|
| Provocative Satire - Intoxicating Creative Wit |
|
| Unlock the Meaning of Current Affairs |
If an exchange between two parties
is voluntary, it will not take place unless both believe they will benefit from it. Most economic fallacies derive from the
neglect of this simple insight, from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the
expense of another. - Milton Friedman
|
|
Tariffs For Survival Or Profits
For Multinationals
The deadline approaches for President Bush to accept or reject the recommendations from the International Trade Commission on protective Tariffs for the U.S. steel industry.The dire condition of a crucial domestic industry is beyond
dispute. The core question - "We need to go to the root cause of the problem," the official said, pointing to the need to
get foreign governments out of the business.
The case from the viewpoint of the steel workers, industry and national interests is compelling. The
facts and statistics are clear, the implications of the destruction in an independent capacity to produce steel should be recognized
as a national security issue. So why do the high priests of the 'Free Trade' movement continue to preach the line that the costs of proposed tariffs would cause the consumers billions, as
the determing factor in the decision?
For decades we have been forced to systematically dismantle significant domestic manufacturing industries
under the suicidal policy of Free Trade. There is nothing free about the loss of living wage jobs and the demise of independent
production capacities. The notion that America is best served when multinational 'stateless' corporations are allowed to leave
our shores and dump their foreign built products back upon the society that developed, financed and provided a ready
market, is insane.
The madness of public support for purchasing foreign made goods based solely on a subsidized price reduction
is know to the consumer. But what effective choice do they have when domestic options are not available in a marketplace that
is anything but reasonable. International trade must be beneficial for all interests for it to be successful. Commerce is
the life blood of all economies. But under GATT, NAFTA and every other effort to open the U.S. economy, while transferring
our industrial capacities outside our own borders; our country becomes dependent upon the whims, availability and political
intents of foreign suppliers.
Tariffs have always been the traditional method to protect our sovereignty as an independent nation. Arguments
that America benefits from Free Trade, when it is not Fair, are the siren's calls of the a deceptive vamp. Just look at the
record that Free Trade has inflicted on our economy and security. Our Balance of Payments problem requires the financing of this deficit by foreign investment.
"The rise in the current account deficit was led by a surge in the merchandise (goods) trade deficit, which rose to a historic high of $347.1 billion
in 1999 more than $100 billion higher than its previous record of $246.9 billion in 1998. Measured as percentages of gross
domestic product, the current account deficit was 3.7% and the goods trade deficit was 3.8%, exceeding the previous peaks
set in 1987 of 3.4% for both indicators."
The prospect for the future only gets worse. From The Interim Report: Notes on the U.S. Trade and Balance of Payments Deficits - Wynne Godley we get this projection: "After
ten years the current account deficit is about 6 percent of GDP, nearly double its present level, while the NNAP (see Chart
6) continues to rise rapidly, reaching 50 to 60 percent of GDP in ten years' time."
Also from this same report: The Current Account and Primary Balances: Actual and Projected (Percentages
of GDP)
Compare this report to the most current Economic and Financial Data for the United States, latest update: March 3, 2002 So what does all this mean and why should we care
about continued rising balance of payment deficits?
In simple terms, we all have to pay for the loss of American jobs. Don't be deceived that cheap foreign
imports really benefit America. Temporary perceived price bargains just means that domestic produced alternatives will be
forced out of business. Slogans that the world is now 'interdependent' is translated to read - your job has disappeared. When
the last native manufacturing facility closes and only imports are available to purchase, do you really think that price competition
will exist or that you will be able to afford the new cost structure?
Your so called Foreign allies reveal their attitude towards rational national trade policy with reports
like this: "The United States has been accused of an unfriendly act by considering the imposition of tariffs against imports to protect its domestic steel industry." Preserving an indigenous
steel industry is not an option, but is a necessity for the U.S. to survive economically. One need not be a fan of unions
to see the wisdom of maintaining the ability to produce basic and necessary industrial capacity.
The political agenda for those who demand trade to be a one way street, flowing in the direction of imported
foreign goods, should be totally clear. Destroy American industry and her people will be required to accept a bleak economic
future. When government employment replaces skilled labor, your nation is doomed. Tariffs level the playing field and will
stop the exodus of crucial elements of industrial autonomy. The choice is obvious. If America is the end user, we become the
loser if we abandon homeland production. There is more at stake than just steel. The survival of a free people is the real
issue.
SARTRE - March 4, 2002
|
