Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
yes yes the evidence is clear, bill clintons free trade, tax breaks for the wealthy, and deregulation is stripping americas middle class clean: Between 2000 and 2014, 203 out of the 229 metropolitan areas analyzed had a decline in the percentage of t
6 views
Skip to first unread message
nickname unavailable
Mar 25, 2017, 1:28:37 PM3/25/17
to
yes yes the evidence is clear, bill clintons free trade, tax breaks for the wealthy, and deregulation is stripping americas middle class clean: Between 2000 and 2014, 203 out of the 229 metropolitan areas analyzed had a decline in the percentage of their populations that fell in that middle-income range: the decline in the middle class is associated with an overall increase in inequality in the US, which could lead to somewhat dire consequences for American society.
bill clintons policies created the environment for the rise of a trump. when bill clinton sold us out to the chinese communist party, you will note incomes plunged, and have never came back.
bill clintons own government researchers warned him the chinese communist party would strip america clean of its middle class jobs, homes, wealth, and pensions, and warned him this will end in a economic debacle and depression, and he did it anyways.
http://www.epi.org/publication/issuebriefs_ib137/
the blowout of 2008, was not caused so much by the housing bubble that popped, which billy was also responsible for(see deregulation), because millions upon millions of good paying jobs disappeared from the late 1990's till 2008, the vast job losses in america, were before the housing bubble collapse.
the collapse of the middle class engineered by billy, is why americans simply no longer had the income to pay their bills.
http://www.businessinsider.com/pew-research-center-middle-class-report-2016-5
The middle class is vanishing in America's cities
Andy Kiersz
May 14, 2016, 7:52 PM
The middle class in America's cities has shrunk dramatically in the 21st century.
A Pew Research Center analysis of Census Bureau data looked at the state of the middle class in America's metropolitan areas. Pew defined "middle-income" households as those whose income fell between two-thirds and twice the national median household income, adjusted for household size and for the local cost of living in each metro area.
The results are fascinating and disheartening: Between 2000 and 2014, the two years Pew reviewed in the study, 203 out of the 229 metropolitan areas analyzed had a decline in the percentage of their populations that fell in that middle-income range.
Business Insider made a map showing those shifts. The darker red each metro area, the more the middle-income group shrank as a percentage of that metro area's population between 2000 and 2014. The handful of blue metro areas represent those that saw an increase in the middle-income share.
Business Insider/Andy Kiersz, data from Pew Research Center
Pew's research shone light on the issue that has contributed to the rise in anxiety throughout the American public, which has helped explain the rise of the insurgent candidacies of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders.
As the US is a country of vast proportions, the causes for the decline in the middle class varies among metro areas. Pew pointed out the examples of Goldsboro, North Carolina, and Midland, Texas. Both cities saw large declines in their middle-income shares — but for very different reasons.
Pew Research Center
Goldsboro, which Pew noted is a railroad hub and home to Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, saw a big rise in the share of lower-income households that earned less than two-thirds of the national median income after adjusting for household size and local cost of living.
Meanwhile, Midland, which as of 2014 was still enjoying the fruits of the US shale-oil boom, lost middle-income households, but saw a big jump in the share of upper-income households earning more than twice the adjusted national median income.
The news nationwide, however, is more bad than good.
Pew observed that the decline in the middle class is associated with an overall increase in inequality in the US, which could lead to somewhat dire consequences for American society.
Pew also noted that the drop in the percentage of households that fall in the middle coincides with an overall decline in incomes. The report pointed out that in the time period covered, real median household incomes in the US as a whole fell by 8%.
The decline of the middle class in America's cities is one of the biggest political and economic problems of the 21st century, and Pew's analysis shows the severity of the problem.
