djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 22, 2012 19:32:45 GMT -5
"basically Clinton left us with a functioning system, and we have since folded it over and humped it to unconsciousness." Now we enter an area of total disagreement. I was very close and involved with some of the decisions made during the Clinton years and predicted that the decision to open free trade with China would result in a devastating long term effect on our economy and feel very certain that he left office while the economy was racing building new machines and banks of product so we could send 37% of our high tech manufacturing jobs and the technology to a foreign country that still hates us and our ideals. It is the classic example for short term gain to rape our future and it was so predictable! you seem to think that trade is the root of all of our problems. perhaps that is true. but what do you suggest as an alternative?
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Aug 22, 2012 20:27:38 GMT -5
"you seem to think that trade is the root of all of our problems. perhaps that is true. but what do you suggest as an alternative? " I must attempt to be more clear. Trade is a very important component to a vibrant economy but just like infrastructure or defense it is only helpful when strategically planned and implemented. A bridge to "somewhere" can be most useful, stimulative and help achieve great things. The same bridge to "no where" is nothing but a great waste of tax payer dollars, time and effort. A carefully crafted trade agreement with strategic partners can be very beneficial to all involved but signing arbitrary agreements with countries who consistently violate international trade, environmental and human right laws will most likely result in major long term negative effects.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 22, 2012 22:17:06 GMT -5
"you seem to think that trade is the root of all of our problems. perhaps that is true. but what do you suggest as an alternative? " I must attempt to be more clear. Trade is a very important component to a vibrant economy but just like infrastructure or defense it is only helpful when strategically planned and implemented. A bridge to "somewhere" can be most useful, stimulative and help achieve great things. The same bridge to "no where" is nothing but a great waste of tax payer dollars, time and effort. A carefully crafted trade agreement with strategic partners can be very beneficial to all involved but signing arbitrary agreements with countries who consistently violate international trade, environmental and human right laws will most likely result in major long term negative effects. very interesting position. so, you are saying that bad trade relationships will lead to ..... what?
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Aug 22, 2012 22:33:41 GMT -5
Trade deficits in themselves are not bad. They are bad when you go into debt to finance them.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Aug 23, 2012 7:49:46 GMT -5
"very interesting position. so, you are saying that bad trade relationships will lead to ..... what? "
Poor trade agreements with countries who do not oppose violating international copyright laws, human rights, safety or environmental laws and have a much lower standard of living will create an environment where corporations will find huge advantages in moving the production of product to the lower cost country. This in turn could cause a higher unemployment rate in the donor country, reduce their standard of living, increase the amount of home foreclosures, reduce the projected revenue stream to the government, increase deficit spending which could make people panic and elect a president who promises hope and change, gets elected and borrows trillions more from the very country who we donated our manufacturing technology to, tries to rebuild an economy based on service jobs and short term stimulative without strategic planning or purpose. Does any of this sound familiar? I am much less concerned about blaming Obama for the typical things we hear today like high gas, unemployment, inflation worries but I am really concerned about the long term effects of the bad decisions made today that some generation will have to pay for. The seniors are the most to blame for allowing our country to get to this point so I would suggest we eliminate the death tax and just seize their assets now and apply it to the national debt. How do you think that would work out on the campaign trail?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2012 11:39:40 GMT -5
"very interesting position. so, you are saying that bad trade relationships will lead to ..... what? " Poor trade agreements with countries who do not oppose violating international copyright laws, human rights, safety or environmental laws and have a much lower standard of living will create an environment where corporations will find huge advantages in moving the production of product to the lower cost country. This in turn could cause a higher unemployment rate in the donor country, reduce their standard of living, increase the amount of home foreclosures, reduce the projected revenue stream to the government, increase deficit spending which could make people panic and elect a president who promises hope and change, gets elected and borrows trillions more from the very country who we donated our manufacturing technology to, tries to rebuild an economy based on service jobs and short term stimulative without strategic planning or purpose. Does any of this sound familiar? I am much less concerned about blaming Obama for the typical things we hear today like high gas, unemployment, inflation worries but I am really concerned about the long term effects of the bad decisions made today that some generation will have to pay for. The seniors are the most to blame for allowing our country to get to this point so I would suggest we eliminate the death tax and just seize their assets now and apply it to the national debt. How do you think that would work out on the campaign trail? "the race to the bottom" would have been a sufficient answer. ok, so i ask you again, what is the alternative? protectionism? letting the third world fester in their own juices while we live high on the hog? note: don't presume you know my position based on this response. remember: i am in manufacturing.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Aug 23, 2012 12:19:02 GMT -5
Sorry about the ramble. I am in manufacturing as well and I will just say that like most things trade agreements need to be very strategic in nature. Hope that is a sufficient answer and yes everyone must protect their own interests to some degree because the Chinese will not do that for us.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Aug 23, 2012 12:24:17 GMT -5
In terms of the third world countries and their juices. Unfortunately we can not fight that battle for them and they have allowed themselves to be controlled by oppressive government. We had to fight a war against it once already ourselves.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2012 13:00:49 GMT -5
In terms of the third world countries and their juices. Unfortunately we can not fight that battle for them and they have allowed themselves to be controlled by oppressive government. We had to fight a war against it once already ourselves. the opposing point of view is that these people will (rightly, imo) want a better life for themselves. however, in order to get an American level of wealth delivered to 2.5 billion people, a LOT of things have to happen. you can draw your own conclusions. i am not sure we owe them anything, btw. i am just mentioning it. there is a resource battle coming.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2012 13:02:41 GMT -5
Sorry about the ramble. I am in manufacturing as well and I will just say that like most things trade agreements need to be very strategic in nature. Hope that is a sufficient answer and yes everyone must protect their own interests to some degree because the Chinese will not do that for us. no. but what is interesting is that their interests and those of global corporations overlap to some degree. and they have sold us this bill of goods by producing cheap goods that help us maintain our standard of living in a world in which we are steadily losing ground. i think we are on the same side of this issue, but i don't think the solution is as easy as you make it seem. but i could be wrong.
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Aug 23, 2012 13:28:43 GMT -5
Not suggesting easy by any means. In fact I feel the popular idea that we can solve our problems by raising revenue, cutting taxes or a combination is misguided and much more complicated then that. By the way thanks for having an actual discussion on the subject without the normal polarizing politics that normally haunt this board.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 23, 2012 14:26:04 GMT -5
Not suggesting easy by any means. In fact I feel the popular idea that we can solve our problems by raising revenue, cutting taxes or a combination is misguided and much more complicated then that. By the way thanks for having an actual discussion on the subject without the normal polarizing politics that normally haunt this board. rockon- i really think that this trade issue is going to come to a head, if we can get someone less corporatist than Obama or Romney in there. the American public wants a discussion on it, but nobody is talking. that is why i don't even consider it when i look at the overarching issues.
|
|