The Beginning Of The End Ad
Gold Buying Guide: Golden Eagle Coins

Recent Posts

The Preppers Blueprint Economic Collapse Blog Get Prepared Now Ad

Enter your email to subscribe to The Economic Collapse Blog:

Delivered by FeedBurner

10 Reasons Why Conservatives Should Be Against Unfair Trade With China And 10 Reasons Why Liberals Should Be Against Unfair Trade With China

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on LinkedInShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someone

There are very few things that the top politicians in both political parties agree on these days, but one of the things that that they do agree on is that free trade with China is a good thing.  George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John McCain, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have all fully supported our trade relationship with China.  In this day and age, virtually anyone who even dares to question how fair our “free trade” is with China is immediately labeled as a “protectionist” and is dismissed as a loon.  But when you sit down and really analyze it, there are a whole lot of very good reasons why both conservatives and liberals should be fundamentally against our unfair trade relationship with China.  But you won’t hear these reasons being talked about on CNN, MSNBC or Fox News.  You won’t hear many members of Congress get up and give speeches about how trade with China is bleeding our economy dry.  Both major political parties have completely and totally bought into “the benefits” of globalism and free trade and there isn’t even much of a national debate about our trade policies anymore.

But there should be a national debate.  Unfortunately, most conservatives are just going to accept whatever their leaders tell them to believe.  Conservatives have been convinced that to be against unfair trade is to be “anti-business” and no conservative ever wants to be anti-business.

Similarly, most liberals blindly follow whatever Obama, Pelosi and Reid tell them to believe.  Millions of hard working Democrat voters have lost their jobs due to our nightmarish trade relationship with China, but they are still convinced that Obama is their savior and that they must not ever say anything that he does is wrong.

Well, I have a message to members of both political parties….


If you are truly a conservative, there is no way that you should ever support our trade relationship with China.

If you are truly a liberal, there is no way that you should ever support our trade relationship with China.  

Globalism has allowed the big global corporations that dominate our economy to make huge amounts of money, but it has also forced American workers into one gigantic global labor pool. 

Are you willing to work 12 hours a day for less than $2.00 an hour in sweatshop conditions?  

Well, that is your new competition.

The top 1 percent of all Americans is using globalism to make huge profits, but the standard of living for the rest of us is slowly but surely being forced down toward the rest of the world.

Is that what you really want?

If after reading the reasons below you can still consider yourself a good “conservative” or a good “liberal” and still support our current trade relationship with China please leave a comment to this article.  I would love to hear your reasoning.  

10 Reasons Why Conservatives Should Be Against Unfair Trade With China

1 – Conservatives are supposed to be all about creating jobs.  But millions upon millions of good paying middle class jobs have been shipped off to China and they are never coming back.

2 – Once upon a time, conservatives were opposed to communism.  But our trade relationship with China has enabled the largest communist economy in the world to go from third world status to superpower status.  China is now the second largest economy in the world, and that would have never happened without our cooperation.

3 – Conservatives are supposed to be concerned about national security.  But thanks to the massive amount of money they have made from us, the Chinese have been able to dramatically upgrade and modernize their military.  At the top levels of the Chinese government, most officials still believe in the ultimate worldwide triumph of communism, and now thanks to us they have a world class military with which to advance that agenda.

4 – China has a very strict one-child policy which should be absolutely abhorrent to any true conservative.  

5 – China uses mobile abortion vans to help enforce the one-child policy.  How any social conservative can justify trade with China after learning this is a total mystery. 

6 – If Republicans actually started fighting to protect American jobs from going overseas they could win the “angry working class vote” and take both houses of Congress and the White House in 2012.

7 – Conservatives don’t like when other countries try to take advantage of the American people.  Yet China is taking advantage of the American people by keeping their currency artificially low and most conservatives are strangely quiet about this.  This currency manipulation has put large numbers of U.S. small businesses at a huge competitive disadvantage and has forced many of them to shut down.  Essentially, this currency manipulation has enabled China to get us down on the mat and continually beat the stuffing out of us.  Meanwhile, our politicians stand by and do nothing.     

8 – Our trade deficit with China has enabled them to accumulate about a trillion dollars of our debt.  This gives them tremendous leverage over us and is a very serious threat to our economy and to our national security.

9 – Conservatives are traditionally very protective of national sovereignty and state sovereignty.  But a global economy governed by the G20, the WTO, the IMF and the World Bank is a giant step toward world government and a giant step away from national sovereignty and state sovereignty.

10 – The giant trade deficit that the United States runs is making us poorer as a nation each and every month.  Each year, somewhere around half a trillion dollars of our national wealth gets transferred out of the United States.  Much of that gets transferred to China.  The United States spends approximately $3.90 on Chinese goods for every $1 that the Chinese spend on goods from the United States.  The transfer of wealth that this represents is absolutely mind blowing.  China is literally bleeding us dry.

10 Reasons Why Liberals Should Be Against Unfair Trade With China

1 – Liberals are supposed to defend unions, yet our trade relationship with China has done more to hurt unions than anything else and most liberal politicians don’t seem to care.  Globalism has put the average American worker in direct competition with the cheapest labor in the world.  Unemployment is going to continue to increase unless something is done to stop the offshoring and outsourcing of our jobs.

