4 ms·

"Protectionism" is the dog whistle rallying those who wish to circumvent labour and environmental protections by making products elsewhere, yet, selling them he

"Protectionism" is the dog whistle rallying those who wish to circumvent labour and environmental protections by making products elsewhere, yet, selling them here in direct competition with those who follow the rules. If only we could fashion trade agreements to lift all boats, removing tariffs only when the production of a product is ecological and societally sustainable.

davidw 11y ago
When the US went through its own period of "getting ahead" - it did a lot of things that weren't very ecologically sustainable. There's an argument that it's not entirely fair to tell other countries what they can and cannot do as they go through a similar period in their history.
- debacle 11y ago
  And it's a very poor argument based on a logical fallacy.
  - davidw 11y ago
    It doesn't seem terrible to me. Someplace like Vietnam simply can't compete if it's held to the same wage, worker benefits and so on that say, Sweden has. Perhaps it's best to let them decide that stuff on their own as they grow wealthier.
    - debacle 11y ago
      I would agree to some extent. Human rights transcend borders, as should environmental controls. The US has never really tried exporting the minimum wage in the name of globalization. I think that's a strong indicator of who benefits most from globalization.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - davidw 11y ago
        http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/smokey.html http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/smokey.html - I've always found this to be a convincing read, not least because it's written by a left-leaning person, and not someone simply fixated with free markets as an end in and of themselves.
        debacle 11y ago
        That article is nearly 20 years old. Krugman's views have changed considerably since then, and he is against the TPP.
        davidw 11y ago
        The TPP is a big, complex thing, and I could see being opposed to it despite being in favor, generally, of globalization.
- tw04 11y ago
  Of course not. But it's entirely fair to tell them they can't sell their goods in our country if they're unwilling to play by our rules. They had the same option when we were "cheating".
  - davidw 11y ago
    Not if they wanted any of the 'advanced' goods we were producing, like, say, cars or chemicals or whatever. Also, some people might view a large, wealthy, populous country imposing its will on a smaller, poor country as not very nice.
amalag 11y ago
This is really where tariffs should be applied. We don't need to apply tariffs on goods from Germany or France. But we do need tariffs on goods from China. There should be a department which analyzes the laws and production and applies tariffs accordingly. The zero tariff on import stuff we have actively discourages lower cost manufactured goods in the US because of cheap imported crap.
snowwrestler 11y ago
Making products elsewhere and selling them in the U.S. is what happens right now. We don't have a big trade deal with China. Do you see that slowing down imports from China? Or forcing them to have higher labor and environmental standards? Tariffs do not provide any way for one country to request/impose higher standards for labor and environment on another country. Tariffs are domestic policy and don't cross borders. Trade deals create leverage. A trade deal like the TPP provides the legal framework for one country to make demands on the other. The TPP, imperfect as it undoubtedly is, will make its signatories promise to one another to meet certain basic standards. Right now, there is no mechanism for them to do that.

davidw 11y ago

When the US went through its own period of "getting ahead" - it did a lot of things that weren't very ecologically sustainable. There's an argument that it's not entirely fair to tell other countries what they can and cannot do as they go through a similar period in their history.

debacle 11y ago
And it's a very poor argument based on a logical fallacy.
- davidw 11y ago
  It doesn't seem terrible to me. Someplace like Vietnam simply can't compete if it's held to the same wage, worker benefits and so on that say, Sweden has. Perhaps it's best to let them decide that stuff on their own as they grow wealthier.
  - debacle 11y ago
    I would agree to some extent. Human rights transcend borders, as should environmental controls. The US has never really tried exporting the minimum wage in the name of globalization. I think that's a strong indicator of who benefits most from globalization.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - davidw 11y ago
      http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/smokey.html http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/smokey.html - I've always found this to be a convincing read, not least because it's written by a left-leaning person, and not someone simply fixated with free markets as an end in and of themselves.
      - debacle 11y ago
        That article is nearly 20 years old. Krugman's views have changed considerably since then, and he is against the TPP.
        davidw 11y ago
        The TPP is a big, complex thing, and I could see being opposed to it despite being in favor, generally, of globalization.
tw04 11y ago
Of course not. But it's entirely fair to tell them they can't sell their goods in our country if they're unwilling to play by our rules. They had the same option when we were "cheating".
- davidw 11y ago
  Not if they wanted any of the 'advanced' goods we were producing, like, say, cars or chemicals or whatever. Also, some people might view a large, wealthy, populous country imposing its will on a smaller, poor country as not very nice.

amalag 11y ago

This is really where tariffs should be applied. We don't need to apply tariffs on goods from Germany or France. But we do need tariffs on goods from China. There should be a department which analyzes the laws and production and applies tariffs accordingly. The zero tariff on import stuff we have actively discourages lower cost manufactured goods in the US because of cheap imported crap.

snowwrestler 11y ago

Making products elsewhere and selling them in the U.S. is what happens right now. We don't have a big trade deal with China. Do you see that slowing down imports from China? Or forcing them to have higher labor and environmental standards? Tariffs do not provide any way for one country to request/impose higher standards for labor and environment on another country. Tariffs are domestic policy and don't cross borders. Trade deals create leverage. A trade deal like the TPP provides the legal framework for one country to make demands on the other. The TPP, imperfect as it undoubtedly is, will make its signatories promise to one another to meet certain basic standards. Right now, there is no mechanism for them to do that.