ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Thursday, November 24, 2016

Free trade kills

As if the costs of free trade weren't already high enough, some researchers have determined that free trade, specifically with China, is literally killing more white working-class Americans than guns and traffic combined.
Increasing competition with China for trade has been blamed for soaring death rates among white, middle aged Americans. A silent 'epidemic' of deaths from suicides, drug and alcohol poisoning within that faction was first highlighted last year. But scientists were baffled as to why white, middle aged Americans were bucking the national trend of decreasing death rates. Now two economists believe they have found the answer.

Justin Pierce and Peter Schott believe they can trace back the uptick in suicides, drug overdoses, and alcohol-related deaths to 2000, when President Bill Clinton decided to relax the rules on major imports.

Between 1978 and 1998, the study reveals the mortality rate for US whites aged 45 to 54 fell by an average of two per cent each year. This was reflected in other rich countries, including France, Germany, the UK, Canada, Australia, and Sweden. After 1998, these nations saw mortality rates for this group steadily continue to fall, by two per cent every year.

But, in the US, mortality rates rose by half a per cent a year. The authors wrote: 'No other rich country saw a similar turnaround.' They estimate that had the white mortality in the US rate held at its 1998 value, 96,000 lives would have been saved between 1998 and 2013. And had it continued to fall as it had between 1978 and 1998, 488,500 deaths would have been avoided from 1999 to 2013.

This figure is comparable to the number of deaths caused by the Aids epidemic in the US.

While death rates related to drugs, alcohol and suicides have risen for middle-aged whites across the board, the largest surge are seen among those with the least education. A shock rise in mortality rates for middle-aged, white Americans has been driven by a rise in suicides, drug and alcohol poisonings and liver disease. In 2011, poisonings overtook lung cancer as a leading cause of death in this group and suicides is poised to do so, Princeton researchers said For those with a high school degree or less, deaths caused by drug and alcohol poisoning rose four fold, suicides increased by 81 per cent, and deaths caused by liver disease and cirrhosis jumped 50 per cent.

All-cause mortality rose by 22 per cent for this least-educated group. Among those with some college education, researchers noted little change in overall death rates. While among those people who achieved a bachelor's degree or higher, death rates fell.
Free trade was already dead from an economic and nationalist perspective. This should make it clear that there is no longer a moral case for free trade. It is both deeply inequitable and deplorably immoral; it is simply another form of the historical predation of the elite upon the peasantry. And it is, therefore, a significant and growing factor in the cliodynamical stresses that are leading towards the ultimate dissolution of the United States.

Labels: , ,

90 Comments:

Blogger Lovekraft November 24, 2016 5:55 AM  

And it reflects yet another way citizen activism/choice is taken away, replaced by entertainment and gossip.

An aware citizenry should be able to use his economic choice to support companies that reflect his goals, not global corporations that see people as numbers on a balance sheet.

Higher up, politicians are complicit in removing this power, seen as collaborators in this theft.

Boycotts.

Anonymous JAMES November 24, 2016 5:57 AM  

I used to be a free trader simply because the leftist arguments against free trade were idiotic.

The fact that it simply doesn't achieve the results that it promises is a far better argument.

Blogger Shimshon November 24, 2016 6:08 AM  

This is your brain.

This is your brain on free trade.

Any questions?

Blogger Keyser Soze November 24, 2016 6:23 AM  

Having spent considerable time in auto factories and their associated component factories, one can see the effect on those people still working and by extension and first hand knowledge, those now not working, but still able. That free trade import affect, coupled with the "white man hating" discrimination, yep, I believe that many have succumbed to alcohol, drugs, and no longer feeling useful, no longer feeling like a man....

Blogger Leo Littlebook in Shenzhen November 24, 2016 6:29 AM  

Free trade betrays freedom.

Blogger Phillip George November 24, 2016 6:33 AM  

Suicide prevention is a powerful argument because the common law duty of care allows the suspension of all types of laws. Saving lives voids myriad other arguments.

Vox, if an election steal is still on/ recounts then so too is WWIII. A missing Julian Assange, breaching Ecaudorian borders to murder an inconvenient Journalist is something like the free trade in Planned Parenthood late term aborted body parts.

The biggest stories, in plain sight should arrest the attention of everyone right now. This isn't editorial narrative. It's a call for more of your own facts.

SOS. This. Is an SOS.

Anonymous Mighty Humanzee November 24, 2016 6:34 AM  

One factor that the CNBC glitterati never mention with respects to free trade is that laborers from capitalist societies are competing with slave labor. Despite "can-do" spirit, it's nearly impossible to compete with Foxconn, or worse, societies where day care consists of chaining a child to a slaving parent.

Blogger Badger Brigadon November 24, 2016 6:40 AM  

If you wish to increase the complexity, check out Osha statistics.

Electrocution injuries and deaths have risen sharply since 2000, as have injuries and deaths due to shoddily manufactured safety equipment, industrial and kitchen equipment, and a huge number of other end-user manufactured goods, all in almost direct relation to the market shares of cheap, shoddily-manufactured Chinese, Korean, South American, and Taiwanese equipment.

In addition, the ready price drop of importing Sugar Beets and HFCS fruit from South America have made sugar vastly more readily available as a cheap additive, at an almost 45% increased per capita consumption in the last 16 years. This has led to a drastically increased diabetes rate among consumers in the US in the last five years, adding both massive health risks and enormously increased health costs.

I'll let you do the research yourself, but landfill rates, of which a large portion is broken imported goods, which have a much higher repurchase rate (The crappy imports break easily) has also taken a huge upswing in the last 15 years.

In short, open and 'free' trade with moving manufacturing to third world countries has affected nearly every facet of American infrastructure. It needs to end.

Blogger YIH November 24, 2016 6:41 AM  

Yeah it does, and sometimes in ways you might not realize:
Knock-off building materials have been shown to catch fire. Counterfeit electronics have caused military equipment to fail. And SKF says a sham bearing in a swimming pool pump sparked a fire that burnt a house to the ground.

Forgeries of its products typically originate in China, often from factories where legitimate competitors make their products, Aastroem said. Workshops there buy unmarked bearings, stamp them with the SKF brand and put them in packaging designed to look genuine, the company says. From China, the bearings are shipped worldwide to customers who often believe they are buying legitimate parts.

Cheap Chinese Crap is bad for children and other living things.
Something to give one hope however: Detroit Lions 36-38-2 .487 because it could have been: Dallas Cowboys 29-18-1 .615

Anonymous DJF November 24, 2016 7:08 AM  

YIH writes """""Forgeries of its products typically originate in China, often from factories where legitimate competitors make their products""""

Also it damages brand names that have spent huge amounts of money on building up their name since when there are recalls its often shown that the high end brand name and the cheap knockoffs are being made in the same factory on the same assembly line since they announce multiple product names in the same recall. So why bother with the name brand when the knockoff is made in the same assembly line?

