Warren Buffett: Free trade has turned American workers into roadkill

[WVPATX]

Hmmmmm!

Warren Buffett Says Free Trade Has Turned American Workers Into Roadkill

The Associated Press/Cliff Owen

by JOHN CARNEY8 May 2017295

a test run on CNBC’s Squawkbox.

So free trade is wonderful for the world and for the United States, but its benefits are diffused among 320 million people. You buy your bananas cheaper because we don’t try and produce them in the United States. But the penalties from free trade are terrible to specific industries. And as an investor, I can own – make a dumb decision on owning a shoe company. But if I own a good insurance company, I can diversify away the problems. If you’re a 55-year-old steelworker, you can’t diversify away your talents. I mean, you had it if steel or textiles or shoes become subject to total, it all moves offshore. So you want to have free trade, but you also have to take care of the people who, through no fault of their own, have spent their life learning one profession. And you can talk about retraining and all that, but it just isn’t practical. And just take Berkshire Hathaway. We started with 2,000 employees in New Bedford, Mass, turning out textiles. And that business was doomed. And we had workers there who really they didn’t have alternatives at age 50. Fair number of them just spoke Portuguese. They didn’t have a chance. And a rich country that’s prospering because of free trade, and as the world is prospering, should keep the free trade as much as possible. But they also should take care of the people that become the roadkill, you know, when an industry moves.

 

[op2]

Hmmmmm!

Warren Buffett Says Free Trade Has Turned American Workers Into Roadkill

The Associated Press/Cliff Owen

by JOHN CARNEY8 May 2017295

a test run on CNBC’s Squawkbox.

So free trade is wonderful for the world and for the United States, but its benefits are diffused among 320 million people. You buy your bananas cheaper because we don’t try and produce them in the United States. But the penalties from free trade are terrible to specific industries. And as an investor, I can own – make a dumb decision on owning a shoe company. But if I own a good insurance company, I can diversify away the problems. If you’re a 55-year-old steelworker, you can’t diversify away your talents. I mean, you had it if steel or textiles or shoes become subject to total, it all moves offshore. So you want to have free trade, but you also have to take care of the people who, through no fault of their own, have spent their life learning one profession. And you can talk about retraining and all that, but it just isn’t practical. And just take Berkshire Hathaway. We started with 2,000 employees in New Bedford, Mass, turning out textiles. And that business was doomed. And we had workers there who really they didn’t have alternatives at age 50. Fair number of them just spoke Portuguese. They didn’t have a chance. And a rich country that’s prospering because of free trade, and as the world is prospering, should keep the free trade as much as possible. But they also should take care of the people that become the roadkill, you know, when an industry moves.

So just to be clear, Warren Buffett's opinion is to be valued? Correct? Because I think he may have some opinions on other subjects that may not be to your liking.

 

[WVPATX]

So just to be clear, Warren Buffett's opinion is to be valued? Correct? Because I think he may have some opinions on other subjects that may not be to your liking.

I just posted what he said. I agree with Buffett on some things, disagree on others. He is a brilliant financial investor and a liberal democrat. He correctly, in my view, recognizes that unfettered free trade kills some industries and jobs and that retraining is mostly a fiction. He has first hand experience with this.

There were even some things on which I agreed with Obama.

 

[op2]

I just posted what he said. I agree with Buffett on some things, disagree on others. He is a brilliant financial investor and a liberal democrat. He correctly, in my view, recognizes that unfettered free trade kills some industries and jobs and that retraining is mostly a fiction. He has first hand experience with this.

There were even some things on which I agreed with Obama.

Oh my goodness, if I wasn't so lazy I think I'd make that last line my signature.

ETA: I mean, using it as my signature line with quotes around it and then including your name. That is something I never thought I'd hear from you.

 

[WVPATX]

I agree when Obama said colleges and universities should open to all speakers even those with which they disagree, for example.

As a conservative, you would not expect me to agree with very much of Obama's policies.

 

[WVPATX]

So just to be clear, Warren Buffett's opinion is to be valued? Correct? Because I think he may have some opinions on other subjects that may not be to your liking.

But I have noticed you haven't commented on Buffett's statements. Deflection? Most libs think unfettered free trade is good and that workers can be retrained. Buffett knows first hand it does not work that way.

 

[op2]

I agree when Obama said colleges and universities should open to all speakers even those with which they disagree, for example.

As a conservative, you would not expect me to agree with very much of Obama's policies.

I didn't know Obama said that and I"m a bit surprised to hear it. If Hilary had said stuff like that last fall and in general stuck up hard for traditional liberal principles like free speech and protection of minority rights she'd be POTUS right now.

