade. That said, you can't stop trade, you can't contain it, you can merely delay the inevitability of a competitive world. The rest of the world is catching up and our manufacturing prospect doesn't look good at all. At some point all we'll be able to do is trade in intellectual property and services.

I do have a problem with free trade in the sense that corporations are taking complete advantage of cheap lobar to the extent that they are cutting corners they normally wouldn't be able to in the U.S. It's more of a moral issue for me than anything else. I have no problem with them setting up shop elsewhere if they abide by universally known labor laws. Give people breaks, let them take bio breaks without fear of losing their job. provide some semblance of health service, give them some time off, don't have child labors, don't blackmail their governments, and so on and so on.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

saden, you are right on the money. these other countries have NO rules to follow as far as emissions, work safety, and child labor laws. it needs to be established by someone, to keep the playing field level. and gtripp, i respectfully disagree with your statement that outsourcing jobs creates unemployment is a myth. i have seen this first hand in Pennsylvania. Armstrong flooring was a mainstay here in my hometown. it employed over 6500 people. now, that production facility is on the verge of being torn down. fewer then 200 people work there. both of my grandfathers, my wife's grandfathers worked there for over 40 years. these guys earned good enough money to raise their families, and live part of the American dream. i work at Alcoa. when i started, 15 years ago, there were about 1300 employed. now we are under 700. they always talk about how cheap everything we do, can be done in china. Hershey foods shipped 100's of jobs to Mexico. with probably thousands more in the future. our economy isn't able to sustain this drop in employment, with new jobs behind it. the production jobs leaving are all fairly good paying jobs. the jobs replacing those jobs are all 10.00 jobs. going from 50,000.00 a year, or better, to under 40,000.00 a year, or less, is a helluva change in life style

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

Saden,

I don't know that there are any "universally known labor laws." If you wanted to list all universally accepted labor laws, I'm not sure that you would come up with any list whatsoever. But, I don't believe that corporations should run roughshod over laborers abroad. I just don't know where the line should be drawn.

Dmek,

I believe that outsourcing does create unemployment. However, you shouldn't make decisions solely based on the fact that there is a tragedy of sorts taking place. Decisions about free trade should be made with an eye towards the consequences of those decisions. I don't think we can fight outsourcing effectively; it's simply the result of a new world economy. It's sad, but true IMO.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;425547]I don't know that there are any "universally known labor laws." If you wanted to list all universally accepted labor laws, I'm not sure that you would come up with any list whatsoever. But, I don't believe that corporations should run roughshod over laborers abroad. I just don't know where the line should be drawn.[/quote]

Universally know labor laws are what you, I and every American expect from an employer...Fairness and to be treated with dignity, the ability to take a day off if you are sick, to speak freely without fear of reprisal. I mean, why is it acceptable to have one set of standards for the western world and another for the third world? It's really not about the pay, it's about the other things. Some may say that's not a corporations job but what are corporations but a reflection of us? Of what kind of people we are?

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;425547]Saden,

I don't know that there are any "universally known labor laws." If you wanted to list all universally accepted labor laws, I'm not sure that you would come up with any list whatsoever. But, I don't believe that corporations should run roughshod over laborers abroad. I just don't know where the line should be drawn.

Dmek,

I believe that outsourcing does create unemployment. However, you shouldn't make decisions solely based on the fact that there is a tragedy of sorts taking place. [B]Decisions about free trade should be made with an[/B] [B]eye towards the consequences of those decisions[/B]. I don't think we can fight outsourcing effectively; it's simply the result of a new world economy. It's sad, but true IMO.[/quote]
i agree. but for the united states to be involved, there has to be something that they could gain from it. right now, we are gaining lower prices for just about all goods. is that worth the price of losing production jobs? that will never come back? in my eyes, the risk/ reward doesn't merit the U.S. to be part of the agreement

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

by the way sheriff, good thread

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=dmek25;425578]i agree. but for the united states to be involved, there has to be something that they could gain from it. right now, we are gaining lower prices for just about all goods. is that worth the price of losing production jobs? that will never come back? in my eyes, the risk/ reward doesn't merit the U.S. to be part of the agreement[/quote]

Keeping those jobs here would result in much, much higher inflation. You'd be singing a different tune when the cost of everything goes up 8-10% every year, while your wages go up no more than 3% per year.

