Why do Americans hate free trade?

Why do Americans hate free trade?

Both Trump and Sanders supporters hate all free trade agreements. I have no idea what Hillary supporters want because I've never seen them on Sup Forums or reddit.

Hillary was and is pro-free trade. We hate it because NAFTA (who Hillary's husband signed) killed what was left of American manufacturing. There are entire cities that literally don't have anymore jobs. You drive down the streets and all you'll see are massive abandoned factories and nothing else. There is nothing left in the Midwest now thanks to it. Fun fact for you, exit polling showed that most Trump voters in Wisconsin actually disagreed with what Trump had to say about immigration. They voted for him because he was anti-free trade, and there's no reason to believe that wasn't the case in Michigan and Ohio.

>Meme trade

>free meme

Increasingly "free trade" has been used to justify very questionable laws, such as the TPP. Thus the term has a very negative connotation now.

Because free trade only works when a superpower decides to subsidize global maritime commerce by fielding a massive blue water navy in order to protect shipments from piracy, both state-sponsored and otherwise (see pre-WW2 European empires for an example of how global trade works normally).

Thus it only works for us when we can effectively secure compensation for protecting trade, which we can't, so now we're no longer pro free-trade.

>Why do poor/stupid Americans hate free trade?
Ftfy
Only poor retards without education/skills care about free-trade because it means their minimum-wage monkey jobs will get shipped out of the country.

Why do an American worker deserve a job when a Mexican can do it cheaper?

Denmark also lost thousands of jobs to poorer EU countries but we retrained those workers so they could get other jobs.

American conservatives like free market capitalism in theory and hate in practice. Actually that applies to just about every conservative I've met.

>Why do an American worker deserve a job when a Mexican can do it cheaper?

That's not the point you dumb coon. The POTUS should put Americans before Mexicans.

this is at the heart of it really

t. brainlet

He is decreasing the competitiveness of American businesses. That will in the end hurt far more Americans.

Why should European farmers deserve to sell their produce when American farmers can produce the same goods much more cheaply? Most European countries (including all of the ones in the EU) run massive agricultural subsidy programs (which put the US's own subsidies to shame) and levy high tariffs on imported food.

But let me pose an opposing viewpoint: Why should the American voter willingly support government policies that put him out of a job?

well americans aren't know for their foresight.

because food is ecologically sustainable you stupid mutt?

It's not even the Mexicans taking those jobs anymore. It's the movement towards automation that is and you really can't build a wall to keep all the robots out

They either can't or won't be re-trained.

>He is decreasing the competitiveness of American businesses
Not really

*won't

The same ones getting mad at the brownies for stealing their jobs are the same ones that are for private education and against programs that benefit the unemployed.

Europeans don't slobber over the dick of "free" markets and lack of regulations like americans do.

Here's the other side of the coin too - we're one of the least integrated economies in the world and most of the extra-US trade you see in this chart takes place in NAFTA or CAFTA.

So you disagree with op's point?

That's fine, but then you have a European starting a thread asking us why we don't support free trade. And I answered the question.

Just some retard who probably lights a candle to Milton Friedman on Hanukkah.

True, he is making up for it by decreasing corporate tax. Even with Trump in command Wall Street love a Republican government.

No you didnt

What did he mean by that?

This is just delussions, those jobs would have been gone anyway if not to Mexico to countries with even lower costs in South America or South East Asia. I wouldn't even be surprised if we all start seeing African products on the shelf within the next few decades. China is the US main import partner despite trade running on no FTA, just WTO rules. What NAFTA allowed in regards to Mexico is five things
>Lower logistics costs, these are ultimately paid by consumers
>The ability to integrate productive chains, 40% of Mexican exports are American inputs (eg we make a pick up truck using an American made engine and electronics) this actually saves American manufacturing jobs as opposed to just buying from China
>Related to the above an export destination, as Mexico buy industrial inputs this provides a better chance to place American exports, Mexico buys almost as much as Canada and near twice as China from the US
>Related to the above a complementary market, not just on manufacturing, Americans are good at growing corn which Mexico imports while Mexico produces vegetables and fruit year round which it exports, there are dozens of examples to this and it would be difficult to build such a relation with more distant countries. Just look at how South America, which produces both grains and fruit, must compete with Africa and Asia to place its products in Europe or any other international market.
>It stabilizes Mexico which has advantages for the USA, the decline of Mexican migration, partly a result of better living standards, is the best illustration for this. The better off Mexico is the less its problems can spill over.

