Who here is pro trade?

Remember Seattle, etc? Right before 9/11 stole our attention for the next 3-4 years.

At the time, the establishment DNC leadership, the DLC, was very much in favor of globalization in the form of trade pacts. That more or less continued under Obama.

Trump, no fan of nuance, doesn't have the first clue when he claimed that trade wars are "so easy to win." Multinational industries and other countries all have their own agenda, their own interests to defend. When environmental concerns and worker rights get steam-rolled by "free" trade, far more people suffer than profit, but as long as the "right" people are extracting the wealth of labor and natural resources to line their own pockets, a lot of people play along for a variety of reasons. Sooner or later the costs must be paid: Who will pay them? Who will not? Who gets the center of the meat and cushions on the seat?

Good enough for FDR, good enough for me.

That said, trade is very complicated and since we do not have a real Social Safety net we do nothing for those harmed by the practice. Plus our corporate compensation rules encourage CEOs to make short term gains the goal rather than long term stability.

But free trade stops to exist when companies can move to developing nations or the still developing parts of some nations and pay workers pennies on the dollar.

So it gets complicated. I'm pro free trade with Canada, most of Europe, etc. I'm also pro free trade with companies that pay their workers fairly.

that will sell cheap steel, for example, long enough that it puts American manufacturers out of business. Then we'll have no domestic steel industry, and China will have us by the balls.

I was going to add a comment about governments who prop up certain industries so they can undercut prices.

But I don't think becoming protectionist is the answer. A lot of people called for protectionist policies in the auto industry against Japanese automakers in the 80's and early 90's. But the reality of that is the US car manufacturers had to step up their game and make better cars.

I understand steel is a whole different ball game. Which is what makes the discussion around free trade complicated.

If I wanted a truck, big SUV or big sedan I'd buy American, but because I drive small, fuel efficient vehicles, they've all been Japanese for the last 30+ years. I'm driving a 12 year old Scion (Toyota) now.

two things that are generally good, or at least better than many of the alternatives, but which require serious monitoring and regulation.

Unfettered, capitalism leads to fascism and "free trade" leads to mercantilism and colonialism.

I think not joining TPP was a grave mistake.

Sorry, but that's just me...I understand that it is not so by nature, but by practice.

Instead we are, outside of the EU, chained to our nation states like serfs to their manor.

I’d be fine with a free and fair global economic system that transparently and democratically regulated goods services and work for everyone everywhere for safety and quality. We could all live and work anywhere.

I think I like the old model of "free trade" between nation states that produced raw materials, goods, and services and then exported/imported to/from other nation states. The offshoring of jobs to cheap labor markets and attacks on labor by Reagan and Republicans have disempowered working people and created way too much inequality and too many dead end jobs.

One of the only things Drumpf kind of gets is the idea that jobs can theoretically be protected from offshoring using tariffs/regulation, but he's 40 years too late with that. Neoliberal Reagan and Republicans would have never dreamed of doing anything like that for the benefit of labor back when it might have worked and set a precedent.

I don't see a problem with Honda building cars in Ohio for sale in the U.S. The problem I have is with a U.S. company like Apple building phones using cheap labor in China and then shipping them to rich countries all over the world to maximize their profits.

Several types of drawbacks - including substitution using FIFO inventory accounting. It's perfect for USA Manufacturers who craft with imported parts and components then export globally.

The coastal manufacturers (I work for one) are getting one over in the 45. No one is losing their jobs.

Nobody can anticipate all the tricks and workarounds that somebody will come up with. I think a general framework might have been feasible 35-40 years ago, but it would have needed a lot of attention and updating as the workarounds appeared.

The thing is - 45/140 is such a fucking idiot that he had no clue such a thing even existed.

To be blunt? 45 sucks and we are getting one over on the man.

Much of what trump is doing now — walking away from TPP, tariffs, Nationalism, etc. — are mistakes. Unfortunately, a number of Democrats supported this position during the primaries.

Is managing Import Export Compliance - along with some key supply chain and global regulatory issues.

So yep - pro trade.

Where we adjust trade practices based on a countries commitment to worker's rights and safety, wages, environmental protections, building standards and taxation.

I am not for a company making a pair of shoes for $20 in a low wage country and selling them for $230 here. Either give the workers in the manufacturing country a lot more wages or make the shoes here in the USA paying wages that shoemakers can live on.

Everything equal (comparative wage rates, environmental policies, ect), I say let the best and best executed idea win.

I'd throw in every Libertarian to seal the deal.

Companies have the freedom to go around the world to find cheap labor but labor doesn't enjoy similar freedom to go around the world to find the best paying job.

I am all for using trade as a secondary means of alliance building in particular and influence and trade deals aiming to lift the floor on labor standards, tho I don't expect them to be perfect all the time - a trade deal involves other countries with their own laws and practices.

For example, the TPP will happen whether America is involved or not, we only have control whether we have a say in it and it is inevitable because it is the first free trade agreement which focuses on a modern economy where intellectual property is treated as other products like car parts and clothing.

The world moves on.