Comments on: Protectionism risks rise in 2009-2010 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/01/08/protectionism-risks-rise-in-2009-2010/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: jason http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/01/08/protectionism-risks-rise-in-2009-2010/#comment-5220 Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:30:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=1201#comment-5220 Reading this column has strengthened my opposition to these global organizations. As it applies to America, we should be providing for ourselves first. We are fortunate enough in our country to have the means to do it. We can feed ourselves and manufacture goods here at home for domestic consumption. We have the resources, intelligence, and manpower to do so. We can “fix” our currency to solid commodities that WE produce here at home and make it valuable to Americans most importantly first. We once fought like heck to remove the cancer that ruled over us from abroad who would not hear our cases nor defend our standards. Who held control over both our means and our ends. Why are our own people so eager to internationally bind America to another entity? Do we (they) really fear the world that much or do we not have enough trust and faith in each other that we can do a good job? It wasn’t that long ago that we did provide for ourselves.

]]>
By: Glen http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/01/08/protectionism-risks-rise-in-2009-2010/#comment-4890 Fri, 09 Jan 2009 05:07:36 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=1201#comment-4890 “Free Trade” has come to mean that companies are free to do elsewhere what they cannot do domestically. The only litmus test for true free trade is when an exchange of rules and laws has minimal effect on aggregate cost.

]]>
By: RFL http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/01/08/protectionism-risks-rise-in-2009-2010/#comment-4848 Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:24:29 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=1201#comment-4848 In the point of fact of the balance of payments (BOP) numbers; how Mr. Kemp and all other advocates of “Free Trade” can continue to push the “benefits” of “Free Trade” on any society is ridiculous to the point of incredulity. The “Free Trade” movement must be suffering from a massive collective case of denial, mental illness. Or bought and paid for by the corporation… To be sure they are deniers of reality – kinda like believing in the Tooth Fairy…

]]>
By: RFL http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/01/08/protectionism-risks-rise-in-2009-2010/#comment-4846 Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:02:11 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=1201#comment-4846 The BOP since 1998: -$4,869,669,000. I see no where in this number where the USA has benefitted from “Free Trade”. It’s a scam folks, pure and simple.

]]>
By: Ray http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/01/08/protectionism-risks-rise-in-2009-2010/#comment-4845 Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:50:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=1201#comment-4845 Global “free” trade is a tragedy and just another mechanism to shunt money to the world’s upper classes.
Naturally, trade “wars” are a necessary part of this effort because every country wants to come out on top. This is the same reason the American Civil War was fought.
GM, Ford and Chrysler are in trouble and what are the proposed solutions? Funnel taxpayer money to them while reducing wages and benefits for the workers so the companies can compete against slave labor wages in the global market. The working class in this country hasn’t had a raise in 25+ years when adjusted for inflation but the wealthy have gotten much richer.
Meanwhile, hundreds of millions are dying of starvation, disease and “rebel” attacks all over the world which are mainly measures to control resources. Anyone who says that any trade measures or rules will stop that is a dreamer of great magnitude or a cynical, lying politician. There are simply not enough resources left on earth to bring the mass of humanity even close to the living standards of those in the U.S.
Which begs the question: “Free” trade is for whose benefit? Certainly not the middle and lower classes. Of any country.

]]>
By: Tony http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/01/08/protectionism-risks-rise-in-2009-2010/#comment-4842 Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:39:32 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=1201#comment-4842 Bailing out Banks, the car industry etc is protectionism.

]]>
By: RFL http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/01/08/protectionism-risks-rise-in-2009-2010/#comment-4840 Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:05:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=1201#comment-4840 The swindle of “Free Trade” is finished. Among other points, the collapse of this economy proves that the USA cannot continue to transfer massive amounts of its wealth to those countries that provide slave labor and cheap manufactured goods to US corporations (to be sold domestically at outrageous prices); while depressing wages at home and creating a limited number of low paying, short lived, volatile, low skill service jobs (retail) without dire economic consequences.

Manufacturing is the ONLY generator of real wealth. The USA must force the return of its manufacturing and end H1-B visas.

Notwithstanding what the “experts” say about the “post industrial economy” and “globalization”.

]]>
By: anton kleinschmidt http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/01/08/protectionism-risks-rise-in-2009-2010/#comment-4836 Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:11:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=1201#comment-4836 And what about interest rates used in defense of a countries global economic wellbeing. The Bank of England has announced a 50 basis point drop in their official rate rather than the expected 100 basis points. Sterling strengthens against the USD and Euro and investment fund flows are likely to be affected to the benefit of the UK.

We will learn that there are endless ways to skin this particular cat

]]>