The ultimate goal for NAFTA was to allow for a trade bloc that could better compete against the EU as well as Asian behemoths like China or India, eventually the idea was to expand it to cover the full Western hemisphere but this was foiled by South American populists and the urgency of creating larger trade blocs was lost.

I'm broadly against globalized free trade but NAFTA was a pretty good deal. I'd rather not see it dismantled desu.

If you think the point of a government is only the promote commerce then sure but governments should he looking out for the welfare of their own citizens too.

If those jobs weren't in Mexico they would have moved overseas with your new chinese overlords

Isto. Os macacos (se nāo é samefag) tāo certo

America is terrified of structural unemployment, and we dont offer good displaced worker relocation programs because muh socialism

He's an idiot so he probably doesn't know what he splurged out

>all of these brainlets think that regional trade blocs are free trade

NAFTA & the TPP are just excuses to surrender sovereignty from the nation state to regional bodies like the EU. The politicians don't come out & say it because they'll get voted out of office for saying the truth, so they have to use the trade pretext.

Besides, the trade blocs don't really bring free trade, they just Man's manage it at the supra-national level. If NAFTA were really free trade, American agriculture would not be subsidized & Mexican industry would not be protected. The only ones who shill for it outside/pol/ are fashy goy trendsters who think they'll be respected in society by regurgitating The Economist

By having them work menial labour like third world workers and keeping their purchasing power down by not reducing production costs?

Hillary was /ourgirl/, she supported free trade and rational, centrist, neoliberal policies.

Berniebros and Drumpfkins both need to return to Reddit.

NAFTA did eliminate tariffs but it placed no political body on charge of North America. Platitudes aside how can you back surrendered sovereignity in facts? Any conceivable transnational power group (lobbyists, corporations, think tanks) would exist regardless.

>What are NAFTA courts

>low quality bait

Okay, what the fuck is it? Are we free market ideologues or retards that compete in a capitalistic economy?

A mechanism to settle disputes and controversies, wouldn't it be more of a surrender of your sovereignity if the US government was forced to abide by the rulings of Mexican courts? We would certainly consider the contrary to be so, to have bi-national bodies OTOH ruling on very specific and technical issues works out as a fair solution.

That Americans can consider unacceptable the thought to abide by decissions made by foreign or even international bodies yet you mantain it as perfectly reasonable others should accept those by yours is an idea detached from reality. there's no loss of sovereignity in dealing with practical issues and for the most part the work of these panels is rare and infrequent.

No one enters international commerce unaware that special rules apply.

Excelent post.

>Why do an American worker deserve a job when a Mexican can do it cheaper?
You just described exactly why Trump won. His slogan is "America first".

Democrats sitting in their ivory towers behind their pedestals, clutching illegal immigrants by the shoulder while proclaiming "Who the fuck cares about Americans, people are only worth their GDP output and the country you live in shouldn't matter" is why they lost and why they will continue to lose into the future. People who sell their countries out to make a quick buck deserve a traitor's death.

Hillary is unironically much more capitalist than trump

That foreigners think they should abide by the rulings of unelected & unaccountable international bodies makes them cucks. I agree that we shouldn't hypocritically demand others so, but you sound like a faggot cuck who would rather have everyone beholden to EU-like technocracy than sovereignty for everyone. Am I right Chespirito?

t. The Economist radical centrist faggot

This is true. Trump's policies are protectionist as fuck, but that's not a bad thing.
Politicians implementing socialist domestic policy but capitalist foreign policy sucked much of the local commerce out of America like a mosquito.

This
NAFTA was a good deal that was buried in a sea of shit deals.
North American Trade should, ideally, stay in North America wherever possible.

at this point left and right wing mean nothing
I mean using a strong state to override the free market to artificially inflate wages for the working class, thats pretty fucking socialist but he can't say that because its a naughty word for his voter base

yeah but you negate that everything in trade has a counter effect. jobs may have moved south to mexico but in return you guys got cheaper goods. in the end free trade makes economies more efficient but allowing specialization, some work is simply better suited for different environments. but i suppose one person with a sob story simply tugs at more hearts then presenting the cold hard facts that Americans save a lot of money through outsourcing and makes america more competitive on the world stage.

the WTO has bodies dedicated to trade disputes. disputes will occur whenever nations trade and a neutral panel that can view the dispute and apply the rules that both parties agreed to is a necessary function of international trade.