Do trade deals really kill jobs in america or is that a load of shit?
No shitposting I legitimately want to know
Yes.
>>67549189
Ok but how?
Also if this is really the case why hasn't there been a stronger push to stop these deals until now?
>>67548733
It obviously depends on what's in the deal or what's being advocated, something as non descript as "trade deal" is so broad you have to be retarded to make a thread like this.
Be more specific faggot, either name an up and coming trade deal or particular policy or fuck off.
>>67548733
Yes, how could you be so dumb?
>>67548733
That woman looks like a penis
Without a bit of protectionism it is much easier for jobs to be exported to places like China which have little regulation and taxes.
>>67549423
Well all I've heard from sanders and trump is "trade deals kill jobs" but I don't understand how and if it is true why hasn't there been more discussion about it before?
>>67549453
>stacy if you eat any more dick you're going to start looking like one
>>67549453
You're really gay for making that statement
>>67549398
People in China are paid like 2 cents a day to make things, that are then shipped here and sold in the 1 to 2 hundred dollars range. That's 99.99% profit. There is no health insurance, no labor laws.
Any self-respecting money-maker would do his business there, and sell the goods here. Why wouldn't that person do this? Hiring an American to do the same job means you're paying more than minimum wage and following all kinds of rules and laws that are just kind of annoying or horrifyingly necessary. But you don't need to do that shit, just hire Chinese people to do it.
Why wouldn't this kill jobs? Like, I don't even know WHY you need to have that explained.
>>67549726
You must have missed all the TPP and TTIP threads. Go look up the Ross Perot / Al Gore debate about NAFTA on Larry King on YouTube if you want a more extensive answer. Pretty much everything Perot says is spot on and applies to the modern definition of "free trade."
TTP and TTIP bring that up to a whole new set of horrible things on top of all that.
>>67549398
we buy all their shit but they dont buy our stuff so its not really trade
its one sided trade they get all the money we get inferior products
>>67548733
Eh. Sort of.
Trade liberalisation does kill some jobs. Low-skill, easily replaceable jobs are especially common for this. On a whole, however, trade liberalisation does have the ability to lead to greater economic development, which should create more jobs overall. However, most of these jobs will probably require more education and skills than the previously laid-off factory workers have.
Overall though, trade liberalisation does benefit the majority of people. A small minority of already poor individuals get screwed, but most benefit from the cheaper products they can buy.
>>67549453
Seeing womans curvature makes you think of penis? Juan I have news for you
>>67549398
It boils down to what the trading partner is doing. If they're China, they constantly devalue their own currency at will to optimize their ability to export goods to the US for sale. This means we're more likely to purchase a Chinese product than an American one due to the price. Less American product sales = less American jobs to make said products.
Or lets look at Saudi Arabia. Under normal conditions, they'd be charged by the WTO for economic dumping (flooding the market with a commodity to drive the price down and therefore competition away). They're doing this to price Canadian shale oil out of the market. Hurts jobs in Canada.
Historically speaking, temporarily isolationist foreign and economic policy has resulted in high employment and standard of living. Both the US in the 1890s-1910s and the German Empire from the 1890s-1910s are good examples of this.
>>67549944
China also forces its people to save whatever they make and then uses the combined people's savings as a gigantic loan base.
They also deliberately undersell to establish market dominance and use their central planning go put off having to make a profit. Imagine the Pentagon covering all your expenses for the first five years of operation.
>>67548733
The very essence of trade is that someone else is creating something instead of locals. There is no way around it.
>>67549944
But at what level does it not kill jobs? If we were making tires in America at one point, we typically imported the rubber to do so. Wouldn't the job we lose of harvesting rubber or figuring out a way to grow rubber trees lead to higher quality job manufacturing tires? The same could be said for protecting sugar farmers here by tariffing sugar. All the candy-making jobs went to Mexico where they could import sugar for dirt cheap. Do we want the sugar jobs or the candy jobs?
