Just a thought about "free" trade, from one who claims no expertise. I do understand the concept, that products should be made where it is most fiscally efficient to do so, and should then be sold where local enterprise cannot meet the price. The manufacturers make money, the consumers save money, and everybody supposedly wins. But here is the stumbling point for me: Look at the U.S., where the manufacturing sector has been gutted and its home-grown products replaced by subsidized goods often from arguably its greatest economic and political enemy, China.
Yes, American consumers enjoy lower prices, but at what cost in jobs for their fellow Americans, and themselves? And what happens if China turns off the flow of goods? Just look at the supply chain debacle in the early 2020s. It is all well and good to talk about America evolving away from manufacturing into a service economy, but that only makes sense if one presupposes that economic decisions in the rest of an often-hostile world will be based on economics and not, as is more often the case in a strategic sense, geo-political considerations.
One need not look much farther than the evident collapse of the American Dream to the point where entire generations despair of ever having a good job, owning a home and comfortably raising a family. You cannot turn back the clock, but it is instructive to note that when America was a dominant manufacturing power providing well-paid jobs for almost anyone who really wanted to work, the American Dream became a reality for millions. It takes little imagination to see where America is heading under current trade policies, and it's not a pretty picture.
Is economic isolationism a bad thing in every case? Would it lessen the standard of living of American workers? Yes, prices would go up for some items but competition puts inexorable downward pressure on prices and Americans are demonstrably among the most industrially-competitive people on the planet. And consumers might well be prepared to pay a little more for this and that knowing that the extra cost in part goes to supporting American jobs. In many cases, their own jobs.
It is easy to say that free trade offers advantages for all participants, but in the case of an economic giant like the U.S. I wonder if there isn't a similarly-compelling argument that restricting imports to support the renaissance of a manufacturing and industrial sector that has proven its ability to deliver both quality goods and good jobs has some compelling advantages for the country , too.
Great that you are thinking and asking questions Jim. I believe the argument is always and everywhere that free trade is the optimum. Obviously if you are at war not so. Personally I believe the China bogeyman is overblown to enrich certain interests. The big piece in your question I believe is the destruction of the US dollar over the past hundred years. Mises.org is an excellent place to find some of the answers you’re looking for. Have a great rest of the long weekend if your in the US
Correct. Inflation is one of the many culprits that sent jobs over seas. Another is ,I hate to say it is corporate greed. One will always look for a win win situation. Not a win lose propaganda like is being fed to Us. We , the people can make a difference. It depends on Our perspective. Win win or win lose!
Irt is one thing to talk about Fee trade and Ricardo's Theory of Comparitive Advantage but another to try and implement it. in the case of China we buy their goods but they restrict our goods. Secondly I was competing in silicon metal technology i.e. the stuff used to make computer chips and solar panels. We were the world leader with 40% of the world's business in silicon metal. China was stealing our technology, Intellectual Property. We caught several Chinese employees, employed at our company, with thousands of IP reports on their personal computers. So how does free trade work when one country is stealing from the other and doesn't accept their "opponents" superior products. Answer: not very well ! It's not free trade and it is a lying relationship. In the end China dominated the silicon metal supply of solar panels because you can make workable solar panels with lower grade silicon metal. The overwhelmed the market with cheap, poorer quality, silicon metal and dominated the solar market.
Having lived in the USA and travelled a fair bit I must comment on the idea that the "American Dream
can somehow be resurrected .
My opinion is that the chances are very slim .Americans have become a fat and lazy crew and the real work is done by the underclasses.
Going back to the utopian era of post war America is not going to happen .
The values of family, religion, and free enterprise are held by such a small proportion of citizens that a positive reinvention of society is a long shot .
Well Joel, our hero, presidente Javier Milei, has apparently gone to the dark side. The Economist reports that Argentina plans to spend $300 million on some used F-16’s from Denmark. The “good” news is that the USA is chipping in $40 million (that we don’t really have), and that Argentina’s fighter jet order with China has been cancelled. I guess there will always be backs to be scratched, but it’s still a pity that real economic progress meets the inevitable obstacles. Rest well, knowing your skies are safer.
I'm not sure how that qualifies Milei as having 'gone to the dark side.' He had previously stated that his government will not trade with china, or any other authoritarian regime, although private citizens are free to do as they wish. Good for him. Of course, the purchase begs the question of why Argentina needs fighter jets to begin with...
The “need” for expensive military equipment was my point. Not buying from China was the good news. And I doubt Denmark takes pesos, so Argentina will likely have to come up with dollars.