2 – Liberals are supposed to care about the environment.  But our trade relationship with China means that thousands of factories and businesses leave our shores and end up in China where the environmental regulations are not nearly as strict.  In fact, China has become a complete and total environmental nightmare at this point.  If liberals truly cared about the environment they would want to keep factories and businesses here.

3 – Our trade relationship with China (and with the rest of the world) has caused the income inequality gap in America to explode.  The top 1% of all Americans have done very well in this environment while the rest of us suffer.  For much more on this phenomenon, please see my recent article entitled “Winners And Losers“.

4 – Dangerous products from China are pouring into the United States. Liberals should be horrified that so many of our products are now made outside the United States far from the watchful eyes of our regulatory agencies.  Over the past couple of years, there has been headline after headline about dangerous products made in China.  The following is just one example of this: 10 Babies Die Mysteriously At Fort Bragg: Toxic Drywall From China Used In Base Homes The Culprit?

5 – In a global economy, every piece of legislation that Democrats intend to help American workers with ends up backfiring.  For example, a rise in the minimum wage or a law increasing worker benefits causes American workers to become even more expensive and gives corporations even more incentive to move jobs overseas.

6 – “Free Trade” has been the most destructive in the inner cities where Democrats have traditionally gotten a tremendous amount of support.  Shiny new factories are going up all over China while at the same time formerly great manufacturing cities such as Detroit have degenerated into rotting war zones.  This is not good for liberals.

7 – Democrats won’t get elected if there are no jobs.  Each month, more jobs leave the United States for China and the growing number of long-term unemployed workers in the U.S. is not going to be inclined to keep the same politicians in office if this continues.  If liberal politicians value their jobs they should start protecting the jobs of average Americans.

8 – Free trade with China threatens to ruin our social safety net.  It is a good thing to help those in need, but there comes a point where too many people jump on to the net and it breaks down.  Already, one out of every six Americans is enrolled in at least one anti-poverty program.  Over 40 million Americans are on food stamps.  These are not good numbers for liberals.

9 – True liberals should be absolutely horrified by the exploitation of labor in China.  In China, millions of people work in horrific conditions for what is essentially slave labor pay.  The fact that big global corporations are getting rich from this should make the stomach of every liberal turn.   

10 – The giant trade deficit that the United States runs is making us poorer as a nation each and every month.  Each year, somewhere around half a trillion dollars of our national wealth gets transferred out of the United States.  Much of that gets transferred to China.  The United States spends approximately $3.90 on Chinese goods for every $1 that the Chinese spend on goods from the United States.  The transfer of wealth that this represents is absolutely mind blowing.  China is literally bleeding us dry.

Liberals and conservatives should both be able to agree that it is not a good thing for millions of American jobs to leave the United States and go to China.

Liberals and conservatives should both be able to agree that it is not a good thing that billions of dollars in wealth gets transferred from the United States to China every single month.

But will our leaders wake up and start pursuing a more logical approach to China?

Don’t count on it.

  • Gary

    Good article. This shows that both parties are owned by the rich and corporations. These elite will not willingly share their wealth/power with the rest of us which is why I am thinking a revolution may be inevitable. Here I am saying what I believed was crazy talk back when I was middle class and here I am now saying the very thing I thought was crazy. Times have changed.

    The biggest issue is that almost all in congress are the rich and they have no concept or care of how the rest of us live. Its hard to represent people you know nothing about.

    Maybe campaign finance by the public so they represent us>

  • Concerned Reader

    Here is an essay that I have written about the rise of China as a global super power:

    China: The Rise of the Dragon

    In 1991, the Soviet Union, America’s chief rival for the preceding fifty years, collapsed and its empire ceased functioning on the world stage. For nearly two decades afterwards America experienced the privilege of functioning in the international world as a unipolar power, one in which it is the only superpower acting in geopolitics. However, during this period of time a new potential rival was gaining strength in the world, that rival is the People’s Republic of China. According to Doug Bandow, author of “China Rising: The Next Global Superpower” says, “Rapid economic growth, global trading ties, and expanding diplomatic cooperation have pushed China to the first rank of nations.” Since the 1970s China has made significant gains in regards to it gaining prescience among the developed nations of the world and especially their economies. There are several factors that will contribute to China becoming a superpower and factors that will hinder its rise.

    The first factor that is driving China towards superpower status is globalization. Everyone in America has witnessed the ever growing prevalence of products made in China within many of our major retail giants. One retail giant, Wal-mart, has a massive trading policy with the Chinese government. According to Jiang Jingling, Author of “Wal-mart’s Inventory of Stock Produced in China to reach $18 Billion.” Says, “More than seventy-percent of commodities sold in Wal-mart are made in China.” Every time an American consumer ventures into Wal-mart, or any other major retail store, and buys products from that business, they are helping the economy of China grow. America’s spending habits and China openness towards Multinational Corporations have helped these businesses to flood their shelves with products made in Chinese factories and this has helped China gain a massive export based economy that is on tract to produce consumer goods for the entire planet.