My point is that there is a seen and unseen to protectionism. Free trade is usually a good thing and even when it leads to a loss in jobs, it opens up other jobs.
>>67549398
>Ok but how?
The biggest issue has been the de-industrialization of the country. Manufacturing jobs used to be some of the best paying jobs non-college grads could get. Once "free trade" opened up manufacturing went over seas where wages were lower and regulations basically non-existent.
>if this is really the case why hasn't there been a stronger push to stop these deals until now?
Because they were profitable for multi-national corporations and the wealthy. The problems they caused were ignored because the liberals in charge of the media despise the white working class who were hurt by these policies.
>>67548733
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwmOkaKh3-s
Watch this interview with this billionaire from the 90s. He says exactly why this type of free trade shit is awful.
Chinks produce goods at slave labour rates and flood the American market. Chinas pretty much subsidizing American consumers. Who's hurt most is the Americans who want to work in a factory soldering pcb boards for $4 an hour.
Instead of worry about that to much you should be focused on getting the lowest class in America who don't have an education to engage in the post-industrial economy by getting them free access to skills e.g. free college instead of trying to bring back factory jobs Chinks are willing to do for next to noting
>>67548733
Yes and no. It kills off unskilled labor jobs and in return, gives a much, much smaller percentage of high paying white collar jobs back.
So if you're a factory worker/blue-collar laborer or their director manager, you get fucked.
If you're a desk jockey, you're probably fine.
>>67550660
>But at what level does it not kill jobs?
When it's carefully structured to protect domestic industries and help them grow. Trade is good when it's done right; it's bad when done poorly.
>>67549726
basically it goes like this. In the US we have labor laws, safety laws, pollution laws. Companies then must match your FICA, carry 5 different kinds of insurance, pay income tax, etc
Now instead of producing a box in the US that cost me $.89 to make, I contract out a company in lets say India who can make it for 40 cents, and it costs me 10 cents to get it shipped to my factory. I just saved 39 cents per box by using someone elses laws and tax system.
Most countries stop this in some way with tariffs, fines, or fees of various kinds. In the US there is no penalty at all. Our system actually encourages companies to use other companies outside the US to manufacture their products.
You will hear a lot about NAFTA as November rolls around. That only effects the US, Canada, and Mexico. After NAFTA passed you started to see a lot of manufacturing from the US go to Mexico. The TPP is basically NAFTA, but even worse, and involves almost all of Asia. Its a boom for China, Japan, Thailand, etc... Its fucking death for what little manufacturing the US has left.
>>67548733
who is this semen demon?
wages have stagnated for FIFTEEN YEARS.. What the FUCK do you think?
>>67548733
who is this fluid druid?
>>67548733
i really need more pics of her immediately
>>67551377
China isn't in the TPP. It's still a disaster for what remains of US manufacturing.
>>67549726
Democrats like to make trade deals that destroy whole sectors of the economy via outsourcing in order to force more people on welfare, whom they can then control.
Republicans like to make trade deals that outsource people's jobs so that their campaign donors will reward them with tasty treats as the labor surplus drives down wages.
The trade deals we make these days aren't "Hey, let's trade together!" It's "Hey, let's find some way to fuck over the American people and benefit you, the foreigners, for no apparent reason."
The purpose for trade deals is to reduce political restrictions like tariffs, regulations, allow foreign investment etc. The issue people have with it is the assumption that every investment into industry overseas is industry taken away from domestic industry. This is assuming they would even bother putting money domestically in the first place. Regardless, it does improve the over all economic conditions overall by creating more and cheaper goods for consumers. History has shown that isolated countries generally stagnate, that isn't to say the country wouldn't survive or change but there wouldn't be pressures to innovate without the additional outside influences. There are also other factors within the country that stifle employment, economic growth, competition but that's too much to talk about.
>>67548733
anything you buy from other countries kills jobs in america
every time america has made a trade deal we give them preferential tariffs or some shit so they can sell stuff
factories go overseas and companies that go along with it get tax breaks for putting a factory in a specific country. not counting the cut in the cost of labor
>>67551839
oops
>overseas is investment* taken away
>>67548733
who is this cock warlock?
>>67551734
This guy is right, China's not a party to the TPP.
That said, I'd be surprised if they wouldn't want to join in if it gets started, they would be able to take jobs out of almost every other country involved.
>>67551417
That has less to do with free trade as American workers collectively being cucks and not demanding anything. If wages are ever going to increase you need to force it to happen.
>>67549398
>Also if this is really the case why hasn't there been a stronger push to stop these deals until now?
People have been protesting against globalization for decades. You just haven't been listening but now the cries have gotten loud enough to catch your attention, especially with Trump leading the charge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Seattle_WTO_protests
It also didn't help that people kept trying to force it into the left/right dichotomy instead of its own unique collection of issues. Blue collar working class whites for too long through it was a hippy movement while many on the left thought anti-globalism to be a rightwing xenophobic movement. Trump is pulling these groups together into a common interest and changing the left/right divide into a nationalist/globalist divide. If he gets elected, expect both parties to change radically as factions swap around to this new paradigm.
>>67549398
when I was a kid in the 70's almost everything in the stores was made in the usa. everything
made in japan was rare.
>>67550015
Correct answer. /pol/ is pretty retarded on this topic. Free trade creates more jobs than it destroys but there are winners and losers. Access to cheap goods is a big win for everyone and a huge economic boon.
>>67548733
Yes, but that's not the only thing that matters. Trade deals allow for different countries to compete on their relative economic strengths, rather than doing everything.
Consider the following hypothetical scenario: USA has a trade deal with the Republic of Elbonia, and Elbonia's main export is Qtips. Because of Elbonia's geography and whatever, they are able to produce Qtips for cheaper than any other country. This will result in the USA importing Elbonian Qtips rather than producing our own (why would someone buy more expensive Qtips when they could get Elbonian Qtips for cheap?). The direct cost of this deal is the American Qtip industry. Qtip workers will have to find other lines of business because they can't compete with Elbonians.
That sounds bad, why would anyone do that?
Good question. That's because the above scenario only considers part of the entire picture. Sure, some people in the USA will have to look for work elsewhere, but the American public as a whole will benefit from the lower price of Qtips. You also have to consider that trade deals usually aren't one way. This means that while we're importing Qtips, we're going to be exporting to Elbonia our products that we can produce more cheaply. This means that the other industries in the USA will do well, and (theoretically) will make up for the lost Qtip worker jobs.
So yes. Trade deals do kill jobs. But the wonders of the free market means that jobs will certainly be created elsewhere in the economy, and everyone else also benefits from buying cheaper goods.
>>67551096
While this sounds good not everyone is suited for college, what for them?
>>67548733
global trade is about wealth redistribution. when you are a wealthy nation you lose to lower wealth nations. As planned.
>>67550015
The problem with this is the jobs lost are almost always lower middle class labor jobs. The backbone of an economy unless you are The Netherlands or Switzerland where your "middle class" looks a whole lot like upper class in every other country.
>>67553003
>wonders of the free market
It's always easy to spot the guy who replaced worship of God with worship of the market. Economics exist past ECON101. Reality doesn't actually match the simplistic models they present in your first economics class. That's why degrees up to the doctorate level (which I'm sure you'll claim you have) exist in economics instead of it being just a single freshman class.
>>67552829
There's noting wrong with getting third worlders to build stuff for you for next to noting.
The US just never reoriented the economy towards high skilled jobs so you're left with a massive underclass of blue collar workers who can't do high skilled knowledge work and are of no value besides mooching off welfare. That's why something like free college is absolutely necessary unless you want to compete with workers in third world countries and go down to their level.