Blogger Elizabeth November 24, 2016 7:35 AM  

DJF wrote:YIH writes """""Forgeries of its products typically originate in China, often from factories where legitimate competitors make their products""""

Also it damages brand names that have spent huge amounts of money on building up their name since when there are recalls its often shown that the high end brand name and the cheap knockoffs are being made in the same factory on the same assembly line since they announce multiple product names in the same recall. So why bother with the name brand when the knockoff is made in the same assembly line?


I used to work with trademarks and was told that the Chinese were notorious for copying a legitimate product, slapping its name, logo and packaging on the fake and selling the fake as a legitimate product. American companies sue, but the Chinese courts don't care. Ironically enough, Chinese and Russian markets are considered "emerging markets."

Blogger Duke Norfolk November 24, 2016 7:40 AM  

It's no doubt a feature, not a bug.

You just know that when this news hit the streets a while back there was much celebrating in the Democrat party.

Blogger Elizabeth November 24, 2016 7:43 AM  

8. Badger Brigadon November 24, 2016 6:40 AM
If you wish to increase the complexity, check out Osha statistics.

Electrocution injuries and deaths have risen sharply since 2000, as have injuries and deaths due to shoddily manufactured safety equipment, industrial and kitchen equipment, and a huge number of other end-user manufactured goods, all in almost direct relation to the market shares of cheap, shoddily-manufactured Chinese, Korean, South American, and Taiwanese equipment.

Brings to mind two old sayings: (1) You get what you pay for; and (2) Planned obsolescence.

I read an article somewhere about the popularity of cheap and fashionable, but shoddy clothing that lasts only one season before falling apart.

Blogger Robert What? November 24, 2016 7:48 AM  

The problem is that if the manufacturing is brought back to the United States or high tariffs are placed on Chinese imports, those same working class whites will be paying a whole lot more for their goods.

Anonymous p-dawg November 24, 2016 7:49 AM  

@Elizabeth: I had this happen with a playstation 2 controller. It was advertised as a sony product, had packaging with sony trademarks on it, and looked (on the outside) just like a regular ps2 controller. But it didn't work very well, and when opened up, it had about 1/3 the components inside that my original, broken ps2 controller had. I got it from a national retailer, not some shady store. This causes me to believe that it's a widespread issue.

Anonymous RabidRatel November 24, 2016 7:52 AM  

@14 but they will pay for it once, instead of every 3 to 6 months. Short term expensive, long term victory.

Blogger Bill Halsey November 24, 2016 7:57 AM  

This piece came out yesterday, which also argues against free trade:

http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/the-free-trade-fallacy.html

Blogger Stilicho November 24, 2016 8:13 AM  

Think of a billboard (or color ad): image of closed, dilapidated factory (or Detroit, images of meth addicts, etc.) the caption reads "Free trade isn't free". Repeat as necessary.

Blogger Benjamin Kraft November 24, 2016 8:13 AM  

@14. @16. Yeah, but like Rabid says, China has a long, long history of stealing IP via shoddy reverse engineering that fails suddenly and unpredictably at all levels of play.

#1: It may be cheaper, but it almost certainly won't...
#2: Last as long.
#3: Interact properly with other components (these parts literally damage other parts).
#4: Produce as high a quality of resulting product.

It may cost $5 as opposed to $15-$20 in the short term, but it will last a fraction as long, damage the machine it's used in, and produce further inferior products, like a disease in mechanical form.

Getting rid of the crap and the mentality will take a little while, but:

A: Our resulting product quality will go up in every area.
B: We won't be shelling out for new items every couple of weeks/months.
C: Scheduling will be easier and vastly more efficient because of much less incessant stoppage due to #brokeagain.

Oh, yeah, and...
D: We won't be literally financing slave-labor.

Blogger wreckage November 24, 2016 8:14 AM  

What's really interesting to me is that over the same time period Australia pursued free trade policies and didn't see the mortality uptick. This suggests that free trade outcomes might depend on the overall structure of a given economy.

Or it might imply that the US pursued a free international trade policy while screwing its domestic economy; it could be that for a large and diverse economy like the US, internal trade (which is in some instances heavily hampered) is much more important than international trade (which was freed up much more).

Australia, for example, took steps towards ensuring internal free trade BEFORE freeing up international trade, but then, Australia is much smaller and historically as basically a food-producing sub-unit of the British Empire, it suffered more from the end of favoured trade with GB some decade ago than from free trade implemented later.

Blogger wreckage November 24, 2016 8:15 AM  

@20, Trump's energy and regulation policies will do a lot to improve US manufacturing. Energy ultimately is the bottom line for everything.

Blogger VD November 24, 2016 8:22 AM  

Think of a billboard (or color ad): image of closed, dilapidated factory (or Detroit, images of meth addicts, etc.) the caption reads "Free trade isn't free". Repeat as necessary.

Think of it? Why don't you do it? Get a Twitter account, make a few memes, post them, and see what happens.

Blogger wreckage November 24, 2016 8:25 AM  

Just on the subject of energy: if an economy is a physical system, it runs on energy. It's that, or magic.

Trade is just efficiency gains, nothing more. And giving energy costs an order of magnitude higher pricing than "market value" corrects economic models that otherwise consistently fail:

http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2014/12/correctly-factoring-in-more-important.html

Blogger Elizabeth November 24, 2016 8:46 AM  

Robert What? wrote:The problem is that if the manufacturing is brought back to the United States or high tariffs are placed on Chinese imports, those same working class whites will be paying a whole lot more for their goods.

That's a legitimate point. It's a trade-off: You'll pay more for American goods, but Americans will be working, paying taxes and staying out of trouble. Or, Americans lose their jobs, collect unemployment, and often end up working for less if they can find a job, living off their savings or collecting disability.

If I have a job, I'll pay $30 for the American shirt. If I'm out of a job, I won't pay $20 for the Chinese shirt.



For example, a friend of mine worked in the headquarters office of ASCO, Automatic Switch Co., the biggest employer in Florham Park, NJ, 20 years ago - about 1000 people worked in the office and manufacturing plant. The manufacturing relocated to Mexico and most of the office to the appropriately-named Welcome, North Carolina. How many satellite businesses depended on the folks at ASCO: a deli here, a pizza parlor there, the local Trader Joe's. ASCO paid property taxes to Florham Park and corporate taxes to the State of NJ. That's mostly gone now. The job that my friend has now is in retail and doesn't pay what she made at ASCO.

Blogger Wanda Sherratt November 24, 2016 8:51 AM  

@12 - At NRO, too. That was the takeaway from Kevin Williamson's infamous "just hurry up and die, already!" essay on the disgusting white heartland.