    The second factor that is driving China towards superpower status is currency manipulation. Currency manipulation is to artificially inflate or deflate a one currency against another currency and China has been doing this for years now and have benefited from it. According to Don Lee, author of “China Denies Charges of Currency Manipulation” says, “In written comments to the Senate Finance Committee last week, Geithner buttressed complaints that the Chinese kept the value of their currency artificially low, making their exports cheaper in the U.S. and giving them a bigger trade surplus.” The benefits of currency manipulation is that they can make more money from their exports and redistribute that money inwards to grow their domestic economy in regards to infrastructure, personal saving accounts, etc.

    The Third factor that is driving China towards superpower status is nationalism. Nationalism is loyalty to ones collective or nation. According to Professor Pranab Bardhan, author of “China Ascent” says, “As nationalism has replaced socialism as the social glue in this vast country, old memories of humiliation at foreign hands and current pride in phenomenal economic success generate popular resentment at what looks like external attempts to rain on the parade of China’s glorious Olympic moment.” Basically, China has had its sovereignty violated numerous times in the 19th and 20th century by foreign nations and by becoming a superpower it will be able to prevent this from happening again the future by staving off violators of its sovereignty.

    A fourth and final factor that is driving China towards super power status is the need for resources. Two continents in particular are key places where an abundant source of minerals and petroleum can be found for China to exploit; those continents are South America and Africa. In Latin America, China has just surpassed the US as Brazil’s largest trading partner. China has been making massive amounts of financial and infrastructure investments in many South American countries along with many contracts that give Chinese corporations free reign and are in the midst of creating massive trading hubs on the continent. According to Tyler Bridges, author of “China’s Big Move into Latin America” states, “Beijing’s main interest in Latin America has been guaranteeing access to the region’s raw materials – principally oil, iron ore, soybeans, and copper – to fuel its continued rapid growth.” China needs these materials to help keep its growing manufacturing base going and to maintain its own economic prosperity. In order to maintain this inflow of need resources, the Chinese government has been in the business of brokering alliances with the leaders of each country, regardless of their political standing in the world (I.e. Hugo Chavez in Venezuela). Another continent that is seeing a significant Chinese hunt for resources is Africa. Like Latin America, China is using its economic clout to bolster financial alliances via monetary investments in Africa. According to Jacques DeLisle, author of “Into Africa: China’s Quest for Resources and Influence,” says, “Major state-owned and state-linked Chinese companies are already on the ground or soon will be, largely through investments to develop Sudanese oil, Zambian copper, and other African resources for export.” The government of China uses aid as a carrot on a stick to needy countries in order to bribe them into allowing them open access to the large resource reserve within the African lands. China is also willing to deal with both democratic and dictatorial countries to get what they want and turn the other cheeck in regards to human rights violations in the countries they do business with. However, it was the need domestic need for energy resources and quest for new markets that helped propel the Western countries to super power status.

    One factor that will hinder China from becoming a super power is its massive wealth disparity. Despite its large economic growth and strength in the last couple of decades, there has been a growing wealth gap between the urban citizens and the rural inhabitants of the country. According to Ian T. Brown and Tao Wu, authors of “Chinese Economy Climbs, but Struggles to Spread Wealth,” says, “Education and healthcare systems are less available and of poorer quality, leading millions of rural Chinese to relocate to the city in search of better public services and economic opportunity.” The economic growth has raised as many as three-hundred million Chinese citizens into their equivalent of a middle class, but there is still large numbers of poor rural citizens who are left to play catch up with their higher income countrymen.

    Another factor that will hinder China from becoming a super power is the consequences of its one-child policy. In 1978 the Chinese government introduced the one-child policy in an attempt to decelerate population growth. The policy prevented an estimated 400 million births and lowered the fertility rate from five to two; however, this policy has also contributed to a growing demographic nightmare within the population of China. A BBC News Report titled “has China’s one-child policy worked?” Claims: “This will result in an increasing proportion of older people, a smaller workforce to look after them and a disproportionate number of boys to girls. “ Although China has a one billion plus population, its population will age eventually and with fewer births to take their place of the aged workers productivity will falter and so will its status as an economic super power. Secondly, the disproportionate number of boys to girls will have several consequences on China. First, is replenishing the aging population. Second, is internal strife over the scarcity of women, of which will possibly cause major societal problems for the government. Lastly, the Aging population will place a large strain on the few youth in the workplace. Unless China finds a way to solve this problem; they will not become a superpower via demographics.

    A third factor that will hinder China from becoming a super power is its effect on the environment. Although globalization has helped China’s economy grow, it has had negative effects on its environment. According to Carin Zississ, author of “China’s Environmental Crisis,” says, “About one-third of China’s population lacks access to clean drinking water. Its per-capita water supply falls at around a quarter of the global average. Some 70 percent of the country’s rivers and lakes are polluted, with roughly two hundred million tons of sewage and industrial waste pouring into Chinese waterways in 2004.” However, water quality is not the only environmental problem China faces. Desertification and soil degradation brought on by overgrazing and cultivating of farmland has created a massive dustbowl that engulfs many population centers, icluding the capitol city, Beijing. Massive amounts of green house gas emissions, mainly from the burning of coal and automobile emissions, which creates acid rain. Air quality stands out among the most prevalent environmental hazard in the country. On an average day, the smog created by industrial pollutants bloats out the sun with a thick, gray haze that fills the skies of many cities in the North. With over a billion people, in order to gain the amount of prosperity that the developed world now enjoys, China would have to further depredate its environment even further, which is something that is not feasible because every empire that has over burdened their surrounding environments has fallen.

