re: Trump to begin a true Free Trade agreement

Just bodybagging SFP and Bayouputz

quote:

---

You totally ignored the response to post more ignorance.

---

No I pointed out accurately how you changed the hypo to answer

There can no be no honest response until you start being honest

Don't melt because I called you out.

quote:

---

You’re just going to have to get with the program. As I said:

Tariffs are now called free trade charges.

Losing is now called winning.

Terrible hires are now called great hires.

Incompetent is now called competent.

---

Are you always this dumb? You TDS fools are unreal

quote:

---

Again for the billionth time, Trump is about reciprocity.

---

There's a big topic about Trump starting a tariff on imported seafood. Is that because India has a tariff on shrimp from the US?

We need a reversal of the wealth. Look at where we were compared to where we are:

Now let's rewind history for a minute. Do you know how many millions of Americans got wrecked for this global order that you are speaking about? Money moved out of the USA and as a result, our welfare system exploded. As a result, we promoted abortions to kill off generations.

There is always cause and effect. We have to now rely on nations who wants to replace the USA for meds and more.

Common sense should say to everybody that it's unacceptable. A reversal is needed to bring wealth back into the middle class.

Any price increase is more than nullified in wages and jobs. People seem to forget that at one point, houses were affordable. $7,900. That was the average cost of a 3 bedroom home in the USA in 1955. The average family income in the United States was $4,400.

Compare that to today. In 2024, the median sales price of a home in the United States was $419,200 in the fourth quarter. The average sales price of a new home was $512,200. In 2024, the average salary in the United States is $62,027

See the difference?


What you have are ingrained globalists who are convinced that free trade is the answer to everything because a professor taught them that. They did so with selective history.

quote:

---

and certainly in something like the WTO

---

Let me be clear, I specifically did not include that.

quote:

---

there are a whole host of regulations, tariff structures, and protected industries built into the agreements.

---

Correct, but they're are still fewer than the prior arrangements. More free but certainly not perfect.

quote:

---

They are not "free trade" in the sense of unregulated reciprocal access to markets.

---

Correct, but, again, within these agreements the existence is closer to this status than the prior scenario. That's progress, not perfection.

What Trumpism proposes is regression by making trade less free. It's just just the American actions, the responses from the countries experiencing the higher transaction costs will also engage in regression, which just increases the presence of government, raises the transaction costs/externalities, and decreases the "free" status of the trade.

The only way this makes sense within Trumpism is the argument about domestic production. It's typically a bad argument, but it's an honest one that works within the anti-free trade policies. The populist argument against free trade is always domestic protectionism.

quote:

---

And in most cases the result is a more open U.S. market and less open (comparatively) non-U.S. market. A lot of this is the result of history - post WW2 we had no economic competition, and we wanted to build up the western markets and we wanted to help 3rd world countries defeat communism. Should we continue that approach?

---

There can always be improvements, but that system worked out pretty well for the US. We're still the #1 economy, there is no close 2nd, and there hasn't even been anything resembling a competing hegemon for 35 years now. We've almost lived as long as the sole hegemon than we lived with the bipolar hegemons of the Cold War. Things have only gotten better for us in that post-Cold War time frame.

A lot of the issues is the dishonest messaging about America's actual status in the world. It creates this belief that somehow the system hasn't benefited us and we've been taken advantage of by other countries. The most irrational version of this points to specific countries improving their economies/SOL during this timeframe, ignoring how the US benefits from this greatly.

quote:

---

We need a reversal of the wealth. Look at where we were compared to where we are:

---

We're the richest country in the world.

quote:

---

Do you know how many millions of Americans got wrecked for this global order that you are speaking about?

---

Only ones who made bad decisions.

Do you know how many more millions are incredibly better off?

quote:

---

Money moved out of the USA a

---

No. Money within the US was invested in more higher-end economic outputs as we developed the most advanced economy in the world.

This is exactly the dishonest framing I spoke of in my post above.

quote:

---

Common sense should say to everybody that it's unacceptable.

---

Yes, if you construct a dishonest position based on dishonest points, people will see that as unacceptable.

quote:

---

Any price increase is more than nullified in wages and jobs.

---

And here we go, the "we need tariffs for domestic protectionism", which is the exact opposite argumenta as "free trade". The transition is complete

quote:

---

Compare that to today. In 2024, the median sales price of a home in the United States was $419,200 in the fourth quarter. The average sales price of a new home was $512,200. In 2024, the average salary in the United States is $62,027

See the difference?

---

This is due to the domestic version of the very same leftist economic interventionism you're promoting abroad. Leftist economic policy sucks, I agree.

quote:

---

What you have are ingrained globalists who are convinced that free trade is the answer to everything because a professor taught them that. They did so with selective history.

---

Or we look at the stats and reality.

quote:

---

with millions of job losses as the cost.

---

Ignoring the job gains, and better jobs, at that, clearly.

quote:

---

The long-held myth that globalization keeps prices low has been shattered by decades of evidence and a multitude of economic studies.

---

And not a single study was posted.