I knew that Trump had, among other things, deliberately crippled the WTO, I didn't know Biden was doing the same. The WTO that the US basically imposed on the rest of the world.

I'm not necessarily a free trade fundamentalist, but some consequences of ill thought out protectionism are quite obvious. Yet the US is currently following such a path, alienating allies in the process.

A detailed article about the situation : https://www.cato.org/regulation/fall-20 ... tanglement

Well the USA does have a balance of trade problem which they need to address, no other developed country has their problem, time for them to learn from others even if that means the actual consumers not just the politicians.
https://oec.world/en/profile/country/usa

China signed on and agreed to be in conformity with WTO policies. It has not come close. When the world's largest trading partner does that the whole agreement fails. And res the title, there is no such thing as 'free trade'. it is always distorted by a variety of considerations - even within the US, and I suspect, the EU. Both the EU and the US also have carve outs with their trades.

It is not just the US and it is not just China.
If it is only China then US would have been actively engaging into free trade treaties like TPP and try to engage free trade with countries like India yet this is not the case we are seeing now.
In fact even back in 2016, major Democrats candidates already turned against the idea in general, which I think representing a shift in general US popular opinion against free trade, and even back in Obama era there weren't much comment from the US that I know of were praising TPP and TTIP either. If one still remember what was TTIP.

Question that remain are 1. why, and 2. how to solve the issues that caused this.

par13del wrote:

Well the USA does have a balance of trade problem which they need to address, no other developed country has their problem, time for them to learn from others even if that means the actual consumers not just the politicians.
https://oec.world/en/profile/country/usa

A lot of it is self inflicted, unrestrained capitalism is to blame, the manufacturers threw domestic production under the bus and offshored as much as they could, this made Wall St, the shareholders and consumers happy.

c933103 wrote:

It is not just the US and it is not just China.
If it is only China then US would have been actively engaging into free trade treaties like TPP and try to engage free trade with countries like India yet this is not the case we are seeing now.
In fact even back in 2016, major Democrats candidates already turned against the idea in general, which I think representing a shift in general US popular opinion against free trade, and even back in Obama era there weren't much comment from the US that I know of were praising TPP and TTIP either. If one still remember what was TTIP.

Question that remain are 1. why, and 2. how to solve the issues that caused this.

A lot of TPP nations were happy when the US backed out of TPP, the US tried to bully other countries into unfavourable terms to them but favourable terms for the US, it would not have been a be a trade agreement of equals. CPTPP is better off without the US at the wheel.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

And res the title, there is no such thing as 'free trade'. it is always distorted by a variety of considerations - even within the US, and I suspect, the EU. Both the EU and the US also have carve outs with their trades.

Of course they do, but it's always about the US to some. Most of the Brexit negotiations were about what would happen to the trade status of the UK. It wasn't about the military or foreign affairs or anything like that, it was trade.

Kiwirob wrote:

c933103 wrote:

It is not just the US and it is not just China.
If it is only China then US would have been actively engaging into free trade treaties like TPP and try to engage free trade with countries like India yet this is not the case we are seeing now.
In fact even back in 2016, major Democrats candidates already turned against the idea in general, which I think representing a shift in general US popular opinion against free trade, and even back in Obama era there weren't much comment from the US that I know of were praising TPP and TTIP either. If one still remember what was TTIP.

Question that remain are 1. why, and 2. how to solve the issues that caused this.

A lot of TPP nations were happy when the US backed out of TPP, the US tried to bully other countries into unfavourable terms to them but favourable terms for the US, it would not have been a be a trade agreement of equals. CPTPP is better off without the US at the wheel.

That's not what I saw.

par13del wrote:

Well the USA does have a balance of trade problem which they need to address, no other developed country has their problem, time for them to learn from others even if that means the actual consumers not just the politicians.
https://oec.world/en/profile/country/usa

There is no problem. The balance of trade situation is a consequence of the dominance of the dollar, it benefits the US greatly.

The US is concerned about the exodus of jobs, and the lack of production capability that has resulted. Despite what the article claims about free trade, fair trade doesn't result in those imbalances. In some industries, expertise is threatened as well.

So it will be US policy, for the foreseeable future, to rebuild enough capacity in those industries to assure some level of independence. Pretty much the entirety of the American electorate agrees with this.

c933103 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

c933103 wrote:

It is not just the US and it is not just China.
If it is only China then US would have been actively engaging into free trade treaties like TPP and try to engage free trade with countries like India yet this is not the case we are seeing now.
In fact even back in 2016, major Democrats candidates already turned against the idea in general, which I think representing a shift in general US popular opinion against free trade, and even back in Obama era there weren't much comment from the US that I know of were praising TPP and TTIP either. If one still remember what was TTIP.