"The current and future status of the American middle class continues to be a central issue in the 2016 presidential campaign. Moreover, new economic research suggests that a struggling middle class could be holding back the potential for future economic growth," Pew wrote in its report. "The national trend is clear — the middle class is losing ground as a share of the population, and its share of aggregate U.S. household income is also declining."
bill clintons policies created the environment for the rise of a trump. when bill clinton sold us out to the chinese communist party, you will note incomes plunged, and have never came back.
bill clintons own government researchers warned him the chinese communist party would strip america clean of its middle class jobs, homes, wealth, and pensions, and warned him this will end in a economic debacle and depression, and he did it anyways.
http://www.epi.org/publication/issuebriefs_ib137/
the blowout of 2008, was not caused so much by the housing bubble that popped, which billy was also responsible for(see deregulation), because millions upon millions of good paying jobs disappeared from the late 1990's till 2008, the vast job losses in america, were before the housing bubble collapse.
the collapse of the middle class engineered by billy, is why americans simply no longer had the income to pay their bills.
http://www.businessinsider.com/pew-research-center-middle-class-report-2016-5
The middle class is vanishing in America's cities
Andy Kiersz
May 14, 2016, 7:52 PM
The middle class in America's cities has shrunk dramatically in the 21st century.
A Pew Research Center analysis of Census Bureau data looked at the state of the middle class in America's metropolitan areas. Pew defined "middle-income" households as those whose income fell between two-thirds and twice the national median household income, adjusted for household size and for the local cost of living in each metro area.
The results are fascinating and disheartening: Between 2000 and 2014, the two years Pew reviewed in the study, 203 out of the 229 metropolitan areas analyzed had a decline in the percentage of their populations that fell in that middle-income range.
Business Insider made a map showing those shifts. The darker red each metro area, the more the middle-income group shrank as a percentage of that metro area's population between 2000 and 2014. The handful of blue metro areas represent those that saw an increase in the middle-income share.
Business Insider/Andy Kiersz, data from Pew Research Center
Pew's research shone light on the issue that has contributed to the rise in anxiety throughout the American public, which has helped explain the rise of the insurgent candidacies of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders.
As the US is a country of vast proportions, the causes for the decline in the middle class varies among metro areas. Pew pointed out the examples of Goldsboro, North Carolina, and Midland, Texas. Both cities saw large declines in their middle-income shares — but for very different reasons.
Pew Research Center
Goldsboro, which Pew noted is a railroad hub and home to Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, saw a big rise in the share of lower-income households that earned less than two-thirds of the national median income after adjusting for household size and local cost of living.
Meanwhile, Midland, which as of 2014 was still enjoying the fruits of the US shale-oil boom, lost middle-income households, but saw a big jump in the share of upper-income households earning more than twice the adjusted national median income.
The news nationwide, however, is more bad than good.
Pew observed that the decline in the middle class is associated with an overall increase in inequality in the US, which could lead to somewhat dire consequences for American society.
Pew also noted that the drop in the percentage of households that fall in the middle coincides with an overall decline in incomes. The report pointed out that in the time period covered, real median household incomes in the US as a whole fell by 8%.
The decline of the middle class in America's cities is one of the biggest political and economic problems of the 21st century, and Pew's analysis shows the severity of the problem.
"The current and future status of the American middle class continues to be a central issue in the 2016 presidential campaign. Moreover, new economic research suggests that a struggling middle class could be holding back the potential for future economic growth," Pew wrote in its report. "The national trend is clear — the middle class is losing ground as a share of the population, and its share of aggregate U.S. household income is also declining."
Bret Cahill
Mar 25, 2017, 4:34:57 PM3/25/17
to
> yes yes the evidence is clear, bill clintons free trade, tax breaks for the wealthy, and deregulation is stripping americas middle class clean: Between 2000 and 2014,
Bill Clinton was president in 2014?
Why not credit H. Hoover for the 1940s economic boom?
> 203 out of the 229 metropolitan areas analyzed had a decline in the percentage of their populations that fell in that middle-income range: the decline in the middle class is associated with an overall increase in inequality in the US, which could lead to somewhat dire consequences for American society.
> bill clintons policies created the environment for the rise of a trump.
> when bill clinton sold us out to the chinese communist party, you will note incomes plunged, and have never came back.
> bill clintons own government researchers warned him the chinese communist party would strip america clean of its middle class jobs, homes, wealth, and pensions, and warned him this will end in a economic debacle and depression, and he did it anyways.
> http://www.epi.org/publication/issuebriefs_ib137/
> the blowout of 2008, was not caused so much by the housing bubble that popped, which billy was also responsible for(see deregulation), because millions upon millions of good paying jobs disappeared from the late 1990's till 2008, the vast job losses in america, were before the housing bubble collapse.
>
> the collapse of the middle class engineered by billy, is why americans simply no longer had the income to pay their bills.
>
> http://www.businessinsider.com/pew-research-center-middle-class-report-2016-5
>
>
> The middle class is vanishing in America's cities
>
> Andy Kiersz
>
> May 14, 2016, 7:52 PM
>
> The middle class in America's cities has shrunk dramatically in the 21st century.
>
> A Pew Research Center analysis of Census Bureau data looked at the state of the middle class in America's metropolitan areas. Pew defined "middle-income" households as those whose income fell between two-thirds and twice the national median household income, adjusted for household size and for the local cost of living in each metro area.
>
> The results are fascinating and disheartening: Between 2000 and 2014, the two years Pew reviewed in the study, 203 out of the 229 metropolitan areas analyzed had a decline in the percentage of their populations that fell in that middle-income range.
>
> Business Insider made a map showing those shifts. The darker red each metro area, the more the middle-income group shrank as a percentage of that metro area's population between 2000 and 2014. The handful of blue metro areas represent those that saw an increase in the middle-income share.
> Business Insider/Andy Kiersz, data from Pew Research Center
> Pew's research shone light on the issue that has contributed to the rise in anxiety throughout the American public, which has helped explain the rise of the insurgent candidacies of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders.
>
> As the US is a country of vast proportions, the causes for the decline in the middle class varies among metro areas. Pew pointed out the examples of Goldsboro, North Carolina, and Midland, Texas. Both cities saw large declines in their middle-income shares — but for very different reasons.
> Pew Research Center
>
> Goldsboro, which Pew noted is a railroad hub and home to Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, saw a big rise in the share of lower-income households that earned less than two-thirds of the national median income after adjusting for household size and local cost of living.
>
> Meanwhile, Midland, which as of 2014 was still enjoying the fruits of the US shale-oil boom, lost middle-income households, but saw a big jump in the share of upper-income households earning more than twice the adjusted national median income.
>
> The news nationwide, however, is more bad than good.
> Pew observed that the decline in the middle class is associated with an overall increase in inequality in the US, which could lead to somewhat dire consequences for American society.
>
> Pew also noted that the drop in the percentage of households that fall in the middle coincides with an overall decline in incomes. The report pointed out that in the time period covered, real median household incomes in the US as a whole fell by 8%.
>
> The decline of the middle class in America's cities is one of the biggest political and economic problems of the 21st century, and Pew's analysis shows the severity of the problem.
>
> "The current and future status of the American middle class continues to be a central issue in the 2016 presidential campaign. Moreover, new economic research suggests that a struggling middle class could be holding back the potential for future economic growth," Pew wrote in its report. "The national trend is clear — the middle class is losing ground as a share of the population, and its share of aggregate U.S. household income is also declining."
The legacy media keep Georgism top secret.
All you need to do to solve these problems is pop enormously exposed legacy media fanny with Henry George.
Repeat as necessary until all the jerryspringers scream and run.
Flailing out at Bill Clinton just makes it look like you have Clinton derangement syndrome.
Bret Cahill
nickname unavailable
Mar 25, 2017, 9:04:46 PM3/25/17
to
On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 3:34:57 PM UTC-5, Bret Cahill wrote:
> > yes yes the evidence is clear, bill clintons free trade, tax breaks for the wealthy, and deregulation is stripping americas middle class clean: Between 2000 and 2014,
>
> Bill Clinton was president in 2014?
