3 ms·
You seem to be focusing on one rallying point of the protectionist agenda (subsidized production), and not the underlying predatory trade practices. See, there
by djrogers 9y ago
You seem to be focusing on one rallying point of the protectionist agenda (subsidized production), and not the underlying predatory trade practices.
See, there are unfair trade practices, even if you think your example isn’t - practices such as dumping, or outrageously high unilateral tariffs. These destabilize global economies, and are used specifically to damage foreign industry. These are not simply a matter of ‘strategic opportunity’, which is why they are generally forbidden by international trade groups.
Of course they don’t actually get to do much to enforce international law at the WTO, but that’s a different story.
- digitaltrees 9y agoYou make some good points. I agree. There are differences in subsidies. For example. It may be ok to subsidize food production so that a country can ensure continued ability to maintain production capacity domestically, even where it’s not economically viable. But that is very different from a country strategically subsidizing an industry with the objective of marking the products so low priced that they drive all the domestic producers out of business and then, when they are left standing, jacking up the prices. That’s called dumping. There is a reason we have the WTO and a dispute resolution process, it’s be cause some things are ok and some are not.
- fwdpropaganda 9y ago> It may be ok to subsidize food production so that a country can ensure continued ability to maintain production capacity domestically Isn't that how the Chinese justify what they do?