27-08-2005 12:59									#31
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Well, I don't know enough about all this to make an educated opinion, but the same argument can be said of the auto industry.

While their product has improved, it seems the companies have been limping along for the past 20 years, and have never fully responded to foreign competition.

The Japanese own us.We can compete with the Germans but that's only because their cars are so damn expensive and just as unreliable as our own.

So I don't know if gutting the aerospace industry is the smartest thing, but then again I don't have a deep understanding of all the factors and competition involved. It seems to me that the Euro governments are just as involved, if not moreso, in Airbus as the US government is, through protectionism, favoritism by Congressional military spending, etc.

	27-08-2005 13:00									#32
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by DanS The cure is always worse than the disease. The fact is that there is a net benefit to free trade, no matter that your trading partners are protectionists or wasting their own money on subsidies.

Except that every wealthy country in the world -- every single one -- built its wealth through agressive, unrelenting protectionism.

	27-08-2005 13:02									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly Except that every wealthy country in the world -- every single one -- built its wealth through agressive, unrelenting protectionism.

*cough* Bullshit. *cough*

	27-08-2005 13:03									#34
	Got spare money?

The aerospace industry in the US is far from being gutted. That's just hyperbole.

	27-08-2005 13:04									#35
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by DanS The exception proves the rule.

	27-08-2005 13:05									#36
	Suffering from ads?

Boeing is getting it's ass handed to it by Airbus though.

In commercial aerospace, there really is nobody else in the States besides Boeing.

The recent multibillion dollar deal between Boeing and the Air Force to build transports is now also under investigation as well.

	27-08-2005 13:06									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

VJ: Don't expect me to focus unduly on an industry that, while large, represents a relatively small portion of overall Canada-US trade. We have free trade with Canada, by and large.

	27-08-2005 13:07									#38
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither *cough* Bullshit. *cough*

Really? what's your counterexample?

	27-08-2005 13:10									#39
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Boeing is getting it's ass handed to it by Airbus though.

That's not true. Boeing is getting about half the business globally. Besides, Boeing's strategy for pricing (premium) made it inevitable that an aggressive competitor could pick up lots of business.

	27-08-2005 13:10									#40
	Put an end to popups!

quote: VJ: Don't expect me to focus unduly on an industry that, while large, represents a relatively small portion of overall Canada-US trade. We have free trade with Canada, by and large.

You asked for examples. You were given an example. You can't counter it with anything. That's pretty much the definition of pwned, Dan.

	27-08-2005 13:11									#41
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly Really? what's your counterexample?

I'm gonna pick blindly here, and say Canada.

We built our country on trade. The freer the better. We have **** to sell, wanna buy it? We won't mind buying your **** back either.

	27-08-2005 13:12									#42
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: You asked for examples.

No, I didn't.

	27-08-2005 13:18									#43
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither I'm gonna pick blindly here, and say Canada. We built our country on trade. The freer the better. We have **** to sell, wanna buy it? We won't mind buying your **** back either.

Right. Canada's made it to the G7 without any legislation protecting its lumber, mining, or fishing industries; Canada spent most of it's history as one big open market.

John Macdonald? National Policy? Ring any bells?

	27-08-2005 13:26									#44
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

We were always part of some trading bloc or other. We even tried it with you (Reciprosity) while we were still colonies.

Did we protect our industry from Yanks who did the same to us? No ****, Sherlock. All the while we traded our hearts out within the Empire.

Then, one day, Britain said she had to go with the EC. That would mean dislocation of trade with our traditional partners. We said, mommy?

However, even before that we had come to terms with you Yanks on some common policies. We had an auto pact. That made your manufacturers free to sell into Canada. Not our fault we were better at building cars and instead sold more into the US than the reverse.

We have always been for trade. We live on trade. And we are part of the G7 (as you observed) so I would say we have been successful.

