Skip to content

Good News For Free Traders

September 1, 2016

From The Wall Street Journal lead editorial today comes this paragraph.  I much approve.

By the way, there’s also good news on the politics of trade from Democrats. Politico reports that after Tuesday’s results the 28 House Democrats who voted for trade-promotion authority in 2015 have either won their primaries or didn’t have a challenge. This is notable because Big Labor had promised to defeat the trade heretics. Maybe Hillary Clinton should rethink her retreat toward protectionism that began in the primaries against Bernie Sanders and has grown worse against Mr. Trump.

(I strongly suspect she will–and should.)

  1. September 2, 2016 11:04 AM

    The facts are clear that free trade has made a positive economic impact on states and the nation as a whole. Are there pockets of people or places that face some negative impact from these policies? Yes. Is that the majority case? No. Your sovereignty word choice reminds me of the Brexit debate which allowed for a disastrous outcome–with the worse yet to come for Britain. I strongly supported the fast track legislation on my blog and applauded when it passed in congress. That vote on fast track is precisely what the WSJ commented on .

    There are always ways to improve trade deals–and the Asia deal is no different than the rest in this respect. But let us be clear and state up front there is a most vocal group in this nation who hates every trade deal and would just prefer to talk it to death and let it bleed from a thousand cuts.

    That must not happen when it comes to the Asia trade pact.

    If I could make changes they would be to toughen up environmental standards, for instance. But I also understand the greater good from these deals must outweigh the personal laundry list that any of us have about such deals. At the end of the day we have to be pragmatic about matters of policy. (And I really do try to do that.) There would be not deals of any kind in government without compromises.

    The numbers speak for themselves as to why this trade deal matters.

    The United States’ biggest and fastest-growing commercial partners are in Asia, accounting for $1.5 trillion worth of trade in goods in 2012 and $242 billion worth of services in 2011. They’re responsible for 40 percent of the world’s GDP and 26 percent of the world’s trade.

    From a foreign policy perspective I think this trade pact is a strong way to be better “contain” China and provide an economic counterweight to it in the region.

    I fear this deal may not Passat the end of the year due to the damaging politics from both sides of the aisle who take more stock in playing to the uneducated in the nation rather then taking the election season and making it a learning time for the voters.

  2. nonquixote permalink
    September 2, 2016 8:39 AM

    Oh right, surrender US sovereignty, near totally to multi-national corporations. If this was actually a trade deal, which it is not, and which I’m not certain that you have even one clue about, from the naive to the ridiculous in “progressive,” blogging, got something for you. Oh wait, some of you have already had your fill…

    (The owner of this blog had a notice the link that was included with this comment had a virus. Therefore it was deleted. If the commenter wishes to have any other written comments other than sending a link posted that would be fine.)

  3. Solly permalink
    September 1, 2016 4:28 PM

    If she does, let’s hope she has the integrity to say that she’s flip-flopped back again BEFORE THE ELECTION. She was for it before she was against it and now she’ll be for it again. Oh, who am I kidding, “hope she has the integrity?”

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: