HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » If Bernie supporters trul...

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:22 PM

 

If Bernie supporters truly believe in economic justice, why do they oppose free trade?

By definition, economic justice means reducing the level of inequality. The US is one of the most prosperous countries in the world. The median wage ($30k) is in the top 1% by world income. Hence shouldn't Bernie supporters work towards reducing global inequality and support free trade?

The only reason I can think is that Bernie supporters want economic justice when they are the ones gaining something but not when they are the ones that have to give something up for those even further down the inequality scale.

97 replies, 5574 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 97 replies Author Time Post
Reply If Bernie supporters truly believe in economic justice, why do they oppose free trade? (Original post)
hill2016 Mar 2016 OP
FreakinDJ Mar 2016 #1
TheBlackAdder Mar 2016 #26
randome Mar 2016 #31
TheBlackAdder Mar 2016 #42
randome Mar 2016 #60
TheBlackAdder Mar 2016 #62
randome Mar 2016 #63
TheBlackAdder Mar 2016 #64
morningfog Mar 2016 #2
JackRiddler Mar 2016 #7
AgingAmerican Mar 2016 #67
JackRiddler Mar 2016 #3
litlbilly Mar 2016 #4
Svafa Mar 2016 #5
katsy Mar 2016 #6
Kip Humphrey Mar 2016 #8
Skwmom Mar 2016 #9
randr Mar 2016 #10
farleftlib Mar 2016 #34
randr Mar 2016 #55
My Good Babushka Mar 2016 #11
fredamae Mar 2016 #12
hobbit709 Mar 2016 #13
Recursion Mar 2016 #14
Armstead Mar 2016 #25
Recursion Mar 2016 #27
delrem Mar 2016 #45
Armstead Mar 2016 #69
delrem Mar 2016 #75
think Mar 2016 #33
Recursion Mar 2016 #35
think Mar 2016 #36
Recursion Mar 2016 #38
think Mar 2016 #44
Recursion Mar 2016 #72
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #83
Recursion Mar 2016 #88
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #89
Waiting For Everyman Mar 2016 #15
Cal Carpenter Mar 2016 #16
Nanjeanne Mar 2016 #17
pberq Mar 2016 #18
Depaysement Mar 2016 #19
farleftlib Mar 2016 #37
Recursion Mar 2016 #39
whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #20
Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #21
vintx Mar 2016 #22
Recursion Mar 2016 #40
wobble Mar 2016 #43
Recursion Mar 2016 #71
Armstead Mar 2016 #23
Bluenorthwest Mar 2016 #28
Bluenorthwest Mar 2016 #24
ucrdem Mar 2016 #29
Gregorian Mar 2016 #30
pangaia Mar 2016 #32
Recursion Mar 2016 #41
jillan Mar 2016 #46
ucrdem Mar 2016 #48
delrem Mar 2016 #79
libtodeath Mar 2016 #47
TransitJohn Mar 2016 #49
vintx Mar 2016 #50
Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #51
TM99 Mar 2016 #52
DefenseLawyer Mar 2016 #53
arcane1 Mar 2016 #54
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #56
Earth_First Mar 2016 #57
reformist2 Mar 2016 #58
Marr Mar 2016 #59
Android3.14 Mar 2016 #61
Arugula Latte Mar 2016 #65
jfern Mar 2016 #66
OnionPatch Mar 2016 #68
Avalux Mar 2016 #70
Bradical79 Mar 2016 #73
jpb33 Mar 2016 #74
Scootaloo Mar 2016 #76
Turn CO Blue Mar 2016 #77
Turn CO Blue Mar 2016 #78
marew Mar 2016 #86
silenttigersong Mar 2016 #80
polly7 Mar 2016 #81
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #82
coyote Mar 2016 #84
marew Mar 2016 #85
Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #87
quaker bill Mar 2016 #90
bulloney Mar 2016 #91
Surya Gayatri Mar 2016 #92
Sky Masterson Mar 2016 #93
Turn CO Blue Mar 2016 #97
Vinca Mar 2016 #94
Demsrule86 Mar 2016 #95
Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2016 #96

Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:25 PM

1. Do you support Corporations writing our trade agreements

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:58 PM

26. "Free Trade" = "Globalization" = "Offshoring" One goal in mind, transfer wealth out of the U.S.

.


Actually, the Right Wing like it because it helps to keep U.S. Labort wages and benefits low.

After all, we have to stay competitive. Bring on the $5 and hour minimum wage!


.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #26)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:11 PM

31. Free trade does not necessarily mean any of that. Congress could do its job for a change.

 

They could easily prevent off-shoring but they love giving the store away. For those saying that free trade is evil in and of itself, I don't see it that way at all.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #31)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:27 PM

42. The whole point of free trade, as even mentioned by some Dem on MSNBC last night...

.