Fighting free trade is the easiest way to drive your economy into the ground. Those in American manufacturing jobs simply must adjust. While that field is contracting, other fields are growing very strongly (ie healthcare). It's not easy for those people to just switch careers, but it's better than driving up prices for all 300 million of us who live here.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=Schneed10;425586]Keeping those jobs here would result in much, much higher inflation. You'd be singing a different tune when the cost of everything goes up 8-10% every year, while your wages go up no more than 3% per year.

Fighting free trade is the easiest way to drive your economy into the ground. [B]Those in American manufacturing jobs simply must adjust[/B]. While that field is contracting, other fields are growing very strongly (ie healthcare). It's not easy for those people to just switch careers, but it's better than driving up prices for all 300 million of us who live here.[/quote]
being in production, this has started almost 5 years ago. we hourly are ask to do 2, and sometimes 3 different jobs at once. you talk about switching careers. easier said then done. how is someone my age, with limited schooling, going to accomplish this? i say lets make the playing field even. how can something that's made in china get into the American market with lead paint on it? isn't there any guidelines that must be followed? why do i need to give up my job, to satisfy the Chinese economy. we American workers have proved time and time again, that no one can match our quality. lets bring the other countries up to our standards,. or lower our standards, so that we can compete equally

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=dmek25;425600]being in production, this has started almost 5 years ago. we hourly are ask to do 2, and sometimes 3 different jobs at once. you talk about switching careers. easier said then done. how is someone my age, with limited schooling, going to accomplish this? i say lets make the playing field even. how can something that's made in china get into the American market with lead paint on it? isn't there any guidelines that must be followed? why do i need to give up my job, to satisfy the Chinese economy. we American workers have proved time and time again, that no one can match our quality. lets bring the other countries up to our standards,. or lower our standards, so that we can compete equally[/quote]

Bringing them up to our standards would mean forcing our perceptions of quality on them - forcing them to pay minimum wage, give employees breaks, limit them to 8 hour days, force the countries to allow workers to unionize, etcetera. How would this be any different than forcing democracy down Iraq's throat?

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=Schneed10;425605]Bringing them up to our standards would mean forcing our perceptions of quality on them - forcing them to pay minimum wage, give employees breaks, limit them to 8 hour days, force the countries to allow workers to unionize, etcetera. How would this be any different than [B]forcing democracy down Iraq's throat[/B]?[/quote]

What? You're comparing economic negotiation to the use of force by military means? Cuba or Sudan would have been a more palpable comparisons.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=Schneed10;425605]Bringing them up to our standards would mean forcing our perceptions of quality on them - forcing them to pay minimum wage, give employees breaks, limit them to 8 hour days, force the countries to allow workers to unionize, etcetera. How would this be any different than forcing democracy down Iraq's throat?[/quote]
in my opinion, invading Iraq was one of the dumbest moves any American president could have done. it took an already fragile economy, and put it into a recession. if its not alright to have kids in America working, then why is it in china? for the simple fact that you can pay them peanuts. basically making them slaves. what about the emissions? its not alright to subject Americans to the dirty air, causing all kinds of health issues, but its OK to have the Chinese with the dirtiest air on the planet? and you have to answer your own question about Iraq, seeing that you are for the war. i say lets look out for our fellow americans first. then we get to help others

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=dmek25;425613]in my opinion, invading Iraq was one of the dumbest moves any American president could have done. it took an already fragile economy, and put it into a recession. if its not alright to have kids in America working, then why is it in china? for the simple fact that you can pay them peanuts. basically making them slaves. what about the emissions? its not alright to subject Americans to the dirty air, causing all kinds of health issues, but its OK to have the Chinese with the dirtiest air on the planet? and you have to answer your own question about Iraq, seeing that you are for the war. i say lets look out for our fellow americans first. then we get to help others[/quote]

First, the war did not put us into a recession. This recession, more than anything, was the result of the crunch on consumer credit thanks to the American public's unsustainable spending, culminated by purchasing way more house than many could afford.

