This was a pretty good op-ed on what our trade policy is doing to the world.
Since the 1980s, pesticide use has increased fivefold in Latin America as countries have expanded their production of nontraditional crops to fuel the demand for fresh produce during winter in North America and Europe. Rice farmers in the region use monocrotophos, methamidophos and carbofuran, all agricultural chemicals that are rated Class I toxins by the World Health Organization, are highly toxic to birds, and are either restricted or banned in the United States. In countries like Guatemala, Honduras and Ecuador, researchers have found that farmers spray their crops heavily and repeatedly with a chemical cocktail of dangerous pesticides.
We regulate our food production to protect our environment and safety, then accuse U.S. producers of not being efficient enough to compete with farmers in other countries. And the trade agreements prevent us from addressing those nasty foreign production practices. We have to treat imported rice the same as domestic rice.
But when you try to change trade policy, you get haughty speeches about "Economics 101" and "Adam Smith" - as if those terms provide any assistance to the wacko free trader position.
The NY Times had a series last year on China's big environmental problems. Trade was not front and center, though China's currency manipulation is the root cause. Why? Currency manipulation fuels China's 12% annual growth rate, which is too fast to do responsibly. It also fuels vigorous outsourcing by U.S. companies who can then benefit from the artificially low prices that exceed the cost of several thousand added miles of shipping (which net benefit would disappear absent the manipulation). Efficient factories here, that produce in compliance with U.S. safety and environmental laws, shut down to either jump on the Chinese currency manipulation gravy train - or because they are victims of multinationals chasing the "China price".
Protectionism and mercantalism drive the trade deficit. The protectionism and mercantilism of our major trading partners. We preach free trade when few others engage in it. You don't bring a knife to a gun fight. We are in a gunfight folks. And we don't have a knife. We are singing kum-bay-yah.
Unable to justify Free Trade Agreements on economic grounds, the wacko free traders use foreign policy to justify them.
The Colombia FTA is supposed to be about foreign policy, says the Washington Post in an editorial with lots of claims, no proof, and no logic.
A vote for the Colombia deal would show Latin America that a staunch U.S. ally will be rewarded for improving its human rights record and resisting the anti-American populism of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez.
Yup. Sign the silly FTA and George Bush's Chavez problem goes away. Great logic. Multiple regression studies have shown the cause and effect, and the world will be a better place.
Which specific provision in the Colombia FTA will help us isolate Chavez? Which one?
Never mind that these FTA's are outsourcing enabler.
Remember Peru's president Alan Garcia? What did he say a few days after the Peru FTA passed:
"Oil, mining, agriculture, fishing and manufacturing firms should now flock to his nation of 29 million people, which has a per-capita income of less than $3,000 a year, Garcia said. ``Come and open your factories in my country so we can sell your own products back to the U.S.,'' Garcia told the U.S. Chamber of Commerce".
Well. That was not about foreign policy. And we did not solve Bush's problem with Chavez. I guess we had better do more FTA's because the others obviously did not work.
Maybe the free traders are conceding the NAFTA-style agreements don't help the economy. Have the overwhelming data on trade deficits, outsourcing and job loss made that claim go away.
Is there any record of trade agreements helping on foreign policy? No. I challenge the Washington Post and the other free traders to show a consistent cause and effect relationship.
Let's try using foreign policy to achieve foreign policy ends. Not trade agreements We don't need to give away our economic future to make nice with the president of a small-geopolitical player. We are already trading with Colombia, and have low tariffs for their goods.
What, do you suppose, would our Founding Fathers do? Build America or trade our kids' futures away for a nice, friendly foreign alliance.
Can you believe this? This is wacko even for the wacko free traders.
The United States has outsourced the manufacturing of its electronic passports to overseas companies — including one in Thailand that was victimized by Chinese espionage — raising concerns that cost savings are being put ahead of national security, an investigation by The Washington Times has found. The Government Printing Office's decision to export the work has proved lucrative, allowing the agency to book more than $100 million in recent profits by charging the State Department more money for blank passports than it actually costs to make them, according to interviews with federal officials and documents obtained by The Times.
But everything is okay says GPO:
"Aside from the fact that we have fully vetted and qualified vendors, we also note that the materials are moved via a secure transportation means, including armored vehicles," GPO spokesman Gary Somerset said.
Armoured vehicles? That may stop Jesse James and his gang riding up on horses, but not hackers and spies. This is 2008. So maybe its not okay.
But GPO Inspector General J. Anthony Ogden, the agency's internal watchdog, doesn't share that confidence. He warned in an internal Oct. 12 report that there are "significant deficiencies with the manufacturing of blank passports, security of components, and the internal controls for the process."
And about those hackers and spies, consider that one of the "vetted vendors" are in Thailand, Smartrac Technology.
Smartrac divulged in an October 2007 court filing in The Hague that China had stolen its patented technology for e-passport chips, raising additional questions about the security of America's e-passports.
Yes, but at least they have armored vehicles.
by Peter Morici
The recession is a wake up call. Americans need to confront some false gods--free trade, gas guzzlers and Wall Street. In the 1990s, the U.S. launched the World Trade Organization and opened trade with China. Americans were to import more tee-shirts and TVs and sell more software and sophisticated services to a world hungry for U.S.knowhow. That would move Americans into better paying jobs. Unfortunately, the U.S. welcomed imports with more enthusiasm than China and other developing countries, who kept high tariffs and notorious regulatory barriers to purchases of western products. America’s CEOs and bankers learned how to outsource just about everyone’s job but their own—radiologists and computer engineers joined textile workers among trade-displaced workers. Since the last recession, imports have jumped nearly $1 trillion, while exports are up only about $650 billion, and the trade deficit now exceeds $700 billion. For most Americans inflation-adjusted wages have stagnated or fallen, while corporate CEOs and bankers get fat on bonuses and can’t lose stock options.