>>67551096
This right here you silly burgers.
>>67553002
how is that a win when laid off workers cant buy said goods?
>>67548733
America has simply lost the industry lead that it once had. We used to be more technologically capable than other countries (and were a large country) so our global dominance of trade was tremendous.
Other countries have since caught up, and we didn't do anything to stay ahead. Now, uneducated workers in China and Mexico can perform a large portion of the manufacturing jobs that Americans used to it. It was good for us, because it meant cheaper products. However, our labor market shifted away from industry and towards service. Now we produce very little, and by importing manufactured goods we are constantly bleeding money.
Bringing jobs back here doesn't solve the problem but it does employ people in the near future. What we really need is to come up with something we can export to other countries. Something we're better at than them. Services aren't really suitable.
The BEST thing we could do is increase our national IQ and education levels, which means deporting shitskins.
>>67553585
OP asked a general question and I gave a general answer. I won't claim to be an expert, so if anything I stated was incorrect, please enlighten me.
>>67553585
Very few economists oppose free trade. You know you're dealing with someone mentally challenged as soon as they spout some leftist anti-trade bullshit.
>>67553693
The problem we have is niggers and the never ending flood of Mexican rejects. People who we will never be able to educate, even if we dumped social security and the military in favor of education.
A country can not survive on college graduates alone. The world needs garbage men, truck drivers, and roofers just as much as engineers, lawyers, and doctors. You can not sustain yourself on service industry jobs alone unless you have a very small population and are surrounded by relatively "stupid" countries
>>67553693
>There's noting wrong with getting third worlders to build stuff for you for next to noting.
tell that to the millions who got laid off because the stuff they used to build is now made somewhere else.
>>67554401
Well, you need to have retraining programs for it to work. You have to move the redundancies over to an industry that a first world country can be competitive in.
Probably a negative income tax/basic income will be necessary at some point but this is more a result of increased automation rather than globalism.
>>67554477
>increase our national IQ
hahahahaha
you are so stupid
>>67553693
creating skilled workers does not create skilled jobs though.
>>67553003
Your example sucks dude, you're not losing shit jobs to the shit countries, in America the jobs would be more capital intensive I.e. There would be one or two workers operating the machines, whereas overseas it would be done by hand, substituting labor for capital. By losing that q-tip plant you lose the capital intensive jobs, and the jobs to maintain the machines and develop new ones.
>>67554401
The people who lose jobs will need to find new ones. It would be idiotic to protect 1 job from being lost if 5 more would be created in its place.
Basically 90%+ of the population benefits from lower prices, which means people have more money to spend and therefore the economy will grow faster, and a tiny minority loses when they aren't able to find new work. The correct policy choice is the one that makes the economy and the majority of people better off, even if you can point to some small group who loses.
>>67555282
it just created skilled cashiers....
part time cashiers....
>>67554853
Basic manual labour jobs maintaining infrastructure and such will always be necessary in any society.
Trying to bring factories soldering pcb boards and shit like that back just doesn't make any sense when third worlders are willing to do it like 50% cheaper. Knowledge jobs have much higher value added and will bring more back into the state in taxes.
Not doing anything is masochistic and you'll just end up using the same funds to pay for welfare and prisons, you would be better off just using those funds training people to be productive.
>>67554990
Why not just pay them to retrain to work in modern industries
>>67555666
>It would be idiotic to protect 1 job from being lost if 5 more would be created in its place.
despite trips.. we didn't create 5 jobs for every job lost. that is the problem.
>>67548733
absolutely they do.
Cost of living is higher in the US so US workers demand higher wages for the same work as someone in a third world country, so it costs more to make things in the US. With protectionist policies, the boards of companies just have to stomach the costs.. but under free trade agreements, they're free to lay off all their American workers and have their goods produced overseas for less cost.
Those workers are out of good paying factory jobs that had benefits.. and instead are stuck with low paying service jobs with no benefits.