    The fourth and final factor that will hinder China from becoming a super power is its massive dependence on energy. According to David Zweig and Bi Jianhai, authors of “China’s Global Hunt for Energy,” says, “An unprecedented need for resources is now driving China’s foreign policy. A booming domestic economy, rapid urbanization, increased export processing, and the Chinese people’s voracious appetite for cars are increasing the country’s demand for oil and natural gas, industrial and construction materials, foreign capital and technology. Twenty years ago, China was East Asia’s largest oil exporter. Now it is the world’s second-largest importer; last year, it alone accounted for 31 percent of global growth in oil demand.” China is so dependant on imported resources that if their delivery to the mainland China were to be disrupted many issues would surface. Resources such as fossil fuels and metals are becoming finite and harder to procure for the global economy. As growth continues, so will its hunger for resources. This puts China in a precarious situation, one in which it must choose between acquiring needed resources to maintain economic growth, or slip back into decline. Zweig and Jianhai go on to say, “Beijing’s access to foreign resources is necessary both for continued economic growth and, because growth is the cornerstone of China’s social stability, for the survival of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).” China’s thirst for petroleum and other form of energy is putting it on track to surpass the US as the world’s largest oil importer. The CCP knows that to stay in power it must continue prosperity, and in that very same prosperity depends on easy access to energy resources. However, China is attempting to take measures to curtail their dependency on foreign energy, but will it be enough to help them will have to wait to be seen in the future.

    In conclusion, despite China’s economic growth, it still remains a very poor country marred by wealth disparity, environmental hazards and many other problems. However, China does stand out as an example to the developing world on how to rise up to become a developed nation. If a people aspire to help their nation achieve greatness, then there really is not any thing that can be done to prevent it, regardless of what kind of hindrances it might encounter while achieving that goal. China was a significant economic center for the western hemisphere during the last millennium and it may seem that it play the same role for the millennium that is just starting.

    Work Cited
    Bandow, Doug. “China Rising: The Next Global Superpower.” 27 January 2007

    Bardhan, Pranab. “China Ascendant – Part II.” Global Politician. 4 Apr. 2008

    Bridges, Tyler. “China’s big move into Latin America.” The Christian Science Monitor. 12 July 2009

    Brown T., Ian and Tao Wu. “Chinese Economy Climbs, but Struggles to Spread Wealth” Gallup 21 May 2009

    DeLisle, Jacques. “Into Africa: China’s Quest For Resources And Influence.” Foreign Policy Research Institute. Feb. 2007

    “Has China’s one-child policy worked?” BBC 2007. BBC News. 20 September 2007

    JINGLING, JIANG. “Most (70%) of Wal-Mart’s Products Are Produced in China” Organic Consumers Association.

    Lee, Don. “China denies charge of currency manipulation” Los Angeles Times 26 January 2009

    Zissis, Carin. “China’s Environmental Crisis” Council on Foreign Relations. 4 August 2008

    Zweig, David and Bi Jianhai. “China’s Global Hunt for Energy” Foreign Affairs. October 2005

  • WhiskeyJim

    I urge you to consider that the issue is not the trade deficit. It is monetary policy.

    It is fractional reserve banking and counterfeit currency that forces the issues you describe.

  • A well-written piece!

    The problem that so many face, on both sides, is that we like cheap stuff. That stuff is made in China.

    The second problem we face is in even FINDING products that are American-made. Our manufacturing jobs are going away. How can we buy American products?

    The strangest thing is that we ar buying FOOD from China. What is that? Why is our apple juice coming from Chinese apples? Why not use American apples? Ah, yes, it’s the factory worker issue again.

    One thing that even those who live below the poverty line can do is to buy food IN SEASON. When you’re buying food out of season, you’re encouraging food from south of the equator to be shipped to you. Strawberries, out of season, are more money and are tasteless, since they had to be picked so early. Buying in season food will save you money and promote American farmers. You can do that at your local grocery store even if, like me, you city has no farmer’s market.

    In the ’70s, we asked people to “buy American.” Now, we’d like to–if we can find it, and, of course, if we can afford it. Even when we don’t want to support it, so many of us are buying the cheaper version of items because that’s all we can afford, which keeps us dependant on China.

    Even many textbooks are being printed in China, now.

  • All of what you describe is absolutely true, and there is a clear reason why we are where we are: our corrupt political system. CEOs wanted to pay $1 per hour in wages so they off-shored the jobs, paid off the politicians that made it all possible, and pocketed the difference.

    Nothing is going to change until we have public funding of campaigns. What is it about political bribes do we not understand?

