Are there good reasons to be anti-free trade?

[bldysabba]

@BrightNShiny

Lol. I said I’d post it if you wanted it, and then you just assumed I didn’t have it instead of saying you wanted it. That’s a lie. If you were actually interested in the issue of slave labor in SE Asia, you’d be wanting me to post it. But you didn’t even ask for it. I know what game your playing here.

This is strange. I specifically asked you to go ahead and make a claim about slavery and support it. And then I asked you to post data instead of threatening to do it, but you’re still just threatening.

Because, as I’ve already pointed out, I can fine a company who is using slave labor by putting a tariff on its goods.

And that is why you need to show that trade is driving slavery. If slavery is ocurring independently of trade, then by slapping a tariff, you may not help the slaves, but you will hurt the economy. In general equilibrium, you may even make the condition of those slaves worse, if their owners switch to serving the domestic market instead, and decide to squeeze their slaves to keep their own profits constant.

So, even though I’m skeptical of what you’ve posted here, I want to read these papers. So post a link. Because I’m not a liar like you, and if Burgess and Besley actually can show me this, I might alter my position. I’m not going to lie like you did and just pretend you didn’t proffer an argument here.

Once again, I refute that I have lied about a single thing in my statements, or misrepresented what you’re saying.

Here you go

This paper investigates whether the industrial relations climate in
Indian states has affected the pattern of manufacturing growth
in the period 1958-92. We show that states which ammended
the Industrial Disputes Act in a pro-worker direction experienced
lowered output, employment, investment and productivity
in registered or formal manufacturing. In contrast, output in unregistered
or informal manufacturing increased. Regulating in a
pro-worker direction was also associated with increases in urban
poverty. This suggests that attempts to redress the balance of
power between capital and labor can end up hurting the poor.

But, I didn’t advocate stuffing a solution down anyone’s throats (more lies). I said that something has gone wrong when a building can collapse and kill a bunch of workers. And since the only mechanism I have available to me to stop that kind of thing in the future is US trade power, then yes, I’m going to advocate looking as to how US trade power can be used to stop that kind of thing from happening in the future.

I think basic labor and environmental standards should be in all our free trade agreements, although I’d start a new round of the GATT to address them worldwide. I don’t think every country needs the exact same labor or environmental standards, but I’d come up with a schedule for implementation tied to per-capita GDP (PPP adjusted).

And then I’d implement proper safety nets in the US. And after all of that is done, I’d be inclined to support new trade agreements.

On the contrary, using US trade power to try and fix complex local issues * is * stuffing a solution down their throats, and a solution by which you’ll likely end up harming more people than you help, including the ones you want to help.

ETA: Didn’t notice he was suspended. BnS, I think you’re a good poster, but it’s unfortunate that you’ve become so agitated in your responses in this thread. We can continue the conversation when you’re back and calmer.