Sunday, July 3, 2016

Trump and the Free Traders

From PJB:
In Tuesday’s indictment of free trade as virtual economic treason, The Donald has really set the cat down among the pigeons. For, in denouncing NAFTA, the WTO, MFN for China and the Trans-Pacific Partnership, all backed by Bush I and II, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, Trump is all but calling his own party leaders dunderheads and losers. And he seems to be winning the argument. As he calls for the repudiation of “globalism” and a return to “Americanism,” a Republican Congress renders itself mute on whether it will even vote on the TPP this year. On trade, Bernie Sanders is closer to Trump. Even Hillary Clinton has begun to renounce a TPP she once called the “gold standard” of trade deals. Where have all the troubadours of free trade gone? Why do economic patriots seem ascendant? Is this like the Cold War, where the other side gets up and goes home?

Answer. As Trump pointed out in Monessen in the Mon Valley of Pennsylvania, the returns from free trade are in, and the results are rotten. Since Bush I, we have run $12 trillion in trade deficits, $4 trillion with China. Once a Maoist dump, China has become the greatest manufacturing power on earth. Meanwhile, the U.S. has lost 50,000 factories and a third of its manufacturing jobs. Trump is going to start a “trade war,” wail the critics. But the damage wreaked upon U.S. industry by free traders already rivals what Arthur “Bomber” Harris did for German industry in the Ruhr.

In recent decades, every major U.S. trade partner — China, Japan, Canada, Mexico, EU — has run annual trade surpluses at our expense. How do 40 years of trade deficits in goods, run by a nation that rarely ran one for a century before, make us stronger or wealthier? Or is what is best for the world now more important than what is best for America? And here we come to the heart of the argument. (Read more.)

1 comment:

MadMonarchist said...

What has really frustrated me is the number of "free trade" advocates who are all over Trump about his remarks and giving full-throated defenses of all our free trade agreements, as if they were *real* free trade. If it was totally free, there would be no need for any sort of agreement because anyone could do anything and that's not the case. What they are defending his a system where one side follows the rules and the other doesn't without consequences.

The U.S. buys more products than any other country on earth, access to our market is not something that any economic power would want to sacrifice. We have a great deal of leverage that we just don't use, I think because our leaders are getting what amount to pay-offs to let other countries take advantage of us.