	27-08-2005 13:33									#45
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither We were always part of some trading bloc or other. We even tried it with you (Reciprosity) while we were still colonies. Did we protect our industry from Yanks who did the same to us? No ****, Sherlock. All the while we traded our hearts out within the Empire. Then, one day, Britain said she had to go with the EC. That would mean dislocation of trade with our traditional partners. We said, mommy? However, even before that we had come to terms with you Yanks on some common policies. We had an auto pact. That made your manufacturers free to sell into Canada. Not our fault we were better at building cars and instead sold more into the US than the reverse. We have always been for trade. We live on trade. And we are part of the G7 (as you observed) so I would say we have been successful.

Of course you traded. Who the f*ck doesn't trade? That's not the point. Trade is not the same thing as free trade.

The simple fact is that Canada, like the UK, US, and every other first-world country, built its lasting wealth during industrialization. And Canada, like every other first world country, industrialized behind a wall of very high tariffs. Free trade enhances the wealth of rich countries. But I stand by my original statement: every single wealthy contry in the world originally built its wealth through protectionism.

	27-08-2005 13:35									#46
	Suffering from ads?

Canada is a really bad case for your argument. I think we are the only major industrialised country that is also a net resourse exporter across the board.

No **** we favour free trade.

	27-08-2005 13:39									#47
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly Of course you traded. Who the f*ck doesn't trade? That's not the point. Trade is not the same thing as free trade. The simple fact is that Canada, like the UK, US, and every other first-world country, built its lasting wealth during industrialization. And Canada, like every other first world country, industrialized behind a wall of very high tariffs. Free trade enhances the wealth of rich countries. But I stand by my original statement: every single wealthy contry in the world originally built its wealth through protectionism.

You have no clue.

Major industrialization took place under the Auto Pact. That was when the flow was unrestricted. A lot happened prior to that under Imperial trade.

You just don't get it. We built our wealth out of resources. We leveraged that into industry.

Your model is simply faulty, because it is too narrow. Other countries, with different demographics and economies, will yield different results from what you expect.

	27-08-2005 14:10									#48
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly The simple fact is that Canada, like the UK, US, and every other first-world country, built its lasting wealth during industrialization. And Canada, like every other first world country, industrialized behind a wall of very high tariffs.

In the case of Britain which levied no import duties between the 1840s and 1930s. (I'm not certain of this, but teh Encarta says so. I thought that it was just very limited)

	27-08-2005 14:15									#49
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither You just don't get it. We built our wealth out of resources. We leveraged that into industry.

Well, I do get that the period of greatest economic expansion in Canadian history, from Confederation up to World War I, was also the period of Canada's highest tariffs.

Yes, you built your wealth out of your resources. Yes, you leveraged that into industry. And you did it all way before the Auto pact. You did it protected by tariffs, just like the UK, the US, and, later, Japan -- just like everybody else, in fact.

	27-08-2005 14:21									#50
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Dauphin In the case of Britain which levied no import duties between the 1840s and 1930s. (I'm not certain of this, but teh Encarta says so. I thought that it was just very limited)

But that's just my point. Britain dropped tariffs only after it emerged as the world's unrivalled economic an dpolitical superpower. In other words, Britain dropped tariffs only after it got rich.

Free trade is how the rich get richer, but its not how the poor get rich.

	27-08-2005 14:34									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Actually, one of the reasons automobile companies are favoring Canadian plants is because they have no health insurance costs, and the lack of tariff barriers to equalize this major difference heavily favors Canada. It's not a direct subsidy, but it is a de facto subsidy. Also, Canadian workers are much better educated that US workers in the Southern anti-union states. The Koreans are complaining they have to use pictorials to train Bubba for the assembly line.

And DanS - every example that has been given by a fellow poster, you spout vague economic principles. As VJ said - put up proof, or you are pwned, so to speak.

	27-08-2005 14:38									#52
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: The government also helps out quite a bit with land,fuel, and other items.