>
his polices are still in place, and those polices were crafted in 2000. as i have repeatedly proven, he did his worst damage in 1999, and 2000.
> > yes yes the evidence is clear, bill clintons free trade, tax breaks for the wealthy, and deregulation is stripping americas middle class clean: Between 2000 and 2014,
>
> Bill Clinton was president in 2014?
>
> Why not credit H. Hoover for the 1940s economic boom?
>
you have to show me we no longer free trade with china, and that glass-steagle has been brought back, that derivatives have become regulated, that the banks are now re-regulated, etc. because you cannot and you are not a honest person. those polices are still in place today, and its why we cannot recover.
> > 203 out of the 229 metropolitan areas analyzed had a decline in the percentage of their populations that fell in that middle-income range: the decline in the middle class is associated with an overall increase in inequality in the US, which could lead to somewhat dire consequences for American society.
>
> > bill clintons policies created the environment for the rise of a trump.
>
> The article never mentions Bill Clinton.
>
its all billys polices, plan and simple. the polices are there, and the results of the policies are there, its called causation.
even dean baker says it was done on purpose. its why you keep losing. the sooner you realize this, the sooner perhaps you can reform.
> > when bill clinton sold us out to the chinese communist party, you will note incomes plunged, and have never came back.
>
> > bill clintons own government researchers warned him the chinese communist party would strip america clean of its middle class jobs, homes, wealth, and pensions, and warned him this will end in a economic debacle and depression, and he did it anyways.
>
> > http://www.epi.org/publication/issuebriefs_ib137/
>
> > the blowout of 2008, was not caused so much by the housing bubble that popped, which billy was also responsible for(see deregulation), because millions upon millions of good paying jobs disappeared from the late 1990's till 2008, the vast job losses in america, were before the housing bubble collapse.
> >
> > the collapse of the middle class engineered by billy, is why americans simply no longer had the income to pay their bills.
> >
> > http://www.businessinsider.com/pew-research-center-middle-class-report-2016-5
> >
> >
> > The middle class is vanishing in America's cities
> >
> > Andy Kiersz
> >
> > May 14, 2016, 7:52 PM
> >
> > The middle class in America's cities has shrunk dramatically in the 21st century.
> >
> > A Pew Research Center analysis of Census Bureau data looked at the state of the middle class in America's metropolitan areas. Pew defined "middle-income" households as those whose income fell between two-thirds and twice the national median household income, adjusted for household size and for the local cost of living in each metro area.
> >
> > The results are fascinating and disheartening: Between 2000 and 2014, the two years Pew reviewed in the study, 203 out of the 229 metropolitan areas analyzed had a decline in the percentage of their populations that fell in that middle-income range.
> >
> > Business Insider made a map showing those shifts. The darker red each metro area, the more the middle-income group shrank as a percentage of that metro area's population between 2000 and 2014. The handful of blue metro areas represent those that saw an increase in the middle-income share.
> > Business Insider/Andy Kiersz, data from Pew Research Center
> > Pew's research shone light on the issue that has contributed to the rise in anxiety throughout the American public, which has helped explain the rise of the insurgent candidacies of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders.
> >
> > As the US is a country of vast proportions, the causes for the decline in the middle class varies among metro areas. Pew pointed out the examples of Goldsboro, North Carolina, and Midland, Texas. Both cities saw large declines in their middle-income shares — but for very different reasons.
> > Pew Research Center
> >
> > Goldsboro, which Pew noted is a railroad hub and home to Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, saw a big rise in the share of lower-income households that earned less than two-thirds of the national median income after adjusting for household size and local cost of living.
> >
> > Meanwhile, Midland, which as of 2014 was still enjoying the fruits of the US shale-oil boom, lost middle-income households, but saw a big jump in the share of upper-income households earning more than twice the adjusted national median income.