    If politicians are going to be beholden to their funders, those funders should be the taxpayers. And at $5 per taxpayer per year it would be a bargain. Even at 100 times that. We MUST lobby our senators and representative to co-sponsor the bill at:

    Jack Lohman

  • emma

    yes what is the use of being against them, when the US losing its super power and china becomes the next US, then you will want to be friends with them. They will have everyone in their hands soon, just us here in the US do not want to admit it.

    I think they are taking over our country silently by buying up realeastate as they know we are on the verge of crumbling soon economically speaking. I am glad for people like that guy at FFT for waking me and my wife up. Worth a look. The next few months will be interesting i think!!!

  • JustanOGuy

    There is nothing free about this trade. The same ignorant people who voted these idiots in are the same ignorant people who can’t figure out everything you mention above and put 2 + 2 together in figuring out why the U.S. Economy is going down the tubes.

    Nope… they just want their cheap junk made with cheap labor and expect the Federal Government to come save their fat bon-bon eating butts with borrowed money from China that ironically… used to be our money.

    Now it’s being loaned back to us to pay for overinflated Government jobs that don’t produce anything to add to the bottom line of the U.S. economy.

    Maybe someday when the Chinese Figure out that the dollar is really worthless and we incapable of their debt back that Americans will realize they really are not our buddies.

    Have a Happy Collapse!

  • Lennie Pike

    On second thought, it will not take an armed revolution by either the Military or a large group of American Citizens to take our country back because there is no large opposing side to fight against.

    Very few people are profiting by selling out our country and just about everyone like the article says, would be very upset and put a stop to it if they just understood what was being done to them.

    We have been blinded by the cheap goods and credit, but now the music has stopped. This should be as easy as the Assistant Principal extracting a cheating student from a classroom. I can’t come up with an analogy to describe the damage that has been done though. Manufacturing is not the only thing that has been destroyed, people’s character, work ethic, and ability to think accurately for themselves also has been. It could easily be irreversible and now we have the one world prison to look forward to.

  • Lennie Pike

    I take back what I said. The 100 million newly imported workers in the U.S. who have been given many of the jobs that have not been exported qualify as a large opposing side to fight against. And they do vote (illegally) which certainly doesn’t help the situation.

  • Jason

    I been reading articles on this site for quite
    some time. Generally they are quite good but I fear that this is becoming a Chinese-bashing website. For instance you say:

    “4 – China has a very strict one-child policy which should be absolutely abhorrent to any true conservative.”

    However if you look at the bigger picture you can see that China has a population of about
    1.34 billion. The chinese have no other choice
    but to implement some kind of population control.
    “5 – China uses mobile abortion vans to help enforce the one-child policy.”

    Abortion is abortion whether it is done in a
    hospital or a van. Do they not have abortion
    clinics in the USA.
    “Liberals are supposed to care about the environment. But our trade relationship with China means that thousands of factories and businesses leave our shores and end up in China where the environmental regulations are not nearly as strict. In fact, China has become a complete and total environmental nightmare at this point.”

    If the chinese want to pollute their own land
    that is their own business, not ours. They will be forced to make changes in their environmental laws over time just as we did.

    I think we should look at the bigger picture
    on China and recognise that China is embarking on becoming the next superpower. There is nothing wrong in that. After all did not the US embark on a similar program a 100
    years ago. The way I see it is that the orientals (China,Japan,Singapore etc) have a
    “work-hard” culture and they deserve their
    success. I (being a westerner) may not like it but I have to accept it and adapt.

  • alice

    ….Violation of allegiance toward one’s sovereign or country…..! If someone’s actions undermines the welfare and security of the great majority (98%) of Americans, what is this? Is it only about someone who waves a certain flag in protest? Has the acceptance and approval of Globalism by society made “IT” obsolete? Should the definition of “IT” be re-examined by the courts to reflect today’s Globalism? Exactly who and what percentage Americans are benefiting from Globalism? If I am in China, and express proud words about my American brothers and sisters, am I a Racist? Am I wrong to ask these type of questions? Is being a Nationalist wrong? Maybe our Supreme Courts should be in the forefront of protecting our National Security Interests and Laws!

  • sharonsj

    Who says conservatives are about creating jobs?

    Carly Fiorina claims she will create jobs in California, but when she was at Hewlitt Packard, she outsourced 10,000 jobs.

    Conservatives in Congress threw a hissy fit when people tried to improve working conditions in the Maldives (which included mandatory abortions for young women). Too many corporations were getting rich in the Maldives and Republicans didn’t want to upset them.

    As for China–which is both buyer of our debt and seller of crap to our consumers–they manipulated their currency to our detriment…and they have no worker, consumer and environmental laws. Anything goes there, so you see contaminated food and other products, the trashing of the environment, worker suicides, etc.

    Liberals do care, but Congress doesn’t.