Anonymous Biz Executive November 24, 2016 8:52 AM  

As a small (American) business owner, I need custom microscopes for my products (to replace the ones Japan quit making 5-6 years ago, currently replaced by a less-worthy but affordable "workaround" Chinese-made scope).

When I took over the co., I tried to find an American co. that could support me. All the companies would jump: "YES! We'd be happy to make your microscopes! Oh, well, no, NOT custom ones."

Four years trying to get them made in China (American sourcing co.; repeated failures from two Ch. design co's ($$$) and three Ch.factories). I finally had to fire the sourcing co. I have now found a (good, local) industrial designer, and a (local) machinist who may be able to make the parts I need.

Downside? *I* will be doing scope assembly (Deeply not optimal! I don't know if the company / I can handle that additional work.) Another downside: the scopes will be very expensive: I'm not sure my co. / customers can support a large price increase. (On the other hand, I really need the different / better scope for the co. to move forward!)

Potential up-side: Maybe I can find an ACTUAL American to work part-time doing the assembly (but: if the company can support the increased cost). (And, as a vet, I'll try to hire a vet.)

Praying "The Donald" can make a substantive / helpful change in how the economy works!

Anonymous Biz Executive November 24, 2016 9:02 AM  

Another tidbit:
The lower-quality scopes I currently buy (from an American importer) for $38 cost him about $5-8, including shipping from China. (I tried to find scopes to import myself. No luck.) After more than a few broke in customers' hands, I learned that for every new shipment I have to to try to break every single scope (in four possible places), so I can "superglue" them and not have them fall apart on a customer.

It's no wonder American manufacturing is "reshoring." I fear it's going to be a truly uncomfortable couple years while we get President Trump's "70,000 factories" (from the NY Times meeting) back in place!

Anonymous TheHardRight November 24, 2016 9:46 AM  

I took the suggestion and ran with it. Did it on my phone so it's not polished but I think it's still impactful.

Blogger Cail Corishev November 24, 2016 10:09 AM  

I used to own a small niche retail gift shop. The previous owner told me there was no choice but to carry mostly Chinese imports, because American products were simply too expensive. There was a huge difference in quality, but also a big difference in price. When it comes to things like seasonal gifts, people aren't that concerned about quality, and they don't have a lot of money to spend in this working-class community. I tried to shift to more American products anyway, taking a loss in hopes that people would appreciate the improved quality and get used to the prices.

Wal-Mart and another large retailer started carrying cheap imports in a couple of my best-selling product lines. I don't know whether this was coincidence, or a response to requests from people turned off by my higher prices. In any case, my sales dropped, the losses stacked up, and I went out of business. Now there's no one offering the higher-quality products at all, and one local business fewer paying taxes (the Wal-Marts of the world get tax breaks when they come to town). I'm doing fine personally at something else, but nearly all my work is remote now, so I'm generating much less local economic activity.

That's free trade. The people shopping at Wal-Mart may be happy with what they're getting for the price, but they don't even realize their choices have been reduced. They have no idea how much they're paying in taxes to support people working on low wages to keep retail prices low, or what effect all this has on the overall health of the community.

Anonymous Eric the Red November 24, 2016 10:17 AM  

Free trade has allowed economic strangulation by regulation in the US, as the left ramps up its virtue signaling about the environment often supported by little other than the precautionary principle instead of empirical evidence.

Conversely, free trade has provided little incentive for massive polluters like China and Bangladesh to improve their environmental safety, since the income stream they're making from other countries would otherwise be squelched.

Now that free trade is finally under scrutiny, fresh reasons emerge as to why it hurts everyone except the elite. Anyone who still supports it is obviously on the take.

Blogger Elizabeth November 24, 2016 10:20 AM  

What is the quality of so-called "aftermarket" auto parts made in China? Years ago, men who fixed their own cars would forage through an auto junkyard for parts they needed rather than buy new from a dealer. I was told that the auto junkyards were largely put out of business because of the aftermarket parts.

Also, cars were stolen and sent to "chop shops" to be cannibalized for parts because the parts were more valuable than the intact car.

Anonymous Eric the Red November 24, 2016 10:24 AM  

Free trade has allowed economic strangulation by regulation in the US, as the left feels free to ramp up its virtue signaling about the environment often supported by little other than the precautionary principle instead of empirical evidence.

Conversely, free trade has provided little incentive for massive polluters like China and Bangladesh to improve their environmental safety, since the income stream they're making from other countries would otherwise be squelched.

Now that free trade is finally under scrutiny, fresh reasons emerge that it benefits nobody except the elite. Anyone who still supports it is obviously on the take.

Blogger Elizabeth November 24, 2016 10:26 AM  

Cail Corishev wrote:I used to own a small niche retail gift shop. The previous owner told me there was no choice but to carry mostly Chinese imports, because American products were simply too expensive. There was a huge difference in quality, but also a big difference in price. When it comes to things like seasonal gifts, people aren't that concerned about quality, and they don't have a lot of money to spend in this working-class community. I tried to shift to more American products anyway, taking a loss in hopes that people would appreciate the improved quality and get used to the prices.

Wal-Mart and another large retailer started carrying cheap imports in a couple of my best-selling product lines. I don't know whether this was coincidence, or a response to requests from people turned off by my higher prices. In any case, my sales dropped, the losses stacked up, and I went out of business. Now there's no one offering the higher-quality products at all, and one local business fewer paying taxes (the Wal-Marts of the world get tax breaks when they come to town). I'm doing fine personally at something else, but nearly all my work is remote now, so I'm generating much less local economic activity.

That's free trade. The people shopping at Wal-Mart may be happy with what they're getting for the price, but they don't even realize their choices have been reduced. They have no idea how much they're paying in taxes to support people working on low wages to keep retail prices low, or what effect all this has on the overall health of the community.


Years ago, there was a 60 Minutes piece on what happened to one town's local businesses after Walmart came to town. The answer was that they were driven out of business. Someone remarked that before Walmart arrived there were x (I don't remember the number) number of places where one could buy a bicycle; after Walmart arrived, one one - Walmart.

Blogger James November 24, 2016 10:26 AM  

I've been calling my self a Neo-Protectionist for a while now. I think that it is the NATION that needs protection, not necessarily the business enterprise or industry sector that needs protection. This point is where the crypto-Marxist Libertarians fool the unwary, because the faux libertarians tell you that businesses ought not be protected from competition. I agree, but it ought to be obvious that there is more than just a business or group of businesses involved. It turns out, in the event, that "businesses" that are multi-national are the ones "protected" by the "free" trade polices that favor globalist institutions over national ones. Anyway, I wonder what the good folks of Vox Populi think of the label "Neo-Protectionist?" Should I keep using it or should I find a different term to use to describe my approach?

