Create account

Sk8eM dUb
replied 2921d
Define "free trade" and tell me why it's necessarily a good thing. Which companies does he "attack"? Free speech(from large voices and small) are an essential part of the free market.
replied 2915d
Free trade is voluntary exchange of value. Do you want tariffs between you and your supermarket?
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2915d
Most businesses are too small to ship overseas, they just close up shop. Yayy corporate consolidation! Just what we all want, cheap crap made in China bought with unemployment checks!
replied 2915d
Why would being small mean you cannot ship overseas?
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2915d
No, but if there's tariffs between my business or my employer's business and our customers you either lobby the government to fight it, make your product overseas or close up shop.
replied 2915d
So tariffs are bad?
replied 2915d
yep
replied 2919d
Free trade is free movement of goods between nations. It lowers prices for consumers, which makes it a great thing. He attacks Harley Davidson, and Google. He will likely attack Ford.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2918d
As for his "attacking" companies, he's only doing exactly what he said he'd do on the campaign trail. He said he'd use the bully pulpit of the presidency to keep jobs in the US.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2918d
Definitions. Free trade: Traders are free to negotiate a price. When a "trader" is an entire country, other countries may need a representative to negotiate on their behalf.
replied 2918d
Wrong definition for this context. Free trade is a out removing national barriers to trade, such as tariffs.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2918d
Well whoever wants that free trade is an idiot who's incapable of doing math.
replied 2918d
Quite the opposite. Those who hate it can't do math. It is best on the consumer to have free trade. Tariffs hurt the consumer most.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2918d
Would you cut your feet off to put on a hat?
replied 2917d
What do you mean by that? What could possibly be negative about removing barriers to trade? Seems all the evidence is against you on this issue.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2917d
A lot of manufacturing buisinesses have their prices undercut by Chinese importers who are willing to use essentially slave labor to monopolize a given market.
replied 2916d
It is hardly slave labour. It is actually well paid labour that creates a new middle class for the nation. What we call sweat shops they call opportunity.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2916d
I'd encourage you to ask some actually Chinese people about this. You seem to believe a lot of stuff that I'd consider Chinese communist propaganda which is rampant in the US.
Metalbrushes_Tattoo
replied 2916d
Propaganda all kinds runs rampant in the US. Too many sheeple with mushy brains too busy watching the Kardashian’s. Nothing but bobble heads all over the place
replied 2916d
Coercive psychiatric propaganda is at least indirectly related to this.
replied 2915d
Yes, and they love it. In some places opening those factories ends starvation. It vastly improves their standard of living.
Rawdeal
replied 2915d
Is that why they need to install nets to prevent suicides from people jumping off the top of the buildings? They love it so much they want to die at work!
replied 2915d
You try living under and authoritarian communist government. It isn't having a job that makes people want to kill themselves. Tall buildings are just one place they choose.
Rawdeal
replied 2914d
Tall buildings like the Foxconn factories where they work like slaves assembling iphones and trinkets. I thought they loved it? Which is it? They = foxconn, suicides = foxconn workers
replied 2914d
Well paid workers are not slaves. They not be well paid by our standards, but they are by their standards. That is why manufactoring labour moves there.
Rawdeal
replied 2914d
replied 2913d
People forget how much worse the conditions were before manufacturing jobs became available there. It's hard for westerners to understand.
Rawdeal
replied 2914d
replied 2914d
The only thing capitalists do is brutally exploit people and the environment. The only reason they're in other countries is to brutally exploit them and their environment more.
replied 2913d
Exploitation is more often then not a mutual thing. It is absurd to call it brutal. In this case it increased their standard of living, and working considtions.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2915d
Damn, spoken like a true limousine lefty. "Slaves should be thankful for their masters! After all, they were starving before the benevolent plantation owners found them, saved them!"
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2917d
Having zero import taxes on China allows them to wage war on the US economy by exploiting their own people. The only ones benifiting are the Chinese government and sellout corporations
replied 2916d
Nope. It means helping to poor in China, and helping the poor and middle class in America.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2916d
"Helping" how?
replied 2915d
Providing them with work that pays more than they are use to. It is absurd to judge them by our standards. In reality that is high paid work.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2917d
A zero tariff policy means that while prices may go down for consumers in the short term, capital flowing outward eventually undercuts any economic benefit you get from low prices.
replied 2916d
That is actually false. Trade deficits are balanced by foreign investment. Large trade deficits mean a strong economy.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2916d
The regurgitation is strong with this one. Ok riddle me this, if zero tariffs are so self evidently good, why is the USA the only country that does it?
replied 2915d
The US does not do it at all. The US has always been very protectionist, at least with agriculture they are. I think Japan is the only country that protects their agriculture more.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2918d
So it's not really *him* attacking those companies. It'd be more accurate to say that the people who voted him in are using him to retaliate against those companies, like a loose union
replied 2918d
No, he was directly attacking them on Twitter himself. He was saying he wants to regulate Google search results, as an example.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2918d
Right, on behalf of the people who voted for him, exactly. If the search results aren't unbiased then google should be reporting campaign contributions.
replied 2918d
The search results are not biased. His supporters, but mostly him, just can't accept reality.
Sk8eM dUb
replied 2918d
Ah yes "reality", very 1984 of you
replied 2917d
Quite the opposite. Reality makes Trump look bad, so he wants to go 1984 on them.