Made in the USA

[sprange]

No they are sending you their money actually and helping to support your economy. The U.S owes China well over $700 billion...

You should note that Graeme is not American, yet our problems are very similar. China is -extremely- protectionist when it comes to Canadian imports.

 

[Sas]

You should note that Graeme is not American, yet our problems are very similar. China is -extremely- protectionist when it comes to Canadian imports.

Oh cheers, I presumed he was American given we were talking about America, sorry Graeme I don't know what Canada's current situation is with China.

Also note that I don't think China is less protectionist or whatever, just that when it comes to the U.S. it is China that is helping to support their economy and is the one that is actually sending money over

 

[jswantek]

Be better at your job and be more valuable to a company than the cheap labour available in those countries. Or move there and be an engineer. Just because you can't get a job doesn't mean that the rest of the economy should suffer by paying more for goods so that locals can be employed. I am a software tester so I am aware that my job can easily be outsourced so I just have to make myself valuable to a company given the vastly higher wages I demand. If I was an employer, I would most likely outsource testing. Eventually I will probably have to find another job, but I have kept my options open.

Simply put, NO, I love my country and I'll never leave it. I served this country and fought under its flag, I have no desire to sacrifice the freedom and independence that is granted to me by the United States Constitution so that I can be part of a 'global market'. I won't even touch how you could comment on how I should be 'better at my job', since you don't know how good I actually AM at what I do. If I say any more on that, I'll get in trouble. I'll just finish this part by saying that's a pretty brazen and rather unfair statement.

Well it is more efficient actually. People who can offer the same quality of work at a lower price are better for businesses to hire. Textile industry is not something I would want my local government spending my taxes on to support as other countries can do it much cheaper. Do you think she is somehow owed a living? I don't think anyone is owed a living. People need to compete for work and be the most efficient and valuable to be hired. Basically there are always human costs when industries fail but I am a supporter of a minimum safety net for people in society and assistance to retrain in a job that is needed.

No, again. I want you to have this concept straight. First off, the quality of goods that are coming from overseas is DRASTICALLY INFERIOR to what has been made here in the United States. Secondly, we are NOT looking for government handouts or subsidies, we are NOT thinking we are 'owed a living', we WANT to work for what we have and can have. Finally, what exactly should my sixty-one-year-old mother be 'retrained' to do?

Oh please, free trade didn't destroy your economy. Your economy is always trying to avoid trading freely with others.

And we did quite well before 'free trade' hit, thank you very much. At least we had JOBS!

No, that is not how an economy works. There are many things that your country can not to do well. Therefore it makes sense to outsource those to allow people to focus resources on the things your country can do well. Welfare increases.

I think the industrial development that this country bore during the first half of the twentieth century shows quite well what our country is capable of doing. If I remember correctly we came up with everything from synthetic rubber (latex) to atomic submarines. But, maybe you're right, maybe we're not capable of doing everything, but I for one think that we are.

If we continue to outsource, welfare doesn't increase, welfare cases increase.

I think if the public was not so ignorant on the effects of trade, then economies would be doing a lot better as people wouldn't be screaming for protection all of the time.

The public knows quite well what the effects of trade are. Increased unemployment, inferior products and less spending in general.

 

[Graeme Tolton]

My problem with china is that they have taken over much of the consumer market here. I go to the store looking to buy a quality item. I get there and have much choice. I can buy chinese piece of cr@p # 1 or chinese piece of cr@p # 2... sometimes i get the option of chinese piece of cr@p #3. Yeah, the price is right, buy when i have to buy the same thing every year because it keeps breaking, i get pi$$ed off. At lease when I am able to go buy a sherwood reg, i know I will get many years use out of it. After than, my kids can get many years use out of it. We are being backed into a corner and soon all of our manufacturing will be gone. It pains me to say that, but it looks like the future. I try to buy as much made in canada, use, europe product, or grown locally produce. However, i go to the local grocery store and despite living 25 mins from one of the largest garlic producing regions in the country, i am faced with the option of buying chinese garlic or no garlic! ***!?

 

[Sas]

Simply put, NO, I love my country and I'll never leave it. I served this country and fought under its flag, I have no desire to sacrifice the freedom and independence that is granted to me by the United States Constitution so that I can be part of a 'global market'. I won't even touch how you could comment on how I should be 'better at my job', since you don't know how good I actually AM at what I do. If I say any more on that, I'll get in trouble. I'll just finish this part by saying that's a pretty brazen and rather unfair statement.

I was not saying you were bad at your job. I was saying that if you want work you have to be better than the competition. If the competition can work much more cheaply than you, you have to find another way to be valuable. I am talking in generalities here.

No, again. I want you to have this concept straight. First off, the quality of goods that are coming from overseas is DRASTICALLY INFERIOR to what has been made here in the United States. Secondly, we are NOT looking for government handouts or subsidies, we are NOT thinking we are 'owed a living', we WANT to work for what we have and can have. Finally, what exactly should my sixty-one-year-old mother be 'retrained' to do?

Why do people buy these products if they are so inferior then? The market if left alone sorts out issues such as these. Protectionism = government handouts. How else will failing industries keep employing people if not for handouts? These handouts also include people paying grossly inflated prices compared to the rest of the world just to 'buy Americna'

And we did quite well before 'free trade' hit, thank you very much. At least we had JOBS!

Yes protectionism works to keep jobs in the short term. But not in the long term. It is now the long term.

I think the industrial development that this country bore during the first half of the twentieth century shows quite well what our country is capable of doing. If I remember correctly we came up with everything from synthetic rubber (latex) to atomic submarines. But, maybe you're right, maybe we're not capable of doing everything, but I for one think that we are.