> >
> > The news nationwide, however, is more bad than good.
> > Pew observed that the decline in the middle class is associated with an overall increase in inequality in the US, which could lead to somewhat dire consequences for American society.
> >
> > Pew also noted that the drop in the percentage of households that fall in the middle coincides with an overall decline in incomes. The report pointed out that in the time period covered, real median household incomes in the US as a whole fell by 8%.
yep, free trade with china, that his own government warned him not to do, and beyond a shadow of a doubt they were right, and right that we would never ever be able to recover till we got rid of billys free trade polices.
> >
> > The decline of the middle class in America's cities is one of the biggest political and economic problems of the 21st century, and Pew's analysis shows the severity of the problem.
> >
> > "The current and future status of the American middle class continues to be a central issue in the 2016 presidential campaign. Moreover, new economic research suggests that a struggling middle class could be holding back the potential for future economic growth," Pew wrote in its report. "The national trend is clear — the middle class is losing ground as a share of the population, and its share of aggregate U.S. household income is also declining."
>
> Over 135 years ago, writing from San Francisco, Henry George suggested taxing land ownership at full rental value, a powerful policy that lowers housing costs, unemployment, poverty, homelessness, etc.
>
> The legacy media keep Georgism top secret.
>
> All you need to do to solve these problems is pop enormously exposed legacy media fanny with Henry George.
>
> Repeat as necessary until all the jerryspringers scream and run.
>
> Flailing out at Bill Clinton just makes it look like you have Clinton derangement syndrome.
>
GIGANTIC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRPPPPPPP!!!
henry georges land tax would no longer work today, billy made sure of that. its all over seas, out of your reach. just look at apple.
besides, it would still not stop chinas rape of america. nor wall streets. we must keep things as simple as possible, be we must not let simpletons dictate policies that will never work.
till you reverse what billy did, which i doubt can happen today unless the american people finally rise up, anything you try will get you no where.
you better have a plan b.
>
> Bret Cahill
Bret Cahill
Mar 25, 2017, 11:25:21 PM3/25/17
to
> > > yes yes the evidence is clear, bill clintons free trade, tax breaks for the wealthy, and deregulation is stripping americas middle class clean: Between 2000 and 2014,
> > Bill Clinton was president in 2014?
> his polices are still in place,
just like Obamacare is still in place?
> > Bill Clinton was president in 2014?
> his polices are still in place,
See a trend?
Anything them ebil neoliberals do is 100% irreversible.
Them ebil neoliberals pop Luddite fanny and political Luddites scream bloody murder. They flail out powerlessly.
And them ebil neoliberals just laugh at your powerlessness.
Buddy, you need to give up fighting death, taxes, neoliberals and God Himself.
You just ain't gonna win.
> and those polices were crafted in 2000.
> as i have repeatedly proven, he did his worst damage in 1999, and 2000.
> > Why not credit H. Hoover for the 1940s economic boom?
> because those were not hoovers polices,
<CIA>
. . .
> > > bill clintons policies created the environment for the rise of a trump.
> > The article never mentions Bill Clinton.
> it does not have to.
> in fact, its the second study that has tied in the destruction of the middle class, to bill clintons time period.
<CIA>
. . .
> > > "The current and future status of the American middle class continues to be a central issue in the 2016 presidential campaign. Moreover, new economic research suggests that a struggling middle class could be holding back the potential for future economic growth," Pew wrote in its report. "The national trend is clear — the middle class is losing ground as a share of the population, and its share of aggregate U.S. household income is also declining."
> >
> > Over 135 years ago, writing from San Francisco, Henry George suggested taxing land ownership at full rental value, a powerful policy that lowers housing costs, unemployment, poverty, homelessness, etc.
> > The legacy media keep Georgism top secret.
> > All you need to do to solve these problems is pop enormously exposed legacy media fanny with Henry George.
