>>You know the talking points: Regulation is the problem and deregulation is the solution. The distribution of income and wealth doesn't matter. Providing incentives for the investors of capital to "grow the pie" is the only policy that counts. Free trade produces well-distributed economic growth, and any dissent from this orthodoxy is "protectionism."<<
So, I noticed a trend lately.
I live in the uber-overpriced Seattle-Tacoma metroplex, almost 4,000,000 people rammed into only 6% of the State's area.
The housing collapse has been slower here than I'd like (only saying that because I make $65K and haven't been able to afford a house in years). What I'm seeing is an implosion in pricing. First the far out burbs were feeling it, then the closer ones then the closer ones, and now the core cities are starting to show it.
So now folks from the burbs are starting to move to the core cities (Seattle, Tacoma, Everett, Bellevue) and the prices are still falling!
So, I tend to think that as more folks move in (high fuel costs) the prices in the cities will stabilize at some point.
But yet our economy in the great State of WA is heavily trade dependent. Apples and software go out, Kia's and computers come in. A collapse in the dollar would have bad effects, especially on said potential recovery... damned if you do, damned if you don't.
You posted Monday, Wall Street and Washington read it on Tuesday, and by Friday, the deed was done!
The run on Fannie and Freddie was so quick, I've been wondering if it was a "bear raid". Not like I can read the minds of traders, but what do you think?
P.S. What did those banks who called for financial meltdown in late June, that you highlighted in a diary, know, and when did they know it?
I'm thinking you're right, I saw a lot of "dilution" of "stock" but that won't solve a thing sorts of articles and the 2x increase of the federal debt sure sounds like a disaster (if it happens). The fed announced $15B to inject into them, but I don't see any real options they have but to fry the dollar, which to me implies macro economic toast, esp. with oil and even worse, a possible decoupling from the US dollar/economy.
I try to put really accurate, in depth blogs in the middle column and credit slips has Elizabeth Warren, who specializes in consumer credit abuses. I haven't been tracking on just how much of this is pure predatory lending types of practices, but the obvious thing to me would be to refinance all of those mortgages into conventional mortgages minus all of that.
It sure seems like many lost their homes where it was needless, but I don't know the situation now or the statistics (good blog topic for someone wanting to go into depth on it maybe).
It was only Monday that I posted a diary here about the insolvency of the GSE's. Then I leave town for a couple days and suddenly everyone is talking about them.
If they blow up the bond market is screwed. If the Treasury bails them out the dollar is screwed.
Which poison will they pick? I'm betting they will kick the dollar to the curb.
it must all be in your head - quit yer whinin' ;-)
(in re the McCain camp assertions that the economic woes are mental)
When I bought my first home, they put me thru the credit check ringer, even though I had stable employment, great credit and 20% down. it just blows my mind that lending institutions no longer require that to buy a home.
The second home was a totally different experience. we really had to stick to our guns to get a conventional loan - they put real used car sales tactics to use trying to push us into a gimmick ARM loan and borrow more than we wanted or needed. Once we got past that they tried to slip in all sorts of BS charges, and even tried to insist we needed PMI, again despite spotless credit , 20% down and buying well under appraised value. we threatened to walk at that point - the tune changed real quick.
Yes, they have the labor unit without family, most assuredly without kids, no family obligations, no ties, no illness....so you know what happens when these life things pop up as far as the employer goes.
Yes, people are just head count on some CFO's spreadsheet.
Someone states the obvious which seems to escape many economic sites!
Yeah, notice that in most of the stuff on the housing crisis few comment that few salaries can handle these mortgages, period. When people were buying these things I thought, Good God, there is no way in hell they are going to make it and that's people with 6 figure salaries, duos. One layoff, or the interest only drops and they are history and that is what is happening.
Labor mobility is yet another supply side free marketeer fallacy.
Labor really isn't all that mobile afterall. Family and community ties often make relocation dificult if not out of the question for most people. There are many middle aged folks such as my wife and I who have elderly parents to look after as an example.
And how does one expect to sell a home in this time of real estate bust? - at least without a loss?
I had read an article in a business mag a little while back, I am pretty sure it was Industry Week, that said a recent trend is fewer and fewer employers are offering relocation assistance as part of a hiring package. who wants to lose money on their house, pay their own moving expenses and take a job for often less pay than the one you just lost? Sounds like a great deal - not.
Whoever heard of a labor shortage that did not have a corresponding upward pressure on wages, and employers willing to help with relocation assistance and or signing bonuses?
