Free Trade Raises Standards of Living

[KenH]

"In every trade, both sides benefit. There is a simple reason for that. Each side is giving up something he values less for something he values more. Thus, at the very moment of the trade, both sides have improved their own respective economic condition. The trade has enabled both parties to the trade to raise their own standard of living."

Free Trade Raises Standards of Living – The Future of Freedom Foundation

 

[canadyjd]

“Free trade” between nations can only be fair if there are similar economic standards in the nations.

If one nation subjects its manufacturers to strict safety, environmental, wage standards while the other does not, then the trade isn’t fair and therefore not free.

Peace to you

 

[KenH]

therefore not free.

I could not disagree more.

Peace to you as well.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

"In every trade, both sides benefit...."

But that’s hardly the whole story, or even most of it. Trade is like any other game, there will always be competition and need rules. And there are more than two sides involved. Oh, and don’t hold your breath waiting for government to cease taxing it or you will hasten that other guarantee—death.

 

[carpro]

There is no such thing as "free trade" when dealing with China.

 

[KenH]

There is no such thing as "free trade" when dealing with China.

Only one side has to be doing free trade. It doesn't matter if the other side is or is not. It is still free trade for the country practicing it.

 

[carpro]

Only one side has to be doing free trade. It doesn't matter if the other side is or is not. It is still free trade for the country practicing it.

I disagree. Free trade is a 2 way street or it's not free trade at all.

It's thinking like yours that put us at the economic mercy of a renegade nation like China.

 

[KenH]

I disagree. Free trade is a 2 way street or it's not free trade at all.

That's fine. No problem with disagreeing. We all have our own opinions.

 

[canadyjd]

I guess the problem I see with “free trade” between nations is that the one side (US businesses) are dealing with the other side (a foreign nation).

The US business gives up something (good paying American jobs manufacturing antibiotics or vaccines) for something else (increased company profits for shareholders and corporate bonuses)

The other side (foreign nation) gives up....? They don’t change safety standards, child labor laws, environmental standards. They suppress freedoms including freedom of worship. They constantly steal intellectual property.

They manufacture substandard products (flu vaccines that are routinely ineffective but are paid for by US taxpayer money anyway.) The employees in the foreign nation get relatively little income. The foreign nation political leaders get hundreds of billions of dollars to upgrade its military, fill the pockets of party leaders, and develop products from the corporate secrets they have stolen.

So, I don’t see the benefits of “free trade” in circumstances where the standards are so different.

But we can disagree.

peace to you

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Only one side has to be doing free trade. It doesn't matter if the other side is or is not. It is still free trade for the country practicing it.

That's fine. No problem with disagreeing. We all have our own opinions.

No, this is completely contrary to the premise of the article, and entirely indefensible. Assertion is not opinion. There needs to be clear reasoning supporting it. So far, that is completely lacking.

If only one side is engaging in so-called “free trade,” while the other is engaging in manipulative practices designed to destroy the very foundation of free trade, calling it “free trade” is hand waving, or worse.

Toydarians are immune to such Jedi mind tricks. It might fairly be called “manipulative trade.” Trump has the right idea on how to deal with such bullies, but we’re in very deep now and the Dems are determined to help dig us deeper, all the way to China it would seem.

 

[Revmitchell]

Only one side has to be doing free trade. It doesn't matter if the other side is or is not. It is still free trade for the country practicing it.

"Free trade" is a buzz term that can be used to make something sound hood even when its not. I agree with you but just because its free trade if only for one side that does not mean its a good deal. Free trade alone is meaningless.

People have the freedom to buy gas anywhere they want. Yet I see some buying gas at some stations that are 20 cents a gallon more expensive than many others they're acting on their freedom but it's stupid to spend that much more money on gas.

 

[Reynolds]

"Free trade" is a buzz term that can be used to make something sound hood even when its not. I agree with you but just because its free trade if only for one side that does not mean its a good deal. Free trade alone is meaningless.

People have the freedom to buy gas anywhere they want. Yet I see some buying gas at some stations that are 20 cents a gallon more expensive than many others they're acting on their freedom but it's stupid to spend that much more money on gas.

You ever seen the combustion chambers of engines that ran strictly top tier gas? Strictly unbranded? I have and I only run top tier. I would not even consider running lower tiered gas.

 

[Revmitchell]

You ever seen the combustion chambers of engines that ran strictly top tier gas? Strictly unbranded? I have and I only run top tier. I would not even consider running lower tiered gas.

Pink elephants draw purple squares on giraffes tails

 

[Reynolds]

Pink elephants draw purple squares on giraffes tails

A stupid reply.