Question that remain are 1. why, and 2. how to solve the issues that caused this.

A lot of TPP nations were happy when the US backed out of TPP, the US tried to bully other countries into unfavourable terms to them but favourable terms for the US, it would not have been a be a trade agreement of equals. CPTPP is better off without the US at the wheel.

That's not what I saw.

A lot of kiwi businesses were very happy this ended.

Kiwirob wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

A lot of TPP nations were happy when the US backed out of TPP, the US tried to bully other countries into unfavourable terms to them but favourable terms for the US, it would not have been a be a trade agreement of equals. CPTPP is better off without the US at the wheel.

That's not what I saw.

A lot of kiwi businesses were very happy this ended.

That's one country.
And businesses could be happy because they won't need to face competition from US businesses directly

Avatar2go wrote:

The US is concerned about the exodus of jobs, and the lack of production capability that has resulted. Despite what the article claims about free trade, fair trade doesn't result in those imbalances. In some industries, expertise is threatened as well.

So it will be US policy, for the foreseeable future, to rebuild enough capacity in those industries to assure some level of independence. Pretty much the entirety of the American electorate agrees with this.

We'll see if they agree with the consequences.

The example of Whirlpool in the article is telling (incidentally, Whirlpool has also made political waves here in France, closing a factory here to open a new one in Poland, it played out during the 2017 presidential election).

Avatar2go wrote:

The US is concerned about the exodus of jobs, and the lack of production capability that has resulted. Despite what the article claims about free trade, fair trade doesn't result in those imbalances. In some industries, expertise is threatened as well.

So it will be US policy, for the foreseeable future, to rebuild enough capacity in those industries to assure some level of independence. Pretty much the entirety of the American electorate agrees with this.

The pinnacle (thorn) of capitalism: send all the low paid i.e maunfacturing jobs abroad so that every remaining job is high return on investment. Unfortunately this ignores the fact that many low paid jobs (such as rubbish colection) need to be perfomerd locally. It also ignores the fact that, given a spread of capability, not every local citizen is capable of qualifying for one of these high earning jobs.

Aesma wrote:

We'll see if they agree with the consequences.

The example of Whirlpool in the article is telling (incidentally, Whirlpool has also made political waves here in France, closing a factory here to open a new one in Poland, it played out during the 2017 presidential election).

It's basically consumerism vs investment. You can export production for lower prices, until you've lost the capacity to produce. Or you can accept higher prices and maintain the investment in production.

Here is an example regarding Whirlpool. I bought a $300 convection oven. After a year, it died. I tried to order parts for it, Whirlpool told me it's not a serviceable product, it comes from China. If it fails within a year, they replace it. After a year, it's junk.

Fortunately I had the skills to repair it on my own. But people can rapidly get tired of that kind of thing. You are paying the same price either way, but there is nothing in the US for product support. That is a stupidity, that we have inflicted on ourselves.

The US needs to ensure technological independence/reliability by moving more critical production (computer chips for example) back home. There’s also the balance of trade inequality that has plagued us for years. We were overdue for a course correction.

PhilBy wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

The US is concerned about the exodus of jobs, and the lack of production capability that has resulted. Despite what the article claims about free trade, fair trade doesn't result in those imbalances. In some industries, expertise is threatened as well.

So it will be US policy, for the foreseeable future, to rebuild enough capacity in those industries to assure some level of independence. Pretty much the entirety of the American electorate agrees with this.

The pinnacle (thorn) of capitalism: send all the low paid i.e maunfacturing jobs abroad so that every remaining job is high return on investment. Unfortunately this ignores the fact that many low paid jobs (such as rubbish colection) need to be perfomerd locally. It also ignores the fact that, given a spread of capability, not every local citizen is capable of qualifying for one of these high earning jobs.

Citizens being incapable of performing jobs needed by companies for their operation is really a government problem instead of economical problem.
Even if companies willing to pay multiple times extra salary and rent in developed countries, consumers won't
Problem is not how to prevent this since this is inevitable, no matter with or without free trade, but the problem is how to make everyone involved better off despite occurrence of such phenomenon.

dampfnudel wrote:

The US needs to ensure technological independence/reliability by moving more critical production (computer chips for example) back home. There’s also the balance of trade inequality that has plagued us for years. We were overdue for a course correction.

The thing people really seem to miss with this (but it's *not* a reason to *not* reshore or nearshore) is that so-called "critical" components or things we want to produce at or close to home are still going to be reliant at the tier 2... tier 3... or perhaps even deeper levels on China and other distant locations. At some point, these low-cost, far-flung locations will have an impact.