Is to transfer wealth to other countries in a manner to fight global poverty.


Free Trade is NAFTA and the TPP, where businesses get to move personnel assets from one country to the next.

Without tariffs, the U.S. companies cannot compete with countries that pay workers $1-2 an hour. This is a corporatists dream, to be able to trade freely with other countries, something that completely destroys any deterrents to abuse.



Companies are now moving middle class jobs to Poland, because the cost for skilled labor is 1/3rd that of the U.S.. They will provide their product and ship it back to the U.S. in a way that does not impact the business, as they feel no pain displacing American workers.


Corporatists love it.



.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #42)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:20 PM

60. That is not the whole point of free trade. Some dude on MSNBC is not the only 'expert'.

 

It's a very minor consequence, imo. But free trade, in general, means more sales, and not all of that is simple corporate greed. A lot of smaller companies are chomping at the bit to grow their markets, too.

Free trade also makes war less likely.

It also introduces our lifestyles and 'first world freedoms' to other nations. A free trade agreement is more often than not a very long term investment in stability.

If Congress would prevent off-shoring and tax havens, we probably wouldn't even be having this conversation.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #60)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:24 PM

62. From a liberal perspective it is. From a corporatist perspective it's profits.

.


You either want to help other countries, or you want to increase profits.

Since employees are a cost center, the cheapest labor equates to higher profits.


.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #62)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:40 PM

63. It's not always just binary thinking like that. Treaties can have more than one objective.

 

The more the hemispheres of the world become interconnected, the less likelihood there is of war. The more our values 'bleed over' into those other countries. And there are plenty of smaller companies who are grateful for a level playing field so they can become successful.

Capitalism is not evil. Corporations are not evil. What is done with them and for them can be evil.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #63)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:45 PM

64. The next jobs that goes, I hope it's those who support "globalization," as I have often seen.

.


A perversion of capitalism is evil, just as unbridled communism creates a failed state, so does unbridled capitalism.


What the hell is being smoked here?

"Our values" of paying for slave wages, sweatshop conditions, prison labor, bombing the shit out of people. See, you are the whole connected hemisphere types who want to level the playing fields, which requires many of the high-paying jobs to be lost to foreign business and domestic business that offshores profits and wages.


When did you hate America so? Before liking Hillary or after?

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:27 PM

2. Why does it always smell like someone left the right wing of the outhouse open in your threads?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #2)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:30 PM

7. Indeed, this is like a study in RW propaganda.

 

Attack him for not living up to the standard of Jesus, basically. Like, he says he's for economic justice, but he uses cell phones made by child labor! Aha! Burn! He says he's against fossil fuels, but he drives in a car! Burn burn! Now let's fire up our engines and drive on the highway forever, yay!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #2)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:54 PM

67. Your 'fracking = jobs' OP went over like a lead balloon

 

So this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:27 PM

3. Is that supposed to be a difficult question?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:28 PM

4. its free trade vs fair trade. big difference

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:28 PM

5. The trade deals

that have been passed and enacted have done nothing to reduce global inequality. They have been bad for American workers and bad for the workers in the countries the deals were made with. The only ones on the winning end have been the corporations. I have no problem with trade deals in theory, but in practice, the ones that we have seen have been pro-corporate garbage that do absolutely nothing to promote economic justice (quite the opposite). Show me a trade deal that actually does promote economic justice, and I'll be interested.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:29 PM

6. republican nonsense

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/no-free-trade-didnt-lift_b_8705312.html

If free trade was about equality labor worldwide would have a big chunk of the pie. That's not what happened.

Your argument is pure fiction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:31 PM

8. this is a joke, right?

Do you seriously not know? I'm truly amazed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:31 PM

9. Oh yeah, that is some real living wages they are paying in those other countries...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:31 PM

10. Free Trade is an oxymoron

It is all about moving American manufacturing base to poor nations where labor is cheap.
One simple look at the parties to the agreement and the secrecy of negotiations is all one needs to understand who is to benefit.
When you work for large corporate PACs you tend to support what makes them wealthy.
All the 'free trade' pacts so far have not done one thing to raise the wages or standard of living in any of the countries outside of ours and we know what they have done here.
Please educate yourself about these issues before pledging to a candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randr (Reply #10)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:16 PM

34. ^^THIS^^

 

I still can't believe that because "free trade" is in the title that people fall for this. These agreements are all about sending jobs overseas and putting the American taxpayers on the hook for corporate losses and malfeasance. They have NOTHING to do with free trade.

Remember the "Clean Air Act"? It was about allowing corporations to pollute at will without consequence.

