Free Trade

[Wiz in Wis]

The one issue that could take down Clinton and give us President Trump is free trade. How does Clinton combat this? She has been getting hammered on this already in the primary.....

This issue is way overblown by people navel-gazing into the reasons why Trump won the nomination. He didn't win it because of "trade" - he won it because "brown/yellow people = bad." Trade is not now, nor will it be, a huge issue in the campaign, because the majority of working class people in this country will still vote Democratic, as they have been for years, because they are a) poor women b) ethnic or racial minorities or c) both. Trump might move the needle a bit with working class white men, but that group was already highly right leaning... he doesn't have much room to grow there. He can, however, really hurt himself among professionals who are not reflexively anti-trade, but don't want to pay an extra $200 on their next iPhone.

[pho]

If Hillary were a more honest politician she would own it and say "Free trade, while it may cost some jobs, makes consumer goods cheaper. Donald Trump wants you to pay more for your children's clothes and toys, I do not."

I would fundamentally disagree with her, but it would be far less uncomfortable to listen to than whatever awkward contortion act she is planning for this line of attack.

Trade barriers are an indirect tax to subsidize obsolete jobs.  Why not just tax people directly and create public works jobs?

I would argue that the jobs lost are not 'obsolete', at least no more obsolete than the goods the consumer is producing. Trade barriers are an indirect tax, but only on imported goods and therefore avoidable by shopping domestic - which is the intended consequence of the policy.

I agree with creating public works jobs, but most of the jobs would be temporary (infrastructure) where as the jobs lost to free trade are mostly permanent. I don't know how you would replace such a large number of permanent jobs with a public works program without nationalizing industries, which I disagree with generally.

[Gustaf]

Ideally, Hillary Clinton would defend NAFTA and, in general, the fruits of trade while pledging to do her best to ensure that the gains from trade are equally distributed among the population, with a disproportionate share of these gains given to those who are adversely affected by trade. If she can't run to Trump's left on this issue, she might as well do her best to make a strong case for trade imo.

Agreed, but since when does politics work that nicely?

[Orthogonian Society Treasurer]

Free trade stops war. Not surprising to see that trump doesn't support it in that regard since he's created animosity with all of our allies.

In the nineteenth century, free-trading Britain was involved in more wars than any other nation. The 19th century's bloodiest war was fought inside the world's greatest free trade zone - the United States. The German Empire waged war against a Russian Empire to whom she sold more goods than any other nation, and Britain declared war on a Germany that was her greatest continental trading partner. In the 30s, Japan's principal overseas trading partners were China and the United States. When Hitler turned on Stalin, he was attacking Germany's principal source of food, oil, and raw materials.

[ElectionsGuy]

Both candidates are protectionist anti-free traders. She'll just outflank him with her 'experience' on trade issues. There's no real difference between the two.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

NAFTA is one of the greatest trade agreements in the world. It's actually larger than the European community in terms of trade value. And there's no tariffs on American goods in Canada. The reason some goods are cheaper (softwood lumber) has nothing to do with tariffs and everything to do with economies of scale. Canada has huge mills.

[The Last Northerner]

Lady NAFTA isn't going to challenge the consensus on trade agreements. She went from supporting to going against TPP for political reasons, probably to pre-empt a possible Biden run. Besides the US military and the dollar's status as the world reserve currency, these agreements help maintain US hegenomy, specifically against China in this case, and the so-called foreign policy expert isn't going to risk jepordizing this. Clinton does a lot of things but backing down isn't one of them - no, she'll sign the TPP once the election dust has cleared.

[Boston Bread]

I support NAFTA and oppose TPP, so I'm happy if Clinton maintains her current positions.

[Sbane]

The one issue that could take down Clinton and give us President Trump is free trade. How does Clinton combat this? She has been getting hammered on this already in the primary.....

This issue is way overblown by people navel-gazing into the reasons why Trump won the nomination. He didn't win it because of "trade" - he won it because "brown/yellow people = bad." Trade is not now, nor will it be, a huge issue in the campaign, because the majority of working class people in this country will still vote Democratic, as they have been for years, because they are a) poor women b) ethnic or racial minorities or c) both. Trump might move the needle a bit with working class white men, but that group was already highly right leaning... he doesn't have much room to grow there. He can, however, really hurt himself among professionals who are not reflexively anti-trade, but don't want to pay an extra $200 on their next iPhone.

Oh I know he won the election with racism and xenophobia. He won't be able to win the general with that message though. And I think the one message he has that could appeal to a large portion of the country is trade, especially in the rust belt. If he can win Ohio and Pennsylvania with that message, it makes Hillarys path pretty narrow.

[ag]

I believe that there should be zero restrictions on trade at all (unless it is an embargo to punish a country).  Any economist will tell you that completely free trade makes us all better off.  Unfortunately, enough of my party doesn't seem to understand economics.  Apart from social issues, this is my biggest problem with Trump.

Reciprocated free trade like we had after World War II, is beneficial. Unilateral and one sided free trade where we remove our tariffs and others don't

Well, since the US is not a party to any such agreements, nor are any currently proposed or under discussion, the issue is entirely moot.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I believe that there should be zero restrictions on trade at all (unless it is an embargo to punish a country).  Any economist will tell you that completely free trade makes us all better off.  Unfortunately, enough of my party doesn't seem to understand economics.  Apart from social issues, this is my biggest problem with Trump.

Reciprocated free trade like we had after World War II, is beneficial. Unilateral and one sided free trade where we remove our tariffs and others don't

Well, since the US is not a party to any such agreements, nor are any currently proposed or under discussion, the issue is entirely moot.

Our trade relationship with China is the functional equivalent, to which I wll note you intentionally hacked off half my post to cut that portion out, to make your response seem more effective. Nice Try!

[ag]

I believe that there should be zero restrictions on trade at all (unless it is an embargo to punish a country).  Any economist will tell you that completely free trade makes us all better off.  Unfortunately, enough of my party doesn't seem to understand economics.  Apart from social issues, this is my biggest problem with Trump.

Reciprocated free trade like we had after World War II, is beneficial. Unilateral and one sided free trade where we remove our tariffs and others don't

Well, since the US is not a party to any such agreements, nor are any currently proposed or under discussion, the issue is entirely moot.

Our trade relationship with China is the functional equivalent,

It is not. Except if you listen to demagogues.

[Meclazine for Israel]

I think Trumps main issue was currency manipulation leading to commercial dumping from countries like China.

It's a real issue. Australia had an FTA with China, but the increase in exports to China far outweight any decrease in manufacturing because of cheaper imports.

For every 1 customer in Australia, there are 70 in China, so the opportunities are enormous.

The issues facing the USA because of NAFTA are not of a similar level of fairness by the looks.