I have a tough time feeling sorry for employers who move from a skilled labor rich region such as the industrial midwest to a skilled labor scarce region such as the rural SE or a 3rd world country and then whine because they can not attract and retain skilled workers.
Alan "bubble boy" Greedspan once suggested flooding the market with college educated workers as a way to suppress middle class wages.
I too live in a highly desireable solidly middle class neighborhood. It was rare that a home in decent condition was ever on the market here more than 3 weeks. Now they sit for months and months with "reduced price" signs. We are also seeing them being auctioned off at a rate of one or so every two months. Even more than a few orange repo tags on the windows as well -something almost unheard of in this neighborhood a few short years ago.
Whats surprising to me is this is the midwest, where we don't get the rapid rises and falls in prices they stay pretty stable. The majority of the homes lost are not from subprime loans - they are largely from those who are losing their jobs to the constant drip of plant closings and are forced to move due to employment needs or income loss
As I see it, the adjustment is already happening. In my neighborhood, there seems to be 1-3 newly vacant homes on nearly every block. My subdivision is about one or two steps above the starter home level, and it's pretty much the same story for every neighborhood on this side of town from the middle level on down.
I know several people who are trying to negotiage short sales of a home they own, and I am one of them. I wound up owning two houses, and I am not an investor or flipper, nor did I fall for the adjustable rate pitch (as an IT pro I know better than to bet that my salary is going UP). Neither of them is worth anywhere near their appraisal price when I bought them, and that is true for a huge percentage of homes purchased over the last two or three years: http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSN117179120080212
My bankruptcy attorney has someone in his office who does nothing but handle short sales, and business is brisk.
The only way the vacant homes will ever move is if one of three things happens: a) the price has to come down to what someone who fits in with the neighborhood can afford, or b) we would have to go back to allowing all the liar loans backed by monopoly money, or c) the gummint will have to step in and start giving the houses away. Bank-owned property sales (in my area $130-140K as opposed to the $160s for private owners), and short sales (where the bank cooperates because it doesn't want another property to manage) are making the great write-down happen even as we speak.
I know someone in the business of arranging financing who could get you whatever type of loan would fit your comfort level, but he's not in business any more. If they are serious about going back to sound finances, the prices will all have to come down. Way down.
So, if home equity vanishes (as it is), and wages stagnate (as they have since the turn of the century), and jobs keep being lost (ditto), don't things come to a grinding halt, just as back in the 1930s?
The federal government can't afford to take over all of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's operations, because such a move would more than double federal government debt outstanding and ``have disastrous consequences for the dollar,'' according to Joshua Rosner, an analyst with Graham Fisher & Co. Inc.
Freddie Mae/Freddie Mac hold about $6 trillion out of $12 trillion in mortgages, that's half.
Then, this fact:
Almost one in every 10 U.S. home loans had a late payment or had defaulted in the first quarter
That's 10% at least showing signs of duress and now as I understand it, due to falling prices, it makes more sense economically to plain walk away from a mortgage where the underlying asset is so significantly less than the loan and this is going on as well.
So, 10% is $1.2 trillion. Ok, now I'm really standing back thinking a tsunami is really approaching in spite of the chicken littles of the world.
Our friggin' Congress doesn't even show up to work, never mind put their politics on hold for a couple of weeks, get the experts in, write up what they recommend and plain pass it now. As far as I know this Senate bill (we need to look at this) is only going to assist about 500k or so mortgages, that's out of 4M (last 24 months it's about 4M in foreclosure).
Seems to me something much more dramatic in terms of refinancing vehicles needs to happen, say something that takes a partial loss on a distressed property, evaluation to stem these from being total losses (foreclosure, put up for resale cycles).
That is true, they want unlimited, but corporate controlled labor mobility for this is a major element in controlling wages on a global scale (per their profit agendas of course).
EBs or employment based green cards, well that can be almost worse than guest worker Visas for once again, employers control and now universities control mobility (immigration) and if employers and the higher education system do not invest , support, employ Americans 1st, this is just another method for global labor arbitrage and displacement. The tricky thing here is the US has always been a magnet for the rare, extremely talented, but this has been manipulated for pure labor (wage) arbitrage purposes, so we have a problem. My solution is everything, including scholarships, acceptance, research grants, all of it, should be "Americans only" or "Americans first" and enforced to ensure displacement isn't happening. On top of it, investment in the American people (education, training, other supports) is almost nil and we must have policies in place that invest in America and Americans. Then, I think employers AND universities need to prove, much more burden of proof that the non-citizen they are bringing in is not simply a replacement or a denial of opportunity for a qualified American.
