>both Democrats and Republicans are opposed to trade
Why are people stupid?
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/08/exit-polls-michigan-dems-republicans-oppose-trade/
Free trade is destroying our country.
>>66722240
How? It makes things cheaper for everyone.
Assuming, of course, we're talking about actual free trade, not these government-made "agreements" and "associations"
>le free trade meme
We'll stop fucking with your companies if you stop fucking with ours. That's what 'free trade' means.
>>66722476
When you lose your job, paying $10 less for sneakers means fuck all.
>>66722476
>one way free trade is good
>>66722167
>friedman
globalist jew
The libertarian meme is dead.
>>66726492
When everybody else wins, your job means fuck all
>>66726626
One way "free trade" is not free trade
>>66722167
>immoral kikes driven only by greed
Libertarians are degeneracy incarnated.
>>66722167
They're protectionist. They somehow think it's a sustainable trade option, rather than something you do with a young economy.
>>66722476
There's free trade and there's getting shorted. It's also worse for the environment despite environmentalism driving deindustrialization, it requires less carbon than letting third worlders make and send it. It is about autarky and this does not contribute to it.
>>66727133
That's what our "free trade" policy is. China, Japan, Mexico, Phillippines, etc. all sell their cheap shit to us and buy nothing in return. We give up our jobs and money to them. It's not "trade" if only one side is buying products.
>>66727167
>muh greed
Everyone is greedy.
Socialism happens when you demand people to be these perfect altruistic beings devoid of greed and self-interest.
>>66722167
yep, free market will fix everything you libertard anarch capitalist little s***!
>>66727612
>posts a picture that depicts the exact opposite of a free market
not sure if bait or just retarded
>>66727552
And I agree 100% with you.
When we are forced to compete it brings out the best in everyone. Trade ensures that degenerates do not find their way into positions of influence.
>>66722167
>Everyone will be angry at free trade
>Policies like Smoot-Hawly will be implemented
>The economy will collapse
>People will blame "Protectionism"
>People will love free trade again
>Nothing actually gets done.
This is what happened during the depression. It's happening again.
We'll never have real fair trade in this world until post scarcity happens. It's a shame, because the perverse incentives created by unfair, exploitative free trade are very, VERY easy to correct if anyone actually cared.
>>66727579
>everyone is greedy
Nice generalization. Civil society is made by each individual containing their own instincts, not basking into sin.
Lelbertarians are just the other face of the coin of materialistic history, the other is marxism. You proved that yourself is nothing more than a soulless husk driven by vice.
>>66727133
> one way "free trade" is not free trade
exactly. In a global scale, free trade is not possible since most other countries don't engage in free trade.
>>66722476
Our "free trade" agreements do nothing but enable American companies to move jobs to the cheapest markets around the world so they can sell them back to the people they left to the unemployment line. We don't fucking make anything anymore, we just import foreign goods and goods produced in foreign countries with American brands on them. NAFTA, the TTP, and the TTIP are all bullshit.
>>66728695
imposing restrictions on yourself won't make things better either
adopting free trade policies will ensure you'll be on the better end of the deal
>>66729062
>Been saying this shit for years
>Everyone on /pol/ shits on me and says "COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE! FREE MARKET IS ALWAYS RIGHT"
>Trump says it
>Says some dumb shit that amounts to "Fuck Nafta we don't have to listen to no international treaties"
>He is the face of the anti-free trade movement now
>/pol/ sucks his dick
Fuck me.
>>66729401
Then why are we on the shit end of the deal?
>>66728395
the free market punishes vice and sin by having individuals face the consequences of their actions by not having a higher power to rescue them from their bad decisions
you just proved that you know nothing about libertarianism by confusing libertarians with libertines
>>66729652
because you don't have a free market :^)
>>66729747
But China and Mexico do, right?
>>66729062
that's because your government adopts policies and measures which make it too expensive to produce shit in America
not only China is making their labor force cheap, but America is making things worse by making theirs more expensive
both factors hurt America
>>66729653
Libertarians are libertines because there's no one to impede man be man's own prey.
And they're addicted to one sin already. What makes them not be addicted to others?
Everything immoral is possible to satiate the free market god.
>>66729856
uh... no?
where are you getting that from?
>>66722167
The US have nothing to gain with free trade.
Even our country could not if it wasnt a piece of shit extraction colony.
>>66729964
who or what is going to impede then?