> > Repeat as necessary until all the jerryspringers scream and run.
> > Flailing out at Bill Clinton just makes it look like you have Clinton derangement syndrome.
> that is a,
Here, try again, this time w/o dodgin' 'n dodgin':
Over 135 years ago half a _century_ before the ebil Bill Clinton was even born, Henry George proved beyond any doubt that taxing land ownership at full rental value, a powerful policy that lowers housing costs, unemployment, poverty, homelessness, etc., was the solution.
<CIA>
> henry georges land tax would no longer work today
<CIA>
The more you dodge the more tRUMP tanks and the more free trading Obama's and Bill's approval ratings soar.
That's why you can bet your last cent that the double stack trains will keep coming.
Keep up the good work!
Keep on dodgin' 'n dodgin' like a looneytarian!
Bret Cahill
nickname unavailable
Mar 26, 2017, 1:45:29 AM3/26/17
to
On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 10:25:21 PM UTC-5, Bret Cahill wrote:
> > > > yes yes the evidence is clear, bill clintons free trade, tax breaks for the wealthy, and deregulation is stripping americas middle class clean: Between 2000 and 2014,
>
> > > Bill Clinton was president in 2014?
>
> > his polices are still in place,
>
> just like Obamacare is still in place?
>
that is a distraction. bills polices have been directly linked twice now, and they are still bearing fruit.
> > > > yes yes the evidence is clear, bill clintons free trade, tax breaks for the wealthy, and deregulation is stripping americas middle class clean: Between 2000 and 2014,
>
> > > Bill Clinton was president in 2014?
>
> > his polices are still in place,
>
> just like Obamacare is still in place?
>
> See a trend?
>
no, obamacare was a band aid, clintons polices destroyed the middle class. two completely different animals.
> Anything them ebil neoliberals do is 100% irreversible.
>
> Them ebil neoliberals pop Luddite fanny and political Luddites scream bloody murder. They flail out powerlessly.
>
> And them ebil neoliberals just laugh at your powerlessness.
>
> Buddy, you need to give up fighting death, taxes, neoliberals and God Himself.
>
> You just ain't gonna win.
>
> > and those polices were crafted in 2000.
>
> The % increase in imports was higher under Reagan than Bill.
>
> > as i have repeatedly proven, he did his worst damage in 1999, and 2000.
>
> > > Why not credit H. Hoover for the 1940s economic boom?
>
> > because those were not hoovers polices,
>
> Then what makes you think BushCo tax cuts were Clinton's policies?
>
> <CIA>
>
> . . .
>
yet, obama reversed those tax breaks, and the economy still nose dived. like i said, you better have a plan b.
> > > > bill clintons policies created the environment for the rise of a trump.
>
> > > The article never mentions Bill Clinton.
>
> > it does not have to.
>
> Certainly not if no one believes the problem was Bill Clinton.
>
> > in fact, its the second study that has tied in the destruction of the middle class, to bill clintons time period.
>
> Which was 2014?
>
> <CIA>
>
> . . .
>
Since 2000, the trade deficit with China has surged by 173 percent, from $83 billion in 2000 to $227 billion in 2009. The United States has lost more than one-third of all its manufacturing jobs -- 5.6 million; U.S. wages have declined; the country has suffered a financial meltdown; it has spent $14 trillion on economic stimulus, only to experience the highest unemployment rates in generations and annual federal budget deficits of more than $1 trillion. These trends are not "likely to end,"
what is it, 13,000 jobs per every billion we go into the hole. in 2000 alone, well over a million jobs lost, and every year it gets worse and worse. almost three million in 2009.
can't blame bush, he did not pass those free trade agreements, but we can blame the dim wit, because he said he would fix them, or get rid of them.
http://www.manufacturingnews.com/news/10/0615/WTO.html
June 15, 2010 Volume 17, No. 10
Sixteen Case Studies On Lean Manufacturing From Manufacturing & Technology News
China's Entry Into The WTO 10 Years Later Is Not What President Clinton Promised
By Richard A. McCormack ric...@manufacturingnews.com
It has been 10 years since the U.S. Congress and President Bill Clinton paved the way for China to enter the World Trade Organization (WTO). Most all of the predictions from those pushing the deal at the time have proven to be wrong, according to an analysis done by Robert Lighthizer, former deputy United States Trade Representative during the Reagan administration and head of the international trade department of the Washington firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & From LLP.