I don't see how this is possible -
a) China is an energy importer - if it was energy subsidies that made the industry profitable, it would mean that the industry is an actual burden on the country ( if it's energy is subsidized, it means that it's a burden anyhow, but imported energy also shows up in the trade balance)
b) I don't see land costs being a big problem for industry in the US, especially not around the coast.

	27-08-2005 17:37									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: The Koreans are complaining they have to use pictorials to train Bubba for the assembly line.

Well these days Korean companies do the majority of their manufacturying in China. In the amount of corporate R&D jobs per capita, however Korea's got to have one of the highest in the world...

	27-08-2005 17:45									#54
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly Free trade is how the rich get richer, but its not how the poor get rich.

QFT! Free trade is only to the benefit of those who favour the current production specialization in the world.

	27-08-2005 17:55									#55
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

There's a difference between free trade and free trade, most co-called free trade regimes (including the current one) are badly slanted in favor of certain countries/corporate entities/whatever. Real free trade, however, is almost always a good thing.

	27-08-2005 22:00									#56
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Bosh - but how can we get real free trade? That's why I call it a Republican fantasy - it looks nice on paper, but power dynamics in every industrialized country in the world will never let it happen.

	27-08-2005 22:22									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

The big problem with "free trade agreements" is that rather unjustifiable IP protections are included, which really amount to protectionism on behalf of the rich countries. The other big problem is that such agreements fail to address our agrisubsidies, again amounting to protectionism on behalf of the rich since poor countries can't afford those sorts of trade barriers. There was a fascinating Times article recently pointing out that CAFTA has been so one-sided in these respects that US negotiators had to threaten withdrawing the decades old bilateral trade agreements that we had with Central American states, in order to get them to sign on (and there is still virulent opposition in these states' legislatures).

	28-08-2005 00:14									#58
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by shawnmmcc Highing paying jobs, with their grabbing market share from US companies (want to buy a McDonnel-Douglas jetliner - you cannot, they de facto folded). That's the point for them. My point was that Free Trade does not necessarily work, and that instead well thought out and carefully targeted protectionism instead can be an excellent strategy. Instead of global economic principals, I am giving precise examples where not only have the protectionists come out ahead, but the Free Trade proponents have definitely been hurt. As I stated before, Free Trade per se, as practiced in the real world, is a fantasy, and one that IMHO (with multiple examples given) has hurt the US in multiple areas. If protectionism doesn't work - look at the Chinese economic "miracle".

I'm still left asking what's the point? Didn't foreign competitors offer cheaper prices? If US companies go under because they can't handle the fire, it doesn't bother me. In fact, I say it is a GOOD thing. Ted brought up the US automakers. Protectionism may have killed that industry because US car makers didn't have to worry about competition. That made them build shittier and shittier cars until it came to bite them on the ass. Yes, US auto makers lost a TON of jobs, but it was worth it.

I mean the US doesn't have to build up industry (the only way that protectionism can work). So it's best to allow competition to propel our industry to get more efficient.

	28-08-2005 00:20									#59
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Imran - the cheaper prices by AirBus and Eurocopter are subsidized by their governments. They are not de facto cheaper prices, but subsidized. Favorable loans paid for by the governments of the Airbuse consortium, direct subsidies to pay for new designs - which Boeing DOES NOT get - plus a bunch of other, though less critical, subsidies.

In agribusiness - do I even need to go into that? Of course small farmers in third world countries legitimately make the same complaint about the US and Europeans. As I stated, Free Trade is a wonderful intellectual concept, like "True Love" is - until she gets a headache.

	28-08-2005 00:23									#60
	Tired of ads?

I understand the subsidies and I say, so what? We SHOULD get rid our business tariffs, but dealing with Europeans who may have higher tariffs on certain goods doesn't bother me.

If 3rd world countries want to do reciprocal tariffs, let them. Maybe that'll have us get rid of our barriers. However, I'd perfer that the US benefit from competition. Our industries are already established. They don't need protection.