To really be able to produce critical things at home, you need the entire supply chain within your region.

Hypothetically, it's 10 years from now and the US is producing microchips here. Is the *entire* supply chain for those chips in friendly hands if there is a war in Asia? Almost certainly not. Something will be disrupted, and it's going to eventually stop or severely hinder what production we have here/nearby.

Free Trade always assumes a sort of balance in working conditions. It assumes that jobs will go where the skills best match what is being done.
In a local economy, If I am better at welding, and someone is better at woodworking, then that item is worked out locally.

In a global economy, different labor rules and laws will always affect price and competitiveness. Maybe the person who is just adequate gets the job because the wages are lower where they live, while the exceptional person either goes out of business, or has to highly specialize in order to survive. Is it good for the exceptional person to be rendered inadequate due to price and labor competition?

What happens when the adequate person is tied up in a war, or locked down? Can the alternative be used? Is the Alternative avaialble? We are still seeing issues with this as Covid winds through China.

This is why fair trade may be better utilized. We need to have some domestic capacityy spread out across multiple countries and borders.


Subsidies to restart production in many countries is occuring, but is that the best way? Maybe not. Once again, maybe adequate people are being overpaid to do adequate work.

The US 7,500 dollar tax cut on US produced EV's looks bad at first glance, but due to global allocation of production, loook at all the companies that will benefit. Global companies.

https://electrek.co/2022/12/02/ev-tax-c ... ction-act/

This helps US production, and will help sales of those vehicles.

Yes there are legitimate gripes based on "free trade", but getting the skills in the US may be worth it to keep future supply chains going.

Maybe it is not so much "abandoning free trade" as we are trying to get back what we gave away because it was a mistake?

casinterest wrote:

Free Trade always assumes a sort of balance in working conditions. It assumes that jobs will go where the skills best match what is being done.
In a local economy, If I am better at welding, and someone is better at woodworking, then that item is worked out locally.

In a global economy, different labor rules and laws will always affect price and competitiveness. Maybe the person who is just adequate gets the job because the wages are lower where they live, while the exceptional person either goes out of business, or has to highly specialize in order to survive. Is it good for the exceptional person to be rendered inadequate due to price and labor competition?

What happens when the adequate person is tied up in a war, or locked down? Can the alternative be used? Is the Alternative avaialble? We are still seeing issues with this as Covid winds through China.

This is why fair trade may be better utilized. We need to have some domestic capacityy spread out across multiple countries and borders.


Subsidies to restart production in many countries is occuring, but is that the best way? Maybe not. Once again, maybe adequate people are being overpaid to do adequate work.

The US 7,500 dollar tax cut on US produced EV's looks bad at first glance, but due to global allocation of production, loook at all the companies that will benefit. Global companies.

https://electrek.co/2022/12/02/ev-tax-c ... ction-act/

This helps US production, and will help sales of those vehicles.

Yes there are legitimate gripes based on "free trade", but getting the skills in the US may be worth it to keep future supply chains going.

This is a good take on the issue. Having the supply chain distributed in equivalent societies & economies is not nearly as much of a risk, because the trade is fair, with similar rules and standards of living in both sides.

Also free trade itself is not inherently negative, and in fact many aspects are very positive. But as in all things in life, it requires balance. It takes a generation or more to do it well and properly, to build it up in a fair way to all parties, and allow their societies to adjust. In that case, free trade becomes fair trade.

If it happens too quickly, as ocurred in the last 20 years, and as advocated by the free trade absolutists (the CATO article), then it's disruptive and doesn't have the desired results, on either side.

par13del wrote:

Well the USA does have a balance of trade problem which they need to address, no other developed country has their problem, time for them to learn from others even if that means the actual consumers not just the politicians.
https://oec.world/en/profile/country/usa

If an American business buys a fancy microprocessor making machine from the Dutch, it’ll contribute to a negative trade balance with the Netherlands. But that machine was purchased because it will more than pay for itself. The net effect of importing that machine is positive. It should never be looked at as a negative thing.

Don’t believe in the “trade imbalance” arguments. Trade is “self-balancing” in terms of value, which represents both monetary and goods value. The ability to produce more than its purchased price means it’s actually better than self-balancing, it’s got a positive net effect for both importer country and exporter country.

There is an excellent book Free Market: the history of an idea by Jacob Soll. 2022. It is a great companion book to Brad DeLong's The Long Century 1870-2010, also 2022. Markets and economies are complicated things, and not always is what seems to be true actually is true. Both are fun reads. The later is looong! - also it is a tale of 'slouching towards utopia'.

Avatar2go wrote:

Aesma wrote:

We'll see if they agree with the consequences.

The example of Whirlpool in the article is telling (incidentally, Whirlpool has also made political waves here in France, closing a factory here to open a new one in Poland, it played out during the 2017 presidential election).

It's basically consumerism vs investment. You can export production for lower prices, until you've lost the capacity to produce. Or you can accept higher prices and maintain the investment in production.

Here is an example regarding Whirlpool. I bought a $300 convection oven. After a year, it died. I tried to order parts for it, Whirlpool told me it's not a serviceable product, it comes from China. If it fails within a year, they replace it. After a year, it's junk.

Fortunately I had the skills to repair it on my own. But people can rapidly get tired of that kind of thing. You are paying the same price either way, but there is nothing in the US for product support. That is a stupidity, that we have inflicted on ourselves.

There is an EU regulation for that. Producers have to have parts for 10 years at least.

Aesma wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

Aesma wrote:

We'll see if they agree with the consequences.

The example of Whirlpool in the article is telling (incidentally, Whirlpool has also made political waves here in France, closing a factory here to open a new one in Poland, it played out during the 2017 presidential election).

It's basically consumerism vs investment. You can export production for lower prices, until you've lost the capacity to produce. Or you can accept higher prices and maintain the investment in production.

Here is an example regarding Whirlpool. I bought a $300 convection oven. After a year, it died. I tried to order parts for it, Whirlpool told me it's not a serviceable product, it comes from China. If it fails within a year, they replace it. After a year, it's junk.

Fortunately I had the skills to repair it on my own. But people can rapidly get tired of that kind of thing. You are paying the same price either way, but there is nothing in the US for product support. That is a stupidity, that we have inflicted on ourselves.

There is an EU regulation for that. Producers have to have parts for 10 years at least.

The parts might exist, but when a repair call costs 120 plus what ever part/labor cost, a 300 -500 dollar new unit seems to be the easier choice.

I recently had a washer die after 6 years. I could have paid 350 to repair it + service call, or just buy a new 490 dollar one.

The service charges are where compaines make the most money. Manufactured parts are an almost forgotten afterthought. Many companies are making this transition. Big carriers will subsidize your phone in the US because they can charge you 50+ a month over 2-3 years to make up for the Hardware cost.

As the Free Trade argument goes, services vs goods is also a tradoff.

casinterest wrote:

Free Trade always assumes a sort of balance in working conditions. It assumes that jobs will go where the skills best match what is being done.

I'm all for fighting so that China improves its working and environmental conditions. It's the US that pushed for its inclusion at the WTO, of course, even China was surprised to get in so easily !

But what the US does is fighting its developed allies at the same time as its fighting China. There has been a 6000€ incentive to buy electric cars in France for years, until the euro crashed that was close to 10000$. Thousands upon thousands of made in USA Teslas have been sold thanks to that. What should France do now ?

seb146 wrote:

Maybe it is not so much "abandoning free trade" as we are trying to get back what we gave away because it was a mistake?

Isn't the US an incredibly rich country or did I miss something ?

Isn't the issue rather the unfair distribution of these riches inside the US population ?

Aesma wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

Aesma wrote:

We'll see if they agree with the consequences.

The example of Whirlpool in the article is telling (incidentally, Whirlpool has also made political waves here in France, closing a factory here to open a new one in Poland, it played out during the 2017 presidential election).

It's basically consumerism vs investment. You can export production for lower prices, until you've lost the capacity to produce. Or you can accept higher prices and maintain the investment in production.

Here is an example regarding Whirlpool. I bought a $300 convection oven. After a year, it died. I tried to order parts for it, Whirlpool told me it's not a serviceable product, it comes from China. If it fails within a year, they replace it. After a year, it's junk.

Fortunately I had the skills to repair it on my own. But people can rapidly get tired of that kind of thing. You are paying the same price either way, but there is nothing in the US for product support. That is a stupidity, that we have inflicted on ourselves.

There is an EU regulation for that. Producers have to have parts for 10 years at least.

Very smart. Or at least truth in advertising, there should be a disclaimer that if it breaks after warranty, there is no possibility of service.

I posted an article on Amazon after this, warning others of the Whirlpool policy. I got hundreds of questions and thank you's.

It's a repairability bill so making stuff impossible to repair is also banned, appliances should be screwed rather than glued, etc.

Aesma wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Maybe it is not so much "abandoning free trade" as we are trying to get back what we gave away because it was a mistake?

Isn't the US an incredibly rich country or did I miss something ?

Isn't the issue rather the unfair distribution of these riches inside the US population ?

