Let's get this straight once and for all Free Trade means....

[WCGreen]

Unrestricted capital flow across borders...

That is the only real resource that is fungable enough to actually be free...

The hoary canard that labor can adjust and follow the jobs is just ridiculous...

And training people to relocate is ridiculous as well...

If you own things, have capital, free and unrestricted trade is the bees knees....

But if you work for a living, punch a clock, there is no such thing as free trade...

[mrcheerful]

1. The problem is that you'll never get most to understand that free trade

doesn't effect them in negative way. I keep hearing business people saying that free trade won't effect them because they have a product to sell. When I point out that without customers business will fail. I get that doesn't apply to them, they picked their business so that economics won't effect them. The blind brain dead will never get it.

[izzie]

2. I just know I should not get into this but what was wrong with the tax

on goods coming into country? For years we went to Canada and I am sure I re-call a 'duty' on things we bought and brought back into the country. I re-call an English shirt my father liked and it was costly with the extra charge but he was willing to pay for it. What worker did that hurt? It may have picked on my father being able to buy a shirt at the same price as in the US but I did not see the harm in it but for the lack of every one being able to buy it as they could not go to Canada. Just why was all that type stuff dropped unless it was for the big stores that wanted cheap things to sell for high profits like these silly sneakers. No one got cheaper sneaker when they had kids in a sweat shop making them. Profits for owners and stock holder just got bigger. I am sure the Anderson shirts are still higher than what we make here and now the profits go into some rich guys profits and not to the US govt. in a 'duty'. I would think TV and cars would work the same.

[mrcheerful]

3. Remember under Nixon the Japanese dropped cheap cars on the american market pretty much import tax

free and look what that has caused. Even under Clintons NAFTA agreement there were provisions that would hae kept NAFTA from going to a free market system. Under republican rule free trade means that cheap products made from slave labor and child labor com into america import tax free but the same countries dumping products on the amerian mart impose stiff import taxes on american products which limits the number of products sold as well as limiting the amount of american products going into the countries. Another words its a system thats unfair to american trade. To be honest I thik its time we hit every american business that out sources american factories with import taxes.

[izzie]

4. I was for the guy from Mass when Clinton ran because I just

did not think he, Clinton, would do a thing about NAFTA. I saw it as a job killer. If a duty was on a cheap car and it cost the same as one made here which would you buy? I sort of want free trade but I also feel it is a little one sided and all these smart people could work it better for the USA workers. Frankly who is going to buy anything if you cut out that large middle class of people who do buy? Our society was the odd one with the small poor class and rich class and that large middle class. It did make a differ ce in our country.

[WCGreen]

16. There is more to it than that...

They were letting the cheap cars in because no one wanted to buy them...

It wasn't until the oil crisis of 1973 when all of a sudden the japanese cars looked awfully good in comparision with the big boat gas guzzling cars we were producing domestically...

[malikstein]

10. You're targetting the wrong audience.

Business people are the beneficiaries of free trade, not the victims.

[WCGreen]

15. That sure is true...

It's typical, though...

Americans time line is the here and now whereas the rest of the country seems to be able to look out beyond the next quarterly report..

[zbdent]

5. If, according to repukes, Clinton sent all the jobs to Mexico with NAFTA,

why are all the Mexicans coming here to work, also according to repukes?

Boggles the mind ...

[pampango]

7. I was not aware that most Republicans thought that

Clinton sent all the jobs to Mexico with NAFTA. I know that many here at DU believe that NAFTA has been bad for both US and Mexican workers, but I did not know that the RW agreed with at least part of that.

[mrcheerful]

8. Yep they blame Clinton for Nafta but ignore the fact that it was GW and the pukes that

made it easy for american businesses to take advantage od cheap, slave/child labor in third world countries. Whicjh limit the amount of american goods iported. Free trade=they can impose import tax on the US but their products don't have to have import taxes if the company is american owned.

[pampango]

13. Actually, I think most Republicans are happy that NAFTA

passed under Clinton. It makes it appear to be a bipartisan sort of thing that would not be the case if it the entire negotiation and approval process had happened under Republican rule. Clinton's involvement makes it more difficult to contend that NAFTA was a solely Republican plot.

[malikstein]

12. In fact the repukes are right about that.

Manufacturing jobs did go to Mexico on their way to China. Now, with the exception of a few enclaves, the Mexican indigenous economy is in tatters because of NAFTA. That's why Mexicans are heading north in increasing numbers.

Clinton screwed American workers and welfare recipients to the wall. This is not something to gloss over and make excuses for. He was a corporate-anointed president, and his wife is a corporate-anointed candidate.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

21. Cuz duh, they're "jobs Americans won't do"!

Well...I mean...not for minimum wage and no benefits that is.

[robcon]

6. Free trade is the only world solution...

both for economic prosperity and world peace.

[zbdent]

9. that's true ... the US trades bombs and bullets and occupations

for higher profits for oil companies ...

[Solon]

20. Empty Rhetoric without substance. n/t

[Czolgosz]

11. Among the Democratic presidential candidates, who are the best fair traders and worst "free" traders

[Solon]

19. As far as I can tell, most of them are "Fair Traders"...

Even Hillary. Even the DLC acknowledges that some problems exist that need to be worked out. However, the approach of most of the candidates is to reform the system from within, Kucinich seems to be the exception, he wants us to pull out of NAFTA and the WTO, viewing them as too corrupt to deal with, and possibly replace them with better agreements. All of the other candidates want things like international labor standards, minimum wage, and environmental protection laws. Just the approaches differ, by and large.

[iconocrastic]

14. So do you advocate capital controls?

Seems that has been tried already.

[WCGreen]

17. Not so much capital controls but realistic reporting of what is

actually happening...

There is no way that labor units, you an I, can just pick up and move our operation overseas in order to chase a job....

But capital can and does whizz across the globe in search of the best return on investment...

People have go to understand that free trade is not free unless all aspects of production, material, knowledge, labor and capital can all flow freely...

[leftofthedial]

18. there is nothing "free" about trade

it's an oxymoron

capitalism is good for about 1000 families of plutocrats

the rest of us (and everything else on earth) get screwed

[CaliforniaPeggy]

22. K&R...