This issue is very tough and will be masked by labeling everyone who examines it a xenophobe when that's not what's going on and unfortunately within this issue xenophobia can go on.
That's the thing, by destroying the United States middle class it does clearly affect the macro economics of the nation (witness subprime, trade deficit, health care), which will affect the bottom line of these very multinational corporations. In my view, the United States is the worst of the worst in terms of selling out it's people to make a fast buck.
Hopefully on this site we can get down to the nitty gritty of various trade agreements, policy and generate more public awareness, diligence on the details for in my view so much of the main stream press is about the trivial.
Although anyone writing on this blog has to be aware to analyze the nitty gritty with any intelligence takes more work. It's much easier to focus on the trivial in terms of brain power.
Globalists are so freakin gullible, the entire premise is dependent upon mobility. They have been practicing protectionism by favoring foreign labor, not so much that they need the foreign labor, or that foreign labor is more qualified. They favor the foreign labor to reduce the likelihood of formidable competition. They know that the highly educated domestic candidates are not likely to leave the U.S. and the percentage of the world's population with recent advanced degrees is miniscule.
Now, the globalists have a severe problem with mobility, which is the rising cost of mobility and its relationship to "just in time processing." Just in time processing, assumes that raw materials can be delivered at the time of production, therefore, there is no need to warehouse raw-materials.
The raw-material suppliers are experiencing higher production costs, but the sale price of raw materials is on the rise also. Raw material providers are now disinclined to ship/sell today because the sales price will be higher tomorrow.
Here is an article from a Globalist that claims this profiteering is protectionism and almost suggests "price controls" as a solution. Corporate Protectionism? You bet-ya!
Some nations are beginning to wake up and realize that globalism is about controlling food supplies -- they are storing food and refusing to reduce tariffs, you can't have a growing economy and food riots on the same real-estate.
Globalist Analysis > Global Trade
When Commodities Revolt
By Llewellyn King | Thursday, July 10, 2008
"As if by some secret signal, the commodities of the world have risen up in a great modern-day peasant revolt, ready to shatter economies, overthrow governments — and to make fools of economists. Llewellyn King argues that protectionism and price insecurity are causing the commodities market to run rampant." http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=7113
Vivek Wadhwa, while no longer a Globalist, uses protectionist banter to justify an increase in Employment based green cards.
"Now we’ve set the stage for them [U.S. exchange students & temporary workers] to return to countries such as India and China, where the economies are booming and their skills are in great demand. U.S. businesses large and small stand to lose critical talent, and workers who have gained valuable experience and knowledge of American industry will become potential competitors."
Spot on. The word gamers are painting protectionist as a dirty word just as they did liberal. Perhaps we need to start a word campaign to smear the words "corporatist" and "globalist"?
This is the typical framing of an issue we have seen perfected by the right. Using extremism and hyperbole to shout down your opponents.
The great fallacy is that no one is suggesting we should not trade. What we are suggesting is making trade more fair,balanced and advantageous for all, not just the elite.
Is it really protectionist to encourage keeping jobs, technology and investment at home before going abroad? Is it really protectionist to have products that are safe?
we need to change the discussion and emphasize that manufacturing and industry is the greatest generator of shared prosperity, innovation, as well as the insurance policy for long term economic health and national security. we have lost so much manufacturing that we would be in big trouble if all the middle east saber rattling got us into a 3rd world war and we were incapable of a World War I and II build up. we need to continue to point out the fallacies of the globalist arguments as loudly and quickly as possible - to a wider and wider audience
If its protectionist to want to make sure your neighbor, your relative, yourself has an opportunity for a gainful job, if its protectionist to want a vital domestic industrial base, if its protectionist to want strong national defense, if its protectionist to want non poisonous toothpaste or safe toys, if its protectionist to want fair and sustainable trade then sign me up - I am proud to be a protectionist.
I guess one advantage of antifreeze in your chinese toothpaste, when they come to shut off your heat because you lost your job to outsourcing it wont freeze in the winter!
Rewriting capitalism's script
>>You know the talking points: Regulation is the problem and deregulation is the solution. The distribution of income and wealth doesn't matter. Providing incentives for the investors of capital to "grow the pie" is the only policy that counts. Free trade produces well-distributed economic growth, and any dissent from this orthodoxy is "protectionism."<<
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2008047016_dionne12.html
So, I noticed a trend lately.