Free trade is great for business owners but terrible for labor. Most Americans are not business owners.
>>67555936
well, back when we did all those 'shit jobs' people could buy a house at age 22. Now that we are so much better off, fuckers can't find jobs. So obviously we have a flaw.
>>67553455
Grow straight, faggot.
>>67556253
trchnically we did. remember tge job recover of 2014? millions if jobs were created tganks to obama.
millions of fucking part time low wage jobs without benefits.........
litterally thanks obama.
>>67552706
I remember those protests... we got tear gassed because some nigger broke into Niketown..
>>67555233
The less intelligent a person is in America (anywhere) the more likely they are to be out of work or make very little money and thus collect government benefits. Unintelligent people are a drain on the economy. When your entire country is populated by unintelligent people you have the Dominican Republic.
The best way to improve the average quality of life in America is to get rid of anyone with a low quality of life (people with low intelligence). If we became a country of only whites, asians, and only allowed immigrants with >average IQ we would be the clear frontrunner again. We still are, just not as prominently as in the past.
>>67556253
This is more due to increased automation than anything else though. The U.S. still does a lot of high end manufacturing. (second biggest manufacturer after China)
I think U.S. manufacturing will actually overtake China again due to automation but this will not create many more jobs and the jobs it does create will require more training than old school manufacturing.
why does apple make ipods/pads/everythingelse in third world countries instead of america?
>>67556124
>Why not just pay them to retrain to work in modern industries
such as? within 20 miles of my house are 15 factories. Only two of them are running. The other 13 are empty vacant complexes.
>>67549453
nigga
>>67551377
>>67551734
Look at the bigger picture,
If TPP does not happen, China will just craft their own and will take the WHOLE ASIA-PACIFIC rim nations and latin america. It's zero-sum game. China vs USA. One wins and one must suffer consequences.
>>67548733
Who is the girl that is attached to that butt?
>>67548733
sweet pahooty what a booty
>>67556794
>The best way to improve the average quality of life in America is to get rid of anyone with a low quality of life (people with low intelligence).
so that leave you out, lad
>>67557083
Apple has actually been considering moving some production to the U.S. FYI
>>67553003
The problem with your example is that virtually NOTHING is cheaper produced in the US. These trade deals ARE mostly one sided. Chinese aren't buying American made goods, they're just dumping all their shit on us.
We lose manufacturing jobs and move towards a service based economy. Service jobs just don't pay as well and don't have the benefits of manufacturing jobs.
There simply isn't room for EVERYONE to be a business owner either.
>>67556124
ok whos going to pay for it?
the welfare leeches? nope.
the working poor? you bet they (I) are. they already are burdened with obamacare premiums, rent, and other expenses with help of their part time low wage jobs which by the way employers demand fulltime commitment or you get axed so chances of getting training is slim.
middle class getting fucked either way.
upper class dont care in fact they have means to leave the country.
the 1%? hah ... hahahahaha.
>>67557939
cool
they'll probably change their mind with the whole fbi trying to throw them in jail thing
but you have to imagine with all the bribery and shipping and transport and graft that you'd not lose much when compared to amurikan minimum wage
>>67556829
and this is the problem we are facing. many are going to schools but dropping out because tgey fucking cant afford it anymore.
>>67557996
>Chinese aren't buying American made goods, they're just dumping all their shit on us.
dude, the Chinese want high end high tech top grade machinery tools, IP etc etc, but USA is being too jew about it.
Germany and Japan does not have trade deficit with China because China buys high tech B2B stuff.
>>67558667
I don't think isolationist trade policy would fix this though.
There has to be a change in domestic policy.
>>67548733
Trade agreements don't mean much. A change in the exchange rate has a much larger effect on trade than any trade agreement.
The US lost many jobs due to current account deficits, but it's becoming less of a problem.
However the US will probably continue to run a small current account deficit and lose jobs that way. It's the price you have to pay for your imperialist politics in the world.
