So lets say your worst enemy comes up to you and says, "I'll sell you this brand new Corvette for $10000." Do you say, "no, I think you're trying to hurt me by selling me things for less than they're worth?"

>>>unrealistic so I'm not gonna bother responding. A new/good car for 10K is like Obama and Clinton being an effective President. I presented my facts previously. Reading further, nowhere in my comments do I demand all our products be sold at cheaper prices. I'm more focused on jobs. In fact, 90% of my last response was based on that.

If I'm trying to make an argument against totally free trade, I might carry on the analogy. Now your enemy starts selling you everything you want at pennies on the dollar. The strategy is that eventually you will quit your job because you don't need the money because they are selling you everything cheap. Some time after you quit your job, your enemy will stop selling you all your needs and you will be ruined. That's either diabolical or really stupid on the enemy's part.

>>>a lot of items are overpriced so they get the better end of the deal. Hooray for free trade. But I'm evil for wanting to do the same from our side to some extent.

In this analogy, quitting your job would be like the US closing (and demolishing maybe) factories because China will sell us the stuff cheaper than we can make it. As a nation, we are doing this, so the analogy doesn't extend to saying that you just wouldn't quit because you don't trust your enemy (though that would be the protectionist scheme). The analogy continues then, that some day China will stop selling us stuff and we will be ruined. Maybe I'm just to optimistic,

>>>maybe. I'm being realistic

but I don't think we would be ruined. I think things might be shaky for a while, but we would rebuild those factories that we need (possibly using robotics (ala the Japanese) if we no longer have workers willing/wanting to go back to factory work).

>>>i find it funny so many engineers forget the fact that robotics, technology etc....it's all shit without humans. They don't turn on by themselves.

Even just counting the amount of cheap goods we have gotten from China in the last ten years, if they stopped selling us stuff tomorrow, I think that on balance we would be ahead. We've been able to use that money we saved by buying their cheap goods to invest and increase our standard of living.

>>>? We're in a trade deficit. What money? Factually speaking wages in the US hasn't increased or increased very little over the years

Maybe (probably) our standard of living would fall if they suddenly stopped selling us stuff, but I don't see that it would fall farther than where it would have been it we never had the opportunity to take their money in the first place. I say "take their money" because that's what it comes down to for me.

>>>in order to "take their money," we have to give them ours and we're already witnessing what our money is helping them with.

For the sake or argument, lets say that China does think they are being diabolical and their leaders are manipulating their currency so as to devalue it

>>>again, which is what's happening. Let's lay that to rest already

(not that every other country on earth doesn't try and manipulate their currency to their own advantage),

>>>I supposed you free tradists are happy with this

in the end it comes down to them giving us money.

>>>and us giving them ours

What about South Korea, India, etc., are they all going to stop selling us cheap factory goods at the same time? I tend to agree that China wants to become the "big kid on the block." Or the next solitary superpower if you prefer, I'm still willing to take their money.

>>>one more time: And they're taking ours....MUCH more than us taking. But I guess you're optimistic and willing to risk this.

You suggested (facetiously i think) that the answer to too many managers is outsourcing (I guess to give the managers people to manage).

>>>not facetious, it's fact for a tremendous amount of CEOs in this day and age. And this is not my point of view. It's the other side. After all, y'all don't seem to see any problems with this.

I don't think that's correct. The answer is fewer managers.

>>>? Of course this is the answer but it's not happening for a lot of sectors. I'm presenting the grim reality for you thanks to this free haphazard trading

Corporate America is a little too good at spawning managers, occasionally they hire another manager to suggest they need to "operate lean" and they fire a bunch of managers right before starting to accumulate them again... The free market isn't the problem there, the problem is that the managers, who are of course in charge, think that more of their own is a good thing.

On then to retraining. I don't suggest that retraining is easy. None the less, if I had to retrain to support a family I would. I think most people would.

>>>people can get to first base but what's the goal? Home plate. And for 80% of the people, it's not happening.

Given that retraining is going to be required anyway,

>>>yeah, and we're seeing why.....

I don't think it's a worthy trade-off to sacrifice free trade to save on some retraining that was likely to happen latter regardless. I'm not trying to belittle people's discomfort, I just don't think you can avoid retraining without halting progress.

>>>Well, at least no one hasn't denied the fact that "just change skills" is easy. So again, keep supporting free trade and most legitimate hard-working Americans are gonna suffer. anyways, my next response won't come til probably Sunday at the earliest, so I'm not ignoring.