Free Trade v. Protectionism

[ProJews_Chinese]

Free Trade v. Protectionism

"The prohibiting duties we lay on all articles of foreign manufacture which prudence requires us to establish at home, with the patriotic determination of every good citizen to use no foreign article which can be made within ourselves, without regard to difference of price, secures us against a relapse into foreign dependency." -- Thomas Jefferson

Free Trade v. Protectionism:
http://www.ety.com/HRP/economics/ecoquotes.htm

Quotes:
"Under protectionism, Japan's per capita income doubled from 1960 to 1967 "

"The Japanese "miracle" was not produced by free trade; it is a product of economic nationalism. Why should the Japanese give up a trade policy that is working well for them, to adopt one that is failing for us? "

"A shift in taxation away from incomes, onto foreign goods, is how Bismarck built the German nation. "

"In 1880 (protectionist) Germany and the (protectionist) United States together had less than a fourth of world output. By 1913 the two countries had nearly half, while free-trade Britain's share was sliced from one-fourth to one-seventh. "

[briann]

Free Trade v. Protectionism

"The prohibiting duties we lay on all articles of foreign manufacture which prudence requires us to establish at home, with the patriotic determination of every good citizen to use no foreign article which can be made within ourselves, without regard to difference of price, secures us against a relapse into foreign dependency." -- Thomas Jefferson

Free Trade v. Protectionism:
http://www.ety.com/HRP/economics/ecoquotes.htm

Quotes:
"Under protectionism, Japan's per capita income doubled from 1960 to 1967 "

"The Japanese "miracle" was not produced by free trade; it is a product of economic nationalism. Why should the Japanese give up a trade policy that is working well for them, to adopt one that is failing for us? "

"A shift in taxation away from incomes, onto foreign goods, is how Bismarck built the German nation. "

"In 1880 (protectionist) Germany and the (protectionist) United States together had less than a fourth of world output. By 1913 the two countries had nearly half, while free-trade Britain's share was sliced from one-fourth to one-seventh. "

Protectionism does not improve an economy.  I could give you dozens of examples of where it does not... I honestly don't know where to start.  Nearly every developed country has hurt itself when it practices economic protectionism.   However, i HAVE NO PROBLEM limiting or cutting off trade with enemy or Islamofascist countries.

[Zelhar]

There are more complex issues than pure protectionism. For example, China has cornered the market for "rare earth" minerals. The Chinese government control miners pushed out every foreign miner out of business by cutting prices for years, leaving them the only supplier. The Chinese didn't seek to profit directly from exporting the minerals. They wanted to give their industry and edge and now they have got it. China give its industry an unfair advantage in access to these minerals (used in all sort of high tech industries from lasers to wind turbines).

[ProJews_Chinese]

Daniel Webster: "Protection...of our own labor against the cheaper, ill-paid, half-fed, and pauper labor of Europe, is, in my opinion, a duty which the country owes to its own citizens."

You know, today we would say "cheaper, ill-paid, half-fed, and pauper labor of China".

Without protectionism, American jobs which have, say, $2 per hour wages, cannot compete with Chinese labors with $2 per day wages. If General Motors were to decide where they should build an auto plant, without protectionism they will have more reasons to move their factories to China rather than continuing their local factory in America. (This is also the reason why most of our goods are MADE IN CHINA) Protectionism protects the local jobs by requiring tariffs on foreign-made goods to prevent foreign labors and foreign businesses from overtaking, and eventually destroying, local jobs. It also encourages the growth of local industry (along with free-market system, of course. Otherwise, it is no different from state capitalism (a.k.a socialism)).

Free Trade may be good for China (and other less developed countries), but it is not good for America which has higher standard of living.

[Zelhar]

I disagree with your last post proJew_Chinese. In many industries it is possible to raise productivity per worker by automation and technology so that it more than outmatch cheap unskilled labor.

Companies who move their production lines to China where there is no protection of intellectual rights should soon expect to compete against cheap copies of their products.

The US should have protected its industries by refusing to let China dictate unfair trade conditions. For example, China restricts imports and foreign companies must transfer production and trade secretes to local "joint ventures" with Chinese partners (who have the habit of stealing these secretes and start a competing fully owned venture). The US should have forbid some of its industries of entering into such foolish ventures and also restrict Chinese imports to balance the unfair trade that is going on between the two economies.

On the international markets there will always intervention of countries and so if some country has a policy of minimal intervention/protection it is foolish and naive of its part and in fact creates a handicap to its own industries.

But inside the country it is best if the government lets its economy run as much as possible without intervention in the free market.

[ProJews_Chinese]

(Just a small add-on comment, in case there is a misunderstanding. I believe that free-market system (at national level) is good, while free trade (at international level) is bad. Okay, I may be wrong, though ...)

[Zelhar]

(Just a small add-on comment, in case there is a misunderstanding. I believe that free-market system (at national level) is good, while free trade (at international level) is bad. Okay, I may be wrong, though ...)

In that case I think mostly I agree with you. I think that in international trade, free trade is not bad, it's simply not a viable option. You will always have evil cartels like OPEC or countries that don't respect IP rights, protectionist countries, currency manipulations etc.

[Ulli]

Free Trade v. Protectionism

"The prohibiting duties we lay on all articles of foreign manufacture which prudence requires us to establish at home, with the patriotic determination of every good citizen to use no foreign article which can be made within ourselves, without regard to difference of price, secures us against a relapse into foreign dependency." -- Thomas Jefferson

Free Trade v. Protectionism:
http://www.ety.com/HRP/economics/ecoquotes.htm

Quotes:
"Under protectionism, Japan's per capita income doubled from 1960 to 1967 "

"The Japanese "miracle" was not produced by free trade; it is a product of economic nationalism. Why should the Japanese give up a trade policy that is working well for them, to adopt one that is failing for us? "

"A shift in taxation away from incomes, onto foreign goods, is how Bismarck built the German nation. "

"In 1880 (protectionist) Germany and the (protectionist) United States together had less than a fourth of world output. By 1913 the two countries had nearly half, while free-trade Britain's share was sliced from one-fourth to one-seventh. "

Protectionism does not improve an economy.  I could give you dozens of examples of where it does not... I honestly don't know where to start.  Nearly every developed country has hurt itself when it practices economic protectionism.   However, i HAVE NO PROBLEM limiting or cutting off trade with enemy or Islamofascist countries.

Yes, this is true.

Islamic nations have nothing to offer, except oil and some other natural resources. But we can find easily replacements for them.

[briann]

I disagree with your last post proJew_Chinese. In many industries it is possible to raise productivity per worker by automation and technology so that it more than outmatch cheap unskilled labor.

Companies who move their production lines to China where there is no protection of intellectual rights should soon expect to compete against cheap copies of their products.

The US should have protected its industries by refusing to let China dictate unfair trade conditions. For example, China restricts imports and foreign companies must transfer production and trade secretes to local "joint ventures" with Chinese partners (who have the habit of stealing these secretes and start a competing fully owned venture). The US should have forbid some of its industries of entering into such foolish ventures and also restrict Chinese imports to balance the unfair trade that is going on between the two economies.

On the international markets there will always intervention of countries and so if some country has a policy of minimal intervention/protection it is foolish and naive of its part and in fact creates a handicap to its own industries.

But inside the country it is best if the government lets its economy run as much as possible without intervention in the free market.

I pretty much agree with Zelhar here.  Protecting our intellectual rights is a more significant concern with China.  That along with China's dictating to us how we do business with them.