Bill Clinton, the country's most ardent booster of opening trade with China, looks especially imprudent 10 years later. During a press conference on March 29, 2000, Clinton said that granting China permannt normal trade relations (PNTR), which allowed China to gain entry into the WTO, would be a great deal for America. "We do nothing," Clinton said. "They have to lower tariffs. They open up telecommunications for investment. They allow us to sell cars made in America in China at much lower tariffs. They allow us to put our own distributorships there. They allow us to put our own parts there. We don't have to transfer technology or do joint manufacturing in China any more. This a hundred-to-nothing deal for America when it comes to the economic consequences."
It didn't quite work out that way. Since 2000, the trade deficit with China has surged by 173 percent, from $83 billion in 2000 to $227 billion in 2009. The United States has lost more than one-third of all its manufacturing jobs -- 5.6 million; U.S. wages have declined; the country has suffered a financial meltdown; it has spent $14 trillion on economic stimulus, only to experience the highest unemployment rates in generations and annual federal budget deficits of more than $1 trillion. These trends are not "likely to end," says Lighthizer.
Granting PNTR to China would "increase U.S. jobs and reduce our trade deficit," Clinton promised. There are fewer private sector jobs in May 2010 (107.6 million) than in May 2000 (110.7 million). The U.S. trade deficit in goods skyrocketed to more than $800 billion in 2008, and is presently increasing at a rate that is considered to be unsustainable.
Clinton said the deal with China would "greatly increase the opportunities to open professional services such as law firms, management consulting, accountants and environmental services." Few such opportunities exist for those types of companies. Presidential candidate George W. Bush agreed, saying that PNTR would "narrow our trade deficit with China."
Others were even more adamant in their arguments about the necessity for Congress to pass PNTR with China, Lighthizer told the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission on June 9. Robert Kapp, president of the U.S.-China Business Council, said the agreement would open the Chinese market to U.S. exports and would be "the biggest single step we can take to reduce America's growing trade deficit with China. With American tariffs near zero and non-tariff barriers few and far between, we're not talking about a 'gift' for China in PNTR, we're talking about bringing home the bacon."
Another pro-China business group, the Business Coalition for U.S.-China Trade, said that in return for making concessions to joining the WTO, "China's 'reward' from the U.S. is....ZERO, ZIP, NOTHING, NADA. That's right. China gets no increased access to U.S. markets, no cuts in U.S. tariffs, no special removal of U.S. import restrictions. That's because our market is already open to Chinese imports."
The Cato Institute was equally as strident in support, stating: "It is primarily U.S. exporters who will benefit." Doug Bandow of the Cato Institute added that the "silliest argument against PNTR is that Chinese imports would overwhelm U.S. industry. In fact, American workers are far more productive than their Chinese counterparts. Moreover, Beijing's manufacturing exports to the United States remain small, about half the level of those from Mexico. PNTR would create far more export opportunities for American than Chinese concerns."
Clinton, Lighthizer noted, assured the American public that there were strong measures in the agreement "to strengthen guarantees of fair trade and to address practices that distort trade and investment." That might have been the case, but few of those measures have been pursued by the federal government.
Clinton's U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky chimed in. She said that if the United States "turned down a set of one-way concessions made by China, we will make a very dark statement about our ability to develop a stable and mutually beneficial relationship with the world's largest country....China's accession to the WTO is a clear win. China's trade concessions are one-way and enforceable."