I live in the uber-overpriced Seattle-Tacoma metroplex, almost 4,000,000 people rammed into only 6% of the State's area.
The housing collapse has been slower here than I'd like (only saying that because I make $65K and haven't been able to afford a house in years). What I'm seeing is an implosion in pricing. First the far out burbs were feeling it, then the closer ones then the closer ones, and now the core cities are starting to show it.
So now folks from the burbs are starting to move to the core cities (Seattle, Tacoma, Everett, Bellevue) and the prices are still falling!
So, I tend to think that as more folks move in (high fuel costs) the prices in the cities will stabilize at some point.
But yet our economy in the great State of WA is heavily trade dependent. Apples and software go out, Kia's and computers come in. A collapse in the dollar would have bad effects, especially on said potential recovery... damned if you do, damned if you don't.
What the hell is a working man supposed to do?
There are numerous blogs giving the juice out there.
Implode-O-meter is one.
The Big Picture
The Mess That Greenspan Made
Calculated Risk
All have tidbits (besides what is here in the middle column) to calm your nerves or make the hair on the back of your neck stand on end.
Warning: 3 cups of coffee reading these can lead to heart fluctuations.
You posted Monday, Wall Street and Washington read it on Tuesday, and by Friday, the deed was done!
The run on Fannie and Freddie was so quick, I've been wondering if it was a "bear raid". Not like I can read the minds of traders, but what do you think?
P.S. What did those banks who called for financial meltdown in late June, that you highlighted in a diary, know, and when did they know it?
I'm thinking you're right, I saw a lot of "dilution" of "stock" but that won't solve a thing sorts of articles and the 2x increase of the federal debt sure sounds like a disaster (if it happens). The fed announced $15B to inject into them, but I don't see any real options they have but to fry the dollar, which to me implies macro economic toast, esp. with oil and even worse, a possible decoupling from the US dollar/economy.
I try to put really accurate, in depth blogs in the middle column and credit slips has Elizabeth Warren, who specializes in consumer credit abuses. I haven't been tracking on just how much of this is pure predatory lending types of practices, but the obvious thing to me would be to refinance all of those mortgages into conventional mortgages minus all of that.
It sure seems like many lost their homes where it was needless, but I don't know the situation now or the statistics (good blog topic for someone wanting to go into depth on it maybe).
It was only Monday that I posted a diary here about the insolvency of the GSE's. Then I leave town for a couple days and suddenly everyone is talking about them.
If they blow up the bond market is screwed. If the Treasury bails them out the dollar is screwed.
Which poison will they pick? I'm betting they will kick the dollar to the curb.
it must all be in your head - quit yer whinin' ;-)
(in re the McCain camp assertions that the economic woes are mental)
When I bought my first home, they put me thru the credit check ringer, even though I had stable employment, great credit and 20% down. it just blows my mind that lending institutions no longer require that to buy a home.
The second home was a totally different experience. we really had to stick to our guns to get a conventional loan - they put real used car sales tactics to use trying to push us into a gimmick ARM loan and borrow more than we wanted or needed. Once we got past that they tried to slip in all sorts of BS charges, and even tried to insist we needed PMI, again despite spotless credit , 20% down and buying well under appraised value. we threatened to walk at that point - the tune changed real quick.
Yes, they have the labor unit without family, most assuredly without kids, no family obligations, no ties, no illness....so you know what happens when these life things pop up as far as the employer goes.
Yes, people are just head count on some CFO's spreadsheet.
Someone states the obvious which seems to escape many economic sites!
Yeah, notice that in most of the stuff on the housing crisis few comment that few salaries can handle these mortgages, period. When people were buying these things I thought, Good God, there is no way in hell they are going to make it and that's people with 6 figure salaries, duos. One layoff, or the interest only drops and they are history and that is what is happening.
Labor mobility is yet another supply side free marketeer fallacy.
Labor really isn't all that mobile afterall. Family and community ties often make relocation dificult if not out of the question for most people. There are many middle aged folks such as my wife and I who have elderly parents to look after as an example.
And how does one expect to sell a home in this time of real estate bust? - at least without a loss?
I had read an article in a business mag a little while back, I am pretty sure it was Industry Week, that said a recent trend is fewer and fewer employers are offering relocation assistance as part of a hiring package. who wants to lose money on their house, pay their own moving expenses and take a job for often less pay than the one you just lost? Sounds like a great deal - not.