>>67551096
college =/= skills
college =/= success
college =/= employability
you need to be motivated, pick an employable degree (i.e. STEM), get good grades, and not be a lazy piece of shit. The kind of people who do not go to college and are unemployed will not magically become employable if they had so called "free" higher education.
>>67557303
Who cares? Those nations will decline for taking that stupid deal. Not our problem.
>>67553693
>There's noting wrong with getting third worlders to build stuff for you for next to noting.
Fuck off kike
>>67550724
Damn this is a good redpill. Thanks man.
>>67549398
Low skill requirement jobs are being exported to countries that are filled with people that consider a dollar an hour good pay.
This is of course good for the companies that do it, and it can be good for the country overall. If the companies pay their taxes and dont get a ton of money from the government.
It is very bad for the low skilled workers that are suddenly without jobs.
However the republican party have been very successful at diverting the attention of their voters by ranting about the evil abortionists, the depraved homosexuals and the greedy immigrants that steal the jobs most Americans dont want anyways.
After a good three or four decades of this however a good part of their voters are realizing that the abortions still happen, the gays have won most of the battles and that that Sanchez fellow down the road is still taking the low paying agricultural jobs you did not want anyways.
Oh and you are unemployed, unlikely to ever find a job again and is seen as a racist caricature of a country bumpkin by most of the rest of the country.
Who by the way is earning more money than you.
So there is a lot of rage to go around.
>>67559036
how can there be change when everyone is so fucking divided , manipulated, or blatanlty ignorant on the issues? if there are going to be changes they will be implemented terribly. ie: obamacare.
>>67558910
The problem is that China steals and reverse engineers too much which makes it risky.
China was the wrong horse to bet on in the long term. India has much stronger rule of law and less xenophobic buttfuckery going on.
IT depends which context you look at.
Anti-trade people will always focus on a very small area and identify that jobs in 'x' industry will be lost, which is true and it can have a large effect(Detroit)
Pro-trade people will argue about the macro influence of trade, the greater good ect cheaper goods-->increases discretionary income-->greater consumption/variety = people are better off Also "opens new markets which will create jobs(normally in only a few industries)
The truth is somewhere in-between.
"That's just bullshit, stupid goy! It's a 21st century economy, we need to re-train our workers for newer and better, un-skilled, part-time service jobs!"
t. rich 1%'er jew who gets rich from importing cheap Chinese crap
>>67553693
yeah nothing wrong with illegal mexican farmers working next to nothing just so food is cheaper.
but hey food is cheap! fuck the farmers right mr leaf liberal? they arent slaves cuz they get paid in peanuts! tee hee.
i sware to god i think there is a giant gasleak and its making the populace stupid.
>>67560181
Detroit failed because the American Big 3 made fucking horrible business decisions. It had very little to do with trade. The auto companies tried to be way to jewy but you will have to look into it yourself because I don't want to write a long post.
On top of that the city was run by a stupid nigger and all the white people left.
>>67560540
Don't make the mistake of freeing the slaves again burger. You won't be able to round them and they will just become eventual tax burdens. Let them keep picking oranges.
>>67548733
Free trade is always beneficial in the same sense that competition is always beneficial. You will lose some jobs as an advanced economy you cannot really compete with china in some manufacturing fields but the benefits outweigh the costs. The benefits are of course cheaper consumer goods and a more innovative economy. With trade protectionism you are sheltering inefficient industries.
OP here
This is a really good thread holy shit
But what are the realistic solutions at this point?
>>67561221
I probs should have specified, i meant when you see unemployment in a certain industry it can fuck the city. Most cities are still not diversified in their production (understandable).
eg Finance, the big investment banks started winding down their fixed trading arms effectivly firing 25% of traders. Most of them in 1 or 2 cities, thats like 5000 people
>>67562065
Spend more money on the unemployed poor.