  • Alex

    Well, you guys in the US need the Chinese. As mentioned in the article, they are a liable source for buying government bonds, i.e. China is funding the US treasury department. It is a bad idea to search conflicts with creditors. Each day, with each additonal US$ in debt, the US is getting more and more dependent on China.
    Politicians know everything the article is saying, but there is no way out of the situation. They sell you stuff and accept you pay with debt-notes.
    But: the Chinese also give you safety: They won’t allow the US$ to go bust, as they would use huge amounts of money. They help keeping the US$ as a lead currency (although it is already pretty crappy), as they need a stable US$ to be able to buy commodities or other raw material.
    You should not hate the Chinese. They help to stabilize the crappy US economy. Without the Chinese, things would be worse

  • Webmaster: Why do you take so long to approve comments? People who comment expect a discussion to ensue. When you ignore them they go away. If this is what you want, you should turn comments off.

  • Mr Carpenter

    Well said, as usual!

  • Russ

    The ultimate solution is one you mentioned; China needs to end their (artificially low) currency peg and allow their currency to trade freely on world markets.

    The resulting rise in Chinese currency value, and corresponding drop in US currency value, would have a tremendous balancing affect on both economies.

    There would be short term pain, as ‘cheap’ Chinese goods would become more expensive in America, but it would also end the incentive of big corporations to outsource production to China.

    Of course they might just outsource to Vietnam or India instead, but that’s another story……

    Ultimately, all the nations of the world need to compete on a level playing field. Only then will every economy prosper by doing what it does best.

  • Nick

    You could simply focus on the currency issue alone as it was strart of the problem and it will also be the end. (When it collapses)

    Let’s face it though, that happened in 1971 when Nixon disconnected the dollar from Gold….then it made sense to buy stuff from overseas. Easy money and no fiscal restraint has dominated since. We’ve been living on a credit card for 40 years. There is no going back now without much pain.

  • Concerned Reader

    China is basically what the US was in the early twentieth century in regards to economic power. What I am saying is that in the early 1900s the European powers became dependant on the United States for money to finance their empires. By that time America had built up its industrial power, mainly from Europe, and had the economic clout to keep the Europeans in our pocket. The Chinese are now doing this to America and the other nations of the west.

    We even had the British empire, similar to what we are today, in our pocket because they were so indebted to us that we basically called the shots. Will we suffer the same fate and is history repeating itself.

  • Reader

    The one child policy is a good idea. There should be population control. More people = less jobs and more competition which will lower wages.

    Globalism is not all bad. This blog fails to mention many positive sides. If Tariffs are put up, how many countless American will lose their jobs and businesses that sells imported goods?

    If it wasn’t for cheap goods, the purchasing power of the average american would decrease quite a lot. With a decrease in purchasing power, it would not create enough jobs anyways because less demand will equal less products sold which will mean less jobs. If you add the growth of population every year that will create more competition for lower wage jobs. The only way it can create enough jobs is if we are a export driven economy but thats not going to happen unless the u.s currency decrease in value relative to other global currencies or the collapse of the dollar ( they are printing alot of phony money ).

  • Not so Mad Max

    At the risk of spewing heresy (Again) all this talk about China reminds me of the same talk about Japan in 1980’s. One of the things about Americans that really irritates me is any lack of historical perspective. History is nauseatingly repetitive China has several serious endemic issues that will torpedo any super power bid.

    Have you ever noticed whenever you see an adopted child from China 9 times out of 10 it’s a girl? One the by products of the one child policy is an imbalance between Men and Women it’s bad now and getting worse. China has one of the fastest aging populations in the world, that and the one-child policy heralds’ serious demographic problems for China. China is still a one party state, corruption, badly run programs (See below), restless rural area’s. China is trying to deal with this issue but as you can see in other parts of the world once corruption is allowed to spread noting short of draconian measures will stamp it out. Any China watcher knows China has one of the largest real estate bubbles in the world. In 2009 Currant did a Vanguard special on China they have Apartment Blocks with no one in them. The last or the one before market Ticker Pod cast tracked electrical use nobody is in those Apartment blocks. Why my guess is the keep growth galloping along keep throwing money at construction projects of party hacks.

    The more I read and listen, the more I’m convinced there will not be another super power. The human race is becoming to fragmented dangerous technology is too freely available. That’s just the long-term issues, in the short run it’s global sovereign debt, out of touch elites, Iran and the bomb, and Peak Oil.

  • Something Wicked This Way Comes

    Unvarnished truth with an excellent R rated vid here and there. Nothing wrong with hating on government. Always time well spent.

  • Gary

    sharonsj-you are 100% correct. How can anyone in California be so stupid to vote for this corporate hack, If she gets elected then those who voted for her her what they deserve. Her and Meg are simply trying to buy a gov power position. I refer to them as vanity candidates similar to the idiot with deep pockets here in Wisconsin, Ron Johnson.

    Jack-I have also asked the web master to approve the posts faster.

  • alice

    Why are they all smiling? They are the ones who pushed Globalism onto America! They should be frowning, crying, not smiling! Shame on you! Allegeance to globalism only make those who benefit from it happy!