But am I the only one that sees the inconsistency in your logic? Help Americans first, that's the reason we shouldn't go to Iraq. But at the same time you're saying we should stipulate that nations enact labor laws similar to ours, or else we won't allow our corporations to go overseas and offer jobs to those people? Both are forms of interventionalism.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=saden1;425612]What? You're comparing economic negotiation to the use of force by military means? Cuba or Sudan would have been a more palpable comparisons.[/quote]

Only in the sense that it's forcing our way of life on someone.

Using military force to push democracy, or using economic force to push our labor laws. The killing people part certainly is a glaring difference, but they still have one big thing in common: in both cases we're pushing an aspect of American life on other countries.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

you were the one to draw the comparison between Iraq, and free trade. and the only reason to have consistencies in free trade is to keep the playing field as equal as possible. the other countries involved don't have to absorb the cost of clean air. the minimum wage we have is to try and keep a certain level of life possible for those making below average wages. all American companies pay for this, one way or another. why shouldn't these other companies involved in free trade have to follow some sort of guidelines? doesn't it bother you when you see child labor being exploited? the work related death counts at most of the countries is far greater then we have here. shouldn't those businesses have to follow some safe work practices then would insure the workers a much safer work environment? and about the war and recession, you take the 100's of millions of dollars being funneled into the war, and put it back into the American economy, and see what happens

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=dmek25;425546]saden, you are right on the money. these other countries have NO rules to follow as far as emissions, work safety, and child labor laws. it needs to be established by someone, to keep the playing field level. and gtripp, i respectfully disagree with your statement that outsourcing jobs creates unemployment is a myth. i have seen this first hand in Pennsylvania. Armstrong flooring was a mainstay here in my hometown. it employed over 6500 people. now, that production facility is on the verge of being torn down. fewer then 200 people work there. both of my grandfathers, my wife's grandfathers worked there for over 40 years. these guys earned good enough money to raise their families, and live part of the American dream. i work at Alcoa. when i started, 15 years ago, there were about 1300 employed. now we are under 700. they always talk about how cheap everything we do, can be done in china. Hershey foods shipped 100's of jobs to Mexico. with probably thousands more in the future. our economy isn't able to sustain this drop in employment, with new jobs behind it. the production jobs leaving are all fairly good paying jobs. the jobs replacing those jobs are all 10.00 jobs. going from 50,000.00 a year, or better, to under 40,000.00 a year, or less, is a helluva change in life style[/quote]Good points dmek, and I'm not saying that there won't be people that get screwed by job outsourcing because their professional skills are the ones getting outsourced. The point here is that additional jobs are being created because of the capital that is being created by cheaper labor costs. Because corporations aren't pouring millions of dollars into domestic labor that could be done for thousands of dollars overseas, they can re-allocate costs to other areas of product development and improvement...which of course creates jobs.

It's unfortunate for those who are moving into unemployment, and it doesn't speak any ill about how hard they work or how deserving they are of the American dream, it simply means that the free market has deemed their skills obsolete, and that's going to happen (unfortunately) to good people.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

that i agree with. it doesn't seem fair that the C.E.O's keep getting bigger and better bonuses. while the ordinary Joe's basically have to take a pay cut, to keep their jobs

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

Unfortunately, the American consumers seem to prefer a lower cost over quality in production. I, personally, am not like that, but that's what the market values--so it's tough to prevent the people from getting the benefits/consequences of the choice they made.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=dmek25;425641]you were the one to draw the comparison between Iraq, and free trade. and the only reason to have consistencies in free trade is to keep the playing field as equal as possible. the other countries involved don't have to absorb the cost of clean air. the minimum wage we have is to try and keep a certain level of life possible for those making below average wages. all American companies pay for this, one way or another. why shouldn't these other companies involved in free trade have to follow some sort of guidelines? doesn't it bother you when you see child labor being exploited? the work related death counts at most of the countries is far greater then we have here. shouldn't those businesses have to follow some safe work practices then would insure the workers a much safer work environment? and about the war and recession, you take the 100's of millions of dollars being funneled into the war, and put it back into the American economy, and see what happens[/quote]

I think if you're going to take a hands-off approach in foreign policy, you have to take the same hands-off approach when it comes to telling other countries what their labor laws should be. Otherwise you contradict yourself.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;425700]I think if you're going to take a hands-off approach in foreign policy, you have to take the same hands-off approach when it comes to telling other countries what their labor laws should be. Otherwise you contradict yourself.[/QUOTE]

You do have a point. Shouldn't other countries' governments be able to dictate the scope and nature of their own laws?