Some people are so easily hoodwinked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farleftlib (Reply #34)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 04:49 PM

55. Actually the "Clean Air Act" had some positive consequences

It did give license for polluters to continue to spew CO2 into the atmosphere but at increasingly lower levels.
It gave the electrical generation power plants 40 years to clean up their act.
The hope was that they would be forced by economic persuasion to install scrubbing equipment and develop new combustion technologies. Unfortunately, the Power Generating Industry instead chose to rely on the increasingly abundant sources of Natural Gas that came about through 'Fracking' the hell out of our nation, thus meeting the clean air standards envisioned 40 years ago.
This has put the coal mining industry in foreclosure; thousands of jobs across the nation are gone and our current President is catching the blame for the consequences of decisions made four decades ago.
We are currently emitting far less CO2 than in the past as a result of the shift to natural gas combustion but we have yet to develop or install needed equipment to continue the increase of efficiency in order to make our power plants CO2 free in any foreseeable future.
Meanwhile the development of Solar and Wind energy technologies has far out paced the fossil industry; that is one reason the Koch fossil fuel empire is spending heavy to stop both wind and solar from getting even a fraction of the government subsidies that the filthy fuel producers still rake in to this day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:34 PM

11. Seriously?

Now American workers are supposed to compare their wealth against unindustrialized, non-OECD countries, and just be grateful for their pennies? That's a conservative line, if I ever heard one. After all, we can't be poor, we have TeeVees and indoor plumbing. I think you have shown your hand, and your candidate's. Clinton has no intention of reversing the trend of wage suppression.
A strong middle class is the most important indicator of liberty, security, peace and democracy. Equality is the hallmark of a thriving civilization.
The best thing your candidate could do for the country is quit.

The family whose "welfare reform" doubled extreme deep poverty in this country, especially among children, wants us to know we're not *that* poor. We're not like POOR poor, so we should just be quiet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:37 PM

12. It is the Terms/Consequences of Trade Deals

that Harm American Workers...you "ok" with that?

Of course we need trade.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:38 PM

13. that has to be in the Top 5 Dumbest OP of the day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:39 PM

14. Oh, they don't. That's the huge doctrinal weakness here.

And I wish it weren't so.

The past 20 years have seen, literally, the largest reduction in global poverty in human history.

The American electorate wouldn't know global poverty if it bit them in the ass. But it never will, because they're kept isolated from it.

3/5ths of the world crossed the real $2/day mark in the past 20 years.

This is literally the greatest time to be a human being, ever. I'm not even remotely kidding about that.

And yet, we have demagogues to choose from. And Sanders is the demagogue we need right now. Cynicism gets easier the older you get, I find.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #14)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:57 PM

25. Wait til you reach your 60's...

 

I've become so cynical I've rediscovered my idealism, figuring there's nothing left to lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #25)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:59 PM

27. Cheers to that, friend! (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #25)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:50 PM

45. You actually agree with this right-winger

who says that Bernie Sanders and his supporters don't give a shit about economic justice, because they aren't gung ho supporters of recent free trade agreements, like him?

That's inconsistent with your earlier post, #23.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #45)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 06:29 PM

69. Please lighten up

 

It is possible to have a little light hearted cynical fun aorund here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #69)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 01:16 AM

75. I guess it's a matter of taste.

I admit that I'm over "heavy".
I'm fed up.

And I'm afraid for the future.
Rats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #14)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:14 PM

33. Smedley Darlington Butler, a United States Marine Corps major general had some thoughts

 

on that.

War is a Racket

It contains this key summary:

"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket


As does John Perkins:

Confessions of an Economic Hitman

~snip~

According to his book, Perkins' function was to convince the political and financial leadership of underdeveloped countries to accept enormous development loans from institutions like the World Bank and USAID. Saddled with debts they could not hope to pay, those countries were forced to acquiesce to political pressure from the United States on a variety of issues. Perkins argues in his book that developing nations were effectively neutralized politically, had their wealth gaps driven wider and economies crippled in the long run. In this capacity, Perkins recounts his meetings with some prominent individuals, including Graham Greene and Omar Torrijos. Perkins describes the role of an economic hit man as follows:


Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign "aid" organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources. Their tools included fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man


Sure things have gotten better. But anyone who follows how the world's poor got that way understands why those people are still poor and why the very wealthy continue to take the major share of all the money....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to think (Reply #33)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:17 PM

35. Yeah, don't quote Gen. Butler to me, thanks

I'm a former Marine and I find that kind of tasteless.

Incidentally we are required to read his writings, in the Marines. And Che Guevara's, too. That surprises a disappointing number of people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #35)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:18 PM

36. What is wrong with Butler?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to think (Reply #36)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:21 PM

38. Nothing at all; I get irritated when people expect his writings to surprise me

I read them almost 20 years ago at this point, in boot camp, for the Marine Corps.

He's one of the modern military's heroes.

I'm very much aware of his political views after WWI.

None of this has a damn thing to do with the fact that global poverty has been cut by 2/3rds over the past 20 years. Which btw Gen. Butler would have loved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #38)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:45 PM

44. Would Butler approve of the military and it's use today? And what of John Perkins?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to think (Reply #44)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 09:19 PM

72. Compared to during his day? Absolutely. The improvement is undeniable (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #14)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 02:46 AM

83. You are correct about life improving, globally.

It doesnt go over well with the doom and gloom crowd, but it is objectively true.

That said, there are some long-overdue conversations about trade that we ought to have, starting with the fact that we enable countries like China to sell us stuff at a ridiculous discount because of their currency manipulation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #83)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 03:55 AM

88. Hell, that's as much our fault as theirs

We need a much weaker dollar. But try being a politician against a "strong dollar". Even Sanders would have trouble pulling that one off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #88)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 03:57 AM

89. No question. Also, people sure like to be able to buy cheap stuff.

Its a dynamic, to be sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:41 PM

15. Free trade is a race to the bottom.

It brings down wages in prosperous countries and perpetuates poverty wages in outsourced countries (plus sending pollution there).

It's like water, you can't have unequal levels or the higher level of water will flow down to the lower level, like a waterfall. If the only goal is to tear the US down without improving the rest of the world, then that's a good way to do it; otherwise, it accomplishes nothing.

Other countries need to bring their wages up, and make products to sell to their own people. That is how creating a consumer market is done. It will work for other countries as it has worked for us here.

Look up Henry Ford, who made Ford cars, he insisted on paying his employees a lot more than other car companies so they could afford to buy his cars, and so of course he sold a lot more cars than his competitors. It worked. It always works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:41 PM

16. If 'free trade' is really free, why are 'free trade agreements' thousands of pages long?

What an absurd framing of this question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:42 PM

17. Somehow I have a hard time believing you really want Sanders supporters to answer this question.

The whole premise of it is so ridiculous - and purely written to give you one more moment of hearing yourself speak.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:44 PM

18. By "free trade" do you mean the TPP?

If so, then here is an excerpt from an interview with economist Michael Hudson (emphasis added):

http://michael-hudson.com/2016/02/the-commanding-heights/

. . .The cover story pretends to be about trade, but the real agenda is to force privatization and disable government regulation. This reverses what was central to the whole Progressive Era. For the last 300 years, the assumption of Europe and North America was that you were going to have a mixed economy, with governments investing in infrastructure, roads and other transportation, communications, water and sewer systems, gas and electricity. The role of government infrastructure was to provide these basic needs at minimum cost in order to promote a low-cost, competitive economy. That’s how America got rich. That’s how Germany industrialized and how the rest of Europe did. But the aim of the Trans-Pacific Partnership is to reverse and privatize public investment. Its ideology is that the economy should be owned and operated by private owners, private enterprise, whose aim is short-term profit.

There are a number of related aims: to nullify environmental protection regulations that cost money, to nullify protection of labor, and to nullify attempts to tax natural resources or economic rent. The idea is to turn roads and the transport system into toll roads, which will be owned by foreigners and run at a high charge. The Internet and the water system will be sold off and made into toll systems, to charge for their services and for other basic needs. This will impose a neo-feudal rentier economy throughout the world as the finance, industrial and real estate (FIRE) sector takes over the government sector.

I think you could say that at the broadest level, the idea is to roll back the Enlightenment and restore feudalism. That may sound like an extreme statement, but people don’t realize how radical the TPP’s investment agreements are. For instance, when Australia raised the charges on cigarettes and included health warnings on the packs, Philip Morris sued, insisting that Australia pay it what Philip Morris would have made if people would have continued to smoke and get cancer at the existing rate. . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:45 PM

19. You no longer have to post here

The Campaign has outsourced your job to Mumbai.

Thank you for your service. Don't forget your termination packet at the door.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Depaysement (Reply #19)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:20 PM

37. LOL

 

That about sums up the free trade deals the OP is so worried about.

Now if only they would stop posting nonsense like this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to farleftlib (Reply #37)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:22 PM

39. We have a free trade agreement with India??

When did that happen?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:46 PM

20. It's amazing what a Hillary avatar let's one get away with n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:52 PM

21. FOr Christ sake

With all of the data, experience and job loss with that corporate crap at this point, we have to play the Free Trade game here? At this point in time.

The RW brain at work.


read this:

The Authoritarians

Watch This:

The Power of Nightmares (The politics of Fear)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:52 PM

22. Is this some kind of sick fucking joke?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vintx (Reply #22)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:23 PM

40. You find the largest reduction in poverty and inequality in human history to be a "joke"?

Interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #40)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:45 PM

43. Capitalists are so kind

They ease the inequality and poverty in poorer countries out of the goodness of their heart. Meanwhile citizens in the US are seeing the increasing rates of poverty and inequality.

This OP is a joke because free trade was marketed as a way for the US to stay ahead. Free trade is bad policy for the United States by any domestic measure. Sure people working in low wage countries are benefitted, but at the cost of the United States populous. Sans a few thousand moneyed individuals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wobble (Reply #43)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 09:08 PM

71. They've certainly done more for the world's poor than those opposed to them (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:55 PM

23. New levels of asinity...You think "free trade" is really helpful for the PEOPLE of other countries?

 

It's just Corporate Colonialism with a different name.

Rather than set up sweatshop operations that exploit workers, what would be more appropriate is policies that encourage the development of wholistic domestic economies in those countries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #23)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:00 PM

28. The perfect example of that is Brunei, an originating signatory to TPP. The Sultan and his family

 

want the larger profits that agreement will allow to them and their small circle of friends while openly seeking stricter social controls and passing punitive anti gay laws clearly saying they are doing this to insulate the public from the changes brought by TPP, the Sultan and his family are exempt from all the new punitive rules.

Few will benefit, many will suffer for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 01:56 PM

24. Of course you are not going to answer but do you know what fair trade is?

 

Also, your candidate has voted against some 'free trade' bills. Why is that if their are all about helping the poor? I'd say even Hillary sees the issues as far more complex than you do. She's more prone to support free trade than Bernie is but not nearly as full tilt supportive of free trade as many, many others are. This makes your 'all or nothing, free trade is charity' theory look very shabby indeed. Your own candidate would howl with laughter at your post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:06 PM

29. Because Hillary is an oligarch on 99% steroids?

Something to do with kissing Kissinger at Trump's wedding? Or am I mixing memes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:06 PM

30. Because of FAIR TRADE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:11 PM

32. jesus on a crutch

Do you not know or understand ANYTHING?

Or do you just post stupid stuff because you don't have anything else to do and it's just....FUN?

beats hell out of me..


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:24 PM

41. I'll rec this, only because you have really hit the blind spot of Team Sanders here

I think honestly Americans just don't know that we have just been through the largest decrease in global inequality in human history.

Except sometimes I think they do know that, and just can't bring themselves to care.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:53 PM

46. It's simple really. Team Sanders believes in FAIR TRADE! Don't understand the difference? Here-

I'll save you time googling.


Free Trade
Proponents of free trade emphasize the reduction in barriers between countries and the elimination of preferential policies that favor countries or specific industries. Free traders believe that a business should succeed or fail based on its ability to respond to the free and open market, without needing special governmental protections to protect the industry or its workers. Many free trade advocates advocate for the elimination of tariffs and subsidies, and oppose regulations that force companies to pay extra for doing business in foreign markets.

Fair Trade
Fair trade advocates focus on the wages and working conditions of labor in developing markets. For example, a fair trade activist will fight to increase the wage rates of workers and improve their working conditions, especially when a large multinational corporation chooses to pay pennies per hour for labor in one country instead of dozens of dollars per hour elsewhere. Fair traders suggest that companies and governments should regulate trade to ensure that workers receive a just level of compensation and a safe working environment. "Fair trade" as a term is sometimes used to refer specifically to policies that provide a living wage to farmers for their crops, usually above market prices, because local and small-hold farmers often cannot compete on price with large-scale factory farms.
-------------------------------------------------
Bernie was talking about this during his town hall with Chucky. He was telling a story of visiting a town in Mexico where a US corporation opened a plant. The workers were being paid .65/hr and lived in cardboard shacks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to jillan (Reply #46)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 01:42 AM

79. It's an investment bank's dream come true.

The Key Features listed are exclusively empowering for investment capital.
Exclusively. Regardless of the fact that the word "liberal" is blasphemed at one point.
It is anything but.

Rights of workers and citizens in general are totally disregarded, as being nonexistent.

How can you abide by that?

It's strictly a power grab by Investment Capital.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 02:58 PM

47. Another right wing defense of Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 03:04 PM

49. Free trade is a corporate scam

If it were for real, Labor would also be able to organize transnationally. Imagine US and Chinese workers negotiating for comparable wages and benefits. That's economic justice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TransitJohn (Reply #49)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 03:07 PM

50. Yep - pathetic that neolib cheerleaders / stooges don't see through the ruse.

 

Or maybe they're benefiting personally from the scam.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 03:11 PM

51. That post is insane.

 

Free trade is being used to exploit people.


It is a world wide race to the bottom.

For example:

Country A lowers it's corporate tax rate to attract companies to move there.

Country B matches that tax rate and refuses to increase minimum wage to attract companies there.

Country C matches tax rate and minimum wage, then lowers environmental standards so companies will move there.

Country A finally responds by lowering minimum wage and environmental standards as well as worker safety standards.

Country B now also lowers environmental standards and worker safety standards plus uses taxes paid by workers to build infrastructure for the companies they are trying to attract.

Country C now also lowers safety standards and uses worker taxes to build infrastructure for companies they are trying to attract plus lowering minimum wage even lower for those self same workers.