Whoever heard of a labor shortage that did not have a corresponding upward pressure on wages, and employers willing to help with relocation assistance and or signing bonuses?
I have a tough time feeling sorry for employers who move from a skilled labor rich region such as the industrial midwest to a skilled labor scarce region such as the rural SE or a 3rd world country and then whine because they can not attract and retain skilled workers.
Alan "bubble boy" Greedspan once suggested flooding the market with college educated workers as a way to suppress middle class wages.
I've known about this site for a while, this guy called it early as to the crash of the housing market.
http://patrick.net/housing/crash.html
I too live in a highly desireable solidly middle class neighborhood. It was rare that a home in decent condition was ever on the market here more than 3 weeks. Now they sit for months and months with "reduced price" signs. We are also seeing them being auctioned off at a rate of one or so every two months. Even more than a few orange repo tags on the windows as well -something almost unheard of in this neighborhood a few short years ago.
Whats surprising to me is this is the midwest, where we don't get the rapid rises and falls in prices they stay pretty stable. The majority of the homes lost are not from subprime loans - they are largely from those who are losing their jobs to the constant drip of plant closings and are forced to move due to employment needs or income loss
As I see it, the adjustment is already happening. In my neighborhood, there seems to be 1-3 newly vacant homes on nearly every block. My subdivision is about one or two steps above the starter home level, and it's pretty much the same story for every neighborhood on this side of town from the middle level on down.
I know several people who are trying to negotiage short sales of a home they own, and I am one of them. I wound up owning two houses, and I am not an investor or flipper, nor did I fall for the adjustable rate pitch (as an IT pro I know better than to bet that my salary is going UP). Neither of them is worth anywhere near their appraisal price when I bought them, and that is true for a huge percentage of homes purchased over the last two or three years: http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSN117179120080212
My bankruptcy attorney has someone in his office who does nothing but handle short sales, and business is brisk.
The only way the vacant homes will ever move is if one of three things happens: a) the price has to come down to what someone who fits in with the neighborhood can afford, or b) we would have to go back to allowing all the liar loans backed by monopoly money, or c) the gummint will have to step in and start giving the houses away. Bank-owned property sales (in my area $130-140K as opposed to the $160s for private owners), and short sales (where the bank cooperates because it doesn't want another property to manage) are making the great write-down happen even as we speak.
I know someone in the business of arranging financing who could get you whatever type of loan would fit your comfort level, but he's not in business any more. If they are serious about going back to sound finances, the prices will all have to come down. Way down.
So, if home equity vanishes (as it is), and wages stagnate (as they have since the turn of the century), and jobs keep being lost (ditto), don't things come to a grinding halt, just as back in the 1930s?
I was with you also on the not an Economic Armageddon message but I do am thinking we are at a turning point.
This is what I read last night which put the hair on my head on end.
Fannie, Freddie Turmoil May Hike Rates, Slow Recovery, buried deep within this article:
Freddie Mae/Freddie Mac hold about $6 trillion out of $12 trillion in mortgages, that's half.
Then, this fact:
That's 10% at least showing signs of duress and now as I understand it, due to falling prices, it makes more sense economically to plain walk away from a mortgage where the underlying asset is so significantly less than the loan and this is going on as well.
So, 10% is $1.2 trillion. Ok, now I'm really standing back thinking a tsunami is really approaching in spite of the chicken littles of the world.
Our friggin' Congress doesn't even show up to work, never mind put their politics on hold for a couple of weeks, get the experts in, write up what they recommend and plain pass it now. As far as I know this Senate bill (we need to look at this) is only going to assist about 500k or so mortgages, that's out of 4M (last 24 months it's about 4M in foreclosure).
Seems to me something much more dramatic in terms of refinancing vehicles needs to happen, say something that takes a partial loss on a distressed property, evaluation to stem these from being total losses (foreclosure, put up for resale cycles).
That is true, they want unlimited, but corporate controlled labor mobility for this is a major element in controlling wages on a global scale (per their profit agendas of course).
EBs or employment based green cards, well that can be almost worse than guest worker Visas for once again, employers control and now universities control mobility (immigration) and if employers and the higher education system do not invest , support, employ Americans 1st, this is just another method for global labor arbitrage and displacement. The tricky thing here is the US has always been a magnet for the rare, extremely talented, but this has been manipulated for pure labor (wage) arbitrage purposes, so we have a problem. My solution is everything, including scholarships, acceptance, research grants, all of it, should be "Americans only" or "Americans first" and enforced to ensure displacement isn't happening. On top of it, investment in the American people (education, training, other supports) is almost nil and we must have policies in place that invest in America and Americans. Then, I think employers AND universities need to prove, much more burden of proof that the non-citizen they are bringing in is not simply a replacement or a denial of opportunity for a qualified American.
This issue is very tough and will be masked by labeling everyone who examines it a xenophobe when that's not what's going on and unfortunately within this issue xenophobia can go on.
That's the thing, by destroying the United States middle class it does clearly affect the macro economics of the nation (witness subprime, trade deficit, health care), which will affect the bottom line of these very multinational corporations. In my view, the United States is the worst of the worst in terms of selling out it's people to make a fast buck.
Hopefully on this site we can get down to the nitty gritty of various trade agreements, policy and generate more public awareness, diligence on the details for in my view so much of the main stream press is about the trivial.
Although anyone writing on this blog has to be aware to analyze the nitty gritty with any intelligence takes more work. It's much easier to focus on the trivial in terms of brain power.
Globalists are so freakin gullible, the entire premise is dependent upon mobility. They have been practicing protectionism by favoring foreign labor, not so much that they need the foreign labor, or that foreign labor is more qualified. They favor the foreign labor to reduce the likelihood of formidable competition. They know that the highly educated domestic candidates are not likely to leave the U.S. and the percentage of the world's population with recent advanced degrees is miniscule.
Now, the globalists have a severe problem with mobility, which is the rising cost of mobility and its relationship to "just in time processing." Just in time processing, assumes that raw materials can be delivered at the time of production, therefore, there is no need to warehouse raw-materials.
The raw-material suppliers are experiencing higher production costs, but the sale price of raw materials is on the rise also. Raw material providers are now disinclined to ship/sell today because the sales price will be higher tomorrow.
Here is an article from a Globalist that claims this profiteering is protectionism and almost suggests "price controls" as a solution. Corporate Protectionism? You bet-ya!
Some nations are beginning to wake up and realize that globalism is about controlling food supplies -- they are storing food and refusing to reduce tariffs, you can't have a growing economy and food riots on the same real-estate.
Globalist Analysis > Global Trade
When Commodities Revolt
By Llewellyn King | Thursday, July 10, 2008
"As if by some secret signal, the commodities of the world have risen up in a great modern-day peasant revolt, ready to shatter economies, overthrow governments — and to make fools of economists. Llewellyn King argues that protectionism and price insecurity are causing the commodities market to run rampant." http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=7113
Vivek Wadhwa, while no longer a Globalist, uses protectionist banter to justify an increase in Employment based green cards.
"Now we’ve set the stage for them [U.S. exchange students & temporary workers] to return to countries such as India and China, where the economies are booming and their skills are in great demand. U.S. businesses large and small stand to lose critical talent, and workers who have gained valuable experience and knowledge of American industry will become potential competitors."
http://www.american.com/archive/2008/july-august-magazine-contents/ameri...
Spot on. The word gamers are painting protectionist as a dirty word just as they did liberal. Perhaps we need to start a word campaign to smear the words "corporatist" and "globalist"?
This is the typical framing of an issue we have seen perfected by the right. Using extremism and hyperbole to shout down your opponents.
The great fallacy is that no one is suggesting we should not trade. What we are suggesting is making trade more fair,balanced and advantageous for all, not just the elite.
Is it really protectionist to encourage keeping jobs, technology and investment at home before going abroad? Is it really protectionist to have products that are safe?
we need to change the discussion and emphasize that manufacturing and industry is the greatest generator of shared prosperity, innovation, as well as the insurance policy for long term economic health and national security. we have lost so much manufacturing that we would be in big trouble if all the middle east saber rattling got us into a 3rd world war and we were incapable of a World War I and II build up. we need to continue to point out the fallacies of the globalist arguments as loudly and quickly as possible - to a wider and wider audience
If its protectionist to want to make sure your neighbor, your relative, yourself has an opportunity for a gainful job, if its protectionist to want a vital domestic industrial base, if its protectionist to want strong national defense, if its protectionist to want non poisonous toothpaste or safe toys, if its protectionist to want fair and sustainable trade then sign me up - I am proud to be a protectionist.
I guess one advantage of antifreeze in your chinese toothpaste, when they come to shut off your heat because you lost your job to outsourcing it wont freeze in the winter!
has more, in depth, here.
Pages