General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf Capitalism Really Was Working Like The GOP Claims We Wouldn't ----
need welfare, food stamps and other domestic programs to help the poor. According to them there would be prosperity for everyone. More trickle down economics will make everyone rich.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)it IS all those policies and social safety net that prevent it from working as they think it should.
For the record, the saint they pray to, but fail to read, would give them a lesson as to why you need regulations.
(Yes lurkers, that be one Adam Smith)
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Here's the let's-send-jobs-to-foreign-countries "free-trade" agreements that have been signed so far which have allowed Rmoney and others like him to send American jobs to foreign countries:
1994 - NAFTA
2001 - Jordan United States Free Trade Agreement
2004 - Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement
2004 - Chile - United States Free Trade Agreement
2004 - Singapore United States Free Trade Agreement
2005 - Dominican RepublicCentral America Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA; incl. Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic)
2006 - Bahrain United States Free Trade Agreement
2006 - Morocco - United States Free Trade Agreement
2006 - Oman United States Free Trade Agreement
2007 - Peru United States Trade Promotion Agreement
2011 - Panama - United States Trade Promotion Agreement
2011 - Colombia - United States Trade Promotion Agreement
2011 - Republic of Korea (South Korea) - United States Free Trade Agreement
Let's hope that we have enough Democratic Senators to return traditional capitalism to the U.S. and vote against the pending job-transferring "free-trade" agreement.
Zalatix
(8,994 posts)kenny blankenship
(15,689 posts)Well actually it wasn't the GOP's persuasive power - it was the bribery by the same rich elites who traditionally sponsor the GOP that convinced the Democratic Party that "free trade" corporate totalitarianism was the future.
If you want to put hurdles in the path of that job exterminating angel, you had better come up with a better plan than "more Democrats in the Senate!" Indeed your best bet would appear to be having the two parties so enraged and at each others' throats that each refuses to allow the other to pass significant legislation. But given the importance of such treaties to their transnational masters, however, even extreme partisan gridlock is a weak reed to tie your hopes to.
pampango
(24,692 posts)In 2010 our total trade with the the 17 countries with which we had 'free-trade' agreements (not including Panama, Columbia and South Korea which joined last year) was $1.115 trillion. We had a trade deficit of $71.1 billion (6.5% of the total) with them. Exports were 47% and imports were 53% of the total.
In 2010 our total trade with the rest of the world was $2.108 trillion. We had a deficit of $574.8 billion (27.2% of the total). Exports were 36.5% and imports were 63.5%.
In 2010 the amount of our trade with non-'free trade' countries ($2.1 trillion) was about twice as large as with 'free trade' countries ($1.1 trillion), but our trade deficit ($575 billion vs. $71 billion) was 8 times larger with non-'free trade' countries.
The figures for 2011 are about the same but I don't have them with me.
Our trade deficit with non-"free trade" countries is much larger both in absolute and percentage terms. It makes no sense to want to preserve the status quo with those countries.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)That common knowledge cannot be overcome by claiming that "Our trade numbers are much better with 'free-trade' countries than the rest of the world."
If you are implying that the American middle-class is somehow better off with job-transferring "free trade" agreements, that is not so.
kenny blankenship
(15,689 posts)by lifting the restraints imposed on the behavior of capitalist enterprise by government regulation and by eradicating the waste of government charity: ie, by unleashing more viciousness. The poor will find employment, supposedly, because industry will be freed to create more work, albeit below minimum wages for the most part. Or if that doesn't work out, the unemployed and destitute will disappear because they will starve to death and their carbon and nitrogen will be returned to the soil, thus improving the output of agriculture and the lush plantings of landscaped gated communities. Either way, capitalists are satisfied with their answer. Supremely satisfied: it is the keystone of their moral system, in fact.
meow2u3
(24,774 posts)is to legalize the crimes they're committing. That's what their rationalizations amount to, plain and simple.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,443 posts)However, they always seem to luck out at the polls because they're so unbelievably good at selling people on the dream of becoming rich- by adopting their policies and agenda, of course. The fact that so many people are used to believing in unseen things on the basis of "faith" makes it a lot easier for them to manipulate people into voting against their own interests as well.