The cycle then repeats.... over and over again.. endlessly.


That is the race to the bottom that free trade is all about. It is also in practice, to a lesser extent, within the states themselves by using "right to work" laws.


It is insane. Free trade sucks.


Standards for wages, worker safety and environmental protections need to be a part of any trade agreement. That helps force those other countries to treat their citizens more fairly and it also makes it easier for American workers to compete.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 03:14 PM

52. I have posted this link

 

and these quotes now two times and two days and none of you 'free trade' lovers will touch it.

Clinton spoke of change the way other politicians would talk about God or Providence; we could succeed economically, he once announced, “if we make change our friend.” Change was fickle and inscrutable, an unmoved mover doing this or that as only it saw fit. Our task—or, more accurately, your task, middle-class citizen—was to conform to its wishes, to “adjust to change,” as the president put it when talking about NAFTA.

The phrase that best expressed the feeling was this: “It’s a no brainer.” Lee Iacocca uttered it in a pro-NAFTA TV commercial, and before long everyone was saying it. The phrase struck exactly the right notes of simplicity combined with utter obviousness. Globalization was irresistible, the argument went, and free trade was always and in all situations a good thing. So good, it didn’t even really need to be explained. Everyone knew this. Everyone agreed.

One reason the treaty required no brains at all from its supporters is because NAFTA was as close to a straight-up class issue as we will ever see in this country. It “boils down to the oldest division of all,” Dirk Johnson wrote in The New York Times in 1993: “the haves versus the have-nots, or more precisely, those who have only a little.” The lefty economist Jeff Faux has even told how a NAFTA lobbyist tried to bring him around by reminding him that Carlos Salinas, then the president of Mexico, had “been to Harvard. He’s one of us.”


So NAFTA, the grandfather of free trade, was a no brainer, literally. It was not sold with logic or even economics. It was sold with marketing slogans and pseuo-logic.

Th results of this ---

The predictions of people who opposed the agreement turned out to be far closer to what eventually came to pass than did the rosy scenarios of those 283 economists and the victorious President Clinton. NAFTA was supposed to encourage U.S. exports to Mexico; the opposite is what happened, and in a huge way. NAFTA was supposed to increase employment in the U.S.; a study from 2010 counts almost 700,000 jobs lost in America thanks to the treaty. And, as feared, the agreement gave one class in America enormous leverage over the other: employers now routinely threaten to move their operations to Mexico if their workers organize. A surprisingly large number of them—far more than in the pre-NAFTA days—have actually made good on the threat.

These results have never really shaken the self-assured “no-brainer” consensus. Instead, the phrase returns whenever new trade deals are on the table. During the 1997 debate over “fast track,” restricting the input of Congress in trade negotiations, Al From, the founder of the Democratic Leadership Council, declared confidently that “supporting fast track is a no-brainer.” For some, free-trade treaties are so clearly good that supporting them doesn’t require knowledge of their actual contents. The influential New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, for example, still thought so when the debate was over an altogether different treaty. “I wrote a column supporting the CAFTA, the Caribbean Free Trade Initiative,” he told Tim Russert in 2006. “I didn’t even know what was in it. I just knew two words: free trade.”

Twenty years later, the broader class divide over the subject persists as well. According to a 2014 survey of attitudes toward NAFTA after two decades, public opinion remains split. But among people with professional degrees—which is to say, the liberal class—the positive view remains the default. Knowing that free-trade treaties are always for the best—even when they empirically are not—seems to have become for the well-graduated a badge of belonging.


http://www.salon.com/2016/03/14/bill_clintons_odious_presidency_thomas_frank_on_the_real_history_of_the_90s/

'Free trade' is class division. It is not economic justice. Mexican workers AND American workers are both fucked while the CEO's and stockholders of the major corporations that have moved jobs from America to Mexico got richer while we the people got much, much poorer.

I am so sick of the Republican talking points on a supposed Democratic website.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 03:18 PM

53. Carrier makes air conditions in Indianapolis that they then sell in the United States

 

If they then close their factory in Indianapolis and move it to Monterey, Mexico to exploit cheap 3rd world labor, where they manufacture the same air conditioners and ship them back to the United States to sell, we are not suddenly "'trading" with Mexico. The only thing being traded is labor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 03:24 PM

54. You people are getting so desperate, you're no longer making any sense.

 

And promoting more corporate welfare is a right-wing proposition. It has no place here. Clearly you do NOT believe in "economic justice".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 04:51 PM

56. Pass the popcorn

 

I do not think I will bother to explain the difference between free and fair trade...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:09 PM

57. Figures a HRC supporter is championing the benefits of the WTO,

Agreements from GATS (the #1 reason why a single-payer option has all but been eliminated), to CA/NAFTA, TPP, etc.

