In his book, Screwed; The Undeclared War Against the Middle Class -- And What We Can Do About It , Thom Hartmann talks about how tariffs were the primary source of income for the US. Primary!!!. But Reagan, Bush sr. and Clinton totally screwed us by joining the WTO and NAFTA and Dubya signed on the CAFTA-- all good for a few hundred transnational mega corporation, but lousy for US industry and throwing out a major source of income for the US. I say Dump these trade gifts to megacorporations and bring back tariffs. Charge the highest tariffs to the countries that we owe the most to and charge us the most interest on our debt-- and let them help us pay off our debt to them with tariffs.
Sure, we live in different times and there is a need to face the realities of a gobal economy. But that doesn't mean we should just bend over and allow our butts to be kicked and our native industries destroyed, or that we should allow rampant outsourcing of labor. Now, if a company outsources labor, they can report it as contract cost. They should have to report it as exported labor and pay duty on it. Then, they'll have no reason to outsource and we'll keep jobs here.
The temptation to outsource is great. I know. I've been guilty of it. Back in 1993, I travelled to Russia seeking programmers to hire for software development. The idea was to find people over there to do contract work for a tiny fraction of the cost of paying a programmer in the US, where programmers were making $60-$100,000 a year, or $60- $100 an hour.
I ended up bringing over a programmer from Siberia on an H1-b visa. He was making $200 a month in Russia. Now he drives a Mercedes, not because of me though. He went on to apply for a green card and left my employment as soon as he got it. Then HE started doing outsourcing.
When I was looking at doing outsourcing as a small businessman, my goal was to be more competitive, so my small business could earn enough to support my family. The guy I brought over never really worked out and the software project died on the vine, never making a penny, actually costing me tens of thousands of lost dollars. If I'd invested the money I spent on my Russian project in other, US-based projects, I may have come out way ahead.
Since then, I've found plenty of people in the US who will work for me at affordable rates. But times were different then. It may be that I can find programming help more affordably now because outsourcing has already hurt the US market.
The advocates of outsourcing say that they need to outsource to stay competitive. I don't buy it. If we use tariffs to even the costs, the outsourcing becomes unnecessary. If I know that when I send money overseas, or pay a contractor a flat fee, that I must report an explanation of that expense and pay a duty on it, why would I bother?
Signing on to treaties like WTO, NAFTA and CAFTA totally strips the US bare of protections. It subjects the US to rule by secret councils, literally. It is unnatural to exist without some kind of a "skin." I've written about the idea that every living entity must have a "skin" and even nations must have a kind of economic "membrane" that allows some products and services in, while keeping others selectively out.
Congress and a series of presidents have sold out the American economy and core, bedrock US industries by signing on to these globalist treaties. Yes, we need to deal with globalization. No, we should not just nakedly open our borders.
It is time to reinstate tariffs-- to look at them as protections for US jobs and industries and as a serious source of income. It's a way to pay down the debt without raising taxes. Truthfully, a price will be paid. Walmart loyalists will pay more for the cheap Chinese-made consumer goods they've been lining up at the trough to buy at bargain prices. The alternative will be to buy goods made by US workers who these predominantly right wing consumers have been screwing.
These consumers-- probably the same ones who scream for building a 700 mile border fence-- are happy to allow millions of tons of foreign goods to flood the border. The Zogby polling group routinely looks at who Walmart shoppers are. And the answer is, they are the most conservative voters. It's ironic that they would block foreign workers from coming into the US, but they are happy to buy the goods produced by foreign slave labor pay earning workers.
Globalist treaties like WTO, NAFTA and CAFTA are anti-democratic, forcing the US to obey rules that contradict democratically determined US laws and regulations. They subject the US to destruction of our industries. This is an issue that only the cheapest, most unpatriotic, disloyal Americans, who care nothing of their neighbors' jobs. I'm guessing these are the same leeching people who will do anything to pay their fair share of taxes to support the commons-- our shared costs for roads, quality education, law enforcement, a judicial system that supports robust business, open spaces and clean environments, regulations that protect humans from corporations, international diplomacy...
It's time to make the cancellation of these globalist treaties a major issue that candidates are judged upon. Any candidates who support them are either embarassingly ignorant (I've met them) or more loyal to big corporations than to the people who elect them.
Just as those on the right talk about "tax and spend liberals," we on the left should start talking about globalist corporation lovers who are bleeding the US to death and forcing us to raise taxes because we're bleeding to death because of corporate welfare.
It's time to start making tariffs a major part of US income. This could be a very powerful tool. How do you cut taxes? Create tariffs!! This is good for citizens, but bad for foreign owned corporations. It might even be a wedge issue that Republicans can't endorse. Of course there will be a fair share of Democrats who are owned by corporations who won't support it either.