On a related note, it seems somewhat paternalistic to say, "We are opposed to companies sending jobs to third world countries on the grounds that those jobs entail the exploitation of the foreign laborers." Shouldn't the foreign laborers decide for themselves whether they want to be "exploited?" Working in a dirty and sometimes dangerous factory for 50 cents per hour might sound awful, but if it isn't better than other available options no one will work there.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=Schneed10;425629]Only in the sense that it's forcing our way of life on someone.

Using military force to push democracy, or using economic force to push our labor laws. The killing people part certainly is a glaring difference, but they still have one big thing in common: in both cases we're pushing an aspect of American life on other countries.[/quote]

I am inclined to believe that it is acceptable to have standards and require others to meet your standards before conducting business. This is business 101. As a matter of fact this principle can be and is in fact applied in all phases of ones life. We consistently do it with respect to the politicians we vote for, the goods we buy, the companies we work for, what we choose to believe in, and even the kind of people we associate with. It's not a crime to have expectations.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;425725]You do have a point. Shouldn't other countries' governments be able to dictate the scope and nature of their own laws?

On a related note, it seems somewhat paternalistic to say, "We are opposed to companies sending jobs to third world countries on the grounds that those jobs entail the exploitation of the foreign laborers." Shouldn't the foreign laborers decide for themselves whether they want to be "exploited?" Working in a dirty and sometimes dangerous factory for 50 cents per hour might sound awful, but if it isn't better than other available options no one will work there.[/quote]

If that's the case, let's call them what they really are..modern day serfs living in a [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serfdom#Becoming_a_serf"]surfdom[/URL].

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=Schneed10;425700]I think if you're going to take a hands-off approach in foreign policy, you have to take the same hands-off approach when it comes to telling other countries what their labor laws should be. Otherwise you contradict yourself.[/quote]
i disagree. we have a ton of the Saudis money pouring into our economy everyday. it is a proven fact that they support terrorist camps in Saudi Arabia. our administration doesn't seem to have that big a problem taking their money

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=saden1;425740]I am inclined to believe that it is acceptable to have standards and require others to meet your standards before conducting business. This is business 101. As a matter of fact this principle can be and is in fact applied in all phases of ones life. We consistently do it with respect to the politicians we vote for, the goods we buy, the companies we work for, what we choose to believe in, and even the kind of people we associate with. It's not a crime to have expectations.[/quote]

Agreed. All I'm saying is that if you can force other countries to meet your expectations in order for them to get jobs, you can't really get mad at President Bush for forcing other countries to govern in a way that meets American expectations.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=dmek25;425748]i disagree. we have a ton of the Saudis money pouring into our economy everyday. it is a proven fact that they support terrorist camps in Saudi Arabia. our administration doesn't seem to have that big a problem taking their money[/quote]

I don't think you're hearing me. Or maybe you're just skipping past what I'm saying. What Bush and his Administration are doing has nothing to do with your philosophical beliefs and arguments. If I read you right, you're saying that to take manufacturing jobs to other countries, we should expect those countries to enforce American labor laws. Otherwise, we should deny those people the manufacturing jobs our companies can bring.

But at the same time, we should expect our government to allow other governments to rule however they choose, even if it's dictatorship?

It just doesn't add up.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

At the end of the day isn't this a simple economics problem? Or maybe not so simple? I think Schneed made a decent economic argument as to why free trade is what it is and how it works and I haven't seen much of an argument against it. At the end of the day after all of the emotional and moralistic arguments are made economics rule. We could try and use policy to even the playing field labor wise but economics wise it won't work in the long run. Rather than debate what is right or wrong I think what needs to be figured out first is what actually works. Or even if there is any real economic problem with the current state of free trade.

I'd support an even field in terms of tariffs because it drives me nuts that it is so uneven. That type of external force on the free market is destructive and should be balanced.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

Yeah this is about making the most money possible for our country. Some of what I say in this post may hit home for those in manufacturing positions, but skirting around the issues only serves to inhibit our understanding of the economic principles involved. Here's what happens with free trade:

Country A has highly skilled and highly educated workers, and thus the cost for their services is high. To make a widget in this country, it costs $20 per widget.

