Free Trade

Karen · 03-10-2006, 03:44 PM

UKIP like the Lib-Lab-Con is wedded to the consensus that Free Trade is good and protectionism is bad. That may have been the case 20 years ago but who benefits from it? In Britain and other civilised countries factories must be safe and employ only adults. This increases costs in civilised countries but in places like Communist China; where no such fine feelings apply; production is much cheaper. Therefore British workers are jobless because of unfair competition.
So working class jobs are exported.
Meanwhile service jobs are more cheaply done in India where there are no taxes nor public goods, like drains.
So middle classs jobs are exported.
The wealth of the 4th largest econmy is being steadily exported which suits the bosses who bakroll New Labour and Blue Labour because it widens the gap between rich and poor and robs Brtish workers of bargaining power. The effect of transferring wealth abroad is that house prices rise because interest rates are held low so British people cannot afford housing.
It is time we erected trade tarrifs against countries where working conditions are worse than they are here. OnlyUKIP can do this because we shall leave the EU

mkpdavies · 03-10-2006, 03:50 PM

I have to say, while I fully am for free trade where possible, there is a strong case that certain fairly basic conditions should surely apply?

I personally think the country should have a democracy to qualify for free trade with Britain.

And that's about it.

andypandy · 03-10-2006, 03:52 PM

Good try but UKIP will never adopt the principle of protectionism as they are wedded largely to the Tory principles of bosses first, workers last. It is unfortunate to say, but many within UKIP are from self-employed or semi-professional backgrounds, and it is from these groups the greatest opposition to anything that smacks of socially beneficial legislation have originated,whether from nationalised industries to nationalised health.

UKIP may be many things, but it is not a party dedicated to the protection of working people.

mkpdavies · 03-10-2006, 03:53 PM

You ignored the tax plans then?

The poor no longer pay any tax.

andypandy · 03-10-2006, 04:21 PM

Tax plans which are primarily aimed at the rich and which according to UKIP will warrant the immediate increase in the public sector borrowing requrement of £30 billion a year to fund it.

mkpdavies · 03-10-2006, 04:26 PM

How can they be primarily aimed at the rich, when the poor benefit the most?

eublues · 03-10-2006, 04:33 PM

Surely "free trade" has to include a right not to trade in particular circumstances, and the right to impose tariffs to protect some strategic interests. This approach seems to work for the USA.

B.A.Ware · 03-10-2006, 04:35 PM

I agree with Karen we could not compete effectively with these low wage economies so it would only be fair to put tariff on imports from them.

mkpdavies · 03-10-2006, 04:37 PM

What, any of them. Even if they are democracies who treat their people O.K?

harryaldridge · 03-10-2006, 04:38 PM

I do have sympathy for this case. Free trade is always good and is important for economic efficiency, it does mean that countries with health & safety regulations etc are penalised.

The developed world could get together and develop a free trade area between themselves, with tariffs to countries not meeting basic working rights. This would be sensible and morally acceptable if managed in the right way.

We must never advocate protectionism simply to protect British workers as competition is a vital element of economies that does help the poor. However we must make a decision - do we put economic efficiency at the expense of a civilised society with worker protection?

I say we need to look at this. Globalisation is throwing all the old ideas out the window and we should be actively trying to create a new consensus while such massive global imbalances of economic power persist.

03-10-2006, 03:44 PM	#1 (permalink)
Karen Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Maldon Posts: 302	Free Trade - no thanks! UKIP like the Lib-Lab-Con is wedded to the consensus that Free Trade is good and protectionism is bad. That may have been the case 20 years ago but who benefits from it? In Britain and other civilised countries factories must be safe and employ only adults. This increases costs in civilised countries but in places like Communist China; where no such fine feelings apply; production is much cheaper. Therefore British workers are jobless because of unfair competition. So working class jobs are exported. Meanwhile service jobs are more cheaply done in India where there are no taxes nor public goods, like drains. So middle classs jobs are exported. The wealth of the 4th largest econmy is being steadily exported which suits the bosses who bakroll New Labour and Blue Labour because it widens the gap between rich and poor and robs Brtish workers of bargaining power. The effect of transferring wealth abroad is that house prices rise because interest rates are held low so British people cannot afford housing. It is time we erected trade tarrifs against countries where working conditions are worse than they are here. OnlyUKIP can do this because we shall leave the EU __________________ Lady Di, Hitler and Communism are dead. Forward to Independence!

03-10-2006, 03:50 PM	#2 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,841 Party: Libertarian Party	I have to say, while I fully am for free trade where possible, there is a strong case that certain fairly basic conditions should surely apply? I personally think the country should have a democracy to qualify for free trade with Britain. And that's about it. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

03-10-2006, 03:53 PM	#4 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,841 Party: Libertarian Party	You ignored the tax plans then? The poor no longer pay any tax. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

03-10-2006, 04:26 PM	#6 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,841 Party: Libertarian Party	How can they be primarily aimed at the rich, when the poor benefit the most? __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

03-10-2006, 04:37 PM	#9 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,841 Party: Libertarian Party	What, any of them. Even if they are democracies who treat their people O.K? __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

03-10-2006, 03:52 PM	#3 (permalink)
andypandy Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 880	Good try but UKIP will never adopt the principle of protectionism as they are wedded largely to the Tory principles of bosses first, workers last. It is unfortunate to say, but many within UKIP are from self-employed or semi-professional backgrounds, and it is from these groups the greatest opposition to anything that smacks of socially beneficial legislation have originated,whether from nationalised industries to nationalised health. UKIP may be many things, but it is not a party dedicated to the protection of working people.

03-10-2006, 04:21 PM	#5 (permalink)
andypandy Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 880	Tax plans which are primarily aimed at the rich and which according to UKIP will warrant the immediate increase in the public sector borrowing requrement of £30 billion a year to fund it.

03-10-2006, 04:33 PM	#7 (permalink)
eublues Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 3,102	Surely "free trade" has to include a right not to trade in particular circumstances, and the right to impose tariffs to protect some strategic interests. This approach seems to work for the USA.

03-10-2006, 04:35 PM	#8 (permalink)
B.A.Ware Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Birmingham Posts: 4,499 Party: UKIP	I agree with Karen we could not compete effectively with these low wage economies so it would only be fair to put tariff on imports from them.

03-10-2006, 04:38 PM	#10 (permalink)
harryaldridge Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: West Sussex Posts: 1,912	I do have sympathy for this case. Free trade is always good and is important for economic efficiency, it does mean that countries with health & safety regulations etc are penalised. The developed world could get together and develop a free trade area between themselves, with tariffs to countries not meeting basic working rights. This would be sensible and morally acceptable if managed in the right way. We must never advocate protectionism simply to protect British workers as competition is a vital element of economies that does help the poor. However we must make a decision - do we put economic efficiency at the expense of a civilised society with worker protection? I say we need to look at this. Globalisation is throwing all the old ideas out the window and we should be actively trying to create a new consensus while such massive global imbalances of economic power persist.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode