Bring Back Protectionism

[laststeamtrain]

Bring Back Protectionism
By Dave Johnson

America used to have a policy of protecting our wages against unfair competition from low-wage countries. We placed a tariff on imported goods made by workers who were paid substandard wages. We protected our national interest.

The idea was to encourage the companies that made those goods to pay better wages. This way their countries' economies would improve and their workers would be able to buy the things that we make. Thus, the policy of protectionism was a way to improve living standards for workers everywhere, growing our own economy and improving our standard of living in the process.

The money collected from the tariffs was used for our common good: for example, it was spent on improving our country's infrastructure and education system (including science, research and development) so we could retain and improve our competitive position, as well as retraining workers whose industries were affected by changes in trade patterns.

Protectionism was generally our country's policy until a few decades ago. That was back when our country was OUR country -- for We, the People -- and our economy was OUR economy. And it worked. Our living standard continually improved. Then we changed to a "free trade" policy, meaning our workers work pretty much for "free" and big corporations are "free" to do anything they want. Additionally, without the revenue from tariffs, we have to tax our manufacturers more heavily, which makes them even less competitive internationally.

Since then average wages have stagnated and our pensions and health insurance have been disappearing, as have our savings. The country's trade debt has been increasing alarmingly. And corporate control over all of us has become near-total. Corporations are able to get their way by intimidating employees with the fear of losing our jobs to outsourcing, and intimidate governments by threatening to move to lower wage countries.

So it is time to bring back protectionism. It worked...http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dave-johnson/bring-back-protectionism_b_87102.html

[tritsofme]

1. Because Smoot-Hawley just worked so well.

Let's bring it back!

[Jim Sagle]

2. Fuckin' A.

[Deja Q]

3. Let's make things TRULY globalized.

Digby will find something else to whine about anyway, but if it's globalization, then it's equal costs across the board and trade dealt with on grounds of QUALITY and not cost.

That's why we're doing globalization - in theory, to raise others' standards of living. Given jobs are migrating over and NOT expanding (meaning qualified Americans are losing jobs as are apprenticeship jobs), it's not globalization.

Ask Hillary, Obama, McCain, anyone, what is truly going on.

Indians won't care; plenty are already talking of "America's comeuppance" or whining that America's "Generation Y" demands too much (another lie)...


*sigh*

Whatever. If we're all dead, we may as well live for today and not bother to think about it. Like 60 Minutes says, we may as well learn from the Danes in Denmark... the happiest country on Earth...

[Romulox]

6. Admit it: They made Denmark sound quite nice! nt

[kurth]

4. Amen to that!

[Romulox]

5. Economic darwinism is incompatible with liberal democracy

Which is why modern, "third way" liberalism is such a failure.

The idea that one may be "financial conservative and socially liberal" is a farce--either you care about social justice or you don't. Laissez faire capitalism is demonstrably not a vehicle to achieve social justice.

[eridani]

7. "Free" traders just love protectionism--as long as it's intellectual property they're talking about

They don't like it when it comes to protecting the jobs of the people who create the intellectual property for some odd reason.

[Hippo_Tron]

10. Or agriculture subsidies for that matter

[lostnfound]

11. Or R&D subsidies for big pharma. nt

[MisterP]

8. the post-Cold-War consensus doesn't even acknowledge the possibility of protectionism

or a role for states: most big stories contemplate how economies could cope with the megacorps given the "evaporation of socialism." With Randroids in the L.A. Times's editorial board...

[RuleOfNah]

9. That was before Hayek/Friedman-isms starting their predictable decline into the economic abyss.

I wonder what other plans are laying around...

[KharmaTrain]

12. How About Equalizing Wages...

Tarrifs always favor those who levy them...and for the protection of a special interest or large donor. This punishes not just the worker who loses jobs as American subsidiaries of foreign companies are cut back and consumers lose by a lack of price and product competition.

A solution is to come up with a wage index...the price of labor in countries around the work compared to those of American workers...the company that imports is required to pay the differential...thus giving them the incentive to keep jobs here and hire American union workers...as well as force companies to raise their wages in other countries.

Any tarriff we put on a foreign country will surely be met on tarrifs on our own goods...the goal is to equalize trade, not destroy it.