Melt down being caused by trying to force the narrative of all countries equal

I've been looking around the last few months in regards to the problems in the EU, USA, Mexico etc.

The real problem seems to be very very obvious and it is the fact that free trade can only exist amoung countries of a similar stature.

Should Germany, UK, USA, Canada have free trade it would work well. The standard of living, the average wage etc. etc. is similar. When you start opening completely free trade with countries in the old eastern block, mexico, brazil etc. you open yourselves to de-stabilising the system as there is an influx of cheap labour, people who do not need to earn as much to have a good standard of living.

Rather than trying to allow countries to be part of a free market the effort should be made to bring them on par with the larger countries, so they can join free trade and have a fair tarrif system to not disadvantage either the free trade countries or the developing countries.

At the same time you'd have the developing countries at different stages with their own free trade agreements, which will help them to develop.

I'm not sure how it'd practically work, however surely this would be a better system.

a reply to: latic

What Meltdown?? Banking, energy, and defense industry stocks are actually rallying right now. The DOW hit a record high!

originally posted by: latic
I've been looking around the last few months in regards to the problems in the EU, USA, Mexico etc.

The real problem seems to be very very obvious and it is the fact that free trade can only exist amoung countries of a similar stature.

Should Germany, UK, USA, Canada have free trade it would work well. The standard of living, the average wage etc. etc. is similar. When you start opening completely free trade with countries in the old eastern block, mexico, brazil etc. you open yourselves to de-stabilising the system as there is an influx of cheap labour, people who do not need to earn as much to have a good standard of living.

Rather than trying to allow countries to be part of a free market the effort should be made to bring them on par with the larger countries, so they can join free trade and have a fair tarrif system to not disadvantage either the free trade countries or the developing countries.

At the same time you'd have the developing countries at different stages with their own free trade agreements, which will help them to develop.

I'm not sure how it'd practically work, however surely this would be a better system.

Just so I'm clear, are you basically saying that where work (jobs) can be outsourced to a country who can work for pennies on the dollar is a mis-match? And, subsequently only those who cant make a higher profit margin by outsourcing should be trade partners?

If that IS what youre saying, I can sort of embrace the idea except that the emerging markets might not like it all that much.

I have said this.

Trade would work well between all rich countrys with similiar standards of living.


Throw in poor countrys and the poor countrys act as a economic black hole.

The countries that benefit are the low labor countries as the free trade helps raise wages and standards of living. For example, countries like India, China, etc will see their poor benefit from these jobs even if they are only making $2/day or whatever because it is better than picking rice patties for 50 cents a day. However, this destroys the people/towns in the US who may have depended upon those jobs.

With that said, some would argue that the US still benefits from the influx of cheap goods through lower prices and higher quality goods. This is why even if you are piss poor in America, you still have all the accouterments of the wealth in second and third world countries like TVs, air conditioning, clothing, shoes, etc.

In theory, we should see a meeting in the middle. Over time, the standards of living increase in third world countries as wages continue to increase. However, what we are seeing is that because trade borders are so porous, companies just move factories to cheaper labor elsewhere. So we are hiring people in India today, but sooner or later their wages become too high and then we move the plant from India to Africa.

I do think for trade to be fair, it has to be among equals. However, we also have to realize that not all jobs can be protected. Progress has to occur. People will always be losing jobs due to technology and other advances.

In the past, I would have argued that losing these jobs is a good thing as they are replaced with more productive jobs. However, I think we've crossed a point where technology and globalism means that much higher unemployment for the marginally skilled and intelligent. Not everyone is going to be able to get a high paying job in the service sector.

We literally have entire towns dying in the heartland. I went on a long motorcycle ride through some towns in the midwest over the summer and it was really depressing seeing the old factories shuttered. These places were thriving 50+ years ago, but now nothing is left. Absolutely no where for these people to work.

a reply to: latic

I agree. The way to even the playing field and not hurt the little guy is tariffs. You charge the company that is making the purchase the tariff not the producer, the tariff money could go to our tax system.

That way weather a company imports the same product from Mexico or from Germany they will be paying about the same price.

This will encourage companies that are already in the U.S. to stay there and not move to a country like China because there would be no financial gain.

More companies will stay meaning more jobs will stay, also more companies will be built here and stay here. Also, let the system of immigration do it's job plus secure the border and there will be even more jobs available. Those jobs will now pay much more because of simple supply and demand of jobs and workers to fill the positions.

a reply to: Edumakated

"With that said, some would argue that the US still benefits from the influx of cheap goods through lower prices and higher quality goods."

