Well, the new stimu-less package includes protectionist provisions, which will certainly undermine our economy rather than help our economy (here). A Fox News article suggests that our protectionist provisions could spark a trade war, which will definitely not be in our best interests. Here, from the article, is an excerpt that shows just how much thought is really going into this:
“In several television interviews last week, [O] said the stimulus package should not include protectionist language that could trigger a trade war. But now that it does, he is likely to sign it anyway.”
So let me get this straight: O knows that any tariffs or barriers that we put up against other countries will be reciprocated; yet, he intends to go ahead and allow a trade war to start for the mere expediency of getting his liberal stimu-less package pushed through. The supposed purpose of the stimu-less bill is to help Americans with jobs; so, how is starting a trade war that is going to lead to foreign countries not buying our products and our own government raising the costs of imports through tariffs actually supposed to help our economy? Import prices will go up and exports will go down; that means higher prices and less buyers. Not smart.
Again, from the Fox News article:
“One hundred business groups and companies, including major construction, defense and high-tech companies, wrote Senate leaders last week with the dire warning that the provision “will harm American workers and companies across the entire U.S. economy, undermine U.S. global engagement and result in mirror-image trade restrictions abroad that would put at risk huge amounts of American exports.“‘
I guess the new administration has a mandate from the people to be idiotic in the decision-making process.
If we look back, in contrast, to GW’s policies, we can see a completely different view of trade and protectionism. Here are some great quotes from a CNN Money article (here) wherein Bush warns of the dangers of protectionism. Here are some good quotes from the article about Bush:
‘”One of the enduring lessons of the Great Depression is that global protectionism is a path to global economic ruin,” Bush told the annual meeting of the 21-nation Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum in the capital, Lima.”
“When I took office, America had free trade agreements in force with only three nations. Today we have agreements in force with 14.”
“Bush said that during his administration, “America’s trade with the world has grown from 2.5 to 4 trillion dollars — an increase of 60 percent.”
“Leaders who met in Washington also agreed not to raise new trade barriers over the next 12 months and vowed to reach a resolution on the Doha trade talks.”
So, we can see that one leader actually seemed to care about the effects that our decisions would have on the economy; one leader actually warned against protectionism, which will only yield the same results as that which occurred to hasten and worsen the Great Depression. Should O be so flippant about signing the bill with protectionist measures included? Isn’t his party in charge? Couldn’t the Democrats simply remove those measures since they are going to pass this bill without Republican support?