 

[atlkvb]

So just to be clear, Warren Buffett's opinion is to be valued? Correct? Because I think he may have some opinions on other subjects that may not be to your liking.

As much as I disagreed with Obama philosophically, he was right about a few things:

The debt (he was right about what he said about how bad it was for us, not what he did adding to it)

Race (he often spoke eloquently about us being one America, but he divided us along race as a political strategy)

Middle East (he was correct over how we messed up over there, but he messed it up even more for us)

Marriage & Families (he was right about the importance to Families of Men & Women Marrying, then the Left got to him and he changed his mind about Men marrying only Women at least)

Faith and Praying (Again he talked a good game, but it was all talk...even the Left didn't really believe him...he often mocked Christians to appease the Left)

On America (he said all the right things about what makes us special, but he actually hated us because of all the things that make us special)

 

[moe]

But I have noticed you haven't commented on Buffett's statements. Deflection? Most libs think unfettered free trade is good and that workers can be retrained. Buffett knows first hand it does not work that way.

So free trade is wonderful for the world and for the United States
Adapt or deal with it.

 

[WVPATX]

I didn't know Obama said that and I"m a bit surprised to hear it. If Hilary had said stuff like that last fall and in general stuck up hard for traditional liberal principles like free speech and protection of minority rights she'd be POTUS right now.

She made many huge mistakes that cost her the election. She sided with unfettered free trade and then vacillated and stated she opposed it. No one trusted her. She called Trump supporters deplorable and irredeemable. She called for an end to coal miners' jobs and the coal industry further alienating her union supporters. She did not campaign in Wisconsin and took PA and MI for granted. She had no coherent economic message and she had no overriding campaign theme (you can mock Trump's message of Making America Great Again, but everyone knew where he stood). She also sided with BLM over the police and would not even agree to meet with the head of the Fraternal Order of Police. All this really ticked off red states.

 

[op2]

But I have noticed you haven't commented on Buffett's statements. Deflection? Most libs think unfettered free trade is good and that workers can be retrained. Buffett knows first hand it does not work that way.

I didn't even read it but just knew that Buffett would have some views you wouldn't agree with. I read it now and yeah, I agree with him and I don't think may would disagree.

 

[WVPATX]

So free trade is wonderful for the world and for the United States
Adapt or deal with it.

Road Kill does not sound wonderful to me. Even Buffett acknowledges that. Fair trade is the answer to stop currency manipulation and dumping. Corporate tax cuts are the answer to keep more companies here and growing. Repatriation of overseas profits is the answer to help U.S. companies grow in America. And all of the above energy policy is the answer to create a huge number of high paying jobs. Trade schools are the answer to train young workers for jobs that need to be filled. Smart immigration focusing on the highly skilled, upwardly mobile and those with existing capital.

 

[op2]

She made many huge mistakes that cost her the election. She sided with unfettered free trade and then vacillated and stated she opposed it. No one trusted her. She called Trump supporters deplorable and irredeemable. She called for an end to coal miners' jobs and the coal industry further alienating her union supporters. She did not campaign in Wisconsin and took PA and MI for granted. She had no coherent economic message and she had no overriding campaign theme (you can mock Trump's message of Making America Great Again, but everyone knew where he stood). She also sided with BLM over the police and would not even agree to meet with the head of the Fraternal Order of Police. All this really ticked off red states.

The deplorable remark was a huge mistake. I don't know that the coal stuff hurt her that much. Places like WV weren't going to vote for her anyway. She did take PA and MI for granted. She was not a good candidate. If she had just hammered home classical liberal values though I think she would have won.

She gave a list of things recently for her loss (in her opinion) and one of them was misogyny. My eyes rolled. Yeah, she lost because of misogyny, namely she wasn't against it when she thought she could gain politically.

She would have been the first female POTUS but maybe it's better off that when we get our first female POTUS it's one that makes her way because of who she is instead of because who her husband is (who in this case was a very successful politician in addition to a misogynist).

 

[WVPATX]

I didn't even read it but just knew that Buffett would have some views you wouldn't agree with. I read it now and yeah, I agree with him and I don't think may would disagree.

I have debated many on the board about retraining, especially for out of work miners. It sounds wonderful in theory but not so much in actual practice. How do you replace their level of income where many only have high school education? How do you retrain 50+ year old men in new careers? Where do they need to travel to to get that job? What about their extended family that may depend on them? What about leaving their home, neighbors and friends? It is very complicated.

 

[WVPATX]

The deplorable remark was a huge mistake. I don't know that the coal stuff hurt her that much. Places like WV weren't going to vote for her anyway. She did take PA and MI for granted. She was not a good candidate. If she had just hammered home classical liberal values though I think she would have won.

