And how many of those economists account for most exogenous variables outside of simple trade? Such as the failure of re education, disparate impact among lower classes, failure to achieve capitalization of labor as a result of thst disparate impact, subsiziation of walmartized workers...etc? I have yet to see a study that shows such impacts and adequately includes them in the analysis.Free trade is one of the few subjects where economists are basically unanimous in it being a positive thing for a country such as the US.
Free trade in no way undercuts the US's ability to implement worker rights, environmental protections, etc and it makes our country as a whole richer. What we do with that extra money is the issue in question here and yes, conservatives don't want to spread the additionally generated wealth around, which is a problem.
I've always been curious as to what exactly attracts people about trade isolationism. Do you think if we suddenly decide to get rid of foreign trade that the US will be better off? If so, check out North Korea. Juche has been a big hit over there! Do you think we should just somehow negotiate better trade deals with other countries? If so, why would they accept?
This,
but according to the free trade apologists (many who pretend are pro-union, harp for $15.00 minimum wage, want every regulation under the sun enforced for American businesses, want paid maternity leave, employee funded healthcare, European style vacation days, etc)
magically come out in support of these free trade agreements that allow companies that outsource to bypass all that and claim it's a good thing.
Two perfect examples that represent the two-face democrat party of today, they will point the finger at the evil republicans when it comes to US based workers rights, environmental,$15 minimum wage, working conditions, healthcare, unions, maternity leave, etc. ,
but magically turn around and support free trade agreements that help undercut all that like it's a good thing and call those against it isolationists if it's their man (Obama or Clinton) at the helm and rationalize it away with words like efficiency while doing the dirty work of the 1%, you know the rich, they same rich they always like to criticize for not paying their fair share.
And yet you continue to increase the labor pool through importing poorly educated, low income, impoverished workers which further weakens the existing job pools ability to leverage themselves. You counter this by giving them free shit.Please. The very success of financialized international capitalism has hugely reduced the leverage of workers in this country in all ways except one- our ability to impose regulations, levy taxes & redistribute the rewards of capitalism. We have simply failed to seek fair compensation for the job loss associated with that success. The sooner we accept that reality the sooner we'll be on our way to a better America for the vast majority of citizens. Or we can just go with Freedumb! & wedge issues driving us apart.
And how many of those economists account for most exogenous variables outside of simple trade? Such as the failure of re education, disparate impact among lower classes, failure to achieve capitalization of labor as a result of thst disparate impact, subsiziation of walmartized workers...etc? I have yet to see a study that shows such impacts and adequately includes them in the analysis.
If you have one, please show it.
Free trade doesn't have to do with those things? Rofl.lol, it is abundantly clear you are in totally over your head here. Free trade doesn't have to do those things, those are policy choices that are entirely separate from free trade. Free trade's positive effects drastically outweigh its negatives.
Here's what economists think about free trade. Let me guess though, the guy who has repeatedly shown an inability to read and understand research has decided that the entire field of economics forgot about the costs of free trade. Dunning-Kruger effect in play again.
http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_d68906VNWqVmiGN
http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_0dfr9yjnDcLh17m
So show me a candidate that is against them that doesn't have that baggage?
Please tell me more about Trump and trade deals
And yet you continue to increase the labor pool through importing poorly educated, low income, impoverished workers which further weakens the existing job pools ability to leverage themselves. You counter this by giving them free shit.
So show me a candidate that is against them that doesn't have that baggage?
That isn't what I asked. Show me a candidate that is against the trade deals that you think will follow through with it.He is the anti-trade president candidate while making his money off outsourcing.
Free trade doesn't have to do with those things? Rofl.
What you really mean is that free trade is a myth when it comes to ecnomic reality and fucks over people who have lesser mobility, exiling them to poverty at the behest of ivory tower theoretical "economists", the very same who initially preached trickle down, and most who continue to do so.
And just stop with the economist projections. Tell me one economist who has been able to predict gdp, qe monetary flows, rates, forward curves, fed moves...etc correctly at even a 50% success rate.
Which economist saw the housing crisis at least 2 years before? How about the .bombs? How about the sovereign debt crisis? Oil collapase? Tell me a single one that called all of those correctly. Just one.
My simple question to you is this - what do you think is the end game of this? Do you think the proles will continue to be happy with table scraps left over after your largesse? How much do you think the 1% can aggregate? How poorly do you think the lower/middle class can do before they shuck wedge issues and revolt?
That isn't what I asked. Show me a candidate that is against the trade deals that you think will follow through with it.
So show me a candidate that is against them that doesn't have that baggage?
So your argument is 'I don't care what the experts think I'm sure I'm right'. By the way most economists do not endorse trickle down economics at all, I'm not sure where you got that idea from. Guess who does believe in it though? Donald Trump! His tax cut is heavily supply side in nature.
I hope the middle and lower classes do push for more income redistribution, that's a good idea! It's always better to have more income to redistribute rather than less though, which is why I support free trade.
I'll take the one that has at least he will consider bucking the status quo vs the one who assuredly follow itNeither of them is against trade deals. One of them is pretending he is.
Neither of them is against trade deals. One of them is pretending he is.
I'll take the one that has at least he will consider bucking the status quo vs the one who assuredly follow it
I'll take the one that has at least he will consider bucking the status quo vs the one who assuredly follow it
No, just hopeful for something different.Nah, won't go there.
That isn't what I asked. Show me a candidate that is against the trade deals that you think will follow through with it.
And yet you waffle again. Why? Because you can't point to an economist that has been tight about anything major repeatedly.
Yeh, because they have done so well in the past trade deals.
And yet you waffle again. Why? Because you can't point to an economist that has been right about anything major repeatedly.
I think Bernie said something about unfair trade. That's why the DNC had to railroad him. If he kept talking, he would probably have 2 bullets in the back of his head. A suicide, obviously.That isn't what I asked. Show me a candidate that is against the trade deals that you think will follow through with it.