• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Are LIBERALS So Deluded on FREE TRADE?

Liberals (as a whole) are no more or less diluted then Conservatives (as a whole).

The OP wreaks of baiting.

It's deluded, not diluted.

And you are correct about the pathetic baiting and trolling.
 
Isolationist trade policies are the #1 way to tank our economy. Wait, no, they're the #2 way. The #1 way is refusing to pay any more than 50% of our debt to our creditors and blowing up the world economy to boot.



And wouldn't you know it, they're both Trump policies. I'm beginning to think that in order to be a Trump supporter, one must have run screaming from every single non-fiction book one has encountered, be it biography, history, or even a lowly Econ 101 textbook....
 
The world economy has changed and so has technology with it. We do not need press operators when we can just use robots to do it or pay someone in China $2/hour. The world has changed it is not the 1960s anymore. The economies of developed countries have changed they now rely on high-skill labour, and if you do not have skill or refuse to change you are out of luck. China is not leap frogging the US, they are bogged down by the most corrupt and inefficient government in the entire world and suffering demographic problems.

This is an incredibly short-sighted (and pessimistic) view of the economy. Tossing aside a growing portion of your population because they are not profitable to big business in our particular situation is basically saying that business decides what happens in our society, not the people. (It is also why neoliberals like Hillary Clinton are facing a revolt within their own party, and why Trump has won the nomination over a slew of more mainstream candidates.)

Our economy produces plenty for everybody, so something is still working. And we are fully capable of producing a lot more, were the demand there. That is the problem that must be figured out - how to include more of our labor in the economy. Either that, or shift to a new way of distributing the fruits of the economy that does not depend on the labor market.
 
Industries come and go and with it the skills required to succeed in the market place are altered. It is the peoples job to keep their skills up to date or else they will fall behind. This is been a fact of economic reality since forever.

Government influence on the economy has been a fact of economic reality since forever, but you refuse to accept that. It is the government's job (one of them) to create the structure in which businesses operate. They also decide how we are going to relate to other countries and their economies - governments make the trade agreements, levy the taxes and tariffs, protect the shipping lanes, protect our access to raw materials, etc. It's not the "invisible hand" doing all of that work.

So throwing your labor force on the scrap heap because they "don't have the skills" is being a little ultra-deferential to business (read: ownership), and a bit deaf to the needs of your populace. Not to mention it's a stupid policy.
 
Why are conservatives so deluded about liberals...and everything else!

The problem with liberals is they have a real problem looking into the future to see the horrendous damage their policies do.

I remember when the liberals went to place a 10% luxury tax on yacht sales ("get the rich"). What happened was the rich quit buying yachts so the yacht manufacturers lost all kinds of money and the little guy who helped build the yachts got laid off. So it wasn't "get the rich," it was the liberals screwing the little guy, again.

Another prime example: The do-gooders in San Francisco decided to give $400 'welfare' checks to homeless people. Help the poor, right? Well, next thing you know every bum in America (criminals too) began showing up in San Fran for a free ride. Crime goes up, bums are everywhere hitting on regular folks for money, etc., and the police tell the libs they have to stop the madness, which they eventually did. Another liberal disaster...
 
Because they actually understand a smidge of economics. Comparative advantage and the subsequent gains of trade are well-understood phenomenon.....Er, well-understood by some I should say.

And this isn't a liberal/conservative issue. Big business conservatives have been major proponents of free trade. The issue divides more along the lines of nationalist/globalist ideology or even rich/poor (and definitely educated-in-economics/uneducated-in-economics :lol:) and these all bridge party lines. Both Trump and Bernie have run on platforms critical to free trade. And it has resonated with the working class who are experiencing disproportionately the downsides of free trade. But restricting free trade is not the answer.
 
The problem with liberals is they have a real problem looking into the future to see the horrendous damage their policies do.

