Senator John McCain defends free trade in Youngstown, Ohio
April 22nd, 2008 by Brendan SteinhauserI have to say that I am impressed with Senator McCain’s boldness in talking about the benefits of free trade in Youngstown, Ohio today. It’s about time someone defended trade as a way to encourage economic growth and higher standards of living. Liberals like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been pandering to voters in the area and promising to re-negotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement. It’s good to see McCain stand on principle and for good public policy, despite its lack of popularity.
The unions tend to have a very provincial and selfish view of trade policy, saying that it hurts them and the industries that they control. But they refuse to admit their actions artificially inflate the price of labour. This, coupled with higher demands for benefits, drives jobs out of the areas where unions are strong.
I’m not sure how McCain’s message of free trade will be received in Northeast Ohio, but it’s good to see him deliver the message.
April 22nd, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Those damn unions and their demands for higher pay and better benefits for their workers…we all know that workers want the opposite, right? Oh, maybe not…
Free trade without a more level playing field between trading parnters is just a race to the bottom BTW.
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Mister Guy, do you ever offer any substantive points? Or are your sarcastic remarks just another way of dodging the issues by throwing out emotion evoking comments? What you fail to recognize is that in today’s global economy unions work at a detriment to their members. They raise costs, forcing companies to outsource jobs to countries where there are no unions, thus shooting themselves in the foot.
April 23rd, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Well, I could say the same thing about this entire website…lol… If unions are bad, then I would submit that employees are bad aswell, since unions are merely looking out for employee’s best interests most, if not all, of the time. As you state, the current framework of trade is merely a race to the bottom for all of us…thanx for proving my point!
April 24th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
Besides - it’s PROFITABLE!
April 25th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Race to the bottom? The only alternative to a free market is a quasi-socialist economy. And history has shown us how well that story plays out. The reality of the world economy is it is a zero sum game. What one country loses, another gains. To argue that we should somehow “fix” free trade would only shift your grievances from one country to another. The fact of the matter is somewhere, someone will always be willing to charge a little less in order to gain sales. Unions attempt to undermine this process by artificially inflating costs, and in turn prices. Why not eliminate the unions, and allow for U.S. companies to fairly compete in many markets. Maybe then all those jobs you worry about being outsourced can remain within the U.S.
April 26th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
As a Youngstown resident, I have to laugh.
Youngstown has its own problems, many of them self-inflicted. But the “It’s about time someone defended trade as a way to encourage economic growth and higher standards of living.” Doesn’t wash around here.
Not, I am not Blue collar, not union and not stuck in the past. But I have seen this area go from 150,000 people to 80,000. And Free trade was a big part of that.
We’re not even talking of growth or expansion right now: In order to stay solvent, our city has to demolish whole neighborhoods so we can shut off the power and water and don’t have to patrol the streets:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/08/real_estate/radical_city_plan/index.htm
If any of you free traders would like to invest here, I’d really appreciate it.
April 26th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
“The only alternative to a free market is a quasi-socialist economy.”
Wrong again…the alternative is what the USA and many other countries have right now…a mixed economy of capitalism and socialism. Some of us out here think that it needs to be a little more “mixed” as well.
“Why not eliminate the unions…”
Sure, and while we’re at it, we can eliminate all the things that unions have given this country: paid vacations, paid sick leave, a 40-hour workweek, etc., etc….sounds great…for rich corporations that is.
The fact is that the U.S. can’t base it’s economy anymore on agriculture or manufacturing unfortunately. A highly educated workforce that can do the high-tech jobs of today & tomorrow is our only option IMO, and we’re still a ways off from making that a reality unfortunately.
April 30th, 2008 at 10:16 am
This debate makes me angry but i’ll just make two points. 1. Comparative advantage makes the world go round, without it everything Mister Guy was saying would have some credibility. 2. World Trade is not and never will be a Zero-Sum game; Otherwise there would be no investment structure. What you described was in reality a Coase theory practice that guarantees the most efficient transfers will be sought under a non-restricted structure. Mister Guy, you need to brush up on your trade theory and history before i can even respond to your claims. Race to the bottom for prices? Thats bad for consumers why? And unions are businesses that are out to receive the largest gains for their members. Thats the exact same structure as a corporation only somehow…more American?
April 30th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
And you need to brush up on your history my friend. The price of things matters little if people’s jobs have been shipped overseas in a race to the bottom, and we have not replaced those jobs with the high-tech jobs of today & tomorrow because our workforce is under-educated. Unions are NOT businesses…LOL!!! No one is making a profit from being in a union, period.