>>66730008
>I don't know what free trade is
>>66729986
>adopting free trade policies will ensure you'll be on the better end of the deal
>Even though China and Mexico have much worse economic freedom than you do and are on the much better end of the deal
>>66730180
you're not getting it
their labor force is cheap artificially, in a free market they would be much more expensive
>>66729401
Not really. It's very easy to imagine a system of free markets where one country ends up on the shit end of the deal. Go read the studies that "proved" comparative advantage in the 70s. Really read them. They say that it's proved, but only in the case of 2 countries trading 2 materials that make 2 goods. Any different scenario and the whole thing breaks down. And this is done "in a vacuum" and entirely theoretcially.
The problem is, we don't have perfect information, we don't have perfect sight, and we don't have perfect attention to every spot of every trade deal in the world.
Things get misspriced. Free markets are very easy to manipulate so that those misspricings can add up on one side rather than the other. In the instant case, the value of workers is being misspriced to be lower than it really is.
The biggest problem of all is that we don't have any will to actually regulate things. We only get that will when it's way, way too late, and by then, people are calling for the end to free trade like everyone else in this thread.
Bork and Friedman's greatest and most successful arguments weren't related to the markets, but to regulation, and they successfully convinced everyone that no one governmental body can regulate anything, so it's better to just not regulate anything. This is clearly retarded.
>>66730148
>The US should let foreigners and multinationals have economic power in their country
>>66730116
Institutions. You know, those things that are abhorred by libertarians.
>>66730325
It's too bad the whole world isn't a free market then.
>>66722167
"Free trade agreements" literally means "let's form a cartel to keep wages low"
Even a Brazilian should be able to understand
>>66729630
Well then you should have ran for president
>>66729630
This type of response corresponds with the number of libertarians on the board which has fluctuated over time. Both paleocons and stormfags (to their credit) have always been against free trade.
>>66730389
yeah, but once things crash and normalize, the one with free market policies will suffer a lot less than some socialist latrine with a credit bubble the size of a few trillion dollars
>>66730400
if the result is an increase in quality of life for the natives, I see no problem
fun fact: the free market punishes race mixing and rewards segregation because humans are naturally racist
>>66730676
>let's be part of the problem!
>>66730549
>institutions
>created and maintained by men
>men who prey other men
hurr durr
>>66730984
is that what the poll was about?
eh, I should have guessed they didn't lecture the participants on the Austrian school of economics before making the question
the answer does depend on what the person considers to be a free market
>>66731243
>let's be part of the problem!
More like
>let's work within reality so we don't destroy ourselves!
>>66729953
So we have to lower our standard of living in order to compete with slave wages in foreign countries, right? You libertarian retards live in a fucking fantasy world.
If other countries violate human rights, workers rights, and have lax environmental regulations, the answer is not to drop to their level, but to use tariffs on their shit so they lose their advantage.
>>66722476
If I want advice on how to destroy a country, I'll ask for it Brazil.
Anyway I'll spell it out nice and easy
Free Trade/Globalism= killing the middle class. It's that simple.
>>66731443
tbf Brazilians don't have any wages
so I guess globalist free trade doesn't hurt them
>>66731243
>if the result is an increase in quality of life for the natives
By having jews controlling your country? Nay.
And how does it rewards segregation?
>>66731443
>If other countries violate human rights, workers rights, and have lax environmental regulations, the answer is not to drop to their level, but to use tariffs on their shit so they lose their advantage.
Totally agree
And yes, Americans will need to pay x amount of dollars more for a pair of pants because they weren't made in a sweatshop. However, that money stays in the economy
>>66731417
>the other countries are all tying their nooses and stepping on a chair
>we should do the same!
How about you prepare for the storm by not being neck-deep in debt and bullshit government regulations? This way you'll swim faster out of the sea of diarrhea and get ahead of everyone else
economic protectionism is very short-sighted
>>66731243
>fun fact: the free market punishes race mixing and rewards segregation because humans are naturally racist
That's breddy gool but this segregation should be done at the level of nations instead of within them otherwise you'll end up with special interest warfare and libertarianism isn't an option anymore.
>>66731243
Created and maintained by men to keep men coexisting with men and guarantee a safer environment to sustain the species. This is literally evolution.
If you deviate from the path you hurt the natural machine.
Can't expect libertarians to know a thing or two of morality, though.
Now I'm going to sleep. Have fun being a degenerate.
Good night.
>>66731702
>economic protectionism is very short-sighted
I would argue to opposite
free trade produces a GDP boost at the cost of capital outflow and structural unemployment. Free trade is short sighted
>>66731243
>yeah, but once things crash and normalize, the one with free market policies will suffer a lot less than some socialist latrine with a credit bubble the size of a few trillion dollars
But the problem is, it's the Free Markets that encourage credit bubbling.
Once again, it's VERY EASY for a country who imports while also exporting jobs to fix this.