Anonymous Millenium November 24, 2016 10:26 AM  

@YIH: Don't forget about the hospital roof panels the Chinese sold to the Australian government full of asbestos. A lot of people died from asbestos in Australia and it is illegal over there. Don't forget either about the Vietnamese slave labor peeling prawns for American shelves upto 14 hours a day. Lazy American workers should be working 15 hours a day to compete on the free market.

Blogger Elizabeth November 24, 2016 10:29 AM  

Eric the Red wrote:Now that free trade is finally under scrutiny, fresh reasons emerge that it benefits nobody except the elite. Anyone who still supports it is obviously on the take.

I remember Rush Limbaugh shilling for it in 1993. I wonder what he thinks now.

Before NAFTA, we had a free trade agreement with Canada. I don't have a problem with that because we have equivalent economies, standard of living, salaries, etc.

Blogger Ken Cowman November 24, 2016 10:39 AM  

@14 I for one am more than willing to pay more for a much better product that I know will perform as designed and last much longer. We need to get away from the Walmart mentality of cheaper is better and renew the old adage "you get what you pay for." As well as getting a better product, I know it I am getting a product that was made here by a company providing jobs to Americans. Having more poorly made, cheaper junk does not justify the trade off.

Anonymous Ironsides November 24, 2016 10:39 AM  

About free trade, I think there may be a rhetorical point to be made here. But I'm not that good at rhetoric.

Every country is like a natural habitat. The economic forces in it have adapted to each other and everything is in balance. It works.

But when you allow free trade it's like introducing jackrabbits to Australia, or kudzu to the U.S., or rats to remote islands. The newcomers end up devouring everything in sight and wrecking the place. Foreign companies or international companies are like an invasive species. Let them in, and THEY'LL thrive, but they'll devastate the native environment and do nothing to benefit it.

"Advocating free trade is like asking for more jackrabbits for Australia, or more kudzu for the American South. It destroys the habitat and adds nothing to it."

Blogger Elizabeth November 24, 2016 10:43 AM  

Ironsides wrote:About free trade, I think there may be a rhetorical point to be made here. But I'm not that good at rhetoric.

Every country is like a natural habitat. The economic forces in it have adapted to each other and everything is in balance. It works.

But when you allow free trade it's like introducing jackrabbits to Australia, or kudzu to the U.S., or rats to remote islands. The newcomers end up devouring everything in sight and wrecking the place. Foreign companies or international companies are like an invasive species. Let them in, and THEY'LL thrive, but they'll devastate the native environment and do nothing to benefit it.

"Advocating free trade is like asking for more jackrabbits for Australia, or more kudzu for the American South. It destroys the habitat and adds nothing to it."


That's a great point. Also, foreign government offer financial assistance to their corporations to sell cheaply overseas, drive the local competition out of business and take over.

Blogger Elizabeth November 24, 2016 10:50 AM  

One of the reasons why the Union won the Civil War was because most of the factories were located in Union states. The Confederacy largely depended on goods that were smuggled through the blockade, captured or homemade. During WWII, the US was nicknamed "The Arsenal of Democracy." On the other hand, I remember reading somewhere that we had a problem getting Japanese-made cameras (?) for our fighter jets during the Vietnam War. The situation has only gotten worse. I wonder how much of the manufacturing that remains is dependent on the military.

Anonymous George of the Jungle November 24, 2016 10:53 AM  

Free trade is predatory, offering you candy now and diabetes later.

Anonymous BGKB November 24, 2016 11:12 AM  

multiple product names in the same recall. So why bother with the name brand when the knockoff is made in the same assembly line?

What if the knock offs are simply the rejects that end up not rejected?

Anonymous Just another commenter November 24, 2016 11:55 AM  

But the fact is, to many on the left white lives don't matter. They are always "angry" white men, or the "losers" of modern competition, the descendents of slavers who deserve to die and give someone else a chance. The sad part is that I've heard that idea, in nearly so many words, from straight white guys on the left. They actually think the destruction of their own people and culture is laudable. Yet they call me names if I point out they are effectively both suicidal AND genocidal at the same time. Leftism is a mental disorder.

Anonymous MabyeMicroscopes November 24, 2016 12:06 PM  

@Biz Executive

Please contact me. I'm always interested in trying new things. Microscope assembly seems interesting. I'm located in Houston, Texas.

Email me at maybemicroscopes@shitmail.org (temporary 1 week disposable email) and I'll give you my contact info.

I hope we can come up with a pilot test arrangement to see if this works for both of us.

Anonymous Tipsy November 24, 2016 12:26 PM  

One of the things that Japan did to safeguard their industries was to set up structural impediments to trade. An example: extensive safety testing of imports. It slowed down shipping and added cost, and in so doing tipped the scales toward domestic production.

I've often thought about that when news comes out that chinese toys are painted with lead based paint, or chinese dog food is poisoned, or chinese sheetrock is made partly from fly ash, or chinese powdered milk is adulterated with melamine. It doesn't seem like such a bad idea.

Anonymous Discard November 24, 2016 12:47 PM  

14. Robert What: People have enough crap already. Let them buy better stuff and less of it.
Cheap products degrade the user, like perverted art or ugly architecture, by making them accepting of mediocrity or worse. That attitude gets passed along to everything else. Elevate the people by ridding their environment of cheap junk.

Anonymous A Most Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents November 24, 2016 12:48 PM  

Free trade led to toxic drywall imported from China being installed in up to 100,000 homes.

Blogger Shimshon November 24, 2016 12:53 PM  

@46 Don't you know, Not All Free Trade Is Like That.

NAFTILT after all.

Blogger Doc Rampage November 24, 2016 1:06 PM  

This is the same argument used to defend all government handouts like Welfare. "If we don't give them money they'll all die!" Restricting trade to support American workers is just a government handout. The government forces everyone to pay more for their stuff so that the Americans who manufacture the stuff can have more money.

The country would be better off with free trade and just giving the difference in cash to the people who want to be in manufacturing. At least that way they would have some other, more productive job that would be contributing more effectively to the economy.

Blogger Jose November 24, 2016 1:17 PM  

Happy Thanksgiving, all

There's a Harvard Business Review article from 2009, "Restoring American Competitiveness," by Pisano and Shih that basically explains how moving manufacturing eventually moves the entire technological basis. It's one of the best arguments against free trade, despite few people realizing it.

If you don't have access to HBR (via a library), I summarize the argument in this blog post,

http://sitacuisses.blogspot.com/2011/08/decline-and-fall-of-western.html

but essentially it's: moving manufacturing -> engineering follows -> R&D follows -> long term prosperity follows (leaving original country).

Pisano and Shih were very optimistic, in my opinion (in that post). From the vantage point of 2016 (and a fair understanding of innovation strategy), I look at my own post from 2011 as somewhat Pollyannish...