Just a thought about "free" trade, from one who claims no expertise. I do understand the concept, that products should be made where it is most fiscally efficient to do so, and should then be sold where local enterprise cannot meet the price. The manufacturers make money, the consumers save money, and everybody supposedly wins. But here is the stumbling point for me: Look at the U.S., where the manufacturing sector has been gutted and its home-grown products replaced by subsidized goods often from arguably its greatest economic and political enemy, China.
Yes, American consumers enjoy lower prices, but at what cost in jobs for their fellow Americans, and themselves? And what happens if China turns off the flow of goods? Just look at the supply chain debacle in the early 2020s. It is all well and good to talk about America evolving away from manufacturing into a service economy, but that only makes sense if one presupposes that economic decisions in the rest of an often-hostile world will be based on economics and not, as is more often the case in a strategic sense, geo-political considerations.
One need not look much farther than the evident collapse of the American Dream to the point where entire generations despair of ever having a good job, owning a home and comfortably raising a family. You cannot turn back the clock, but it is instructive to note that when America was a dominant manufacturing power providing well-paid jobs for almost anyone who really wanted to work, the American Dream became a reality for millions. It takes little imagination to see where America is heading under current trade policies, and it's not a pretty picture.
Is economic isolationism a bad thing in every case? Would it lessen the standard of living of American workers? Yes, prices would go up for some items but competition puts inexorable downward pressure on prices and Americans are demonstrably among the most industrially-competitive people on the planet. And consumers might well be prepared to pay a little more for this and that knowing that the extra cost in part goes to supporting American jobs. In many cases, their own jobs.
It is easy to say that free trade offers advantages for all participants, but in the case of an economic giant like the U.S. I wonder if there isn't a similarly-compelling argument that restricting imports to support the renaissance of a manufacturing and industrial sector that has proven its ability to deliver both quality goods and good jobs has some compelling advantages for the country , too.
Just wondering.
Great that you are thinking and asking questions Jim. I believe the argument is always and everywhere that free trade is the optimum. Obviously if you are at war not so. Personally I believe the China bogeyman is overblown to enrich certain interests. The big piece in your question I believe is the destruction of the US dollar over the past hundred years. Mises.org is an excellent place to find some of the answers you’re looking for. Have a great rest of the long weekend if your in the US
Correct. Inflation is one of the many culprits that sent jobs over seas. Another is ,I hate to say it is corporate greed. One will always look for a win win situation. Not a win lose propaganda like is being fed to Us. We , the people can make a difference. It depends on Our perspective. Win win or win lose!
Irt is one thing to talk about Fee trade and Ricardo's Theory of Comparitive Advantage but another to try and implement it. in the case of China we buy their goods but they restrict our goods. Secondly I was competing in silicon metal technology i.e. the stuff used to make computer chips and solar panels. We were the world leader with 40% of the world's business in silicon metal. China was stealing our technology, Intellectual Property. We caught several Chinese employees, employed at our company, with thousands of IP reports on their personal computers. So how does free trade work when one country is stealing from the other and doesn't accept their "opponents" superior products. Answer: not very well ! It's not free trade and it is a lying relationship. In the end China dominated the silicon metal supply of solar panels because you can make workable solar panels with lower grade silicon metal. The overwhelmed the market with cheap, poorer quality, silicon metal and dominated the solar market.
Having lived in the USA and travelled a fair bit I must comment on the idea that the "American Dream
can somehow be resurrected .
My opinion is that the chances are very slim .Americans have become a fat and lazy crew and the real work is done by the underclasses.
Going back to the utopian era of post war America is not going to happen .
The values of family, religion, and free enterprise are held by such a small proportion of citizens that a positive reinvention of society is a long shot .
In my humble opinion .
Well Joel, our hero, presidente Javier Milei, has apparently gone to the dark side. The Economist reports that Argentina plans to spend $300 million on some used F-16’s from Denmark. The “good” news is that the USA is chipping in $40 million (that we don’t really have), and that Argentina’s fighter jet order with China has been cancelled. I guess there will always be backs to be scratched, but it’s still a pity that real economic progress meets the inevitable obstacles. Rest well, knowing your skies are safer.
I'm not sure how that qualifies Milei as having 'gone to the dark side.' He had previously stated that his government will not trade with china, or any other authoritarian regime, although private citizens are free to do as they wish. Good for him. Of course, the purchase begs the question of why Argentina needs fighter jets to begin with...
The “need” for expensive military equipment was my point. Not buying from China was the good news. And I doubt Denmark takes pesos, so Argentina will likely have to come up with dollars.
Edit: should have said “the inevitable temptations”.
Don’t the interns do all the reading for said gov’ment, uh, personages, as in “pass the bill and then we’ll <someone can> read it?”