Global Free Trade = Increased US Unemployment

Last week, in "A Crisis Is a Terrible Thing to Waste," I wrote that despite our

current unemployment crisis, neither Obama, nor the Democrat Party, nor the

Republican Party could or would "create more jobs". The reason was fairly simple:

"There will be no legitimate 'job creation' in this country until we restore tariffs and

thereby cause manufacturers who left the USA for Mexico, China and India to return

their factories to the USA.

"So long as we have global free trade, real jobs will continue to flow out of the

USA and into third world countries. So long as we have global free trade, the only ‘job

creation’ gov-co will capable of providing will be even more government employment.

Such gov-co ‘employment’ is really just a glorified form of welfare in that our new govco

‘employees’ make no productive contribution to society.

"U.S. unemployment is rising because the leadership of both the Republican

and Democratic parties have been captured by globalists. Gov-co is therefore

determined to foster the globalist agenda of global free trade and one-world

government, even though those objectives will necessarily mean the destruction of our

economy, our standard of living, and perhaps even our nation.

"So long as America participates in global free trade, it is virtually impossible for

either major political party to create any significant number of real jobs in this country.

"We, the People, want real jobs that produce real products (not gov-co welfare jobs

that produce nothing but parasites and more debt)—and that means we must restore

industry to the USA. The only way to restore industry is to abandon Global Free Trade

and New World Order, and restore high tariffs so as to force companies to relocate

manufacturing plants now in China, back into the U.S..

"When industrial factories return, so will jobs. Until the factories return, there

will be no new jobs. Until the factories (and jobs) return, a genuine economic

recovery is not possible and the U.S. economy must continue to spiral downward into

a lower and lower standard of living."

My previous explanation is consistent with Ross Perot's warning (during his

presidential campaign in A.D. 1992) that if Congress passed the North American Free

Trade Agreement (NAFTA), we'd hear a "giant sucking sound" as millions of jobs are

drained out of the U.S. economy.

26

The American people, in their infinite wisdom, ignored Perot’s warning and

elected Bill Clinton. Two years later, our federal government ratified NAFTA—the first

big step into Global Free Trade.

In hindsight, Mr. Perot's warning was wrong in this regard—there was no "giant

sucking sound" when the jobs left the USA. But American factories (no longer

protected by high tariffs from cheap foreign labor) were nevertheless forced to relocate

into 3rd world countries and so the jobs (as Perot warned) were sucked out of the U.S.

But the sound of that "suction" was largely hushed by the creation of millions of new

government jobs. Result? The American people didn't really notice the loss of our

industry and our jobs until now.

Today, according to ProPublica, we know that:

"The unemployment insurance system is in crisis. A record 20 million Americans

collected unemployment benefits last year, and so far 25 states have run out of funds

and been forced to borrow from the federal government, raise taxes or cut benefits.

[O]nly a handful of states had built up reserves sufficient to weather the Great

Recession. [As a result,] 25 states have borrowed more than $25 billion to keep

benefits flowing after their trust funds ran dry.

"In many other states the situation is deteriorating fast. Arizona, Colorado,

Hawaii, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Tennessee and Vermont

will find themselves in the red within six months.

"Some states have focused the pain, like Virginia, where unemployed seniors

who also receive Social Security face steep benefit cuts. Other states, like

Pennsylvania, have taken a broader approach: all unemployment beneficiaries will

receive 2.4 percent smaller checks starting this month.

"businesses in 36 states face tax increases this year, ranging from a few

dollars per worker to more than a thousand. Six states have moved to cut, freeze or

otherwise restrict benefits, a number that is likely to increase."

Q #1: As the cost of unemployment insurance increases for businesses, how many of

those businesses will be driven out of business or forced to relocate to Mexico, China

or India?

Q #2: If rising unemployment insurance costs cause businesses to close or relocate

overseas, won't rising unemployment costs necessarily cause even more

unemployment?

Qs #3, 4 & 5: What do you suppose will happen in this country when 1)

unemployment continues to rise; and 2) the unemployment insurance funds are

exhausted? How will the unemployed feed and clothe themselves and their children?

Will the nation be exposed to chaos and political anarchy?

• The unemployment problem is not unique to the United States. According to the

Associated Press, the U.N.'s International Labor Organization (UN-ILO) recently

warned that the hoped-for economic "recovery" could be "jobless". In other words, the

U.N. has warned that if and when there is an economic "recovery," that recovery may

not include the creation of new jobs or the restoration of previous jobs now lost to

unemployment.

27

More, the UN-ILO advised that, globally, about "Twenty-seven million people lost their

jobs in 2009." But note where most of these jobs were lost: "About 12 million [44%] of

the newly unemployed were in North America, Japan and Western Europe"

Thus, although unemployment increases were not confined to the U.S., those

increases were disproportionally among the formerly "industrialized" countries of

Europe, Japan and the U.S.

Why? Because the governments of the several industrialized western nations have

been captured by globalists. Result? The governments of the several "industrialized"

western nations have conspired to betray the best interests of their own people to

support Global Free Trade, New World Order, and One-World Government.

