For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
If your "simple point" involves the naïve assumption that free trade is always a good idea regardless of what other countries do, then I'm afraid I don't. Sorry.bobevenson wrote:I guess you just don't understand my simple point.
I suppose we could thank them if you want for now. If they continued with economically manipulative practices that reduced our country to a third world slum relative to them, then I think we ought to discontinue with the one way free trade agreement. Don't you think that would be a good idea? Or should we stay the course?bobevenson wrote:In other words, I guess you think we shouldn't thank China for free products that put companies out of business just like you think we shouldn't thank God for free light that puts light bulb companies out of business, huh?
We should hope that China will reciprocate and invest for the better in the US. But then how do you explain things like sweatshops, environmental degradation and neo-colonialism going on in other countries in the third world now and in the past? Do you believe it's not possible to be economically manipulative, gaining the advantage, and then using that advantage to dictate policy in other countries to perpetuate that advantage?bobevenson wrote:people should be able to spend their money on wantever they want without artificial government restrictions, especially after the government has taken a large chunk of their money though taxes and inflation. Nobody owes anybody else a job. What do you think the Chinese are going to do with U.S. dollars, paper their walls? No, they're going to buy things, whether it be products or investments in the U.S.
Why would China reciprocate or invest for bettering the U.S.? Countries are just like you and me, they don't buy things to better somebody else, they buy things to better themselves, which indirectly betters everybody else. By the way, that's why nonprofit organizations should be given short shrift by the government since they are basically interested in only bettering themselves without worrying about the cruel discipline of the marketplace in the allocation of resources.Gary Childress wrote:We should hope that China will reciprocate and invest for the better in the US.bobevenson wrote:people should be able to spend their money on wantever they want without artificial government restrictions, especially after the government has taken a large chunk of their money though taxes and inflation. Nobody owes anybody else a job. What do you think the Chinese are going to do with U.S. dollars, paper their walls? No, they're going to buy things, whether it be products or investments in the U.S.
That was kind of my point Bob. You seem to have reinforced my argument. Now can you answer the second part of my question regarding whether or not countries can be economically manipulative?bobevenson wrote: Why would China reciprocate or invest for bettering the U.S.? Countries are just like you and me, they don't buy things to better somebody else, they buy things to better themselves...
I'm talking about the ways "First World" countries have historically treated other countries in the past, basically opening up their markets to us but then installing protectionism to protect our own markets.bobevenson wrote:I don't know what you're talking about. If you're talking about slave labor, that's wrong, but what do you want to do, start another war? If you're talking about people voluntarily working in a sweatshop, that means a sweatshop is better than any alternative. If you're talking about currency manipulations, that's not our problem, it's their problem.
I'm simply pointing out that your statement is not the case. I would amend it to what I said before:It's in the best interest of every country to scrap all foreign trade regulations regardless of what other countries do.
I agree that free trade can be a good thing. But it does need to be a two way street to whatever extent in order to be in the "best interest" of all concerned. I don't think I would recommend economic idealism to the people of the US anymore than I would recommend it to the people of a third world country. Based upon lessons we've all learned from the past, If anyone is going to open up their markets to anyone else, then there should be some mutuality to it if it is to benefit all parties.Sometimes it is in the best interest of some countries to scrap some foreign trade regulations depending upon what other countries do.
No, you are absolutely wrong, free trade is always a good thing, and it does not matter what the policies are of other countries. Again, our own foreign trade legislation on legal products should be totally scrapped, 100% scrapped, and the legislation or policies of other countries should have absolutely no bearing on this, and I don't know how I can make it any clearer.Gary Childress wrote:I agree that free trade can be a good thing.
What evidence are you basing these assumptions on? It certainly doesn't correspond with human history very well.bobevenson wrote:No, you are absolutely wrong, free trade is always a good thing, and it does not matter what the policies are of other countries. Again, our own foreign trade legislation on legal products should be totally scrapped, 100% scrapped, and the legislation or policies of other countries should have absolutely no bearing on this, and I don't know how I can make it any clearer.Gary Childress wrote:I agree that free trade can be a good thing.
Since when did the sun put candle-makers out of business?bobevenson wrote:Gary, there are people who would like to tax the sun for putting candle makers out of business.
It's a classic economic argument you wouldn't understand.Arising_uk wrote:Since when did the sun put candle-makers out of business?bobevenson wrote:Gary, there are people who would like to tax the sun for putting candle makers out of business.
Do tell? As from where I sit the sun was the reason for candles and candlemakers. Gas put them out of work.bobevenson wrote:It's a classic economic argument you wouldn't understand.