  • rishthedish

    2.00$ and hour?! try 2$ a day, and that is if they are well paid! Before getting laid off my job as a cut and sew product designer, where I traveled to china frequently to review product being made in chinese factories, I asked my translator how much people made and a very well paid independent product inspector made 125$ a month, and average factory worker made 25 to 50$ a month and slept in barraks with a wooden board for a bed with 6 or more to a small room. It opened my eyes. Now Ive been unemployed for almost 2 years, and not only are companies not making new products for me to design, but Have you noticed that they are recycling old TV commercials? All the designers and graphic artisits I know are unemployed and have been for a year or more.
    Today Obama(who I voted for) is saying R&D tax breaks? money to build roads and bridges? an army of designers and graphic artists are going to show up for those jobs and be turned down because besides being illequipped for thatkind of work, we dont have any applicable
    experience which
    I have heard more times than I care to repeat since Ive been job searching.
    I think were in Big trouble.
    How about tax breaks for us? or better yet, help me pay off my mortgage so I dont loose my house, oops I think its too late for that. Yup, I think were in Big Trouble.

  • Jason Rowe

    Well, I’ve read the article, and many of the comments, and other than being impressed at the level of ignorance found in some of the comments (ex. “If the Chinese want to pollute their own land, it’s their business”), I feel there are a couple of points that you’ve missed, or purposely overlooked, and these points go to why I support free trade.

    1. Free trade encourages education, more specifically outsourcing encourages education. It may not be a good thing in the short term if we lose jobs in the textile industry by them being outsourced to China, but in the long term, it’s good for our children and good for America as a whole. It encourages workers and students here to strive to do something more, to seek out higher education, to not be content with minimum wage jobs at a factory, but to desire to be the business people who design, invent, and have their products produced at factories, whether they decide to build them here or overseas. It encourages them to be their own boss, and when we combine the work ethic they already possess with the knowledge and skills that come with education, the future of America is brighter. I think we all can agree that one of our greatest resources as Americans is the ingenuity of the American spirit, and that is something that is certainly not going anywhere. Perhaps by creating less drones to populate factories here, we’re actually regaining some of the talent and ingenuity we’ve lost over the past century.

    2. Free trade provides cheaper products. Someone already mentioned it above, but they’re right, Americans like cheaper products. The good thing about capitalism however is, if we decide we want quality over cheap, we can get it. Cheap products provide those in America that are poor and in the lower middle class, including people whose career choices may have never been influenced by outsourcing, to have access to products and luxuries they may otherwise never have had access to without a significantly higher cost. The reality is that cheap products provide amenities and ease the standard of living to millions whose jobs were never outsourced, as well as provide cheaper, more affordable products to those whose jobs have been. The unemployment rate in this country has to do with far more than just outsourcing, and for the millions affected for other reasons, cheaper products provide an easier and more affordable lifestyle.
    For those that do wish to have quality over price however, that option is also available in a capitalist system. The most glaring example of this recently has been in the food industry. Cheap food and groceries absolutely dominated the market until many Americans decided they wanted a higher quality, healthier product. Now organic foods have made a resurgence no one could have anticipated. The organic food market has also demonstrated that those who can afford a higher quality product are indeed willing to pay more to get it. At the same time, cheap food is still available for those who need it. This is the balance of the capitalist market, and a great example of what free trade allows in other industries.

    3. Free trade prevents wars. This is a big one, but no one seems to have touched on it. You argue that free trade is bad for national security, but fundamentally, free trade protects American interests by encouraging countries to resolve their disputes in manners other than war. When countries have invested in each other economically, they have to include the weight of that investment in any decision they make in dealing with that country.

    They also have to consider the cost of losing exports and imports with a country if they do go to war with them. Often this will have a devestating effect on their economy, as is evident in the trade deficit we have with China. American imports from China are a significant portion of their economy. If China wished to seek hostilities with the U.S. or one of our allies (yes, Free Trade also protects allies), they would have to consider the cost of losing that influx into their economy. This is no minor consideration. Our trade with China and other countries ensures not only our own safety and security, as well as that of our allies, but fosters a spirit of peace and cooperation that could never be achieved through ever-increasing defense spending.

    That is why I, and many Americans, support free trade.

  • David Smith

    Jason Rowe:

    Everything you said flies in the face of reasoning, and you contradicted yourself many, many times. If you want what you wrote dissected so that you can see for yourself let me know.

  • Jason R

    Please, if you’re going to criticize, feel free to elaborate. However, if your comments are anything like some of the others, I read above, I’ll be prepared to read it with a grain of salt.
    Judging by your conduct so far in making blanket statements and not taking the time to address anything specific, I’ll not be holding my breath awaiting any wisdom from your words.

  • Lennie Pike

    Jason Rowe:

    It makes more sense to begin with correcting your response to what I said to you. In your response you said: “If you are going to be critical, feel free to elaborate”.

    Correction: You were the first to be critical in your original post. I was responding to what you wrote: “being impressed with the level of ignorance that you had found in some of the comments”. So, I was not being critical, I was responding to your criticism which is distinct from being critical. What you wrote in your first post is what I was being critical of in my response. What??????

    I am only critical of a specific person when I know for sure that they are incorrect, if what they believe if put into practice (which it has been) is beneficial to a few people at the expense of being harmful to others, and usually only if they first criticize the ones their incorrect beliefs are going to have a harmful effect upon. In this case a large majority of the people in the United States and in the countries we currently trade with are those people that are being harmed.

