I was struck by Sen. Sherrod Brown's op-ed in the New York Times today (10/18/10):
For Our China Trade Emergency, Dial Section 301
By SHERROD BROWN
WashingtonTEN years ago this fall the Senate sold out American manufacturing. By a vote of 83 to 15, it established so-called permanent normal trade relations with China, paving the way for that country to join the World Trade Organization. As a result, Chinese imports to the United States fell under the same low tariffs and high quotas as those from countries like Canada and Britain.
Today, though, our trade relations with China are anything but normal. The 2000 agreement's proponents insisted it would enable a billion Chinese consumers to buy American products. Instead, our bilateral trade deficit has increased 170 percent, largely because China has undermined free-market competition through illegal subsidies and currency manipulation.
It reminded me of this FAIR Action Alert at the time of that, uhh, debate:
On Eve of China Vote, Nightline Airs Only One Side
5/24/00
On the night before Congress was to vote on Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) for China–the most important trade vote of the year–ABC's Nightline devoted its broadcast to a discussion of that issue. That discussion, unfortunately, was one-sidedly partisan: All three of Nightline's guests were Republican proponents of PNTR.
Nightline's response was basically to saysome things don't need to be debated–or, as they put it, they "never intended to have a debate on the pending legislation."
About Peter Hart
[...] The Great Non-Debate on China Trade of 2000 [...]
Brown's Krugmanesque blaming of China for the trade deficit is liberal excuse making. China is selling products and labor force on the cheap and American consumers and corporations are buying. When the US does it we call it "free market", "competition", "productivity", "creativity", "know-how", "technology", "efficiency", etc.
The problem is not with China – the problem is that in a capitalist system abundance is translated into scarcity: cheap products and labor force are translated into unemployment and poverty.
Brown and Krugman are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
This 'free-trade' ruse has never been about anything but:
1.) Enabling corporations to reduce labor costs from $7.50-$30/hr to China's $.57/hr,
thus increasing profits while either NOT lowering prices, or just nominally doing so
in token gestures.
2.) Reducing the power of unions and workers in general
3.) Corporations escaping from any environmental costs, and/or making US society more
malleable as regards environmental rules ('We don't want corporation XYZ to leave the
country due to EPA costs, so just soft-pedal the enforcement and everybody will
benefit')
Corporations don't care if these actions gut the US middle class – - whaddaya crazy? HEY, PROFITS ARE UP!
Ever see any lines on a corporate financial statement about social costs of their actions?
I remember I made a comment to my Democratic Congressman that the China deal was a bad idea, not a good investment in the future. He replied, personally, that it was a "good thing" that would help to bring "democracy" to China. He really meant Capitalism. This is how the American public has been misled time and again. Because our voting population is so easily manipulated by Jingoism, fear and other quickthink.comisms. Today " Democarcy" and "Security" go hand in hand around the world …but again it is about Big Corp Capitalism and the giant game of global Risk….. and you have to be able to pay to play.
You're exactly right, Big Em. It's creepy and disturbing how the whole profits-over-people/democracy crime (for that is what it is) resembles cancer in a body. The cancer consumes the body–kills it in the end–and then dies along with the body. The greedy fools who do this are blinded by their stupid mendacity and hatred of working people and democracy.
In the coming decades as it becomes ever clearer that we are in China's Century (or India"s?), and that America has lost it ability to maintain it's roads, (much less it's technological edge, industrially or millitarily), and it's standard of living (with minor but outrageous exceptions), the MFN agreement and Corporate greed will compete for the honor of the handing of the sword (and our Classic car collections). In the last analysis, however, it will come down to the greed and the lust for the easy life on the part of all of us. We live in a Democratic Republic and could regain at least our self respect by becoming a Nation our Forparents would be proud to have begun. One that has inspired similar movements around the world, some of which seem to have progressed further than our own in recent years. As individuals we borrow money well beyond that which we can repay, from Banks that never wnat us to, to buy the latest 60"/LED/LCD/ 3D/hdtv, ipod, ibook, droid (got me one of them!), playstation, xbox, touch screen piece of technology now designed as well as built in China/India/Malaysia/Mexico/ (insert low wage country of origin) until at last there's nothing left to pay the mortgage on the upside down condo we live in with. We do so because we're easy pickins for the adds from the corporations that we watch when we think we're catching a ball game or a police movie. They don't care if we go broke as long as this quarterly report looks better than the last. We don't vote because we don't pay attention to what's gong on because it's too depressing and that leads to more of the same. So far no Nation has figured out how to stay on top after getting there. Maybe China, with a lot of help form US.
This country has not come to grips with the fact that capitalism and democracy are not the same thing and often are diametrically opposed. Capitalism exists in authoritarian countries; it is simpler and cheaper to bribe the ruling party then the multiple parties of a democracy.
We've had no debate since the GATTS and NAFTA (that giant sucking sound) when Clinton caved to the Republicans about labor inequalities, disparity in environmental regulations, infrastructure, resource depletion, and authoritarian rule. Externalizations – not to be considered until "later" (which never came).
There s no such thing as free trade as there was noting comparable about the whole alleged "comparable advantages" and no such thing as a "free market" – they are ideals; articles of faith for mammon worship like the immaculate conception and the Resurrection are to Christianity.
You're right, David D., but at times (especially in the case of Libertarianism) it's less like ideals and more like an insane dystopia tricked out with some really bad history and ideology to look like a utopia. "Free-market cpaitalism" is diametrically opposed to democracy; it could not be clearer at this point, but will most people react to this before it's too late?