{"id":24627,"date":"2015-12-08T09:58:24","date_gmt":"2015-12-08T16:58:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/?p=24627"},"modified":"2015-12-08T10:01:41","modified_gmt":"2015-12-08T17:01:41","slug":"free-trade-is-outstanding-but-not-all-trade-items-are-created-equal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/free-trade-is-outstanding-but-not-all-trade-items-are-created-equal\/","title":{"rendered":"Free Trade is Outstanding \u2013 But Not All Trade Items Are Created Equal"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"We<\/a>

We need to get rid of our sugar program – without getting rid of our sugar production<\/em><\/p><\/div>\n

(Seton Motley)<\/strong><\/em> – I am about as huge a free trader as anyone you\u2019ll read or meet. Because it is in fact yet another less government issue. The less government gets in the way of peoples trading freely \u2013 the better it is for everyone.<\/p>\n

\u201cTrade Wars\u201d actually aren\u2019t about trade \u2014 they are about government trade policy.<\/p>\n

If peoples are trading freely, there isn\u2019t a \u201cWar\u201d \u2013 there\u2019s commerce. The \u201cWars\u201d only happen when governments get involved, placing tariffs, regulations and subsidies in the way of the flow.<\/p>\n

It becomes a regulatory arms race. A government imposes another subsidy or tax. So several others in response impose new subsidies and taxes of their own. Lather, rinse, repeat.<\/p>\n

We Americans are blessed with a (sadly, increasingly distant) history of capitalism \u2013 which gives us relatively inexpensive access to a cornucopia of goods. Manufactured here \u2013 and all around the world. And we of course want these goods to be as cheap as possible \u2013 hence the push for less government impediments thereof.<\/p>\n

But not all trade items are created equal. Sometimes a bargain \u2013 isn\u2019t a bargain. There are items with which we must be very careful. Some things shouldn\u2019t be purchased from some peoples. And we must ensure that in dire circumstances we will always be able to produce them ourselves. To wit: national security items.<\/p>\n

We purchase a lot of items manufactured in \u2013 and often by the government of \u2013 China. Who is at best a testy ally. (Why we borrow from them hundreds of billions of dollars \u2013 to fund domestic government waste \u2013 is light years beyond me. That\u2019s another \u2013 though related \u2013 issue.)<\/p>\n

China is increasingly adventurous in\u2026stretching themselves. As but one instance, they are manufacturing artificial islands further and further from their shores \u2013 to serve in part as military outposts. There is a not insignificant \u2013 and increasing \u2013 possibility that we will one day be at loggerheads with them.<\/p>\n

Which raises an important trade point. Purchasing shoes and televisions from them \u2013 is fine. Purchasing military equipment from them? Not quite so fine. And we certainly should never reach the point where we forsake domestic military manufacturing \u2013 in favor of international production. By China or anyone else.<\/p>\n

There are a lot of trade items that reside under the national security umbrella. To wit: food. If you can\u2019t eat \u2013 not a whole lot else matters. Food is likewise something of which we should never forsake domestic production.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, a few very good people are seeking a short-\u00adterm, tiny political gain \u2013 at the expense of long term national food\u00a0security.<\/p>\n

There are a LOT of really stupid government programs. The many portions of the Farm Bill are certainly amongst them. The sugar program is one of these. There are many on the Right who have for many years called for an end to the sugar program.<\/p>\n

Which is \u2013 on the surface \u2013 understandable. But diving deeper, you find it is inordinately short\u00ad-sighted \u2013 a fairly terrible move from a national security perspective.<\/p>\n

First, this is not just a confectionery issue. Sugar is a staple \u2013 an ingredient in all sorts of foods. So don\u2019t just think desserts. If you eat \u2013 you eat sugar.<\/p>\n

Ending our program would be a very small political gain. Since 2002, it has actually only cost We the Taxpayers money\u2026once \u2013 in 2013. Those other eleven years \u2013 the program never kicked in, and we never spent a dime.<\/p>\n

And as we\u2019ve discussed, global trade has transmogrified many of our domestic policies \u2013 into international policies. Our sugar program has helped create similar \u2013 in most cases MUCH larger \u2013 programs in sugar producing countries all over the world.<\/p>\n

And the king of the world \u2013 is Brazil. They produce about half of the world\u2019s sugar. In large part because they subsidize huge \u2013 to the tune of $2.5 billion per annum.<\/p>\n

Were we to unilaterally disarm, we would be replicating what the European Union (EU) did in the mid-\u00ad2000s. How\u2019d that go?<\/p>\n

(T)he European Union (EU), which supplied as much as 20 percent of global (sugar) exports in the 1990s, shifted from a net exporter to a net importer following sugar policy reforms in 2005.<\/p>\n

Their reforms? Unilateral tear-\u00addown of their sugar program \u2013 which sounds good. Except it allowed Big Sugar Subsidy Brazil to flood their market \u2013 and wipe out nearly all domestic production. And the EU ended up paying about 25% more for sugar.<\/p>\n

The higher costs are bad enough. If the world gets really crazy (like it would appear to be doing\u2026right now) \u2013 international trade gets increasingly dicey. Which means an EU unable to produce a basic food staple \u2013 would be in a world of hurt should trade actually slow down\u2026or stop altogether.<\/p>\n

Thus is domestic food production a national security issue. For the EU \u2013 and for US.<\/p>\n

So rather than myopically focusing on a minuscule political gain \u2013 we must think bigger. Bigger picture \u2013 and freer trade.<\/p>\n

The world\u2019s sugar-producing nations need to sit down together, each with a copy of everyone else\u2019s lists of protectionist sugar policies. And start horse trading.<\/p>\n

\u201cBrazil \u2013 how about if you get rid of this subsidy, we\u2019ll each get rid of one.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cMexico \u2013 if you get rid of this tariff , we\u2019ll each get rid of one.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Let the subsequent discussions ensue. Lather, rinse, repeat.<\/p>\n

That way, we get rid of our sugar program \u2013 without getting rid of our sugar production.<\/p>\n

The former is a tiny win over a tiny, ridiculous policy. The latter is a national security imperative.<\/p>\n

Seton Motley is the founder and president of <\/em>Less Government<\/em><\/a>.\u00a0 Please feel free to follow him on <\/em>Twitter<\/em><\/a> (<\/em>@SetonMotley<\/em><\/a>) and <\/em>Facebook<\/em><\/a>. \u00a0This column was originally published on Red State on December 8, 2015.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

(Seton Motley) – I am about as huge a free trader as anyone you\u2019ll read or meet. Because it is in fact yet another less government issue. The less government gets in the way of peoples trading freely \u2013 the better it is for everyone. \u201cTrade Wars\u201d actually aren\u2019t about trade \u2014 they are about […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":24628,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24627"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24627"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24627\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24632,"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24627\/revisions\/24632"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/24628"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24627"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24627"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nevadanewsandviews.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24627"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}