Yeah, all those exploding note7 batteries from CHINA, along with the exploding washing machines! Cheaper, yes - higher quality, ABSOLUTELY NOT!!! BTW, the people buying these foreign-made goods are running out of money to buy them because the manufacturing jobs were their source of income/money. Most poor countries are also OVERPOPULATED! Correlation? I think so! Don't MAKE more mouths than you can (through your own work) fill with food. BIRDS have better procreative sense!

a reply to: latic


I said that when the UK joined the EU in 1973 .... How could so many diverse

countries and economies possibly merge successfully


I was on a thread yesterday about a person buying a car number plate for $9million

and find it an obscenity when there are others in that same country who are

possibly starving, or ill and unable to pay for medical care. I don't know how that

can possibly be justified.


Why does one person need more money than they can spend lavishly in their lifetime

when they can do so much good and make differences to the lives of so many

unfortunates.

yep

it`s a lot like peeing in your lemonade, it doesn`t make the pee taste better it just makes your lemonade undrinkable.

a reply to: eletheia

People who have money should spend it so it trickles down, it's better he spends $9m in his own country then it setting in the bank.

Completely agree that we need the cheap goods, and tarrifs would keep them cheap and at the same time encouraging those countries to expand.

The worst thing is corruption would stop a fair system working.

a reply to: eletheia

The short answer is that they don't NEED that extraneous disposable cash...BUT they did earn it or were simply in the right place at the right time to be able to cultivate all that cash.


Either way, you cant force someone to want to have compassion for their fellow man, they either do or they don't...is it sad? for sure. But I wouldn't let someone else tell me what I can do with my cash, as a result I wouldn't do it to someone else.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: eletheia

The short answer is that they don't NEED that extraneous disposable cash...BUT they did earn it or were simply in the right place at the right time to be able to cultivate all that cash.
Either way, you cant force someone to want to have compassion for their fellow man, they either do or they don't...is it sad? for sure. But I wouldn't let someone else tell me what I can do with my cash, as a result I wouldn't do it to someone else.

I am fully aware that people cannot be forced.

What do you call someone that would eat a burger in front of someone they

knew was hungry and hadn't eaten for days, then throw away the other half

they didn't actually want to finish.

That's a good point OP.
When the EU started moving towards the free movement of people it was pointed out by some that this should only really apply to countries with a similar standard of living and exclude the poorer, mostly eastern European countries until their median income approached that of the richer ones.

Those in charge refused to listen (As they always seem to) and there was a massive destabilisation in employment and services in countries such as the UK from the influx of people.

This was one of the main reasons for the rise in protest parties such as UKIP and FN.

You can't blame folks for wanting to earn more for their families, but you can blame those in charge for allowing such massive numbers of them to do so at the expense of those who already live and work in the target countries.

I agree with the OP. There are also other obvious problems like 62 people having as much money as the rest of the world. Where it's not those people's fault but all of us who agree to that system.

We should all put our differences aside and stop looking at Earth resources but instead begin to divide space resources and work together to build spacecraft. Share now to get into space and have a lot of everything for everyone, or don't and continue to destroy eachother and/or the only planet we have, ruining it all for future generations if there will be any. It would be a shame if we would just fade out into nothingness, with just a few monuments of our existence like old spacecraft that might be found someday by alien archeologists.

originally posted by: eletheiaWhat do you call someone that would eat a burger in front of someone they

knew was hungry and hadn't eaten for days, then throw away the other half

they didn't actually want to finish.

Exercising their free will, even if that means being a d-bag.

a reply to: latic

And Jina.

originally posted by: crazyewok
I have said this.

Trade would work well between all rich countrys with similiar standards of living.


Throw in poor countrys and the poor countrys act as a economic black hole.

You know, of all the things you have ever said, I totally agree with this.

NOW SHOULDER YOUR WEAPON AND TOE THE LINE SOLDIER.

a reply to: johnnyjoe1979

The problem is working together means the same wages and that causes issues!!!

I cant help but think the minimum wage is something that is causing a lot of people to fail in life.

You earn $15 in Seatac for doing any old job, when you get fired / let go from that job you do not have the skills associated with that small level of earning and therefore consider yourself a $15 worker who would pass up lower level jobs.

The in turn means you need people willing to do the jobs no one else wants.

Maybe thats the problem. The comfortable society no longer has people wanting to do the lower level jobs because everyone now feels they are above that, so you have a whole band of people who are low skilled, want high pay and when you get enough of them its bad for society.

At that point you need free/illegal movement and trade to keep things going.