    You began your first post with criticism of a statement someone had made: “If the Chinese want to pollute their own land, it’s their own business”, and you used that example (which I agree was an ignorant statement) to classify other statements as also being ignorant. You did not specifically identify the other ignorant statements which you were referring to, but by using the word “some” which is plural, you inferred that there were other ignorant statements also. To be accurate and to appear that you are speaking in good faith you should always specifically identify the statements that others have made if you are going to criticize them as being ignorant so that the ones who made the statements can defend their positions. If the only statement you had found to be ignorant was the one about pollution in China, someone like you (I can tell) would have used the words: “one of the statements” instead.

    This is the tactic and type of thinking that you also used to form the other opinions you had in your first post – exclusion. You did not consider many other real facts to form the opinion that it is a good thing for Americans to have free trade with countries who use slave labor. There are so many different areas to consider other than the ones you mentioned: education, cheap products, and war prevention that involve real facts and the effects they have on real people. There are many things you have not thought about in each one of those categories that you did mention as well.

    I will stop here. I do not enjoy being critical of what people say. I do feel responsible for defending the sheep against the wolves. I was born a sheep dog. It is my job. My offer to you will also involve a lot of time and work on my part, and the writer and readers of this blog may not appreciate the length of what I will write, or the fact that I wrote it. But write it I will.

    You would be better served to reflect on and reconsider what you believe yourself because you will be more apt to accept the change in your beliefs if you come to a realization of what is true due to your own examination. All you have to do is start examining what you believe with critical thinking, that is, think of all of the possibilities from all of the angles and points of view if you can. If you can, you will discover where you are wrong.

    If you can’t do it or don’t want to, let me know and I will continue on with my task which gives me no pleasure.

    As far as another one of your criticisms – that I don’t take the time to address anything specific and make blanket statements, you may be correct, even though I don’t think you are. It’s probably more like sometimes I am specific and sometimes I am not. The fact that it is always necessary to be specific is something I don’t understand and maybe you can explain it to me.

    Here’s something that I have written that I can change for you from being non-specific to specific. In my first comment for this column I said “Very few people are profiting from selling out our country”. I feel safe now inserting “including Jason Rowe” immediately after the words “few people”.

  • Jason Rowe

    I won’t spend a lot of time here, but let me quickly point out, I don’t frequent this blog, so I’m unaware if you’re a regular, but it would have been easier to identify what points you believed in had your initial criticism of my post used the same name as the other comments you posted. By referring to blanket statements and not addressing anything specific, I was referring only to your comment criticizing my post, and I stand by that reference. Surely you can see from that post alone how I could come to such a conclusion. I do however appreciate your clarification, David/Lennie.

    To clarify, by “some”, I meant exactly some, and that includes not just one comment the other Jason made, but other comments he made. It’s unfortunate that as you read through the comments from top to bottom, his stand out so much, and linger still when you reach the end, that their ignorance completely overshadows other comments, which may have been very knowledgeable and well thought out. I have no direct criticism of your posts. Like I stated, they just weren’t as memorable as his. If I must include others however, I would start with “Reader” and his echoing of the sentiments of “Jason.” I trust you can see my point.

    You mention that there are areas I don’t address in my post. I never stated that I would address every area, as I understand this is a complex issue. I didn’t address many of the areas the author covered, and had no reason to. I even agree with some of the author’s points. As I stated however, my goal in posting was simply to point out the Major areas left out of the original post. I understand the original author doesn’t have time to hit every area as well and wouldn’t expect him to (especially if they don’t help his argument), but as he stated his reasons against free trade, I stated some major points that were overlooked in favor of free trade.

    Nothing benefits from a one-sided rant. The only way we can truly and fully examine/ discuss any issue, or as you put it, examine an issue with critical thinking, is to examine the issue from both sides. I did that when reading this post, and in posting my comment, I was simply bringing the other side to the table (using arguments largely not yet discussed), so that we all may examine the issue with critical thinking.
    I’m not saying I’m right, but I don’t think anyone can claim to be right if they’re not willing to admit the other side may also have at least some valid arguments. I also don’t think any discussion is worth having if we’re not willing to analyze those arguments from a non-biased perspective so we fully understand, not only the other side’s beliefs, but our own. Of course, as someone so in favor of critical thinking, I’m sure you can agree with this as well.

    I say much of this with the presumption that you’ve applied the same critical thinking you ask of others to your own thought processes as well. If you have, then you’ll likely find my comment to be fair and have some valid points (whether you agree with them or not). If you haven’t, then I’ve likely offended you again, and in that case, I apologize for my presumption.
    Hope your weekend went well. 🙂

  • Lennie Pike

    Jason, I loved what you had to say. You are not the person I thought you were, and I can see how using the name David accidentally and without me noticing through you off. But I have to make just one point that is obvious and the one thing you wrote that set me off: It is impossible for everyone, not even a small percentage of any country’s population to be the business people who design, invent, and have their products produced. All will never be capable, and even if they were, who would produce the products? Peace, Thankyou.

Finca Bayano

Panama Relocation Tours



Facebook Twitter More...