She gave a list of things recently for her loss (in her opinion) and one of them was misogyny. My eyes rolled. Yeah, she lost because of misogyny, namely she wasn't against it when she thought she could gain politically.

She would have been the first female POTUS but maybe it's better off that when we get our first female POTUS it's one that makes her way because of who she is instead of because who her husband is (who in this case was a very successful politician in addition to a misogynist).

Good analysis.

 

[Brushy Bill]

So free trade is wonderful for the world and for the United States
Adapt or deal with it.

We are dealing with it. Get used to these types of solutions, commie.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

Hmmmmm!

Warren Buffett Says Free Trade Has Turned American Workers Into Roadkill

The Associated Press/Cliff Owen

by JOHN CARNEY8 May 2017295

a test run on CNBC’s Squawkbox.

So free trade is wonderful for the world and for the United States, but its benefits are diffused among 320 million people. You buy your bananas cheaper because we don’t try and produce them in the United States. But the penalties from free trade are terrible to specific industries. And as an investor, I can own – make a dumb decision on owning a shoe company. But if I own a good insurance company, I can diversify away the problems. If you’re a 55-year-old steelworker, you can’t diversify away your talents. I mean, you had it if steel or textiles or shoes become subject to total, it all moves offshore. So you want to have free trade, but you also have to take care of the people who, through no fault of their own, have spent their life learning one profession. And you can talk about retraining and all that, but it just isn’t practical. And just take Berkshire Hathaway. We started with 2,000 employees in New Bedford, Mass, turning out textiles. And that business was doomed. And we had workers there who really they didn’t have alternatives at age 50. Fair number of them just spoke Portuguese. They didn’t have a chance. And a rich country that’s prospering because of free trade, and as the world is prospering, should keep the free trade as much as possible. But they also should take care of the people that become the roadkill, you know, when an industry moves.

Right. He said it hurt some but has been a net positive for the country as a whole and needs the big bad government to take care of them. Who has argued differently?

 

[Brushy Bill]

Ian Fletcher has done some really impressive work on the problems with "free trade" and what should replace the free trade mentality of the neoliberals and conservatives.

http://www.freetradedoesntwork.com/

 

[moe]

Road Kill does not sound wonderful to me.

Life isn't fair.

 

[WVPATX]

Right. He said it hurt some but has been a net positive for the country as a whole and needs the big bad government to take care of them. Who has argued differently?

We need fair trade, we don't need free trade that permits currency manipulation and dumping. We need lower corporate taxes to encourage growth. We need repatriation of overseas profits to encourage U.S. growth. We need all energy sources. We don't need massive government intervention. Create a wonderful business climate and businesses and good paying jobs will flourish. We also need smart immigration. Highly skilled, upwardly mobile and those with capital.

 

[atlkvb]

If she had just hammered home classical liberal values though I think she would have won.

Most Liberals don't even admit that's what they are. We have a guy here (Altanta) locally running for Congress John Ossoff, calling for cuts in spending and lower taxes.

No true Leftist wants any cuts in spending unless it's for the Military, and there is no way he's going to vote for massive tax cuts if Nancy Pelosi tells him not to.

Leftists don't even admit to being Liberal. They call themselves "Progressives" because they know "Liberal" is next to the "N" word politically.

 

[atlkvb]

The deplorable remark was a huge mistake. I don't know that the coal stuff hurt her that much. Places like WV weren't going to vote for her anyway. She did take PA and MI for granted. She was not a good candidate. If she had just hammered home classical liberal values though I think she would have won.

She gave a list of things recently for her loss (in her opinion) and one of them was misogyny. My eyes rolled. Yeah, she lost because of misogyny, namely she wasn't against it when she thought she could gain politically.

She would have been the first female POTUS but maybe it's better off that when we get our first female POTUS it's one that makes her way because of who she is instead of because who her husband is (who in this case was a very successful politician in addition to a misogynist).

Brutally honest, and correct.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

We need fair trade, we don't need free trade that permits currency manipulation and dumping. We need lower corporate taxes to encourage growth. We need repatriation of overseas profits to encourage U.S. growth. We need all energy sources. We don't need massive government intervention. Create a wonderful business climate and businesses and good paying jobs will flourish. We also need smart immigration. Highly skilled, upwardly mobile and those with capital.

Agree with all but the free/fair trade.

 

[WVPATX]

Agree with all but the free/fair trade.

Still can't believe you like currency manipulation and dumping. Both are artificial measures that distort markets. Both can destroy American industry and once destroyed enable the manipulators to raise prices back to normal levels because of much lesser competition.

 

[atlkvb]

We are dealing with it. Get used to these types of solutions, commie.

Just a quick observation here "BB". I think you and I are pretty much 100% in agreement on most issues politically, morally, and otherwise...we're both on the Right and proudly so.

But to me, sometimes you, Dave, and a few others on the Right lower yourselves to call names and attack our political opponents on the Left with derision just because they're confused, mixed up, and wrong.

I know they always resort to that but it's usually because they get frustrated over their inability to counter your well reasoned arguments against their lunacy, or they do it just to make themselves feel superior when they lack cogent responses to the holes we often poke into their Leftist theories.

I understand the urge to respond in kind (I often characterize their mental thought processes with funny names) but to me the personal name calling does not elevate our debate or our disagreements with them.

We look as foolish as they do with the name calling and I just wish our side would rise above that. Deconstruct them with your facts, name calling isn't necessary or even effective and brings us down to their level.

The ones on the Left who insist on it I simply place on ignore...it keeps the board clean and works every time it's tried. I don't engage their childishness.

I still enjoy your posts, you bring good insight minus the name calling.

Carry on.

 

[Brushy Bill]

Just a quick observation here "BB". I think you and I are pretty much 100% in agreement on most issues politically, morally, and otherwise...we're both on the Right and proudly so.

But to me, sometimes you, Dave, and a few others on the Right lower yourselves to call names and attack our political opponents on the Left with derision just because they're confused, mixed up, and wrong.

I know they always resort to that but it's usually because they get frustrated over their inability to counter your well reasoned arguments against their lunacy, or they do it just to make themselves feel superior when they lack cogent responses to the holes we often poke into their Leftist theories.

I understand the urge to respond in kind (I often characterize their mental thought processes with funny names) but to me the personal name calling does not elevate our debate or our positions against them.

We look as foolish as they do with the name calling and I just wish our side would rise above that. Deconstruct them with your facts, name calling isn't necessary or even effective and brings us down to their level.

The ones on the Left who insist on it I simply place on ignore...it keeps the board clean and works every time it's tried. I don't engage their childishness.

I still enjoy your posts, you bring good insight minus the name calling.

Carry on.

If I thought well reasoned arguments had any effect on posters like moe, CR89 et al I'd use them, but alas I don't believe they are willing, much less capable, of seeing the error in their ways through rational discourse. I've changed tack over the last 6 months or so and while the results are still up for debate my psyche is much better for it.

 

[WVUCOOPER]

Still can't believe you like currency manipulation and dumping. Both are artificial measures that distort markets. Both can destroy American industry and once destroyed enable the manipulators to raise prices back to normal levels because of much lesser competition.

Huh? I'm against the federal government buying a few votes at the expense of the many and disrupting free trade. If China starts raising their steel prices, someone else (whether it's the US or someone else) will step in when it's competitive. Until then, other US companies will be taking advantage of cheaper steel prices leading to far more US jobs than the steel industry.

 

[WVPATX]

Huh? I'm against the federal government buying a few votes at the expense of the many and disrupting free trade. If China starts raising their steel prices, someone else (whether it's the US or someone else) will step in when it's competitive. Until then, other US companies will be taking advantage of cheaper steel prices leading to far more US jobs than the steel industry.

And when steel prices go back up, we lose those jobs. Dumping, without a doubt, distorts markets. If you are a free market capitalist, you don't want distorted markets. This is simply undeniable.

If China dumps steel, for example, they win market share and drive out U.S. producers. Once driven out, China can increase prices. Other can compete with China on those prices if they have the capacity to do so, but the U.S. jobs are gone. And once prices go back up again, those jobs gains you cite are gone. It is a temporary situation meant to satisfy the dumping country's trade at that point in time giving them the flexibility to grow market share and then re-up prices when advantageous.

Good article on dumping:

https://www.nap.edu/read/5902/chapter/28#327

 

[atlkvb]

If I thought well reasoned arguments had any effect on posters like moe, CR89 et al I'd use them, but alas I don't believe they are willing, much less capable, of seeing the error in their ways through rational discourse. I've changed tack over the last 6 months or so and while the results are still up for debate my psyche is much better for it.

Much of what you say about those posters unfortunately is true.

I still refuse to allow them to drag me into their barrel of crabs.

When you roll around in the mud wrestling with a Pig, only you really get nasty and the Pig actually enjoys it.

 

[Boomboom521]

Hmmmmm....

Maybe true Republican / conservative fiscal policies towards business are detrimental to Americans well being?

I guess maybe the government should control other aspects of business as well?

 

[WVPATX]

Hmmmmm....

Maybe true Republican / conservative fiscal policies towards business are detrimental to Americans well being?

I guess maybe the government should control other aspects of business as well?

Free market capitalism is the answer Boom, free market capitalism. We don't permit China or any other country to distort markets.

 

[atlkvb]

And when steel prices go back up, we lose those jobs. Dumping, without a doubt, distorts markets. If you are a free market capitalist, you don't want distorted markets. This is simply undeniable.

If China dumps steel, for example, they win market share and drive out U.S. producers. Once driven out, China can increase prices. Other can compete with China on those prices if they have the capacity to do so, but the U.S. jobs are gone. And once prices go back up again, those jobs gains you cite are gone. It is a temporary situation meant to satisfy the dumping country's trade at that point in time giving them the flexibility to grow market share and then re-up prices when advantageous.

Good article on dumping:

https://www.nap.edu/read/5902/chapter/28#327

I don't support Trump's call for tariffs on imports because that only hurts U.S. consumers. However I absolutely agree the way to counter China and other currency cheaters is to make the U.S. THE place to do business.

We do that by getting Government regulation and high taxes off capital and wealth creation, and competing on innovation, quality, price, and dominating our competitive markets with free & fair competition.

The common equation in both currency manipulation, and the responses to counter it is big intrusive Government.

Get rid of it, and everyone is Free.

 

[Boomboom521]

Free market capitalism is the answer Boom, free market capitalism. We don't permit China or any other country to distort markets.

How are tariffs and taxes on goods produced in other countries examples of free market capitalism? Seems to me that is a manipulated market based on the judgement and desires of law makers.

 

[WVPATX]

How are tariffs and taxes on goods produced in other countries examples of free market capitalism? Seems to me that is a manipulated market based on the judgement and desires of law makers.

I call for free and FAIR trade. No tariffs. No currency manipulation. No dumping. No artificial mechanisms for distorting the market. Free market capitalism Boom is the greatest source of wealth creation and elimination of poverty in the world.

 

[Brushy Bill]

More people have to come to grips with the fact that, yes American made products typically cost more, but the trade offs are getting a quality products and are also helping out fellow Americans who are employed because of your purchases. We also have to realize that free trade in it's purest form doesn't exist on an international level, only on an intranational level, just because it works within the US doesn't mean that it will work between the US and all other nations.

 

[atlkvb]

How are tariffs and taxes on goods produced in other countries examples of free market capitalism? Seems to me that is a manipulated market based on the judgement and desires of law makers.

I don't support tariffs, however if we are restricted from selling in their markets I do not oppose closing off our markets to them.

We have leverage here, in that we are a very large consumer market. We can outproduce virtually anyone if our Government allows our manufacturers to compete without crippling taxes and regulations.

If potential traders won't allow us to compete in their markets, then I'm all for limiting their options here. The key is giving American consumers options that lower their costs, and improve their product selections and quality.

This is what we sell to counter currency manipulators. If they can't out compete us on a fair and open level market playing field, no amount of cheating will help them.

Our answer is Freedom, Capital formation, entrepreneurship, superior products at lower costs demanded all over the World, even in preference to Foreign competitors.

No one can do it like us when we are free to do what we do. Our bureaucrats just have to believe that also, and get out of our way.

 

[Brushy Bill]

I don't support tariffs, however if we are restricted from selling in their markets I do not oppose closing off our markets to them.

We have leverage here, in that we are a very large consumer market. We can outproduce virtually anyone if our Government allows our manufacturers to compete without crippling taxes and regulations.

If potential traders won't allow us to compete in their markets, then I'm all for limiting their options here. The key is giving American consumers options that lower their costs, and improve their product selections and quality.

This is what we sell to counter currency manipulators. If they can't out compete us on a fair and open level market playing field, no amount of cheating will help them.

Our answer is Freedom, Capital formation, entrepreneurship, superior products at lower costs demanded all over the World, even in preference to Foreign competitors.

No one can do it like us when we are free to do what we do. Our bureaucrats just have to believe that also, and get out of our way.

:100points::100points::100points:

 

[Boomboom521]

I call for free and FAIR trade. No tariffs. No currency manipulation. No dumping. No artificial mechanisms for distorting the market. Free market capitalism Boom is the greatest source of wealth creation and elimination of poverty in the world.

I agree completely

 

[bornaneer]

Life isn't fair.

Best thing you have said in years. What took you so long to get it?

 

[Brushy Bill]

The real question is what are we going to do about the multinational corporations who exist only to devour everything in their wake in search of profits.