The 'fair trade' your candidate champions is shackling labor and destroying the environment worldwide!

This is such a shit OP!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:11 PM

58. Free trade tends to produce slave-labor sweatshops overseas. Not exactly social justice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:15 PM

59. It's hilarious, watching 1%er stooges try to sell deregulation as altruism.

 

Do they actually expect anyone to believe that international conglomerates, big banks, and right-wing politicians have devoted the last few decades to *helping the poor*?

Deregulated trade is not about helping poor people-- it's about helping rich people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:23 PM

61. This has to be, bar none, the most ignorant anti-Bernie post I've read

 

Ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:53 PM

65. Careful, you're revealing your true colors.

 

And they ain't pretty.

I would have thought you'd want to at least keep up the facade of being a tiny bit progressive, at least through the primaries, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:54 PM

66. LOL, it's about enriching the CEOs of a few corporations at the expense of everyone else

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 06:21 PM

68. Pitting the world's workers against each other

In a race to find the cheapest labor doesn't sound progressive to me.

Yeah I know that's not how it's supposed to work but that's how it works and I see no reason to believe it's going to be different this time.

International trade should be based on something sensible: your country makes great watches, mine grows great bananas, let's trade! But so far our free trade agreements have been about nothing other than exploiting the cheapest labor pool, no matter what they'd have you believe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 06:46 PM

70. Smearing Bernie won't make Hillary's NAFTA and TPP support go away.

It's not free trade we want, it's FAIR trade. Sometimes these posts are just so transparent....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 09:27 PM

73. Do you have an economics background?

 

Read a convincing article from an economist against free trade, though it's a few years old:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/free-trade-isnt-helping-w_b_837893.html

Would be interested in thoughts on it, since there are few people here who openly argue in favor of free trade.

I'm in the middle of my first economics class at the moment, though it's microeconomics so a lot of this stuff is still over my head in some ways.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Tue Mar 15, 2016, 09:59 PM

74. This is

actually the dumbest thread I have ever read on this site. Hands down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 01:28 AM

76. Apple factories in Macau have suicide prevention nets outside their windows.

 

Manila's "free trade zone" factories are not subject to Philippine law. They sport armed guards, inward-facing razor wire, and a high level of sexual abuse of the workers.

"Free trade" liberates capital, not people. That's the whole point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 01:33 AM

77. Yeah, tell that to those slaves chained up in shacks in Thailand peeling shrimp for US companies.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 01:35 AM

78. I want to add that this is the most right-wing post I've seen on DU in years. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turn CO Blue (Reply #78)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 02:55 AM

86. Oh, absolutely! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 01:46 AM

80. Fair Trade vs Free Trade


Corps capitalism,exploit therefore no such thing as free trade.It is managed by wall street.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 01:49 AM

81. Wow. This is really disingenuous. You're a smart person, you know exactly why anyone

with a functioning brain opposes these unfair, life, social-program and environment destroying trade deals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 02:44 AM

82. You do understand that China keeps its currency artificially devalued, don't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 02:48 AM

84. WTF?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 02:53 AM

85. Please do the research.

You are confused and lacking in the knowledge of basic economics. Your simplistic comment "The median wage ($30k) is in the top 1% by world income" does not take into consideration so many variables within the world economic system. You do understand that "median" means half of the population makes less than the amount you quoted.

Also, I assume you do already understand that the main driver of inequality--returns on capital that exceed the rate of economic growth--is what threatens to undermine democratic values.

May I suggest you read the following:Capital in the Twenty-First Century by Thomas Piketty
http://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Piketty-ebook/dp/B00I2WNYJW/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1458113956&sr=1-2&keywords=economics+Piketty

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 02:55 AM

87. Right now, you are being completely silly and out of touch and tone-deaf and...

 

how can you ask such questions without the intention to troll?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 04:57 AM

90. Because it works by reducing our median wage

to something more like the world average. However in this country we have laws that prohibit the sort of living conditions the world average median wages afford to most. Living without access to clean water or sewage treatment in shacks cobbled together from debris scavenged from landfills, is generally frowned on here. Heck, even micro housing built of new materials to code provided to the otherwise homeless is zoned out of existence in most places.

We arrest people here for even attempting to live in the manner the world average median wage affords elsewhere.

Now your sense of justice may be comforted by the notion that our working poor will soon live in conditions worse than Flint, mine is not.

Please spare me the neo-liberal BS about education and come to understand fully that half of us have less than the median IQ. (This is a mathematical identity and cannot be debated) We will not be training them to be the next generation of innovators to retain "competitive advantage". So the question then becomes, where will we build the 3rd world hovel villages to house them, and how will we become comfortable with large numbers of our citizens living this way?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 05:29 AM

91. There's a difference between opposing free trade in concept and opposing the agreements we're under

Some people just knee-jerk support an agreement because "free trade" is in its name. Those who oppose them have studied them and saw the devils in the details. Agreements such as NAFTA and WTO are nothing more than conduits for multi-national corporations to move capital and technology across international borders and pit nation against nations in their wage scale, environmental laws and other factors.