Cheers,
JCS

Blogger James November 24, 2016 1:24 PM  

Rampage, did you read my comment about protecting the NATION and not so much the businesses and the jobs? You are wrong about it being the same old argument for welfare. Protecting a nation's borders from cheep foreign crap nobody really needs is not socialist welfare, it is promoting the general welfare. Properly adjusted tariffs would reduce unnecessary consumption and promote more beneficial productive activities. People consume too much crap because of cheep imports paid for with debt bubbles. It's like it's an intentional scam. What kind of idiot wants to promote consumption over production? As if a people could keep on consuming for long if they are not producing. As if eventually the stored capital won't run out and they will be
destitute and unable to consume and incompetent to resume producing at that point.

Blogger Doc Rampage November 24, 2016 1:45 PM  

James, unlike the usual justifications for trade restrictions I see on this blog, yours sound reasonable, so long as the restrictions can be targeted to support those national interests and not be redirected by corrupt politicians to serve their own interests. I'm not optimistic about that possibility.

Another good reason to limit trade is to support strategically important industries so that we can't be unduly pressured by trade partners threatening to cut off some import that we have come to rely on.

I would even be sympathetic to the idea that when a particular industry comes under sudden pressure from foreign competition, there should be some protection for a few years (no more than four or five) to allow the industry to adjust with minimal hardship. But permanent indirect welfare for people in non-competitive industries is only going to harm everyone in the long run.

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky November 24, 2016 1:57 PM  

Jose @49 - It's good to see you making that point. It's one I constantly pound, using the mantra "With production goes the technology." People have got this assumption that we can design it here and build it elsewhere. Yeah, no. That's not how things work. You can only do that for a relatively small window in time. When supply chains and assembly lines move, they take with them everything that supports, maintains, improves, and advances them.

Blogger Stilicho November 24, 2016 2:38 PM  

@vox: done (check your Gab feed). Others with more graphic design talent may get more mileage. Please repost and see if it catches on.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash November 24, 2016 2:52 PM  

James wrote:I wonder what the good folks of Vox Populi think of the label "Neo-Protectionist?" Should I keep using it or should I find a different term to use to describe my approach?

I prefer Economic Nationalist.

@Rampage.
Go eat a bag of dicks and die in a fire.
Your inability to understand the argument is evidently intentional.

Anonymous Selat November 24, 2016 3:17 PM  

The cited article does not show any connection between free trade and all bad that is alleged as consequence. Correlation does not equal causation. No economy has to reason to fear free trade. What’s portrayed in the article is just consequence of ineffective US policy, mainly regulation + minimum wage, making any production uncompetitive.

Arguing against free trade is saying we are bad at competing therefore we forbid competition. This does not solve problems, just hides them and makes them grow bigger. The competition forces to innovate to keep up with competition, which leads to creation of better techniques, better utilization of capital and lowering costs.

Forbidding free trade would even further impoverish the poor people by increasing prices on products on which the relay. Now instead of spending 10$ for shoes, they will be forced to spend let say 20$. This means that they will not have 10$ to spend on some other stuff. So some else now will start having problems selling its products. Things getting more expensive will create pressure wages, which next trigger inflation. Nominal prices will go higher, more people falling into higher tax bracket and in the end earning nominally more, buying now less.

Free trade is also self regulating process. The Chinese keep selling to US products. They get for their products US currency meaning just paper. This paper is a claim on US sourced products or services. Itself it has no other value. So what are two possibilities. Either they keep the paper and do not spend it and still keep sending products meaning that they actually deliver them free (I would assume this cannot be bad for US). Or in other case they will start spending the US paper therefore creating demand for US products as US paper is redeemable only in US.

Moreover, the greater the imbalance of trade the lower is the value of US paper. This automatically lowers price of US products restoring their competitiveness. The reason why it does not help for US is twofold: already mentioned artificially high cost of production (regulation + minimal wage), and second increasing US debt, which Chinese buy to devalue their currency back to constant level. In gold based money system this would be even more apparent. In most extreme US would run out of gold and no Chinese would be interested in selling anything to US.

Last argument why free trade is not your enemy is purely moral one. Forbidding free trade equates to forbidding two persons to do mutually beneficial exchange. If you say that they should scarify they own mutual good on behalf what you believe is better than it’s no different than socialist claiming that he needs to take your money to make world better.

Finally, the free trade does not necessitate free movement of people, quite contradictory it vastly reduces it. “When Goods Don’t Cross Borders, Armies Will”. For full purely logical argument why that is so I recommend book by Hans H. Hoppe “Democracy: The God That Failed”.

Anonymous BGKB November 24, 2016 3:36 PM  

Japan did to safeguard their industries was to set up structural impediments to trade. An example: extensive safety testing of imports

Considering what we know about their neighbors the Chinese, that's they only way to trade with low trust cultures. China is willing to use almost slave labor & is willing to poison us.

Anonymous Fred Bastiat November 24, 2016 3:49 PM  

@55
Plus free trade provides glaziers with lower cost glass to replace all the windows broken by out of work rioters. So there's another win! It's all good!

Anonymous Dixout 4 Harambe November 24, 2016 3:50 PM  

@14, @16

Those same working-class whites saw their wages fall by 80% or more when the cotton mill/foundry/Ford plant/etc. went to China/Mexico/Guatemala in the 1990s. I'm sure most of them would be only too happy to make the tradeoff to get their jobs and homes back.

@19

We also won't be funding the expansion of a Chinese nuclear arsenal that's aimed at us, either.

@24

The GOPe answer is that if your friend isn't able to compete economically with Guatemalan seven-year-olds who are chained to the machinery, then your friend is lazy and stupid and deserves to die, along with any children she may have. Which is one of the reasons I, personally, am so enthusiastic about the rise of an alternative to the Dead Elephant Party, which has proven that it is lazy and stupid and deserves to die.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash November 24, 2016 4:15 PM  

Selat wrote:No economy has to reason to fear free trade. What’s portrayed in the article is just consequence of ineffective US policy, mainly regulation + minimum wage, making any production uncompetitive.
Bullshit. What's portrayed in the article is the consequence of taking skilled productive workers and throwing them out of work, and giving them a pittance to live on.
Look, we realize your dogma does not allow for making those kinds of observations, but restating free trade dogma does not in any way address the argument. Spending 8 paragraphs restating your free trade dogma does not address the argument.
What does your free trade dogma off the man who, at 45 years of age, is thrown out of productive gainful employment? Just over minimum wage at Walmart and the loss of literally everything he holds dear. Perhaps, on average, there is more money (although I would argue that is a very short-term effect), but he sure as hell isn't seeing any of it. Move to China? Disability fraud?