Other Clinton administration officials were involved in the sales campaign. Clinton's National Security Advisor Sandy Berger said that China's accession to the WTO would assure that it would "play by the rules of the international system."
Kenneth Lieberthal, now at the Brookings Institute and formerly a staff member of Clinton's National Security Council, told the PBS Newshour in 2000 that the U.S. trade deficit with China "will not grow as much as it would have grown without this agreement and, over time, clearly it will shrink with this agreement."
USCC Commissioner Pat Mulloy noted at the June 9 hearing that one person had correctly analyzed the deal: Joseph Quinlan, an economist with Morgan Stanley. Quoted in the Wall Street Journal, Quinlan said: "While the debate in Washington focused mainly on the probable lift for U.S. exports to China, many U.S. multinationals have something different in mind. The deal is about investment, not exports."
While the American people may have been oversold by Clinton and his appointees, the Chinese knew what was going on. The day that China entered the WTO on December 11, 2001, an article in the People's Daily said the deal would "actively spur foreign capital to flow into high and new technological industries and encourage transnational corporations to come to China to set up R&D centers and regional headquarters."
The United States made the mistake of treating China as if it was another democracy, says Lighthizer. The world trading system created by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1947 excluded countries like China for good reason, Lighthizer notes. Members of GATT "agreed on basic principles of democracy and capitalism," and they excluded communist countries "because they thought such countries would sabotage GATT's effectiveness. Indeed, the experience of the Cold War, in which international relations became polarized between democratic and capitalistic nations on the one hand, and authoritarian and communist nations, on the other -- solidified GATT as a 'pillar of the free world.' The United States and its allies generally extended GATT membership to countries that they were intent on anchoring to the alliance of democratic and capitalistic nations."
China still does not fit that description. "It is clear that allowing a huge non-market economy like China -- a country that practices neither democracy nor true market capitalism -- to enter the WTO had profound consequences for that organization."
U.S. proponents of PNTR for China "misjudged China," says Lighthizer. "They assumed that acceding to the WTO would cause China to become more and more Western in its behavior."
Nothing of the sort happened. China continues to believe that the WTO "is a vehicle to do what they want to do and get access to other people's markets. They don't intend to change the essence" of their engagement.
> > > > "The current and future status of the American middle class continues to be a central issue in the 2016 presidential campaign. Moreover, new economic research suggests that a struggling middle class could be holding back the potential for future economic growth," Pew wrote in its report. "The national trend is clear — the middle class is losing ground as a share of the population, and its share of aggregate U.S. household income is also declining."
> > >
> > > Over 135 years ago, writing from San Francisco, Henry George suggested taxing land ownership at full rental value, a powerful policy that lowers housing costs, unemployment, poverty, homelessness, etc.
>
> > > The legacy media keep Georgism top secret.
>
> > > All you need to do to solve these problems is pop enormously exposed legacy media fanny with Henry George.
>
> > > Repeat as necessary until all the jerryspringers scream and run.
>
> > > Flailing out at Bill Clinton just makes it look like you have Clinton derangement syndrome.
>
> > that is a,
>
> <crickets>
>
> Here, try again, this time w/o dodgin' 'n dodgin':
>
> Over 135 years ago half a _century_ before the ebil Bill Clinton was even born, Henry George proved beyond any doubt that taxing land ownership at full rental value, a powerful policy that lowers housing costs, unemployment, poverty, homelessness, etc., was the solution.
>
> <CIA>
>
> > henry georges land tax would no longer work today
>
> Are you claiming moochers no longer live off of land rent?
>
> <CIA>
>
> The more you dodge the more tRUMP tanks and the more free trading Obama's and Bill's approval ratings soar.
>
> That's why you can bet your last cent that the double stack trains will keep coming.
>
> Keep up the good work!
>
> Keep on dodgin' 'n dodgin' like a looneytarian!
>
>
> Bret Cahill
0 new messages