The United States is a consumer driven economy. We don't make much of anything but a few people more money. We need to keep buying foreign things to keep our economy going. We have no factories that produce these things. Cell phones, TVs, cars, blenders, chairs, etc. are made outside the United States. We just buy them. Although, Democrats did pass the CHIPs act to bring high tech jobs back to the United States.

seb146 wrote:

Aesma wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Maybe it is not so much "abandoning free trade" as we are trying to get back what we gave away because it was a mistake?

Isn't the US an incredibly rich country or did I miss something ?

Isn't the issue rather the unfair distribution of these riches inside the US population ?

The United States is a consumer driven economy. We don't make much of anything but a few people more money. We need to keep buying foreign things to keep our economy going. We have no factories that produce these things. Cell phones, TVs, cars, blenders, chairs, etc. are made outside the United States. We just buy them. Although, Democrats did pass the CHIPs act to bring high tech jobs back to the United States.

We are the second largest manufacturing country on Earth.

LabQuest wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Aesma wrote:

Isn't the US an incredibly rich country or did I miss something ?

Isn't the issue rather the unfair distribution of these riches inside the US population ?

The United States is a consumer driven economy. We don't make much of anything but a few people more money. We need to keep buying foreign things to keep our economy going. We have no factories that produce these things. Cell phones, TVs, cars, blenders, chairs, etc. are made outside the United States. We just buy them. Although, Democrats did pass the CHIPs act to bring high tech jobs back to the United States.

We are the second largest manufacturing country on Earth.

What do we manufacture? I live in a timber port. That is: raw timber and wood ships are put on cargo ships that set sail for other countries so they can manufacture things like tables and paper. The paper mills in Oregon City have shut down. I think there is still the one between Eugene and Corvallis and maybe one in Grants Pass. Idaho is agriculture and tourism, Utah is military and tourism, Colorado is military and tourism, Kansas is agriculture.....

Aesma wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

Aesma wrote:

We'll see if they agree with the consequences.

The example of Whirlpool in the article is telling (incidentally, Whirlpool has also made political waves here in France, closing a factory here to open a new one in Poland, it played out during the 2017 presidential election).

It's basically consumerism vs investment. You can export production for lower prices, until you've lost the capacity to produce. Or you can accept higher prices and maintain the investment in production.

Here is an example regarding Whirlpool. I bought a $300 convection oven. After a year, it died. I tried to order parts for it, Whirlpool told me it's not a serviceable product, it comes from China. If it fails within a year, they replace it. After a year, it's junk.

Fortunately I had the skills to repair it on my own. But people can rapidly get tired of that kind of thing. You are paying the same price either way, but there is nothing in the US for product support. That is a stupidity, that we have inflicted on ourselves.

There is an EU regulation for that. Producers have to have parts for 10 years at least.

Are you sure it’s 10, I always thought it was 7?

seb146 wrote:

What do we manufacture? I live in a timber port. That is: raw timber and wood ships are put on cargo ships that set sail for other countries so they can manufacture things like tables and paper. The paper mills in Oregon City have shut down. I think there is still the one between Eugene and Corvallis and maybe one in Grants Pass. Idaho is agriculture and tourism, Utah is military and tourism, Colorado is military and tourism, Kansas is agriculture.....

The US does manufacture a fair bit of high end stuff. A fair bit of chemical products, computer, and industrial products are still made in the US.

https://www.nam.org/state-manufacturing ... ing-facts/

The US has shifted to the manufacturing of high end goods that require a fair bit of technical expertise. It is now a white collar job and not necessarily a blue collar job that is medial an repetitive. You haver to be trained and educated to work in manufacturing today.

StarAC17 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

What do we manufacture? I live in a timber port. That is: raw timber and wood ships are put on cargo ships that set sail for other countries so they can manufacture things like tables and paper. The paper mills in Oregon City have shut down. I think there is still the one between Eugene and Corvallis and maybe one in Grants Pass. Idaho is agriculture and tourism, Utah is military and tourism, Colorado is military and tourism, Kansas is agriculture.....

The US does manufacture a fair bit of high end stuff. A fair bit of chemical products, computer, and industrial products are still made in the US.

https://www.nam.org/state-manufacturing ... ing-facts/

The US has shifted to the manufacturing of high end goods that require a fair bit of technical expertise. It is now a white collar job and not necessarily a blue collar job that is medial an repetitive. You haver to be trained and educated to work in manufacturing today.

And when people go to school to train for these jobs, Republicans whine and complain these are throw away degrees and why do we need to subsidize them for doing nothing? It's almost as if Republicans hate education and good paying jobs.