Country B has workers with few skills and little education, thus the cost for their services is low. To make a widget here, it costs $5 per widget.

Anyone making a widget would choose to make it in Country B and market the widgets to Country A. So Country B benefits by:
- Having plenty of jobs available that pay more than what they're citizens are capable of earning now.
- The increased wages in Country B means improvements in standard of living, greater investment in education, and the further development of skill sets in Country B's children. So because of these jobs, the children of country B's workers will get a better education, and add skill sets, allowing them to compete for even more jobs in the future.

Benefits to Country A:
- Cheaper widgets. Much, much cheaper widgets. In our modern economy, this plays out in the form of low inflation (we've managed to keep inflation at historically low levels for the last 15 years).
- The money we save on our widgets means consumers have more money to buy and invest in other things. Standard of living improves. More money is available to invest in education. Etcetera.

Country B is where America was during the 1800s and early 1900s. Country A is where America is now. Reason? Our workers have gained skill sets and education made possible by making a good living as a developing nation. In a nutshell, Americans are too highly skilled to be wasting our time manufacturing widgets. Our skills can be better used by managing the Widget Factories overseas, or as lawyers, doctors, researchers, accountants, insurance adjusters, salespeople, teachers, media distributors, etcetera.

Our country has moved ahead when it comes to skills. To live in this country and miss the boat when it comes to developing your skill sets to meet changing demand for services is a tough way to live. If your skills aren't keeping up with our country's [U]progressing economy[/U], I can see why that's a very emotional problem. But that's what economics is all about: competition.

Manufacturing is on the decline in this nation. It's a tough deal. But that's the direct result of our collective skill set developing. To inhibit that competition only serves to put us at a disadvantage. You want to keep the manufacturing jobs here? OK, it will cost our companies $20 per widget. Widget prices will go up, and we'll have no extra money to invest in education and our standard of living will stall. In the meantime, Country B is SOL, they don't get the manufacturing jobs. They're stuck in their crappy standard of living, with no new money available to invest in skills and education.

And the end result is the world makes no progress.

Free trade and competition are necessary for the world to make progress. The tough thing is some people naturally don't compete and get left behind. And that's sad because they struggle. But it would be even worse if our [U]entire[/U] nation struggled to find ways to fund a good education for our kids.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

scheed, i hear what you are saying. i just don't believe its in the united states best interests to be the worlds policeman. if we are ask, that's one thing. but to go into Iraq, and force our beliefs upon a lifestyle, isn't in our best interests. in that case, why aren't we invading North Korea? there are plenty of dictatorships thru out the world. why just Iraq? I believe all business should play with the same set of rules. the Chinese are very innovative. you set certain guidelines, in order to compete, and they will adjust. it makes me sick that the American company always has to be the one doing all the adjusting. its just not fair

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=dmek25;425775]scheed, i hear what you are saying. i just don't believe its in the united states best interests to be the worlds policeman. if we are ask, that's one thing. but to go into Iraq, and force our beliefs upon a lifestyle, isn't in our best interests. in that case, why aren't we invading North Korea? there are plenty of dictatorships thru out the world. why just Iraq? I believe all business should play with the same set of rules. the Chinese are very innovative. you set certain guidelines, in order to compete, and they will adjust. it makes me sick that the American company always has to be the one doing all the adjusting. its just not fair[/quote]

Actually, you wouldn't like what would happen if every country had to enact the same labor laws we have here. Prices for everything would be SO much higher. Your standard of living would take a direct hit because of it.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

and in your comparison, sure country a will have more money in their pockets. but without jobs, they are holding on to it. thus, part of the economic mess we are into right now. people are very wary of losing their jobs. i know a ton of people that are really nervous about their financial future. in theory, more skilled people should make more money, and with better jobs. its that big transition to that period that scares the hell out of me

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=Schneed10;425776]Actually, you wouldn't like what would happen if every country had to enact the same labor laws we have here. Prices for everything would be SO much higher. Your standard of living would take a direct hit because of it.[/quote]
i dont disagree with this. but the american workers future would be much more secure because of it. ill take higher prices any day of the week, if it means 10 years from now i still have my job

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=dmek25;425778]i dont disagree with this. but the american workers future would be much more secure because of it. ill take higher prices any day of the week, if it means 10 years from now i still have my job[/quote]

Problem is that anybody outside of the manufacturing sector would disagree with you, from a purely financial standpoint. Aside from manufacturers, not too many people would willingly accept 8-10% inflation just so manufacturers could keep their jobs. Most in the country would ask that manufacturers simply find another line of work.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=dmek25;425777]and in your comparison, sure country a will have more money in their pockets. [B]but without jobs, they are holding on to it. thus, part of the economic mess we are into right now. people are very wary of losing their jobs.[/B] i know a ton of people that are really nervous about their financial future. in theory, more skilled people should make more money, and with better jobs. its that big transition to that period that scares the hell out of me[/quote]

Saving money instead of spending it will temporarily hurt the economy, you're right, but the money still stays in our citizens' hands and will eventually be spent when the economy turns back around.

You'll note that even after the worst recession ever, the Great Depression, the economy still turned back around and bounced back. Same thing will happen here. Next year jobs will be back on the rise in the US, they just won't be manufacturing jobs. They'll be healthcare jobs more than anything (Uutrasound techs, MRI techs, radiology techs, nurses, pharmacists, etcetera).

But that's not what put us into a recession in the first place. We got here because too many people borrowed money when they couldn't afford to pay it back.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

This is a sticky situation and it's such a delicate and intricate situation you really can't tell what would happen. Yes, China has made mistakes with the lead paint, etc. However, we are so far in debt to China they could call in their debt and wreck us. China has more or less paid for the war in Iraq, they've been buying up our debt by the shit ton. So taking our business away from China could yield terrible results too.

I definitely feel for the laborers. I've done manual labor for a while. From when I finished high school for a few years and now I work summers doing manual labor. I don't think the doom and gloom is quite there. While many of the large companies will pack up, there will be small businesses that it's not worth to leave the country due to initial costs, importing, shipping time, etc.

I really do hate the environmental standards in many of these foreign countries. Honestly, I'm not very happy with the united states precautions. I recently read an article about the Ganges river in India and the extent of it's pollution is disgusting. Some of it is from poor sanitation (dumping human waste from cities into a river is a bad idea), but a lot of it is from toxic chemicals.

For the sake of America's economy, it's necessary to outsource. As people have mentioned, the price of American labor would shoot the price of products up by a ton and I doubt wages would follow that. I feel like a lot of the manual labor that can leave, more or less has. Lots of manual labor will still be needed within the US. I see us going outside the country a lot more for software development and help desk (even more than now) as we go forward.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[QUOTE=dmek25;425778]i dont disagree with this. but the american workers future would be much more secure because of it. ill take higher prices any day of the week, if it means 10 years from now i still have my job[/QUOTE]

the problem with this is that having that job will mean so much less because prices are higher.

Economics as a guide utilizes the macro view while what you are focusing on is the micro view. Schneed is simply saying that for our country as a whole it would be better to continue to foster free trade in much the same way that we have been. It may be at the expense of some people but not at the ultimate expense of ALL people. Theoretically though it is the best for EVRYONE in a pure competitive environment. The key term is competition. Competition defines free trade and in competition some lose. It is its nature. Is that a bad thing? I guess that is the ultimate question that we constantly face in this country.

I would say that as to manufacturing jobs leaving this country: I really don't care. It is easy for me to say because it does not affect me for sure but my thoughts go back to competition. If a factory goes out of work then jobs will ultimately be created somewhere. Maybe not in that community but somewhere. Those workers need to be able to find other work. They are probably mostly very dilligent, honest and loyal workers and people like that are in demand. If they can't find a job in their community then they need to be ready to pick up and move to where they can find a job. If an entire communtiy is ruined by a factory closing then shame on the community for laying all its eggs in one basket. Local communities all over the US pump billions of dollars a year into Economic development to avoid such situations.

Now that is an exteremly simplified view point and I don't really subscribe to that in the cold hearted way it comes accross. But I think we forget that competition means survival of the fittest which means everyone needs to be trying or they'll get left behind. I find it difficult to have much compassion for those who don't try.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=FRPLG;425807]the problem with this is that having that job will mean so much less because prices are higher.

