What is so great about Free Trade, that makes it worth the decimation of the working class?

[AZ Progressive]

Please, enlighten me. Why should we sacrifice the working class for free trade?

[AgingAmerican]

1. It's neoliberalism on a global scale

And the billionaires get to have it ALL while everyone else scrapes by on next to nothing.

It's a gigantic income redistribution scheme designed to make billionaires into trillionaires.

[Ed Suspicious]

2. Well, those Americans who can afford to do business over seas are in a much better position to

trickle down upon us thanks to free trade.

[Nye Bevan]

6. I buy some prescription drugs from Canada.

Does this count as "doing business over seas?"

[passiveporcupine]

10. How do you do that?

It's illegal. Unless you drive up there to buy them, in which case you are one of the lucky ones who lives close enough to do that.

And then you support Hillary who would never support negotiating drug prices in the US...oh how lovely that must be for you who gets to buy cheaper drugs than the rest of us.

[Nye Bevan]

14. .

http://www.onlinecanadianpharmacy.com

[passiveporcupine]

76. So, I guess it's illegal but the authorities are lookiing the other way.

But is it legal to buy medications from Canadian pharmacies? The answer is, technically no, but U.S. officials are allowing it to happen.

Under the Prescription Drug Marketing Act of 1987, it is illegal for anyone other than the original manufacturer to bring prescription drugs into the country. However, federal officials have decided to exercise "enforcement discretion" in dealing with prescription drugs brought across the border, provided the drugs are not narcotics or other controlled substances. This means that as long as a person brings back no more than a three-month supply for personal use, border officials generally look the other way, Thomas McGinnis, director of pharmacy affairs for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in March 2001. Patients generally may order refills in amounts up to a three-month supply without interference.

http://www.elderlawanswers.com/buying-prescription-drugs-from-canada-legal-or-illegal-1204

I don't know if my doc will do this for me, but I need to check it out. My asthma inhaler is less than half price. It freaks me out a bit to do this, knowing it's illegal.

But thank you for the link. I did try to search for a Canadian site once and am still getting daily spam just from opening a web site. I hate that.

[Kilgore]

43. We do it all the time

https://www.canadadrugs.com/new-order

Saving 2/3 the US price for my mom's glaucoma medication. Adds up to hundreds saved per month.

[passiveporcupine]

77. This one has even better pricing. Thanks!

[Hoyt]

3. I doubt you really care, and probably believe we'll have healthcare, education, etc., trading among

ourselves hiding behind tariffs, etc. But, why don't to read up on it. Here's some good places to start discovering the many positive aspects of trade agreements, including those beyond trade:


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/president-obama-the-tpp-would-let-america-not-china-lead-the-way-on-global-trade/2016/05/02/680540e4-0fd0-11e6-93ae-50921721165d_story.html

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2016/01/28-obama-perspective-on-tpp-galston

[snowy owl]

15. and letting corporations write the rules . . . wonder who'll benefit?

Funny isn't it that the last trade pacts have only served to hurt Americans. But continue your optimism.

[Hoyt]

32. Americans were getting hurt long before NAFTA. Myopic people need something to blame though.

[Jesus Malverde]

36. Are you referencing free trade with Japan

A country that sells millions of cars in the USA. While we sell thousands of our cars there?

[Hoyt]

44. Because our cars suck, but TPP will help make them price competitive.

[Jesus Malverde]

49. How will the TPP make us manufacturers price competitive.

Since exchange rates float, it's hard to predict a price when collecting yen for cars built with dollars.

How will TPP make them price competitive?

[Armstead]

56. Same stuff thats been fed us since the 80's

Never seems to work out like they say it will

BTW there is a certain irony that in the 90's Bill Clinton was pushing for more trade with China....Now we're using China as the excuse for another bad agreemet?

And before your predictable response.....I am not against trade. But not in the form of these power grabbing, job killing gifts to the transnational elites that these "Free trade" represent

[Hoyt]

65. Fine, trade among ourselves, keep raising taxes on all of us to pay for things we want or go without

Alternative -- support international trade where demand is, including cracking down on currency manipulation, and tax the hell out of corporate profits. It will increase jobs here, although different jobs in many cases. If you believe in basic income floor or anything like that, we won't get it trading primarily among ourselves.

[Armstead]

68. Plenty of room to debate the specifics, but the basic framework has to be right

That means not negotiate in secret -- have transparency and EXPLAIN CLEARLY all facets and implications and allow the public (and elected officials) have input into it and opportunity to debate in public sphere instead of fast-tracking them after they are "done deals."

Focus on TRADE RULES, not undermining other national laws and sovereignty in the process. Don't lump everything into the monsterious "all in one" packages. When standards for labor and environment are required they should be in the interests of workers and environment in participating countries -- not allowing corporations to use trade to abuse workers and skirt regulations.

Don't be afraid of protectionism if that means provisions to protect domestic economy industries, jobs and consumers.

[Downwinder]

4. Since we have gotten rid of the jobs and manufacturing

we have to have free trade to get the products.

[Nye Bevan]

5. Would Americans be better off if the 50 states could impose tariffs on goods from each other?

Would it create jobs for Connecticut residents if CT could ban the importation of cars from other states, with the goal of encouraging auto manufacturers to build plants in CT?

Is it unfair that a New York corporation can open a factory in Mississippi to take advantage of the lower labor costs there? Would it help New Yorkers if a NY corporation was restricted to opening factories only in NY? Or could have big taxes slapped on it if it opened factories in other states?

Obviously hypothetical since this would all be unconstitutional, but hypothetically, would this kind of thing make people better off or worse off in general? Because exactly the same economic principles apply to trade between countries.

[AZ Progressive]

8. When we talk about free trade, we are not talking about free trade between U.S. states

We are talking about between foreign nations, which is a different issue.

[Nye Bevan]

12. The principles of comparative advantage are exactly the same.

Every reputable economist agrees that free trade is a good thing. The United States is better off as a country because we have free trade between the states. The EU is better off for having free trade between its members. And the world as a whole is better off when countries can trade freely.

The caveat is that while on average free trade makes us better off, there will inevitably be losers from it, like people who lose jobs to overseas competition, and one can definitely argue that such people should be better compensated for this impact. The termination of US unemployment benefits after an arbitrary period of time, for example, is cruel when compared to other countries like the UK.

[snowy owl]

23. No . . . different economies. Entirely different.

I guess the "country" is better off but it's people certainly aren't. Or do you have a magic answer for that? Oh, I see...put them on unemployment forever. Buying local and enforcing anti-trust would do more for our economy than big trade deals.

[Corporate666]

47. Not entirely different at all

The rules of economics aren't different for each country anymore than the rules of math are different for each country.

The inter-state example is a very good one. And is relevant beyond what most may realize. In Massachusetts, people go shopping in New Hampshire to avoid state sales taxes. In New York, people buy cigarettes from out of state to avoid the high taxes. Thinking you can erect barriers to trade and it will solve a problem doesn't work in practice. It just hurts the people living in the area who are barred from enjoying the benefits of lower cost goods.

Free trade overwhelmingly benefits the lower income earners - that's an economic fact. Just saying "nuh-uh" and ignoring the facts doesn't make them any less true.

[Jesus Malverde]

38. In some ways this is happening

States granting tax breaks and other incentives other states cannot afford to give.

[Glamrock]

62. I wouldn't say exactly the same.

The differences in wages between the states is completely different than the difference between wages here and literal slave wages elsewhere. That's the point. The U.S. worker is being forced to compete against those making a dollar a day by the greed of the shareholder. This has been allowed due in part by said free trade agreements. And it certainly doesn't help that the U.S. govt. grants subsidies for moving overseas.

[ucrdem]

7. The simple answer is that it creates newjobs and secures old ones.

Offshoring and trade aren't the same thing and are regulated by different sets of policies. Yes, offshoring has led to job loss, but so have automation, digitization, and market shifts. TPP (which is a trade deal, not an offshoring arrangement) is about creating new markets for US products.

[passiveporcupine]

11. how does offshoring secure old jobs?

It is a well established trend that we are losing jobs and losing income...and our government is doing nothing about it.

If TPP helped us enough to offset how it hurts us, it might be worth it, but it only helps the wealthy.

[ucrdem]

17. It doesn't. But trade does.

One example would be tobacco, which is losing market share like crazy in the US but still selling internationally. Other examples would be entertainment and software licensing. With TPP the creators might see a return; without it the stuff is simply stolen.

[passiveporcupine]

21. Oh, great example

We should be celebrating the sale of tobacco in other countries so they can die from it.

Jesus...can you be more deaf?

Fracking too...that's something else we are trying to sell to other countries.

[ucrdem]

25. People also die from car accidents, lung disease and cancer.

Should we let Detroit go bankrupt?

[passiveporcupine]

28. If you think that was a smart comeback,

no wonder you are voting for Hillary.

[ucrdem]

31. I notice you haven't refuted any of it.

And yes, that's a big reason I'm relieved that Hillary's on track to the Oval O.

[passiveporcupine]

35. What is there to refute?

Automobiles are a necessary evil, even if they result in some deaths. But we constantly work on ways to get better at it, like self driving cars.

Tobacco is addictive and deadly and we are selling it in countries like Vietnam, where they have stores set up right outside high school grounds to be sure to entrap all the youth in smoking.

Vietnamese males almost all smoke. And there are trade rules that make it harder to label tobacco as a dangerous product over there.

And you are OK with that. I get it. You are not a progressive dem. You are a neoliberal who only cares about profit. You don't care about people or the planet.

Sorry, I find that disgusting.

[ucrdem]

46. Trump feels similarly, so does this guy:

[cheapdate]

58. If we could go back to before

the entire fabric and landscape of our country was destroyed, rescaled, and rearranged to accommodate tens of millions of automobiles, no sane, rational, or ethical person would choose to go down that path. Our cities are a mess, our communities fractured and isolated. We've reengineered an entire continent to suit automobiles. Nothing is built on a human scale anymore. Big box stores sit on acres of asphalt surrounded by concrete roadways.

[ucrdem]

60. Exactly. Cars have huge environmental impacts.

Yes manufacturing them is profitable, but it's long past time to move to the next paradigm. Is Hillary up to the job? I think so. Obama's been on it for eight years and she's learned a lot from him.

[cheapdate]

61. Hillary or Bernie are both light years

ahead of Trump and the Republicans.

I realize that few people probably share my unconventional environmental ethics. But I know where my allies are. I'm supporting the Democrat and it's not a tough call.

[passiveporcupine]

75. Cars can be replaced with mass transit, and are also being made greener all the time

You want to talk about environmental impact? Do you know how much crap is spewed into the air and water by international shippers? You know those huge ships that carry tons of cargo back and forth across the sea to accommodate our trade and keep our wages suppressed, and our products cheap and disposal (another huge form of waste).

Wiki gives a pretty good breakdown of just how nasty these big ships are.

The environmental impact of shipping includes greenhouse gas emissions, acoustic, and oil pollution. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) estimates that Carbon dioxide emissions from shipping were equal to 2.2% of the global human-made emissions in 2012[1] and expects them to rise by as much as 2 to 3 times by 2050 if no action is taken

Wiki

there have been some very good documentaries on the greenhouse gasses and other pollution created by shipping.

Here is a good link to info about a documentary on cruise ship pollution. 4 minute trailer at site.

http://www.folkeryden.com/film-documentary/productions/shipping-pollution/

[Midwestern Democrat]

67. Cigarette tobacco is an agricultural product where we basically have a monopoly on the supply

- Turkish tobacco tastes much different (much harsher and more oily). You don't need free trade deals to sell agriculture that can only be grown in your country.

[snowy owl]

33. Name one trade deal that has benefitted US? Even sovereignty traded away.

So if you are a corporatist you've done pretty well while millions have suffered. Keep it local. Let tourists come to America to see different cultures and commercial areas instead of a MacDonalds on every corner.
Fewer billionaires but so much better for the environment. Keep it local. Let fifty small grocery stores compete instead of ten chain stores in large cities. I can live without globalism. We need food and water policies in this country more than we need globalism. Anything made in China could be made in USA. And yes, we'd pay for it because we make our own economy when we buy local.

[ucrdem]

41. Let's start with NAFTA, signed in 1994, which led to six straight years of employment gains:

The reasons Barack and Hillary support TPP (when they do) have nothing to do with oligarchy.

[reddread]

9. are you asking billionaires

or people who dont know?

[cliffordu]

13. Cheap shit at the Walmart....?

[Nye Bevan]

16. iPhones costing $500 instead of $1200? (nt)

[reddread]

19. 90 dollar a month cell phone bills

[AZ Progressive]

24. So is that the root of it?

"Screw the working class, as long as I get cheap electronics!"

[Nye Bevan]

29. Right. Because nobody in the working class ever buys electronics.

Actually working class people will buy a lot fewer electronic devices without free trade. Millionaires, of course, would be much less affected.

[snowy owl]

37. I don't need to save money on the backs of workers. My mother put a china cabinet

in layaway and bought it that way. I got mine for one-tenth the price at Costco. Yes, I benefited. But does it make me happy to do that? Short term yes but my values are different. Doing her way kept the country employed. That is more satisfying to me than cheap products. And there's Androids.

That is an insufferable attitude. As long as it's good for me. . . screw you.

[Nye Bevan]

48. So you're well enough off that you can afford not to buy the cheapest products.

But many people are not. The poor would be disproportionately affected by increased prices due to tariffs and import restrictions. Millionaires, not so much.

[passiveporcupine]

73. The poor could pay more for their consumer needs

If they had fair wages.

It's all a vicious cycle to keep wages low.

[brentspeak]

52. Apple passes absolutely no savings to USA consumers

Apple pays Chinese workers pennies on the dollar to make iPhones. If labor costs were accurately reflected in iPhone pricing, the phones would cost probably around $100.

Quit lying to those here on the boards. Thanks in advance.

[joshcryer]

18. Typed on a device made where?

We did this to ourselves.

[reddread]

20. from what?

nothing compared what we do to others for their materials.

[joshcryer]

30. Sure.

One thing we've exported is our pollution. We got clear skies over our largest cities because some kid is extracting scrap metal from a toxic junk bound using a hammer and screwdriver.

[snowy owl]

39. The difference is values and human decency. We've lost those.

[joshcryer]

42. Remember that...

...next time you buy a $99 tablet, or cellphone.

[Nye Bevan]

63. What do you think would happen to the workers who make those products

if Americans were prevented from buying them?

Would those workers be better off, or worse off?

[vintx]

22. It helps in the race to the bottom!

[hill2016]

26. The US median income is in the top 1% of the world.

Hence it's economic justice to redistribute this wealth from the top 1% to the rest of the world.

[reformist2]

27. Huge profits for the 1%!!!

[oberliner]

34. Free trade increases access to higher-quality, lower-priced goods

Free trade means more growth and Free trade improves efficiency and innovation.

Those are the arguments I usually see presented by those who support Free Trade.

[snowy owl]

50. Growth, growth, growth - how much growth can the planet sustain?

I live in Seattle. Look what growth has brought us. People living in parks and cars, drugs everywhere, children in poverty the fastest growing segment of society. I'm sick of growth. Perhaps some of these cults (who follow the laws) are right. Do we need to rape countries for copper to keep tech going. When is enough enough? Instead of going to gyms to build muscles, why not start by working for ourselves agriculturally and putting food away ourselves so we don't have to eat everything processed. I'm sure lots of things fit into my paradigm but it will never happen. Today I signed a petition for Disney to put a voice over for his film about a blue coral reef fish (can't remember name) just so people wouldn't deplete them by suddenly everybody wanting one which is what happened after Finding Nemo. Nemo are cloudfish that can be sustained domestically but these blue fish cannot. So one more species which may become extinct that's due to the consumerism of people. It's hard to be older and live all this while having a memory of a simpler time. We seem unable to make choices that reflect what's good for us.

[oberliner]

51. Those are some really profound reflections

They definitely point to much larger questions that are worth contemplating.

[brentspeak]

54. That's theory, but not reality

The reality, here in the USA, is that the so-called "trade" agreements the corporate class has pushed through with the slobbering approval of Washington are a major reason for the destruction of the middle class.

As for "lower-priced goods": the trade agreements have simply vastly increased both American household debt and the federal debt.

[passiveporcupine]

74. what I've seen in my lifetime

is not higher quality goods from trade agreements, but much lower quality goods. We've become a disposable economy, were even repair jobs are gone, because you know longer get things fixed, you throw them away and buy new cheap goods that are designed with a short life span in mind.

[Vote2016]

40. It makes campaign superPAC donors RICH! RICH! RICH!

[scscholar]

45. It hurts more than 10% of the working class!

You're understating the problem.

[Urchin]

53. Free Trade is the Third World-ization of America

Like water seeking its own level, as the living standard of workers in developing countries rises, our living standard must drop to stay competitive.

And cheap labor everywhere further enriches the ruling class.

[840high]

59. .+1

[Urchin]

55. it's madness

We aren't just offshoring jobs, we're offshoring pollution to countries that don't care about the environment.

And then the stuff made in other countries has to be schlepped across oceans in fossil fuel burning ships, further accelerating climate change.

It's all madness.

[beltanefauve]

80. My best friend

is a floral designer. Most of the roses in this country used to come from California. Now roses and other flowers come from South American countries that use pesticides that are illegal here. (Ecuador is more progressive environmentally but the other flower - producing countries are not.) So now we have chemicals deemed illegal here being imported as well. Molds and fungi also come in.

After almost 40 years in the business, my friend has developed respiratory and skin problems. It is inconclusive at this time whether the imports are what are causing her problems, but its a pretty safe bet. All this for cheaper flowers grown and harvested by some of the world's poorest people.

[snowy owl]

57. Business has become notoriously short term and and lacks vision. Sick.

The immediate buck seems well worth the devastation of our sovereignty and our home, the planet. We are suffering from a mental disease. And it's contagious. A few countries have inoculated themselves but for how long. They are called the social democracies of Europe.

I think we need more philosophers.

[Urchin]

78. Business is short term because

Business leaders know that thanks to globalism and technology, our world is more unpredictable than ever.

So if there's a chance to make money now at the expense of making money tomorrow, they will opt for making money now.

This is especially true in high tech businesses, which are more vulnerable themselves to being obsoleted by technology than, say, a business that makes bicycles.

They saw what happened to all those once dominant but quickly dethroned tech businesses like Netscape and AOL.

Of course, pursuing a policy of making money now at any cost, including the demoralization of your employees and the loss of long-term customers, is the result.

But hey, who needs employees and long-term customers when your business is not likely to be here in 6 or 8 years anyway because some new APP or electronic gizmo disrupted your business model and put you out of business.

[Skwmom]

64. It has helped the crooks that vote for it cash in.

[polly7]

66. Corporations get to cash in without having to worry about pesky environmental

laws, a country's social safety nets, health-care systems, etc. etc. More for those already at the top while those at the bottom pay for it all, yay!!!

[Lizzie Poppet]

69. To those who treat free market capitalism as a cult...

...it represents what I can only liken to doctrinal purity in religion. You know the type: they function as if there really is an "invisible hand" guiding the economy, who really believe in the notion that the market is self-correcting. Actions taken to achieve a more"pure" flavor of capitalism are to be encouraged.

These people are, of course, morons.

[ucrdem]

70. To those who think TPP means "free trade," you have no idea whereof you speak.

Check the link in my signature to find out what the TPP actually is.

[Lizzie Poppet]

71. Um...did you mean to reply to me?

My post has nothing to do with TPP.

[treestar]

72. You have not proved that it would decimate the working class

And yet ask us to assume that conclusion.

[Urchin]

79. After what NAFTA did to the American worker

Pardon me if we assume the same result from the TPP.

We believed them when they told us NAFTA would be good for us, and that sure didn't work very well for us, did it?

So this time around, the onus is on supporters of free trade to prove, PROVE, it will help the working class.

Where's the damn proof?

[treestar]

81. Didn't prove anything about NAFTA either

And there is no reason to assume both trade agreements would have the same effects.

Oversimplification and repetition lead you to be certain of something you really have no evidence for.

[Urchin]

82. We ain't talking about our trade agreements

We're talking about trusting those people who want to inflict those agreements on us, when they say such agreements are good for us.

We're worse off economically since NAFTA was passed. But I'm sure that's just a coincidence, huh?