I remember when the liberals went to place a 10% luxury tax on yacht sales ("get the rich"). What happened was the rich quit buying yachts so the yacht manufacturers lost all kinds of money and the little guy who helped build the yachts got laid off. So it wasn't "get the rich," it was the liberals screwing the little guy, again.

Another prime example: The do-gooders in San Francisco decided to give $400 'welfare' checks to homeless people. Help the poor, right? Well, next thing you know every bum in America (criminals too) began showing up in San Fran for a free ride. Crime goes up, bums are everywhere hitting on regular folks for money, etc., and the police tell the libs they have to stop the madness, which they eventually did. Another liberal disaster...

Must be kind of peaceful, living in such an uncomplicated, two-dimensional world.
 
Amazed at the willful self-delusion in this thread.

There is no free trade. The free market doesn't exist exept for on chalkboards and in PP presentations.

No such animal exists.
 
The problem with liberals is they have a real problem looking into the future to see the horrendous damage their policies do.

I remember when the liberals went to place a 10% luxury tax on yacht sales ("get the rich"). What happened was the rich quit buying yachts so the yacht manufacturers lost all kinds of money and the little guy who helped build the yachts got laid off. So it wasn't "get the rich," it was the liberals screwing the little guy, again.

Another prime example: The do-gooders in San Francisco decided to give $400 'welfare' checks to homeless people. Help the poor, right? Well, next thing you know every bum in America (criminals too) began showing up in San Fran for a free ride. Crime goes up, bums are everywhere hitting on regular folks for money, etc., and the police tell the libs they have to stop the madness, which they eventually did. Another liberal disaster...

EXACTLY and i guess you know the answer why.. yep they lack logic
 
The problem with liberals is they have a real problem looking into the future to see the horrendous damage their policies do.

I remember when the liberals went to place a 10% luxury tax on yacht sales ("get the rich"). What happened was the rich quit buying yachts so the yacht manufacturers lost all kinds of money and the little guy who helped build the yachts got laid off. So it wasn't "get the rich," it was the liberals screwing the little guy, again.

Another prime example: The do-gooders in San Francisco decided to give $400 'welfare' checks to homeless people. Help the poor, right? Well, next thing you know every bum in America (criminals too) began showing up in San Fran for a free ride. Crime goes up, bums are everywhere hitting on regular folks for money, etc., and the police tell the libs they have to stop the madness, which they eventually did. Another liberal disaster...

The reason why San Francisco is full of homeless is it never gets cold there and is never hot.
 
Free trade agreements have little to do with the outsourcing of jobs. For that you can blame the advent of containerships in the early 1970s. Prior to containerships, this is how we shipped goods around the world:

talleyrand_1940.jpg


This is how we started doing it in the early 70s:

_80085310_maersk_triple_e_portoffelixstowe.jpg

You see the difference? That is why we now have to compete with workers around the world when it comes to making stuff. You can tear up every trade agreement we have and that won't change that.
 
It is the government's job (one of them) to create the structure in which businesses operate.

I agree, but I'd say the problem with this is that the way the process is supposed to work has The People running the gubmint. The means to accomplish that remain available, and a heavy price has been and continues to be paid to preserve that. But a lot of indifference to the responsibilities involved (e.g., learning about the issues, making decisions, and voting) leaves too much power in the hands of groups that are much better organised to protect and advance their own narrow interests, such as large corporations, professional organizations, and very wealthy individuals.

Tom Jefferson is supposed to have said that you get the gubmint you deserve. This is a common misattribution — you see a lot of them in DP signatures from RW members who wouldn't recognise TJ's political philosophy if they tripped over it. The thought is properly credited to Joseph de Maistre, a French monarchist: "Toute nation a le gouvernement qu'elle mérite." ("Every country has the government it deserves.") In my view, as Will Munny said, "Deserve's got nothing to do with it." I figure you get the gubmint you earn.

The problem with liberals is they have a real problem looking into the future to see the horrendous damage their policies do.

The problem with reactionaries is they have a real problem looking into the past and seeing that everything valuable and worth defending in society has developed out of liberal thought. One of the problems with society is that we have way too many reactionaries.

Must be kind of peaceful, living in such an uncomplicated, two-dimensional world.

I dunno about "peaceful." Facile and shallow, at least. Not demanding of any real effort.

Yawn. Flush.

The reactionary mind at work.
 
The reason why San Francisco is full of homeless is it never gets cold there and is never hot.

Oh it gets cold there. I've been to Candlestick Park in the summer at a baseball game and it was cold as a step-mother's heart.
 
The reactionary mind at work.

Which trumps liberal economics all day long.

Let's me help you out with some pointers:

"When given everything by the state, however, through redistribution of wealth, recipients are taught not gratitude but a sense of entitlement. And while government certainly has a safety-net role, the state should eschew policies that enlarge dependency. A society that is leveled is a society in which all become equally disadvantaged. It is America’s men and women of wealth, imbued with religious and civic responsibility, who have served as the greatest patrons of the civic infrastructure, be it hospitals, libraries, museums, the arts, or the charitable United Way. England once had those patrons, but they went away as redistribution of wealth came in."

"Redistribution of Wealth is, at its core, a radical left wing economic scheme centered in greed and covetousness for other people’s money, rather than exercising personal responsibility and earning it one’s self." - Obama vs. the Bible - Redistribution of Wealth, the Righter Report
 
Oh it gets cold there. I've been to Candlestick Park in the summer at a baseball game and it was cold as a step-mother's heart.

You must have never lived in the midwest then.
 
Free trade agreements have little to do with the outsourcing of jobs. For that you can blame the advent of containerships in the early 1970s. Prior to containerships, this is how we shipped goods around the world:

talleyrand_1940.jpg


This is how we started doing it in the early 70s:

View attachment 67203708

You see the difference? That is why we now have to compete with workers around the world when it comes to making stuff. You can tear up every trade agreement we have and that won't change that.

Differences in technology are part of it; the cause of outsourcing is hardly monolithic.

Currency manipulation/distortions, work visas allowing for cheap(er) imported labour, a dearth of foreign environmental and labour regulations and free trade policy that largely prohibits tariffs and other trade barriers, regardless of the reason, collectively contribute in substantial ways to the outsourcing of jobs in addition to technology that makes logistics more cost effective.
 
Last edited:
Free trade is beneficial to both sides if done fairly. The way many liberals are hurting workers in globalization is by adding so much cost onto business through taxes, and outdated and bad regulation that U.S. companies have a harder time competing with many moving to lower cost nations. These government added expenses on a business also take money away from wages besides eliminating many U.S. jobs through business flight. Much easier to compete globally with just one of the trifecta being high, wages, then if all three of wages-taxes-regulation costs being high.

MY plan would be to first implement something like the following tax code below so that companies will want to come back to the U.S., and then tell places like China if they do no open their markets completely eliminating their like 30% tariffs and 50/50 domestic/international ownership law for companies locating in China, then the U.S. will match them on these things. Ideally no tariffs, but match them if they do not play fairly.

My Tax plan:

No deductions on net income.

0%-first $100,000 of net income
20%-any additional net income between $100,000-1 mil
30%-any additional net income above 1 mil

0% corporate rate
eliminate as best as possible outdated and poorly designed regulations that add unneeded costs to business
eliminate health insurance costs for business by going to single payer catastrophic/cash for minor health issues
eliminate payroll taxes
basically eliminate all direct and indirect taxes on business ie job creation


tax capital gains at above 0/20/30% rates except when companies offer stock to raise money and then at a 15% rate for net capital gains income above $100,000

$15 minimum wage


high tax on luxury goods and services
tax carbon at real cost
tax unhealthy food, beverages, and other harmful products at real cost


State/Local:
Fund government solely through sales and property taxes(These taxes likely will be higher to offset having 0% income tax rates at the federal/state/local level). No value added taxes as it raises costs of exports, no property taxes on business. No sales taxes on nutritious whole foods or low income rent.
 
Back
Top Bottom