Please quote me where I said the U.S. was not capable of doing anything. I said they are not capable of doing everything the best and neither is any other country. That's where trade helps.

If we continue to outsource, welfare doesn't increase, welfare cases increase.

Again that depends on a lot of things. Free trade equals higher welfare and lower welfare cases. But countries that are so-called free trade supporters are often not, and end up lowering overall welfare.

The public knows quite well what the effects of trade are. Increased unemployment, inferior products and less spending in general.

Those are the effects of trade protectionism. Free trade really hasn't been tried out well yet.

 

[vladimir]

Also note that I don't think China is less protectionist or whatever, just that when it comes to the U.S. it is China that is helping to support their economy and is the one that is actually sending money over

Sas, this is too simplistic, and you know it. Why do you think the Chinese are so altruistic? What would happen to the Chinese Yuan if the Chinese stopped buying US Dollars with it? What would happen to the Chinese economy, still organized, to a large extent, around selling goods to the United States?

Nobody with any economics education questions the fact that seamstresses in China that will work for, say, a dollar a day, are more efficient than seamstresses who require $7 an hour. The question is, where will all this efficiency lead us? Pareto optimality? Give me a break. The answer, of course, is to the inevitable equalization of wages. So why should American or Australian or Western European workers wholeheartedly endorse free trade? It may be more efficient, but that's not going to do them any good. The benefits will accrue to those with capital--that is how it benefits an economy. But capital is almost completely mobile, so it will aggregate where taxes are lowest and currencies are most secure. And that is why I live in Hong Kong, not New York.

 

[gcbryan]

There are many countries that are more protectionist than the US. Australia is less overall but as is the case with any country...it's what seems to be in it's best interest. Australia is less protectionist (I think) in farm products than the US but it's mainly because they need to export more of their farm products than the US.

Our policies toward Africa aren't particularly helpful for instance. We give aid to them but at the same time have tarrifs in place that prevent us from being a market for most of their products (agriculture). This is strictly due to the undue influence of farmers in the US.

It is about change however and all countries do have to deal with it like it or not. Protecting industries only "works" for a little while. Certainly protecting textiles isn't going to work for long. How can you pay someone enough to live who's skill is sewing in this day and age. Retraining is the only answer to that one.

Many people are out of work but it's not about free trade. Are scuba stores going out of business due to free trade? Do you want to pay $50 for a T-shirt to keep textile jobs in this country? Early in the last century half of the workforce worked on the farm. Things don't stay the same.

Certainly free trade isn't the reason for an engineer not to have a job. In a down economy there are many people who don't have jobs.

 

[Graeme Tolton]

Oh cheers, I presumed he was American given we were talking about America, sorry Graeme I don't know what Canada's current situation is with China.

Also note that I don't think China is less protectionist or whatever, just that when it comes to the U.S. it is China that is helping to support their economy and is the one that is actually sending money over

Chinese imports are not just an american problem. I would believe that in all reality they are a great problem for you down under.

 

[Sas]

Sas, this is too simplistic, and you know it. Why do you think the Chinese are so altruistic? What would happen to the Chinese Yuan if the Chinese stopped buying US Dollars with it? What would happen to the Chinese economy, still organized, to a large extent, around selling goods to the United States?

I do not think China is doing this out of altruism at all, most likely the opposite. I am just trying to illustrate that U.S's prosperity so far has often been the result of borrowing from others.

Nobody with any economics education questions the fact that seamstresses in China that will work for, say, a dollar a day, are more efficient than seamstresses who require $7 an hour. The question is, where will all this efficiency lead us; the answer, I posit, is to the inevitable equalization of wages. So why should American or Australian or Western European workers wholeheartedly endorse free trade? It may be more efficient, but that's not going to do them any good. The benefits will accrue to those with capital--that is how it benefits an economy. But capital is almost completely mobile, so it will aggregate where taxes are lowest and currencies are most secure. And that is why I live in Hong Kong, not New York.

Well it is hard to say for sure but I think trade is welfare increasing and given such a small percentage of the world has any kind of decent living conditions I think that if it hurts this small proportion and they are brought down in wages, but more people are better off, this is preferable to me than a small, rich elite.

 

[gcbryan]

Sas, this is too simplistic, and you know it. Why do you think the Chinese are so altruistic? What would happen to the Chinese Yuan if the Chinese stopped buying US Dollars with it? What would happen to the Chinese economy, still organized, to a large extent, around selling goods to the United States?

Nobody with any economics education questions the fact that seamstresses in China that will work for, say, a dollar a day, are more efficient than seamstresses who require $7 an hour. The question is, where will all this efficiency lead us?; the answer, I posit, is to the inevitable equalization of wages. So why should American or Australian or Western European workers wholeheartedly endorse free trade? It may be more efficient, but that's not going to do them any good. The benefits will accrue to those with capital--that is how it benefits an economy. But capital is almost completely mobile, so it will aggregate where taxes are lowest and currencies are most secure. And that is why I live in Hong Kong, not New York.

Yeah, it is too simplistic however it is what it is. People used to laugh at the cheap products coming out of Japan...until the industries matured and now they produce better cars at a lower price than the US. The US dominated the market and now look at the situation. The US stuck it's head in the sand and continued overpaying their workers and continued producing an inferior product. Buying American more or less started as a slogan used by the auto workers in Detroit. How did that line of thinking ultimately benefit them? It didn't.

Being a seamstress in PA insisting on Buy American will lead to a similar result. I don't think you would even disagree with that.

And yes, for sure, when in a capitalist society owning capital is the best way to stay ahead of the game. With wages it's always a struggle. But wage owners can accumulate capital and keeping job skills current is the best way to do that.