Investment is also bad in the short run 
Right on, Sieben.
I’m saying that I don’t give a damn if a policy makes “Americans” poorer, so long as its best for humanity.
Solidarity brother! See, we’re all socialists on the inside
What he said is not true in the short term either.
Care to provide evidence?
I’ll give mine; look around you (i know there are a myriad of other factors [is that how you spell myriad], but it is one of the most significant contributors to job loss).
America is 300m people. 300m people do not share a singular experience.
Yes. And how many of those 3m have lost their job because companies can go to dictatorhsips in other countries where they will sell the property of its people far cheaper than the people would have done without the state?
Are you keeping it in perspective?
I don’t define rules by exceptions.
Ya, it’s good for china. Would have been better if they weren’t subject to a dictatorship, probably would have been better for america as well. The rush to find cheap labor and non-regulation would have crawled along much slower. It would be more of a give and take.
China has more labour controls. The problem is that communists define “regulation” as not letting anyone in China make less than $48,000/y.
You can’t just say that simply because free trade compels some workers to retrain that that automatically offsets all the gains in efficiency resulting from increased division of labor.
Retrain? White collar jobs flew out of the country as well.
I am in no way saying free trade is bad. Just that, in the short-term, it has been very bad for the states. It was an equillibrium that had to happen.
We are just saying that you are very wrong.
And your argument was?
- An increase in the division of labor;
Yes, across the world, not in america specifically. Things were going to balance out as competition for lower costs pulled industries to underdeveloped countries. While America, fresh off it’s acid trip as the leading nation in the world, became a consumer culture and pushed herself further and further into debt trying to uphold it.
- China doesn’t allow anyone to make 48k+/yr;
And what would it have to do with anything?
- America is 300m people, who don’t share a singular experience. You don’t define rules by exceptions (I actually do, otherwise it’s pointless to begin with. Human’s are very unpredictable).
Well, free trade opens markets across the world. Whole industries ineveitably shift to underdeveloped nations. Millions of workers in the developed nation begin losing their jobs. This process takes place over decades so America still thinks she is on top of the world.
Spend, spend, spend, is the outcry. Not just by individuals, but by the government, and fast. It starts under Reagan, and only gets worse after.
Suddenly, 20% of the country is out of work (under employed and not looking are not counted). Inflation is going rampant. A gallon of gas is now $2-10k. Foreclosure is rampant across the country. Business’ go under, banks fail.
So we hand the banks $700m dollars, hands off.
I think success for America (so far) is largely the exception rather than the rule.
This is all off-topic tho.
This damn professor we were discussing, he’s not so different from you guys… all of us really. He is using his position of attention to educate, to evangelize.
Hint: learn division of labour economics… or really any economics other than Marx.
Outstanding appeal to ignorance
Your ignorance is not appealing.
One could say the same about your arguments
Except I’m not posting on the website of an educational institution that I don’t use.