3 ms·
None of these things are exactly groundbreaking discoveries lately. I feel like you are taking a very narrow situation, which is China, and somehow imputing tha
by cycrutchfield 5y ago
None of these things are exactly groundbreaking discoveries lately. I feel like you are taking a very narrow situation, which is China, and somehow imputing that to every other trading partner in the developing world.
For instance, were you at the time in favor of the Trans-Pacific Partnership? That agreement had provisions in it to cover many of your concerns about environmental externalities or forced labor. Unfortunately it got scuttled by some FUD from people who sound a lot like you.
>Of course it looks like there's a benefit to us. And of course the economists you sponsor can produce studies showing how beneficial it is. That does not mean that it is true, especially in the long term.
The benefits of free trade are pretty universally understood by economists. It's not something you need to "sponsor" to get some slanted take on the benefits.
- toss1 5y agoI'm not talking about sponsored slanted takes on benefits. I'm talking about a general myopia focusing on short-term I was in favor of the TPP, at least the parts that both dealt with some of the inequalities and esp. in that it constrained China. CCP is a huge problem, and is both uniquely well-positioned and explicitly strategizing to exploit this myopia. It may be the only example like this, but such a failure can be existential. That's why it becomes a focus. Many other situations are different, but giving away core manufacturing know-how is not typically covered by economists as a long-term issue, and is very hard to restore once lost.