And by bringing in tens of millions of illegal and legal immigrants, H1B and H1A workers, followers of your Libertarian twaddle reduce the wages of the few jobs remaining.

Do you offer him anything? Except, of course, your sneering disdain.

Anonymous Selat November 24, 2016 4:37 PM  

@59

First, I've never postulated bringing any migrants legal or illegal. This is your dogma, which tells you that you cannot support free trade and be against immigration.

Second, your 45 year old man is thrown out of his job not because of free trade, but because of all policies that make US product too expensive to compete with Chinese product. Your solution is to make US product even less competitive and more expensive. The more expensive products the less purchasing power of population, especially the poorest one.

Third, free trade is not dogma, is an argument, which might be flawed and if so then you better show its flaws instead of crying over some 45 year old guy, which your ideas impoverish and lead to unemployment. I'm just waiting for 'argument' titled, 'but what about children'.

Anonymous Noah Baudie November 24, 2016 4:45 PM  

Has anyone here ever read Neal Stephenson's "Snow Crash?" For all that it was written as a parody of 1980s cyberpunk, it was terrifyingly prophetic:

"When it gets down to it — talking trade balances here — once we've brain-drained all our technology into other countries, once things have evened out, they're making cars in Bolivia and microwave ovens in Tadzhikistan and selling them here — once our edge in natural resources has been made irrelevant by giant Hong Kong ships and dirigibles that can ship North Dakota all the way to New Zealand for a nickel — once the Invisible Hand has taken away all those historical inequities and smeared them out into a broad global layer of what a Pakistani brickmaker would consider to be prosperity — y'know what? There's only four things we do better than anyone else:
music
movies
microcode (software)
high-speed pizza delivery"

Mr. Stephenson can be forgiven for not anticipating that "microcode" was going to be made in the Third World too, but otherwise, a more concise and more damning description of "free trade" I have never read.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash November 24, 2016 5:10 PM  

Selat wrote:Third, free trade is not dogma, is an argument, which might be flawed and if so then you better show its flaws instead of crying over some 45 year old guy, which your ideas impoverish and lead to unemployment. I'm just waiting for 'argument' titled, 'but what about children'.
Funny, there is no argument only assertion. Free trade is a religious dogma, propounded by Libertarians because they;'re stupid, and promoted by the bankster community because it makes them extremely rich.
"I never advocated it", there's a courageous stance. You never advocated it because you could see the effects. There's
MS-13 gangbangers down the road. But when the effect is hidden in heroin overdose statistics, you can ignore that. But tell me, Mr dialectic, what argument could you use against open borders? The arguments for Free Trade are exactly the arguments for open borders. It's all about freedom and competition, right? Why should we privilege locals against foreigners? It drives down the prices of services! It makes everybody richer!

Let's say he was making washing machines for the US market (sounds weird to modern ears, I know, but that used to be a viable business). He's supposed to compete with $3 per day slave laborers in China?
How?
Why should he? Because your dogma says it's better for him? What the fuck good does it do him that he could buy a washing machine for less (temporarily, ever notice that one of the results of globalism is inflation?) when he can't afford a washing machine, or a car, or a computer?

What do you offer him?
"My religious dogma that has destroyed your livelihood is morally superior" is typical of the narcissistic arrogance and immaturity of libertarians.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash November 24, 2016 5:12 PM  

My ideas are not the ones that lead to his unemployment and impoverishment, cuckster. That was on your side.

Anonymous Eric the Red November 24, 2016 5:35 PM  

The US has had a double whammy inflicted on it with respect to free trade. It hasn't been a case of just some home-grown Chinese industry starting to compete with those already in extent over here. Instead, the globalist vermin have gutted the industry here while moving it over to China.

Free trade proponents don't even begin to grasp that distinction. Again, anyone who still argues for free trade is on the take in one form or another.

Blogger Elizabeth November 24, 2016 6:34 PM  

Dixout 4 Harambe wrote:@14, @16


@24

The GOPe answer is that if your friend isn't able to compete economically with Guatemalan seven-year-olds who are chained to the machinery, then your friend is lazy and stupid and deserves to die, along with any children she may have. Which is one of the reasons I, personally, am so enthusiastic about the rise of an alternative to the Dead Elephant Party, which has proven that it is lazy and stupid and deserves to die.


Ha ha ha! I agree with you. Hail the God Emperor!

Blogger James November 24, 2016 7:53 PM  

Doc Rampage, I think we understand each other. I recognize that providing a crutch to a narrow business interest is costly and not likely to be worth it the longer it goes on. I would like to mention that I see a reasonable level of tariffs that applied to what amounts to imported luxury consumer goods as a good way to raise revenue for government as an alternative to income taxes on domestic production, and it would have the side benefit of reducing debt that is incurred to purchase all the imported luxury crap we don't really need in the first place. If a nation cannot afford to produce the crap in question it probably doesn't need to be consuming it.

Blogger James November 24, 2016 7:57 PM  

Snidely Whiplash, I guess I'm saying that as an Economic Nationalist I call my trade policy Neo-Protectionism. Or maybe I'm saying that Economic Nationalists should support a trade policy descended from the old idea of Protectionism that some call by the neologism of Neo-Protectionism.

Blogger Dave November 24, 2016 8:57 PM  

"Justin Pierce and Peter Schott believe they can trace back the uptick in suicides, drug overdoses, and alcohol-related deaths to 2000, when President Bill Clinton decided to relax the rules on major imports."

Because a change in trade policy is the only thing to happen to working class whites since 2000. Nothing else.

Blogger Bard November 24, 2016 10:23 PM  

Die-versity

Blogger Jose November 24, 2016 11:15 PM  

Free trade looks good in a one-shot game (the "comparative advantage" argument, updated by Michael Porter to "competitive advantage of nations).

Once you add increasing returns to scale (Paul Krugman's early work -- I know he's probably not popular here, but that was good economics, not partisan narratives), endogenous growth theory (a "macro" theory of technological change), path dependence (where you can end up depends on the path you take -- crazy idea, I know), and the industry-level analysis I posted above @50 by Pisano and Shih, almost all the foundations for the comparative advantage disappear.

It's a given in strategic thinking that when a game goes from being one-shot to a repeated interaction, the optimal/equilibrium solution changes significantly. Ironically, when it comes to free trade, mostly everyone assumes that the solution to a repetitive "competitive advantage" problem is the same as the one-shot. It's not. It's known that it's not. It's understood why it's not. But it's convenient to pretend that it is, at least in exchange for fat consulting and speaking fees.

Cheers,
JCS

(This reply burned 3kCal of the 26,783kCal consumed today.)

Anonymous Selat November 24, 2016 11:47 PM  

@63

please, watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rItm9j4vg_Q before you claim that something is argument or not

Anonymous Selat November 25, 2016 12:10 AM  

@63

your example with washing machine and question how to compete with lower wages, is the same argument why US unionized workers demand minimum wage as to create barrier of entry into the trade for the local poor population which would be ready to work for less, which is their only competitive advantage.

Free trade is not giving privilege, 'privilege', if that the word you insist to use, is allowing local producers to demand higher prices for worse products, because you believe that the only way to keep people working.

But guess what, at the end of XIX and beginning of XX century the workers in US had highest wages in the world, and US was still exporting country. Strange, isn't it?

Blogger Snidely Whiplash November 25, 2016 2:44 AM  

Selat wrote:@63

please, watch this video ... before you claim that something is argument or not

Please kiss my ass
I know what an argument it. It's where you address the points made by your correspondent.
That's why it's not an argument.

The point is, you care more for your theory than for your country, your fellow citizens, your descendants, even than your own career prospects. Because it's a beautiful theory. Completely false, but beautiful.
How has this country prospered since the 1980's, when Free Trade dogma was adopted by both political parties as holy writ?
Have wages gone up?
Has standard of living gone up?
Has employment gone up?
Has our ability to supply our military needs in the event of a world war with, say, China gone up?
Has social stability gone up?
Has general prosperity gone up?
Have the life expectancies of what was the majority economic class gone up?
Free Trade promises prosperity. Where is it? your theory has hit a wall and you refuse to see it. It is a beautiful theory, though.

Anonymous EH November 25, 2016 6:49 AM  

US companies could take back a lot of the market just by actually declaring what they are selling, how much it costs and standard discounts for volume, if any, guarantee their products for actual use and give good service and support. Too many companies make the transaction costs unaffordable by making anyone trying to do comparative shopping to cost out different ways to do a project get quotes and talk to salespeople for every little thing. People will buy more, even at high prices, when there are prices displayed, than they will when they have to ask the price of every possible alternative.

Blogger wreckage November 25, 2016 7:03 AM  

Have wages gone up?
Yes
Has standard of living gone up?
Yes
Has employment gone up?
No
Has our ability to supply our military needs in the event of a world war with, say, China gone up?
Yes
Has social stability gone up?
Define social stability, and how to isolate immigration and displacement effects?
Has general prosperity gone up?
Yes
Have the life expectancies of what was the majority economic class gone up?
Yes


You're overstating your case by so much you can't possibly be serious.

Blogger James November 25, 2016 10:18 AM  

"But guess what, at the end of XIX and beginning of XX century the workers in US had highest wages in the world, and US was still exporting country. Strange, isn't it? "
So true, Selat. Back then the US had no income tax, minimal regulatory apparatus, monetary standards of gold and silver, a production ethic instead of a consumption ethic, etc. I think if all the changes are listed and added up and carefully and honestly consider it's a miracle we're even still alive sucking air at this point.

Blogger James November 25, 2016 10:30 AM  

The answers to these questions are more complicated than people seem to realize:
Have wages gone up?
Real wages for low and mid-skilled workers have gone down since 1973 or so.
Has standard of living gone up?
Borrowing more money to consume more worthless crap is not necessarily an improvement in the standard of living. Some things are better, like big screen TV's, but some things are worse, like not being able to find a decent knish in NYC anymore. There's quality not just quantity.
Has employment gone up?
Employment went up when women started working out of their homes but it's gone back down since then and long term chronic unemployment is the worst it's ever been as far as anyone can tell.
Has our ability to supply our military needs in the event of a world war with, say, China gone up?
The only way to prove this is by winning a real war, which most of us would rather avoid. It is a fact that the military is short on replacement parts at the moment, especially the Navy apparently, but perhaps that's how it always is with military equipment and ordnance.
Has social stability gone up?
My impression is that social stability is worse now than it was in the late 1960's, which was a crazy time, man, I know, I was there.
Has general prosperity gone up?
Consumption has gone up, but wealth and economic security have definitely not gone up for most people in the USA.
Have the life expectancies of what was the majority economic class gone up?
Nope, not recently. The tide has been turning on the increase of life expectancies, which was going to be inevitable anyway at some point because people can't live forever.

"You're overstating your case by so much you can't possibly be serious." At least you didn't call him Shirley.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash November 25, 2016 12:34 PM  

wreckage wrote:Have wages gone up?
Yes

Not in inflation adjusted terms, no. In fact, if the actual inflation rate were used, as opposed to the official "hedonically adjusted" rate, wages are down about 15% since 1980.

Has standard of living gone up?
Yes

No, standard of living has slipped. Not only have wages lost ground to inflation, but costs which are not accounted for in the inflation rate have ballooned, including medical care and housing.

Has employment gone up?
No

We have the highest number of long-term unemployed since the mid 70's. At least you got that one right.

Has our ability to supply our military needs in the event of a world war with, say, China gone up?
Yes

Absolutely false, With the loss of our manufacturing base, the US can no linger supply component parts such as capacitors and bearings.

Has social stability gone up?
Define social stability, and how to isolate immigration and displacement effects?

Fair enough. It's obviously worse, but there may be other than economic causes.

Has general prosperity gone up?
Yes

Absolutely not. See above. Infact see the article Vox cites waaaaaay up there at the top.

Have the life expectancies of what was the majority economic class gone up?
Yes

The article cited at the top of this freaking post cites a 25% increase of of the death rate among working-age working class Americans since 2000, largely due to drug and alcohol abuse and suicide. Now you're not even trying.

You're overstating your case by so much you can't possibly be serious.
You're so pig-ignorant you are completely unable to assess reality.

Anonymous SciVo de Plorable November 25, 2016 6:23 PM  

James wrote:Has our ability to supply our military needs in the event of a world war with, say, China gone up?

The only way to prove this is by winning a real war, which most of us would rather avoid. It is a fact that the military is short on replacement parts at the moment, especially the Navy apparently, but perhaps that's how it always is with military equipment and ordnance.


No. Exporting our factories meant exporting all of the jobs for training Tool & Die Makers, and our legacy ones are about to retire. Either we bring the factories and factory jobs and associated skills back to the continental U.S., or we lose the ability to determine our destiny.

Anonymous SciVo de Plorable November 25, 2016 6:33 PM  

Okay, not "all" of the jobs. But unless there are major changes, in less than a couple of decades, we will be unable to repeat the stunt that won WWII, since we will have neither the factories nor the skill to retool them in short order.

Blogger wreckage November 25, 2016 11:25 PM  

"You're so pig-ignorant you are completely unable to assess reality."

Well I got you to support your argument with specifics regarding the major points, so now I can assess it. So if by "pig ignorant" you mean "lazy as fuck" then yeah, maybe.

Here's the thing; I'm a free trader but a realist and a nationalist, and while I'm not alt-right I think the alt-right are observant. Vox in particular, if he's wrong, it's never because of shitty observation or shitty argument.

