General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Obama Levels Cheap Shot At Unions - Again [View all]Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)We grow up understanding trade as basic commerce; two interested individuals agreeing to a mutual exchange of goods or services. Nobody has a problem with this concept, and in fact, looking at other primates, it might even bee instinctive to engage in trade of this sort.
The politician concept of 'trade' however is purely about flow of capital. Goods and services aren't of particular interest, and the desires of the people of a participating nation are not only not considered, but are actively opposed. because in order for capital to flow from one state to another, it must first be 'liberated."
In a healthy economy, the middle and lower classes hold at least half, ideally more, of the capital in the system - simply by dint of population. The 'problem' there is that their capital rarely goes very far away from them. They spend it locally, on local goods, local services. Eventually some fraction of that local spending does exit into global trade, but not a lot of it; it stays within a community, for the most part.
To "liberate' wealth and facilitate fast flow of capital across nations then, it must be taken out of these local communities, stripped from the hands of the middle and lower classes, since they are not 'using it properly." Once so 'liberated" it can be packed together and tossed across borders like a volleyball. it never returns to the communities it was taken from.
Politician "trade" is economic fracking - stressing and shattering a community bedrock to release the resources inside, which are then shipped away, leaving that community with the costs of operation.