CFIF often highlights how the Biden Administration's bizarre decision to resurrect failed Title II "…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: U.S. Internet Speeds Skyrocketed After Ending Failed Title II "Net Neutrality" Experiment

CFIF often highlights how the Biden Administration's bizarre decision to resurrect failed Title II "Net Neutrality" internet regulation, which caused private broadband investment to decline for the first time ever outside of a recession during its brief experiment at the end of the Obama Administration, is a terrible idea that will only punish consumers if allowed to take effect.

Here's what happened after that brief experiment was repealed under the Trump Administration and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai - internet speeds skyrocketed despite late-night comedians' and left-wing activists' warnings that the internet was doomed:

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="515"] Internet Speeds Post-"Net Neutrality"[/caption]

 …[more]

April 19, 2024 • 09:51 AM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Trump's Trade Doctrine Print
By Betsy McCaughey
Wednesday, August 23 2017
That is Trump's trade conundrum. Trade barriers that benefit one interest hurt another.

Most shoppers prefer to buy American. But given a choice between an American-made product and a cheaper import from China, Mexico or another low-wage country, they'll go for the bargain. That's one reason millions of American factory workers have lost their jobs.

In last year's presidential election, Donald Trump put the collapse of American manufacturing center stage. He pledged to take on Chinaour biggest trade rivaland to rip up the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada. He told rallies in Indiana and Pennsylvania that "we cannot continue to allow China to rape our country" and "there are no jobs because China has our jobs." He warned upstate New Yorkers they were being "horribly, horribly hurt by NAFTA."

Just campaign rhetoric? Hardly. Last week, President Trump launched an investigation into China's trade practices. This Wednesday, the Trump administration begins renegotiating NAFTA.

The departure of White House strategist Steve Bannon last week was predicted to end what the media disparagingly call "economic nationalism." Don't believe it. Trump railed for years against unfair trade treaties. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer share Trump's long-held view. Lighthizer said on Friday, "NAFTA has fundamentally failed many, many Americans and needs major improvement." He's promising dramatic changes to NAFTA, not just "tweaks."

Most economists claim global trade is good for America because it keeps prices low, offers consumers more choices and opens up overseas markets for U.S. businesses and farms to sell their products. That's been the rationale for free trade for two centuries, ever since Scottish philosopher Adam Smith famously argued that the global marketplace's "invisible hand" would benefit all. It hasn't worked out that smoothly. American manufacturing workers are getting the back of Smith's invisible hand.

President Clinton's adoption of NAFTA and the massive influx of Chinese goods after China was admitted to the World Trade Organization in 2001 clobbered American workers, causing over 2 million layoffs in less than two decades, according to MIT economist David Autor. New York State alone lost 34,000 jobs due to NAFTA. Politicians who boasted about these deals kept mum about catastrophes ahead for workers.

Chinese imports forced furniture factories in Hickory, North Carolina, to close, putting that community into an economic tailspin. More than three-quarters of the furniture sold in the U.S. now is made in China.

Of course, factory layoffs are only partly caused by trade. Automation is allowing manufacturers to produce more products with fewer workers. Yet it's almost impossible to buy furniture, or a smartphone, laptop computer, Christmas ornaments, furniture or clothes made in America.

Apple is the biggest American corporation, based on stock value. But parts for its smartphones come from all over Asia, and the phones are assembled by Taiwanese companies.

Wall Street investors tremble about a trade war that would hurt S&P 500 companies like Apple and General Motors, which sells more vehicles in China than in the U.S. But autoworkers, including many Trump voters, are pushing for American-made batteries and more American steel in cars, even though it will push up the sticker price, making Detroit less competitive.

That is Trump's trade conundrum. Trade barriers that benefit one interest hurt another.

Past politicians haven't leveled with the public about trade. President Bill Clinton bragged letting China into the WTO would "have a profound impact on human rights and political liberty." Nonsense. China has become more repressive. China is stealing intellectual property, and even worse, plotting to control the supply of semi-conductors, electronic elements needed for weapons and other defense equipment. That puts America in peril.

Trump dared to question the gospel of free trade and changed the national discussion. Over three-quarters of Trump voters, including lifelong Democrats, believed the pacts were hurting America, and they've given Trump a mandate to act. Expect major trade law changes, driven by these voters, as well as the need to thwart Chinese aggression.


Betsy McCaughey is a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research and a former lieutenant governor of New York State.
COPYRIGHT 2017 CREATORS.COM

Notable Quote   
 
"'San Diego is the new epicenter for migrants and illegal immigration,' San Diego County Supervisor Jim Desmond said again this week as record numbers of illegal border crossers continue to pour into California.He made a similar claim two weeks ago when the county was overwhelmed by thousands of illegal border crossers being dropped off on street corners after a U.S. Customs and Border Protection…[more]
 
 
— Bethany Blankley, The Center Square
 
Liberty Poll   

Would you hire, for any job, anyone who as a college student participated in pro-Hamas demonstrations in violation of university rules and/or basic laws?