Economics as a guide utilizes the macro view while what you are focusing on is the micro view. Schneed is simply saying that for our country as a whole it would be better to continue to foster free trade in much the same way that we have been. It may be at the expense of some people but not at the ultimate expense of ALL people. Theoretically though it is the best for EVRYONE in a pure competitive environment. The key term is competition. Competition defines free trade and in competition some lose. It is its nature. Is that a bad thing? I guess that is the ultimate question that we constantly face in this country.

I would say that as to manufacturing jobs leaving this country: I really don't care. It is easy for me to say because it does not affect me for sure but my thoughts go back to competition. If a factory goes out of work then jobs will ultimately be created somewhere. Maybe not in that community but somewhere. Those workers need to be able to find other work. [B]They are probably mostly very dilligent, honest and loyal workers and people like that are in demand. If they can't find a job in their community then they need to be ready to pick up and move to where they can find a job. If an entire communtiy is ruined by a factory closing then shame on the community for laying all its eggs in one basket.[/B] Local communities all over the US pump billions of dollars a year into Economic development to avoid such situations.

Now that is an exteremly simplified view point and I don't really subscribe to that in the cold hearted way it comes accross. But I think we forget that competition means survival of the fittest which means everyone needs to be trying or they'll get left behind. I find it difficult to have much compassion for those who don't try.[/quote]

Excellent post. Goes right along with my way of thinking. If you lose your job you may have to face the fact that your next one may be in a different locale. Or you're going to have to find out what some of your community's "needs" are and fill that hole.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[quote=FRPLG;425807]the problem with this is that having that job will mean so much less because prices are higher.

Economics as a guide utilizes the macro view while what you are focusing on is the micro view. Schneed is simply saying that for our country as a whole it would be better to continue to foster free trade in much the same way that we have been. It may be at the expense of some people but not at the ultimate expense of ALL people. Theoretically though it is the best for EVRYONE in a pure competitive environment. The key term is competition. Competition defines free trade and in competition some lose. It is its nature. Is that a bad thing? I guess that is the ultimate question that we constantly face in this country.

I would say that as to manufacturing jobs leaving this country: I really don't care. It is easy for me to say because it does not affect me for sure but my thoughts go back to competition. If a factory goes out of work then jobs will ultimately be created somewhere. Maybe not in that community but somewhere. Those workers need to be able to find other work. They are probably mostly very dilligent, honest and loyal workers and people like that are in demand. If they can't find a job in their community then they need to be ready to pick up and move to where they can find a job. If an entire communtiy is ruined by a factory closing then shame on the community for laying all its eggs in one basket. Local communities all over the US pump billions of dollars a year into Economic development to avoid such situations.

Now that is an exteremly simplified view point and I don't really subscribe to that in the cold hearted way it comes accross. But I think we forget that competition means survival of the fittest which means everyone needs to be trying or they'll get left behind. I find it difficult to have much compassion for those who don't try.[/quote]

Well-put. The micro vs macro view is definitely what separates the two viewpoints. If your job is the one at risk, naturally you're going to find it hard to focus on the greater good. But whoever is running the country, they need to.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

As my previous posts indicate, I am pretty "pro-globalism." I don't think that there is much we can or should do to fight the effects of the global economy (e.g., manufacturing jobs leaving the U.S.). However, I do think the government ought to at the very least consider offering programs or incentives to encourage people in the manufacturing sector to seek and gain new skill sets.

Re: Free Trade: Fight It, or Embrace It
 

[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;425825]As my previous posts indicate, I am pretty "pro-globalism." I don't think that there is much we can or should do to fight the effects of the global economy (e.g., manufacturing jobs leaving the U.S.). However, I do think the government ought to at the very least consider offering programs or incentives to encourage people in the manufacturing sector to seek and gain new skill sets.[/QUOTE]

Perfect. To me this is a fantastic way of the government helping people. Instead of fixing the market they fix the workers. What's the saying?

"Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed for a lifetime."

This would such a better use of resources and time rather than artificially influencing a market in a way that long term won't work anyways.

I guess once again education is the magic bullet.