I recently attended a conference where a speaker pointed out that after 20+ years of NAFTA, 85% of the automobiles produced in Mexico are exported. That tells me that NAFTA hasn't brought up Mexicans' standards to where they can be consumers of products like cars, major appliances and other major investments. Right now there are 9 auto assembly plants under construction or planned for construction in Mexico. None in the U.S. That tells me that the automakers are planning to further exploit low Mexican wages and lax enforcement of regulations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 05:54 AM

92. Heads up, Hill! I was N° 7...

 

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:40 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

If Bernie supporters truly believe in economic justice, why do they oppose free trade?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511496026

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

No comments added by alerter

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:48 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The post is dishonest and stupid, but those are not rules violations.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Huh? Is this a frustration alert?
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Let it stand as a monument to wrongheaded thinking.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: WTH? Ludicrous alert, abuse of the jury system.
Opinions are hideable now? And, if this was SO offensive, why didn't the alerter make a comment?

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:07 AM

93. Because I am a small business owner that makes products here in America

And I can't compete with Chinese goods in price.
This means that I can't grow or hire anyone.
People seem to forget all of the bad things that happened during the Clinton Presidency.
He opened the doors to what is now happening to American Manufacturing.
Repealing Glass–Steagall, Nafta,Don't ask don't tell.
Michael Moore was right when he said that Bill Clinton was the best Republican president since Lincoln.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sky Masterson (Reply #93)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 12:21 PM

97. ^This too! Chinese shops on Alibaba and DHGate are actually using my product photos of designs


they are using my own photos from MY camera of my ORIGINAL - one-of-a-kind dresses to try to sell dresses, which they will put out of a sweatshop that pays slave wages and that are able to buy the supplies (fabrics, threads) at 1/4 wholesale purchased straight from the Chinese manufacturer right there in the same province.

They figure that if they get an order for MY DESIGN, they'll just figure out the design afterward and copy it.

I know many designers on Etsy of all types of artisan items who have the exact problem and not even once has anyone been successful in getting DHGate to take down the stolen photos.

American manufacturers, retailers and artisans CANNOT compete with these giant sweatshops, especially when the rules of business, and the costs of supplies and labor set us at an extreme disadvantage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 06:10 AM

94. They don't oppose free trade, they promote fair trade.

Our current "free" trade amounts to huge trade deficits and is not working in our favor unless you're a huge fan of poorly made, cheap crap from China at the dollar store.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 09:30 AM

95. Trade as practice today helps no one

Shrimp are now being farmed by mostly slave labor...the TPP does not ban slavery...and many Americans are leaving the middle class as the jobs leave this country. Free trade is just wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hill2016 (Original post)

Wed Mar 16, 2016, 10:11 AM

96. Because the countries that actually rose out of Third World poverty

in a way that didn't make life worse for the poor were all protectionist: Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia.

The Philippines and South Korea are a great contrast. In 1965, both were poor enough to ask for Peace Corps volunteers. In fact, when I was in grad school, I had a fellow student who had spent two years in South Korea as a Peace Corps volunteer.

Fast forward 50 years. They are still sending Peace Corps volunteers to the Philippines, which has opened itself up as a cheap labor, cheap agriculture source for multinational corporations and agribusiness. (Hawaii's pineapple industry went to the Philippines.) There are some rich people, but the majority are still at Third World level.

South Korea took a different tack. Sure, they let some multinationals come in, but on two conditions: That they transfer their technology and that they train Koreans for technical and managerial positions. Meanwhile, they protected their own electronics (Samsung, LG) and auto (Hyundai, Kia) industries and improved them to world standards. They also invested heavily in infrastructure (world-class airport at Incheon, high-speed rail, fine highways) and education. They haven't had any Peace Corps volunteers since the 1970s.

China and India, you say? Sure, they both have more rich people than ever and even a bit of a middle class, which numbers in the millions, because the base populations are so high. But the prosperity of the rich and middle class minorities has made life WORSE for many of the lower-income Indians and Chinese. In India, prices for basic necessities (rice, lentils, cooking oil) have risen without any corresponding rise in incomes. In China, the old social safety net is gone, the guaranteed jobs are gone, and sweatshops are the only alternatives for many. Both countries suffer from unbelievable amounts of air and water pollution.

If I were told, "You have a choice. You have to live in China for a year, or you have to live in South Korea for a year, I know which one I'd choose. There's pollution in Seoul, and they've let the bottled water conglomerates derail any projects to make their tap water safe, but you can see the sun, and there is no vast underclass of, say, construction workers who have to camp out on their building sites because they're homeless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread