Wal-Mart names new head of online site

TalkBack 11 of 16:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Darn ZdNet posts.

Re: Sorry but the numbers simply don't agree with you.

NAFTA: The way I hear it, its been a HUGE success. Just google NAFTA. Sure you get arguments from both sides, but that is true with anything. Then you got to consider: There are economies going free trade all over. We want to extend to Chile, Argentina... The WTO is progressing in the next round of talks about clarifying dumping rules, and IP relations (going slow).

If trade wasn't good (overall, not specific sectors), why would SO many people go for it? Conspiracy theories and such can only take you so far. NAFTA was a testing bed. Economics knew trade would be better, but had never tested it on a large scale. NAFTA proved the theories were right, and now we are using the ideas on an even larger scale. Those countries that have participated in trade have historically done very well in comparison to those with closed borders. Look at India.

Walmart: Actually, I don't think Walmart got directly punished. Legally, they hadn't done anything wrong. They hired foreign contractors that were doing the "dumping". In such a relationship, the one hiring is legally safe from what the contractor does. Of course the punishment of the contractors did affect Walmart's pricing. And I agree, the WTO should have allowed more retaliation against China. I really do wish the WTO (meaning its members) wasn't so lenient on them.

The way I see it, a deficit means we are trading out more dollars than we are trading in. Eventually, those dollars HAVE to come back to us. The buying power of the dollar when it comes back is determined by what we offer in return. Ware better at making some things, if we concentrate on those things, we can offer something of value in return for the dollar. If we produce stuff that they can make cheaper (cotton, steel?), obviously the dollar value will fall.

Earning a living: The world has become a global economy whether we liked it or not. We have to compete against other nations and their workers. If that means living a bit more competitively so be it. It really isn't a choice.

If we didn't trade, we would be worse off. Other countries will become efficient, obtain better growth rates due to trading and surpass us. We can either close ourselves off and maintain our good growth rates or trade and get better growth rates along with everyone else. Either way is fine, but closing ourselves off 100% is next to impossible and therefore not really an option.

Eventually, the other nations will go through the stages of economic evolution like we and Canada have. Like Mexico and Brazil are. Like Argentina, Chile, Peru want to. When that time comes, we might go back to that era you speak of, but only if we stay competitive.

Posted by: doe_z   Posted on: 06/18/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• ChangeAuditor for Exchange ScriptLogic Quest ChangeAuditor for Exchange proactively audits all activity, provides ... Download Now
• EMAIL CONFIDENTIALITY AND THE LAW: A SURVEY OF U.S. LEGISLATION ON EMAIL ENCRYPTION Trend Micro Whether absolutely required by some statutes or simply suggested by other ... Download Now
• Invest in Smarter Collaboration - Early Benefits of Enterprise Social Software IBM Discover the true business value of enterprise social software plus hear about best practices from industry experts during this live interactive webcast. (Sponsored by IBM) Download Now