And I am sick to death of winning arguments with half-retarded socialists.

So, forgive me for poking you guys, but I'm here neither as an avid supporter of the cause, nor as someone who holds you in contempt.

Blogger wreckage November 26, 2016 12:16 AM  

Have wages gone up?
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/

In fact the data back to the 60's suggests real wages were flat virtually forever. Actually, you'd expect this if you were one of the guys who says wage increases just drive inflation in a zero-sum game. OTOH there doesn't seem to be any marked effect of the 1990's Clinton action.

Median household income has gone up: http://www.davemanuel.com/median-household-income.php Again, no marked downtick for the 80's or for the Clinton era, but then, the argument for both those is specific to manufacturing jobs, not to median households.

Point conditionally ceded.

Has standard of living gone up?

Tracking median household income, yes, shown above. I see a fairly steady rate of change with no marked effect for free-trade reforms

Has employment gone up?

Has our ability to supply our military needs in the event of a world war with, say, China gone up?

Possibly unanswerable, but the USA still does a lot of heavy manufacturing at home. And while electronics might suffer in a transition, I expect a war-footing economy would get that sorted very quickly.

Has social stability gone up?

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0873729.html USA murder rate is back down to the lowest on record as at 2014. But then the major demographic issues may only kick in c.2014.

Has general prosperity gone up?

Much is made of this: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/
But while the middle class is a smaller segment, the lower class is static, and the upper class is growing - as in, there are more upper class households than ever. Scroll down a little for the graph:
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2016/06/21/not-just-the-1-the-upper-middle-class-is-larger-and-richer-than-ever/

However, this could be consistent with the alt-right idea that the middle class have used foreign workers (at home or abroad) to leverage themselves into the upper class, bypassing the organic growth of the working and lower-middle that might otherwise have been necessary to drive that prosperity.


Have the life expectancies of what was the majority economic class gone up?

Well, World Socialist News still stops short of calling it static or declining:
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/04/12/life-a12.html
Stats: http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/united-states/life-expectancy-at-birth

1967: 69.77 2015: 79.16

Even allowing the maximum local class-gap of 8 years (And bet you a dollar there are other demographic divides in play there), life expectancy goes up.

Anonymous Selat November 26, 2016 7:55 AM  

@Snidely Whiplash

I'm not in mood to kiss anyone's bottom. So please, keep you fantasies to yourself in this department.

getting back to the topic of discussion, the free trade does not promise higher wages, but it promises lower prices and higher standard of living especially for the poor by increasing the modest purchasing power they have.

Now try to evaluate following 2 situations, in which one of them you are better off.

#1 your wages go 20% up but average prices you pay also go 20% up.
#2 your wages go 20% down and average prices you pay go 20% down.

I would prefer option #2 because I would have to pay less taxes (in progressive tax code that US have) while increasing purchasing power of unit of currency.

In scenario #1 you are worse off us you get in higher tax bracket and you remain with less purchasing power, but your government grows with your tax money and having it more can exercise more coercion on you.

The capitalist system does not make societies richer but increasing its wages (this is merely side effect), it makes them richer by lowering prices and increasing purchasing power. That's why free trade is such good tool in this aim.

So please sharing you anecdotes and provide some coherent reasoned argument against free trade. Because wailing that you friend Joe will lose job is not "an argument".

And one more thing, in last 20 and more years the more free trade is not the only thing what's changed in US economics (e.g. more regulation, FED dual mandate, etc...). So what makes you so sure that all the problems are related to free trade?

Blogger James November 26, 2016 12:08 PM  

SciVo de Plorable, I also admit I cannot see how we could carry on a real war against a worthy opponent such as Russia or China without an industrial base capable of maintaining an effective war machine. Until the war comes, though, the illusion of military strength can be maintained because on paper our military looks very strong. Too bad battles are not fought only on paper, or maybe by computer like on Star Trek episode "A Taste of Armageddon." Then we could keep the war going for 500 years, maybe.

Blogger James November 26, 2016 12:18 PM  

If I may I would like to point out that "real wages" going up is not a matter of wages going up, but, rather, and always, is a matter of COSTS GOING DOWN!!! Guys like Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Ford are the ones who MADE REAL WAGES GO UP BY INCREASING THE EFFECTIVE PURCHASING POWER OF THE WORKING MAN'S WAGES!!! Sorry for yelling and screaming so loud, but I feel like this is an important point that is always missed, even by me because all this time I my self forgot to bring it up. Carnegie got the cost of hi quality steel down from $10/pound to .10cents/Ton. Rockefeller, devious bastard that he was, got gasoline down from sky high to under .20cents/gallon. Ford got the price of his Model T down from $850 in 1908 to under $300 in 1925, and that was for a new one. A poor person could buy a used Model T for $50 bucks and be on the road and able to work at that better job that was out of reach before. Rich people get richer through higher income and asset appreciation, but poor people get rich by means of more efficient production of the things they need to survive and prosper. Rich people get rich by providing poor people with better stuff at a lower cost, and that is what makes everyone better off.

Blogger James November 26, 2016 12:25 PM  

A "Sehlat" is a Vulcan creature resembling a Teddy Bear with 6 inch fangs, but I won't hold that against you. You are correct that free trade is not the whole problem, but it is a problem because it is part of the system that puts the competition out of business so that the multi-culti-internationalist mega-corporations can operate as unmolested monopolies and oligopolies. It's like minimum wage laws, which are not the sole reason that small businesses are destroyed, but they are an important part of the fatal mix.

Blogger Duke Norfolk November 26, 2016 1:31 PM  

James wrote:"real wages" going up is not a matter of wages going up, but, rather, and always, is a matter of COSTS GOING DOWN!!!

Good point, James. And if the Fed (and all central banks) hadn't been determined to relentlessly debase our currency over the last 45 years (and more) the working class would have reaped a lot more from the productivity gains over that time. They siphoned off much of those gains to the crony class and almost nobody understands that. We're taught that inflation is just some kind of natural phenomenon, and/or that it's greedy business' fault.

It's the biggest heist in history and it's done right in front of our eyes.

Blogger James November 26, 2016 1:54 PM  

The love of fiat money is the root of the evil which we are experiencing, no doubt about it. With control over the value of money, they can steal its value from us without us even being aware of it. In order to see that it is happening a person must first understand money, and most people have nofa king idea what money is. To most people money is magical stuff, beyond understanding.

Anonymous TJEL November 27, 2016 8:17 PM  

It's not surprising that kikes support free trade. It allows you to undercut other nations at their expense. It's also a cause of death and suffering. Jews don't care about that, because they operate on a small, flexible ethic system, and they only care about their own group, which is typically dominant, and thus affected less.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts