Buy American Is About Building Jobs, Not Protectionism

[Omaha Steve]

http://blog.aflcio.org/2009/02/20/buy-american-is-about-building-jobs-not-protectionism/

by Tula Connell, Feb 20, 2009

The attack by corporations and their media mouthpieces on the Buy American provision in the economic recovery package illustrates just how far removed Big Business is from the needs of U.S. workers—and, ultimately, from what will benefit the nation.

Last night on the PBS “NewsHour with Jim Lehrer,” AFL-CIO international economist Thea Lee honed in on the false arguments pushed by corporate interests who mutter darkly about how Buy American provisions will lead to “trade wars.” The Buy American provision mandates that only U.S.-made goods be used in projects funded by the bill—and requires that these steps are taken in a manner consistent with U.S. international trade obligations. So screams of “protectionism” are a red-herring.

Says Lee:

I think we have to make a distinction between protectionism in a sense of raising tariff barriers…and stopping trade and government procurement decisions, where governments choose to spend their own tax dollars in a way which is targeted towards creation of good jobs at home. And it’s actually a rational step for governments to take in a time where we don’t have the coordination of fiscal stimulus.

U.S. taxpayers are going into debt to pay for the nation’s economic recovery—shouldn’t those dollars create jobs for Americans? As Lee notes, the U.S. taxpayer wants to

stimulate the U.S. economy, not the global economy…to create good jobs at home in their own communities. They want their tax dollars spent that way. And other countries may not step up to the plate and do the appropriate level of fiscal stimulus, if they think they can free ride off of what the United States has done.

FULL story at link.

[elocs]

1. I understand what you are saying and I would honestly like your opinion

about what happens if other countries in the world decide to buy "their country"?

[Fovea]

2. they are.

The EU, China, both have adopted protectionism.
We are shouting globalism into the maelstrom.

the thing is, we are not so much protecting as re building.

[Deja Q]

3. Already happening, perhaps?

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/News_By_Industry/Jobs/Expatriate_executives_making_way_for_local_hires/articleshow/4039529.cms
(Indians doing their own protectionism)

No evidence, much less a link to any pertinent website, but some on the internets claim China's is telling its own people to "buy Chinese". Still, it would not be surprising if true.

[kestrel91316]

7. To the extent that they can, they SHOULD. Sheesh. Some people

seem blissfully unaware of the negative impact of buying crap made half a world away when the same or nearly same thing can be bought locally. Sheer insanity, and nobody should be supporting it.

[elocs]

8. My simple and honest question is what happens when the people half a world away buy crap locally

instead of made in America? Save the "sheesh" for somebody who is impressed by it.

[pampango]

9. The answer is that our export industries would collapse and we're the #3 exporting

country in the world.

The concept of dividing humanity up into large and small groups based on nation-states and limiting trade with those who are not in your "group" does not seem progressive to me. Promoting trade that is fair, balanced and serves the interests of the people in those "groups", not just the elites, would be more progressive than building barriers between them.

[Occam Bandage]

10. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot-Hawley_Tariff_Act

Not comparing the two, but "to the extent that they can, they SHOULD" was disproven pretty resoundingly quite a while ago.

[Occam Bandage]

4. I think it's more about grandstanding.

From what I've read, at maximum it'll create a thousand jobs, most likely a few hundred. It'll likely not lead to any trade wars, but on the off chance it does, that'd be disastrous. Either way it's not a big deal; it's just unions trying to make a rallying show of protectionism and conservatives trying to break the spirit of unions.

On balance I was mildly pleased to see it passed, but I think there are far, far more important things in that bill.

[pampango]

5. Yeah, it shouldn't lead to a trade war. It really didn't change how federal money is spent.

Some preferences for American suppliers were already recognized under various international agreements. Other expenditures are open for bidding by some other countries and not others.

The ironic thing is that Buy American cheered some people and scared others, but didn't actually change how the stimulus money would have been spent under existing rules.

[kestrel91316]

6. Exactly. Buy local has always been about SUPPORTING YOUR LOCAL ECONOMY

so people in your community can have jobs rather than people far away in another country. Decreasing the carbon footprint of your purchases is only ONE consideration.