http://www.vdare.com/roberts/070816_china.htm
http://www.vdare.com/buchanan/071101_trade.htm

Quote: "Since our commerce has risen with China, GDP here has risen dramatically. So have average incomes. Median incomes have even gone up a little, too. This is not the stuff of which impoverishment is made."

http://www.vdare.com/roberts/070909_rip.htm

Quote: "A tremendous number of the poorest of the poor in the world are Chinese. Median incomes have risen in China and there's a lot fewer of the poorest of the poor there than there used to be. This is an unabashedly unqualifiedly good thing."

http://www.vdare.com/buchanan/070823_ltv.htm

I'm opposed to harming American economic interests in order to prop up the standard of living in foreign lands. Charity begins at home.

Quote: "The advantages of free trade have been well known for 200 years.

Phyllis Schlafly begs to differ:
http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/1996/mar96/psrmar96.html

For much if not the majority of our nation's history, revenue (not protective) tariffs ruled the day instead of the income tax.

Quote: "The tariffs you long for will make us poorer not richer."

Well, China seems to be following my advice and is thriving as a result. China keeps domestic taxes low while placing revenue and protective tariffs and import VAT taxes on imports.

Free trade--which means hiking (corporate and other) taxation on domestic industry in order to pay for tariff exemptions on foreign products--is really just reverse protectionism. If you insist on foreign-made products not assuming any of the tax burden, you then have to shift taxation domestically to make up for the lost revenue, which falls on local manufacturers.

Quote: "The measures you're proposing won't make us richer, more powerful, or more secure. They'll do just the opposite."

Don't expect Beijing to be adopting your advice anytime soon. They are NOT going to get glossy-eyed over free trade and start exempting imports from taxation and make up for the corresponding drop in tax revenues by doubling-up taxation domestically. That's reverse protectionism--which is the most foolish form of protectionism around.

A tremendous number of the poorest of the poor in the world are Chinese. Median incomes have risen in China and there's a lot fewer of the poorest of the poor there than there used to be. This is an unabashedly unqualifiedly good thing.

The advantages of free trade have been well known for 200 years. The tariffs you long for will make us poorer not richer.

Have we become weaker since we began trading substantially with China? The precise opposite is true: we're stronger by any reasonable measure than ever before.

The measures you're proposing won't make us richer, more powerful, or more secure. They'll do just the opposite.

Huh? Whether our one-way free trade policies with Beijing are enriching them while impoverishing us, that is nothing to celebrate as the best "anti-poverty program in the history of the world".

Nonetheless, you are correct in one sense: placing revenue tariffs on foreign made products, and using the income to reduce taxation on domestically-made products, is an excellent anti-poverty program, one that we should adopt here in the United States.

Nor does feeding the China Tiger save us from a future war. On the contrary, it makes her stronger and us weaker, encouraging them to miscalculate. An insurance policy that requires us to lose a manufacturing base is not worth it.

If we weren't so desperately dependent not only on oil but on CHEAP oil, we might have had the stones to make the Saudis change.

Here is my problem with this: All that stuff about “level playing fields”, “fair trade”, etc. is often code for “I’ll talk about open markets, but really I’ll put in place tariffs and other protectionist policies when I’m in office.” (wink, wink, nudge nudge) We saw this with Bush, lots of talk about “free trade” with a “level playing field” and we had steel tariffs, protectionist policies on imported shrimp, and agricultural products as well.

That's pretty much my take, too, Steve. What I think that everybody is forgetting is that China's trade with the rest of the world is the most successful anti-poverty program in the history of the world and our best insurance that we won't be fighting a war with China. Cheap at the price.

But I, too, wish that our deficit with China wasn't as high as it is. China needs to develop its own internal markets if it is to grow and we need to be allowed to sell into those markets fairly. Bigger pie, not bigger slices of a smaller pie.