In order to achieve One-World Government, the several governments of the

industrialized west entered into Global Free Trade treaties like NAFTA. These

globalists have cut their national tariffs, exposed their relatively wealthy people to

direct competition from cheap foreign labor, and thereby forced their own industries to

relocate to 3rd world countries.

When the industrialized nations' industries relocated to 3rd world countries,

they took the industrialized nations' industrial jobs with them. Result? Just as Ross

Perot warned 18 years ago, a massive number of jobs have been "sucked out" of the

U.S. (and Europe and Japan). The formerly "industrialized" western nations are now

de-industrialized, and their economies and standards of living are collapsing.

"The UN-ILO also reported that it expected unemployment to remain high through

2010, with perhaps an additional 3 million people in the rich world losing their jobs"

Note that UN-ILO report implicitly predicts that unemployment for the "rich world" (the

formerly industrialized nations of Europe, Japan and the U.S.) will rise in 2010 from 12

million to 15 million an average increase in unemployment rates of 25%.

A 25% increase in U.S. unemployment would raise the "official" rate of 10% to almost

13%. But some credible sources contend that real U.S. unemployment is between

17% to 22%. If they're right, a 25% increase rate might kick real unemployment up to

between 21% and 28%. (During the Great Depression, unemployment peaked around

25%.)

"To address the problem, the ILO wants governments to adopt a two-pronged

approach of employment creation and better unemployment benefits,"

It is to laugh.

Qs #1 & 2: How can the western industrialized countries "create jobs" without

reindustrializing? How can they reindustrialize without either raising tariffs, or reducing

their peoples' wages and standard of living to a level comparable to that of Mexico or

even China?

Q #3: How can we create "better unemployment benefits" within the "rich countries"

without increasing the costs of doing business in the "rich countries" and thereby

driving more businesses (and jobs) from the "rich countries" to the 3rd world

countries?

The UN-ILO also admitted that the true scope of the unemployment problem was

much worse that some statistics suggest because "over 600 million workers and their

families were surviving on less than $1.25 a day and another 200 million were

hovering just above the international poverty line." In other words, global

unemployment is not simply the 12 million who reportedly have no jobs whatsoever—

it's actually about 812 million when we include the 800 million who, technically, have

jobs that are so low-paying that the "workers" are barely able to survive.

28

I recognize that global poverty is a terrible thing. But I also recognize that most of

those 800 million (over five times the number of American workers) who are currently

working at or below the international poverty line would be happy to work for $2.50 per

day and would be ecstatic if they were paid just $10 per day.

Thus, the UN-ILO statistics imply that if each American worker were making just $10

per hour, there'd still be five foreign workers who were eager and even desperate to

take that job for just $10 per day. Think about that. There are at least five people on

this earth who would gladly do your job all day in return for just one hour of your pay.

If that thought doesn't scare you, you need to cut back on your medication.

Perhaps some economists or politicians can explain how 150 million American workers

can reasonably expect keep jobs at $10 an hour when there are 800 million foreign

workers eager to take those jobs for $10 a day. I can't provide such explanation. I

can't even imagine such explanation.

There are hundreds of millions of people around the world who would kill to

take your job for a fraction of your pay. How can such pressure be resisted in a world

of Global Free Trade? I submit that it cannot be resisted—except with higher tariffs.

The only way you're going to hang onto your job and your standard of living is if you

are protected from the impoverished hoards of the 3rd world by high, national tariffs.

The only way you're going to give your children a prosperous future that includes the

"American Dream" (that each generation enjoys a higher standard of living than that of

the previous generation), is by protecting your children now by abandoning Global

Free Trade and the New World Order and restoring high national tariffs. The only way

that you can protect your grandchildren from abject poverty and a dramaticallyshortened

life expectancy, is by restoring high national tariffs now.

• In this week's State of the Union address, President Obama said, "We face a

deficit of trust-deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works-that have been

growing for years."

No kidding? Gee, who’d’ve thought?

But President Obama also said, "Jobs must be our No. 1 focus in 2010. People are

out of work. They are hurting. They need our help."

Well, that's great. But how will the globalist Obama "create more jobs" for the hurting

American people without restoring high tariffs, abandoning Global Free Trade and the

New World Order, and bringing industry back to America? (And how, pray tell, does

Washington plan to "restore trust" in gov-co by lying about job creation?)

In his speech, President Obama also reminded folks that he inherited a mountain of

problems but that, after one year in office, "the worst of the storm has passed."

Really? The worst is over?

Really?!!

I don't think so. I can't even imagine how "the worst of the storm has passed" so long

as our government is committed to Global Free Trade, low tariffs, and the continuing,

inevitable loss of even more millions of American jobs. How is it even possible for

there to be a "recovery" that doesn't restore lost jobs?

Obama's lying. He has to know that he can't create any real jobs without restoring

high tariffs. And so long as that's true, we might get more gov-co jobs, but we won't

have any more real (industrial) jobs, our standard of living must continue to decline,

the worst is yet to come and you, dear reader, had better. Buckle up.