Those who say we live in global times requiring global policies are telling half the truth when they advocate policies that eviscerate US industries. It's time to call them on their distortions and take back the USA's economic power, which was given away by the signers of these onerous treaties overdue for cancellation.
Rob Kall is executive editor and publisher of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, inventor . He is also published regularly on the Huffingtonpost.com. He is a frequent Speaker on Politics, Impeachment, The art, science and power of story, heroes and the hero's journey, Positive Psychology, Stress, Biofeedback and a wide range of subjects. He is a campaign consultant specializing in tapping the power of stories for issue positioning, stump speeches and debates. He recently retired as organizer of several conferences, including StoryCon, the Summit Meeting on the Art, Science and Application of Story and The Winter Brain Meeting on neurofeedback, biofeedback, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology. See more of his articles here and, older ones, here.
To learn more about me and OpEdNews.com, check out this article.
and there are Rob's quotes, here.
To Watch me on youtube, having a lively conversation with John Conyers, Chair of the House Judiciary committee, click here Now, wouldn't you like to see me on the political news shows, representing progressives. If so, tell your favorite shows to bring me on and refer them to this youtube video
My radio show, The Rob Kall Show, runs 9-10 PM EST Wednesday evenings, on AM 1360, WNJC and is archived on www.whiterosesociety.org Or listen to it streaming, live at either www.wnjc1360.com or here.
A few declarations.
-While I'm registered as a Democrat, I consider myself to be a dynamic critic of the Democratic party, just as, well, not quite as much, but almost as much as I am a critic of republicans.
-My articles express my personal opinion, not the opinion of this website.
The "Global Economy" and their legion depend on these sources of turning third world countries into perpetual debtors for advancement of those that are in and behind the scenes of the World Trade Organization in creating a world economy and helped craft NAFTA and CAFTA. The WTO can't do anything without the bankers that help push their agenda.
by
Jim Reinhart (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 60 comments)
on Sunday, September 17, 2006 at 10:37:43 AM
Is this your idea of progressive reform, to stick our heads in the sand and pretend the world doesn't exist?
Oy, no wonder you didn't understand my post that you rejected.
Wake up Rob. Progressives can be regressive, just like moralists can be immoral and libertarians can be authoritarian.
Orwell wins again. Restart the wheel.
If tariffs are a source of income for the government, they are just a hidden tax to the middle class who pay for it in the inflated cos of goods. ie, the "screwed middle class" is actually the issue of inflation. If you raise taxes you raise prices. If you raise prices you raise inflation. It's lose-lose.
I haven't read Hartmann's book, so I am not sure what he says on this issue. If you want to "face the realities of a global economy," as you put it, then you should realize that the global rebellion is part of it. 9/11 was the Boston Tea Party. You are going in the wrong direction completely.
Your heart is in the right place, but your analysis is woeful.
Peace,
Steve
by
Steve Consilvio (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 75 comments)
on Sunday, September 17, 2006 at 10:56:41 AM
it sounds like you oppose any income for the government-- very libertarian, very Grover Norquist. A WTO-caused job drain that drops pay rates by 20-60% could also be considered a "tax." Actually, that works VERY well as a frame-- supporters of globalization are actually creating a Tax on American workers by cutting their pay.
I rejected your article because you didn't explain your rational for what you proposed.
by
Rob Kall (761 articles, 3850 quicklinks, 320 diaries, 1642 comments)
on Sunday, September 17, 2006 at 11:18:56 AM
"Trade" does not need to be "free" it needs to be fair. Your solution makes it more unfair, not less.
The government doesn't need "income" it creates the currency. It doesn't need it back. If you want to give wealth to the people, then the government and universities need to stop draining the VALUE OF THE CURRENCY.
We have plenty of paper and plenty of numbers, the problem is that the value of the currency changes constantly because of unfair trade. Tarriff is just another version of profit; we need to trade evenly.
An EVEN TRADE is a "fair" trade. Nobody profits, but both get what they need.
We are at war because we insist on trading unfairly. Like Osama, you want to stop the trade by making it too expensive to do business with Americans. That is not a solution. Neither is insisting on unfair trade. The reason we are looking for cheap imports is because nobody can survive in a system of unfair trade, (it is one Scrooge against a million Scrooges) so ever cheaper labor and products need to be found elsewhere. Unearned income becomes more profitable than earned income, so fewer and fewer produce more and more, but the overhead of those who do less and less becomes too great.
This problem has been going on for thousands of years. Is our ability to think abstractly worth nothing?
by
Steve Consilvio (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 75 comments)
on Monday, September 18, 2006 at 11:34:53 AM
I am an opponent of NAFTA, GATT and the like, and not only due to the damage done to the US economy. NAFTA has allowed transnational companies to flood the Mexican market places with inexpensive food stuffs, at prices cheaper than Mexican farmers can sell to their own! This is one reason why we see a flood of workers sneaking into America to earn enough to support their families.
It would seem, and lacking any input from you or others who support such inequitable trade treaties, which benefit a small number of large corporations to the detriment of the rest of the world, that loss of revenue is only the tip of the iceberg..
I would hope that you could explain your support rather than simply posting disparaging commentary about the lack of support...thanks in advance
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Sunday, September 17, 2006 at 7:09:12 PM
I agree with your sentiments. What are the true intentions of a government that outsources jobs while importing cheap labor? Isn't it obvious - even to a Republican! And how secure is a country that no longer knows how to make 'things'? What made this country strong and rich was our vast, incredible manufacturing abilities! We have lost the garment industry, shoe industry, steel (almost), car (almost) and many others. Ruined by cheap imports. We even import food now! We are told that our economy is now an information and service based economy. That scares me to death. Anyone has access to information and anyone can provide service. That's like saying your car will be pushed by the wind to whatever destination you choose. China and India will equal or surpass us in creation of information technology in the near future. There goes that race. They are already taking "service" jobs from us now.
The problem with tariffs, however, is that any country we subject to tariffs will do the same to us and our products. They don't want our products (the ones we have left) to flood their markets and wipe out their native businesses either. It would also make the cheap imports more expensive so that the low income workers would not even be able to afford Walmart's prices (which I have noticed are creeping up now anyway - paying better wages and health benefits are the excuse they use). The reason our car industry lost out to imports is because the prices were always higher, gas mileage non-existent and reliability way too low. We were beaten fairly. If we want to take back the lead we need to produce better cars that have lower maintenance and better gas mileage for the same price as the imports. We CAN do that. We have the know how - it's just a matter of the industry making the needed changes.
Most of the Walmart shoppers I see appear to be low income or no income people who shop there because they have to not because they want to. Sometimes I see a few Mercedes or Jags in the parking lot but not often. I shop there, too, and I am anything but conservative so I don't know that you can categorize all Walmart shoppers as conservative. They seem to be more like the poor and the tired that we invited here - lo, those many years ago.
NAFTA was signed off on by Clinton, too. It's unlikely a new Dem president or Congress would eliminate it. I, frankly, believe we need to reinstate regulation of oil, all public utilities, public transportation, insurance companies. So the price of oil can't go down two months before an election and then right back up afterwards. We have no guarantee that any Democrats elected in November will change anything or can change anything. We also need to cull the millionaires from Congress. How can we expect them to pass legislation benefiting middle or low income people when it would hurt their interests? Like cutting taxes at the bottom and raising them at the top. But if we don't do that soon, this economy will tank. Thanks, Republicans and George Bush & Co. for destroying the best country that ever was. If we "tax and spend" they "steal and torture."
by
Devon Greene (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments)
on Sunday, September 17, 2006 at 4:13:41 PM
Of course some countries will want to put tariffs on us. That's the way it was. But we buy more than we sell, so we have an advantage. I'm not saying to just throw up tariffs. My other article that I linked to talks about the idea of membrane economics. I encourage you to read it. We have to have smarter tariffs and smarter reciprocal agreements, not just naked, no tariff, no nothing, go ahead and rape us and destroy our industries agreements designed to benefit transnational megacorporations.
by
Rob Kall (761 articles, 3850 quicklinks, 320 diaries, 1642 comments)
on Sunday, September 17, 2006 at 7:53:21 PM
Good article Rob! All those trade agreements have proven to be a dismal failure. What these trade agreements have gotten us so far is a massive trade defecit. These countries we trade with in the trade agreements are smarter than us becouse they now have free access to the worlds richest country to sell their goods. Its kind of like being able to lease retail space in the richest area of New york city at Wyoming prices. The people who are against tarriffs are so dumb that they could not even operate a lemonade stand. These countries are too poor to buy any U.S. goods so the trade agreement is virtually worthless. Tarriffs would not raise prices becouse our government would get the money it needs from overseas companies not your paycheck.If one looks at history America rose to an industrial giant by protectionism and tarriffs. Unions and tarriffs made us the worlds tichest economy with the highest standard of living. Without them we will be just another mexico.
by
Gary Denson (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 208 comments)
on Sunday, September 17, 2006 at 5:13:00 PM
You're right on target. "Free" trade agreements have never been anything more than a vehicle to allow Corporate America to replace higher-paid American workers with low paid slave labor in 3rd world countries. The key facilitator, as you have stated, is the removal of tariffs on goods imported from those foreign countries. In doing so it allows American Corporations to move their factories to low-wage foreign countries, then ship the goods made back into the United States without paying tariffs. Thus they get the best of both worlds, access to workers in the cheapest labor markets on the planet, while retaining access to the richest consumer market on the planet.
The obvious conflict is that the very elimination of of higher-waged American workers (to reduce labor costs), also reduces the consumer income of their major market. The only way these Benedict Arnold corporations have been able to continue this process is through the massive expansion of consumer credit created by the credit card industry and the housing bubble. Without the addition of this borrowed money to replace the income lost to outsourcing, these Corporate traitors would not have been able prosper. However, their outsourcing-induced reductions in labor cost have been offset by the loss of labor/consumer income.
Federal policies and the banking industry have come to the rescue, to temporarily make an unsustainable system sustainable. But it cannot survive long-term. Consumers cannot indefinitely spend more than they earn. With wages declining due to the reduced American labor demand caused by outsourcing, there is no possible soft-landing. Eventually the income lost due to outsourcing will show up as a reduction in consumer spending. And the drop-off will be sharp, as current levels are already far above any level sustainable from consumer income alone.
But, as you have stated, all hope is not lost. And the best place to start is dump the WTO and all free trade agreements. And put tariffs on goods as necessary to protect American workers from job loss. Tariffs were always standard policy until the last 25 years, when the rich decided they weren't rich enough, and needed to cut American labor costs to increase profits to the exorbitant levels they're at today.
Again, all is not lost. We need to start debunking the myth that all "free" trade is good, and that "freer" trade is always better. It isn't. It's often good for the short-term profits of Corporate multinationals only. But its bad for Americans as a whole, because it reduces the consumer income, spending, and demand necessary to drive our economy. Our economy has is on borrowed time created by this "borrowed" money. Once again, this is not a sustainable course. We definitely need to "change the course," before we run off the cliff.
Tarriffs make local corporations stronger, not weaker. They can raise their prices, profit more, and provide crappier products to boot.
Remember the Boston Tea Party? A monopoly is good for the corporation. Getting the government to protect the corporations is the problem, not the solution!
This is a perfect example of DOUBLETHINK: Holding mutually exclusive positions simultaneously. It is regressive-progressive thought.
by
Steve Consilvio (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 75 comments)
on Monday, September 18, 2006 at 11:45:24 AM
i totally agree with you that world trade agreements are killing America.They are costing millions of jobs unlike the horse manure the republican facist give about saving and increasing jobs.They are destroying the middle class by forcing Americans to take whatever low paying job they can find at whatever wages they can find.We are returning to the 1880"s when whole familys had to work just to survive and when unions were illegal.I have seen Republicans comment but high tariffs will make goods cost more but the trade off for higher wages and better jobs is more then worth the cost.I agree we should tax the corporations who move over seas a higher rate instead of giving them tax breaks to do it as Reagan and Bush have done.I also think we should tax accounts of the rich overseas as this has become a big source of hiding wealth and costing billions in tax dollars.if America is ever to become grest again we must start supporting unions again like FDR did this also was a large reason for a hugh middle class developing in America.Follow these proven ideas and America can once again become the greatest country in the world with the largest middle class.ignore these ideas and we will become another banana boat republic as the facist republicans want us to be.
by
liberalsrock (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 113 comments)
on Monday, September 18, 2006 at 9:20:13 AM
1. The issue is very complicated and I do not think it can be approached unilaterally. I do not think anyone can 'drop' now or 'impose' anything. As such all in good time and I do not think we can solve anything now.
2. Maybe in principle the idea is viable but the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Any isolation, tariffs and so forth will inevitably at first lead to the downturn of the ' American dream', that is the house buying and accessible credit. The result is predictable. I am not saying the credit system is good. I am just saying what will happen. There is no such thing as free lunch.
I think in real life all those treaties maybe could work fine if and only if there were the right people in the right places. HL Menckhen said once 'The problem with Communism are Communists as well the problem with Christianity are Christians'. The problems are not treaties but people who use only the worst part of those. Rob complains about a Russian programmer? Rob, you wanted a slave. He did not want to be one, I am sorry ( no offense). This slavery tendency is the thing we have to avoid. Outsourcing we complain about only works because we admire and promote that kind of success, the same way we admired and promoted slaveownership when slaves were the source of income. We do not like the treaties but it was us who promoted a system of governance which allowed lobbying people to push such powerful tools without our participation. We liked those people, their greed, their money, their success, their glamorous way of life and we liked our girls to go wild in Cancun ( also an inevitable result of those treaties).
Bottom line- we complain about symptoms and not the root cause. That root cause is our national attitude towards the way a person has to live. But it is such a tough thing that as I said, above, we better stop discussing. It is just impractical in my opinion, sorry. Moreover, we do not have proper people to go another way. We just do not have people of proper menatality.
by
Mark Sashine (47 articles, 19 quicklinks, 235 diaries, 3360 comments)
on Monday, September 18, 2006 at 9:49:28 AM