That's to regulate. Many countries (Such as Brazil and Mexico) have foreign investment boards that comb through foreign investment coming in to the country and must give their vote of approval before that investment can begin.
What the U.S. needs is the opposite, that's all. A board that regulates Investments going OUT of the country. And it's a simple question. Why are you investing in this outside country? Is it because of underpaid workers? Is it because of low environmental law? Is it because of monetary fuckery where their money is pegged to ours? Or is there a good reason? There are good reasons to put a factory in China. But they are narrowly tailored, and it's very easy to pick out companies that are only taking advantage of the system for short-term personal gain at the expense of long term economic stability.
And they don't have to get every offender. But getting a few will deter the rest.
>>66731149
Nah, this is also true of the general public. You're all sheep fags who sway in the wind because you don't actually know what you're talking about. You talk about what the politicians talk about and nothing more. It's very obvious. People treat politicians like celebrities, and only care about their ideologies when it allows them to gossip.
>>66731443
>So we have to lower our standard of living
paying less taxes will increase your standard of living
having less regulations will create more jobs
approving less subsidies will ensure your country stays competitive and flexible
>human rights
>workers rights
>environmental regulations
these shouldn't exist
it's a placebo to make people feel happy, and the costs outweigh the benefits
>>66731702
I don't see China or Mexico with nooses around their necks, I see them laughing as we make our pockets even wider for them to rob.
>>66731699
>tariffs
No. This is what Trump is supporting but it WILL NOT WORK.
A) Because WE OURSELVES built up a tariff free world. Renegging on that is impossible. We're so locked in with an unbelievable amount of international treaties. The only way to break them would to be starting WWIII.
>inb4 HURR GOOD
B) Because tariffs pass the taxes on to the consumer. It's not an outright ban on the worst offenders. Which is what is necessary.
>>66727552
>Amerilard bought the bad deals Trump meme without researching anything
>>66732341
>It's not an outright ban on the worst offenders. Which is what is necessary.
so... sanctions and embargoes?
that would cause an international shitstorm to the same degree, if not worse, as tariffs
>>66731698
studies have found out that multicultural neighborhoods show a decreased level of cooperation and charity between individuals
people naturally help those who are similar to themselves before helping those who are different
in a free market, it's expected that less and less multicultural neighborhoods will form
and it makes sense, most multicultural neighborhoods in Europe for example are a direct result of mass immigration
when the government promises a bunch of free shit, the scourge comes knocking
>>66732569
Nope. Not Sanctions on the other countries.
Inward regulations.
Entirely legal, especially under current International treaty law See >>66732035
No need to fuck with anything.
>>66731906
>I believe that men are shitty to other men
>let's fix this by making people believe it's okay for some men to be shitty to other men in the name of some arbitrary rules imposed by those with the biggest stick
>lectures me about morality
you're a joke
>>66731943
Could you tell me more?
>>66732035
credit bubbles are an entirely government thing
without the government to bail out banks, what incentives to they have to kill their business by giving money to shit people who can't pay it back?
do you even know what a credit bubble is and how it works?
>>66732271
dude, China and Mexico are third-world countries for a reason
>>66732255
>paying less taxes will increase your standard of living
Not if you lower it so much that you can't fund common infrastructure, defense, and a judicial system.
>having less regulations will create more jobs
In exchange you get poisoned rivers and air, with cancer causing chemicals. Good job.
>approving less subsidies will ensure your country stays competitive and flexible
It does the opposite you tard. What happens when you rely on foreign food sources, then something causes global trade to be disrupted? Better to ensure you can produce your own food for security reasons.
>these shouldn't exist it's a placebo to make people feel happy, and the costs outweigh the benefits
Human rights shouldn't exist? Kek.
>>66733134
whats up with that thumbnail?
that's not the image I uploaded at all!
the average moron has never read an economics textbook and just believes whatever shit is popular
>tfw the huehue is smarter than most amerifats here
Tariffs and protectionism don't fucking work. They enable domestic monopolies, and raise prices. It's basically corporate welfare that promotes less competition.
>>66732797
When a free trade agreement is made, companies race to the bottom with respect to wages. Their profits go up which helps GDP.
This means that the workers in the higher-wage countries become structurally unemployed
When a company imports more foreign than domestic good and services, a trade deficit occurs and capital flows out of the country
note that these are broad statements and I am not an economist, but I'm trying to be as logical as possible
>>66731464
This is what helped build the Chinese military that were are now having to deal with in the South China Sea. We sold the rope that is being used to hang us.
>>66733018
I do know what a credit bubble is, hue.
What incentive do they have to do that?
That's what the Mortgage-Backed-Securities were for. Cut up the mortgages and sell off the risk to the greater fool.
Make no mistake, the 2008 crisis was created by a removal of government oversight, not from too much of it. The reason it went out of control is because it took MONTHS for government regulators to figure out just what the fuck happened because they WEREN'T watching.
>>66722167
Suuuuuuuuuuuure
And Brazil's currency manipulation doesn't fuck us up
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME
Your corrupt leaders are at least a little bit smarter than you.
>>66722476
>Assuming, of course, we're talking about actual free trade, not these government-made "agreements" and "associations"
Why would you assume that? Free trade isn't free at all these days.
>>66733187
>common infrastructure, defense, and a judicial system.
There are free market alternatives to all of those
find any ancap thread and ask "how would X work in Ancapistan?"
>In exchange you get poisoned rivers and air, with cancer causing chemicals. Good job.
as if a government bureaucrat will give a shit about some river in the other side of the country
if it had an owner, you can bet he'll get on to solving the problem much faster
a river is a big source of money, using it as a trash bin is stupid. It would quickly diminish its price, and some other entrepreneur with more vision will quickly buy it. The previous owner obviously doesn't care that much about the river, other people will find better uses for it
>then something causes global trade to be disrupted?
unless we're talking about a very specific article of food, nothing short of a meteor strike will cause global starvation
what kind of catastrophe are you talking about?
>Better to ensure you can produce your own food for security reasons.
then plant them in your own backyard instead of having the government use other people's money
>Human rights shouldn't exist? Kek.
in practice, they don't
they also only apply to first-world countries. Go to Africa, shoot up a church, see if anyone gives a damn
it's just an ideal we should strive to always walk in that direction
it also changes from person to person, some people think Facebook is a human right
>>66734398
>a river is a big source of money, using it as a trash bin is stupid. It would quickly diminish its price, and some other entrepreneur with more vision will quickly buy it. The previous owner obviously doesn't care that much about the river, other people will find better uses for it
brazilian can't into tragedy of the commons as his country's rainforest is razed
Ironic
>>66733323
Oh, you're talking about one of those government-made "free trade" agreements
if a company is importing instead of using local stuff, maybe you should look into why they're doing that
maybe it's because the local workers are too expensive, or maybe you have some regulation that makes certain commodities more expensive
or hell, maybe the government outright prohibits a certain item from being produced, and the company has to buy it from other countries that don't ban it
or maybe it's because all the oil reserves in your country are a pain in the ass to extract from, and oil reserves in other countries are piss easy to extract
but then that's just geography and there's nothing you can do about that
then you just have to do some damage control and have as few self-imposed handicaps as possible
LOL. 35+ years of Supply-side, trickle-down, horse and sparrow super uber mega legendary epic fail. Yet you still idolize the scam artist. What does 1% Dick taste like? As a heterosexual male I do not see the appeal that you cuckservatives do.
>>66734398
> Privately owned rivers
You have gone full tilt into retard libertarian land. You hold onto this fantasy ideal of how you think society can work your way as opposed to reality. You are no better than those retard communists who complain that if only we really, really, really, implemented communism the extra special right way it will finally work.
You are too stupid to see your ideas are just as extreme and unworkable as theirs.
>>66733395
if that was true, then we should have had several smaller credit bubbles in quick succession instead of periodic big crashes, because you make it seem like it's a viable and repeatable business strategy
the only reason those fools were buying up was because the government was backing up a promise
same reason Brazil is in deep shit right now, and we've never had free trade in our modern history, and our government regulations are draconian when it comes to banking and financing
saying that the government didn't see it coming is stupid, when it's a very well-known fact that banks have always been in bed with the government ever since the Federal Reserve was created more than 100 years ago
>>66734527
do we have free trade in Brazil? no
wuts ur point dude
>>66735502
my point is that private companies will harm the environment in the short term to make money, even if in the long term the land is fucked
hence the river will be polluted
>>66722476
somehow we got by when we actually manufactured shit in this country
>>66722167
Free trade also includes the option to not participate you globalist kike.
>>66735640
do paper companies destroy their forests to make paper, or do they have an incentive to keep their lands healthy so they can continue to produce paper and continue to have a valuable property value in case they have to sell out?
land, rivers, mines, they're all sources of income
if individuals cannot be trusted to treat them nicely, then the government is the last entity you want taking care of them
>>66735928
>Free trade also includes the option to deny other people from participating because I don't want to participate
bazinga
>>66722167
You've made your way onto the list of Anons i can actually identify lad
>>66736103
Who exactly are we denying?
