General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: For our isolationistic nationalism loving DU'ers who want the world to be a bigger place [View all]pampango
(24,692 posts)We had high and progressive taxes after WWII. We had strong unions. We had an effective safety net. We had effective corporate regulation and oversight of the financial sector. All of these we had thanks to Democrats. (It is true that we never had effective health care, though Medicare and Medicaid were at least improvements over what existed before.) Our income equality was among the best in the world and the productivity gains made for the first 25-30 years after the war were translated directly into increased pay for the working class.
What went wrong in the US was the we (largely, but not solely, republicans) cut taxes and made them more regressive; emasculated unions; shredded the safety net and deregulated everything under the sun particularly the financial industry.
And then we looked around and wondered how things got so bad and how income inequality got back to pre-Depression levels. Rather than reverse all of those policy mistakes, some suggest that maybe we should cut back on trade to make up for all these problems we created. The fact is that we trade less than practically any country in the world (aside from a few "hermit" nations) - certainly much, much less than any developed progressive country.
The reason I look to Europe is that it is largely a progressive continent with much better income equality, strong unions and an effective safety net. They are much further along the path to progressive societies than we are. I realize that the US is different (if not exceptional but there are lessons to learn from Europeans on how to create a progressive society.
They have achieved this by not doing what we did: they have maintained high and progressive taxes, strong unions, an effective safety net and effective regulation of corporations and the finance industry. And they trade more than we do. So trade doesn't kill progressive taxes (just look at Sweden), we did that all by ourselves; it doesn't kill strong unions (just look at Germany), we did that all by ourselves; it doesn't kill effective safety nets or regulation, we did that too all by ourselves.
Trade does not create a "workers paradise". What does create at least a strong middle class and high quality of life (not sure that there is a "workers paradise" anywhere), at least in the "Real World" of much of Europe is what I have mentioned above with respect to taxes, unions, the safety net and regulation. And the countries that have achieved these relatively progressive societies also see trade a significant part of the picture.
With regards to the "Real World" I seldom see trade critics offer real world examples of progressive countries that use high tariffs to provide their citizens with a "workers paradise". If tariffs are all we need to create a progressive society, surely there must be some examples which we can examine and learn from their experience. Or must high-tariff "workers paradises" remain a misty dream unexamined in the context of the Real World.
The most recent examples of high tariffs in the US were enacted in the 1920's and 1930 by republicans and, not surprisingly since they were republican policies, helped create extreme income inequality (though we have matched that in the last few years). That's one reason that FDR was a low-tariff, pro-trade advocate both during the 1930's and in his plans for the post-war world which included GATT to help prevent the return of republican high tariffs.