You dont have to go full socialist. But as long as the answer to the question "I have been unemployed for six years and my family is sinking in to debt, what should i do?", is "Fuck you, i got mine!" anger will rise.
>>67548733
Trade deals massively increase the labor pool and that labor pool is not protected by the same regulations (safety, minimum wage, etc) in every country. Tariffs are used to correct for this between countries without a trade deal. People in favor of trade deals are the workers in the poor countries, management of the companies (which can shift production overseas, pay less to make the product and therefore make more profit), idiots who think only they can do their job, and globalists who think countries are an outdated idea.
Why hasn't there been a big fuss about trade deals in the past? Well, there kinda was. NAFTA and GATT were both met with some pushback in the USA. Democrats and Republicans are essentially the same party when you toss away stupid wedge issues like abortion. At their core they both want money and power. The politicians in those parties know corporations are their big benefactors and corporations love trade deals. Ross Perot (third party presidential candidate in 1992 and 1996) got a considerable amount of the vote and he specifically brought up topics the other two parties don't like to touch such as trade agreements. Watch the three presidential debates in 1992.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XD_cXN9O9ds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6sUGKAm2YQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCGtHqIwKek
You can clearly see the topics Bush and Clinton avoid or try to spin such as trade agreements. After 1992 the two parties made it much harder for a third party candidate to be viable.
>>67562305
Oh, I see. That's true.
>>67561968
>Free trade is always beneficial
lolno, when there are trade imbalances, free trade isn't beneficial
>>67562065
Devalue the Dollar.
>>67548733
sauce
>>67553465
Those people should be allowed to go to a trade school and learn a trade, like becoming a plumber, electrician, or something similar. The kind of thing that can't be moved overseas. If we move into a free college system, people should be allowed to go to trade schools under that system as well.
>>67559757
James goldsmith was too fucking based. He tried his best to save Europe. They just wouldn't listen.
>>67553455
No. Stop using pussy to lure in eyeballs. If your thread is worth something you won't need to resort to such tactics.
>>67563529
Do you understand the implications of that? I can't outline everything that would happen but I don't think this would be a good choice.
>>67549398
Because lots of other populations bred like rats until the value of their labor crashed, and their governments don't provide half the workplace protections we do.
Because there's a shitload of money in keeping these agreements going. Because the government always seeks to increase its power and breadth. Because there are more people potentially buying these cheap goods than working those jobs today. Because modern economics worship GDP and the idea of free movement of labor and business, even though the equilibrium wages and benefits in such a world would be far lower than what we enjoy now.
>>67563342
Free trade absolutely has a net positive benefit to the world. Free trade between first and third world countries completely fucks over the first world countries but it really helps the third world countries. Trade deals are perfectly fine between countries of comparable wealth and standards (USA, Germany, England, etc). But as a first worlder, I hate trade deals like GATT, NAFTA and TPP. If I lived in Vietnam or some comparable piece of shit I'd love trade deals.
Manufacturing keeps moving to wherever it is cheap to produce something. USA used to make it's own shit then moved it's manufacturing to China because Chinese labor was cheap. As time went on, Chinese labor prices started to rise and now their manufacturing is shifting to Vietnam. In another 20 years it will go somewhere else.
>>67566005
Your post is invalidated by a graph I posted earlier >>67559037
The country the USA is losing jobs to largely is Germany.
>>67550015
This brings up a good point. Trade liberalisation should be good for everyone, given that education is easily accessible. However, the price of traditional education is rising geometrically. Were that not the case, we all could be getting wealthier. Not saying that a govt solution is the answer, though.
>>67552477
We have no negotiating power. They can either bring in dirt poor foreigners or send the work overseas to dirt poor foreigners.
>>67548733
Yes some economists argue the world is better off do to the cheaper labor and greater overall production and they are correct. But any that say the United states is better off is just plain wrong. Cheap shit does not make up for the unemployed in this nation.
