Friday, February 04, 2005

Constitutional vrs 'Free' trade (work in progress)

"Free" Trade - The Controlled Trade of the British 'Crown'

What is the history of 'free' trade? We can thank the British 'Crown' for 'free' trade. One conjectures the expression alluded to the lack of taxation on the "Crown's" imported goods, or perhaps where British ships were accessing regions typically controled by ships of other societies, and transporting 'free' of foreign involvement with those exported goods from those regions to Britain and British settlments.

The British in the late 16th through early 19th centuries had attempted to gain more access to, and control of trade in the regions controlled by other countries, this interest to control trade the British Crown-colonistic form of trade/commerce they labeled as 'free' trade. Even in and out of the American settlements as well as other 'colonies' of the British 'Crown', the British Crown wanted to control all trade including all transport of goods. The 'Royal Navy', conceived originally to pirate, then morphed to protect the British "Crown's" (commercial interests') trade from pirates, in time had greater ambitions and beliefs in its efficiency - its speed to transport goods. Reading Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" may remind one of his argument about enterprises more efficient than others at transporting goods in and out of foreign regions. Although some like to identify that part of Smith as describing 'comparative advantage', actually Smith was describing 'free' trade and alluding in this case without specifying some presumed 'techonological' advantage that British ships had over Spanish or Dutch ships, and so the British ships had a comparative advantage with regard to their speed than those of other societies. Identifying the terms and concepts becomes important in the slick double-speak that the commercial interests have perpetrated over the century or so including and since our Civil War.

While discussing the developement of the British navy, Andrew Herman's "To Rule the Waves: How the British Navy shaped the World" (Collins, 2004) reveals and describes the term 'Free' Trade, researches the British Navy's escort and armament of its trade vessels, as well as British Crown efforts to control trade in and out of its regions and colonies, including access to those of the other colonial powers. For this reason, he added, the British viewed Sam Adams and John Hancock as 'smugglers' because they opposed, and competed against the Crown's interests and efforts to control trade in or out of the Americas.

No wonder when we drafted the Declaration of Independence, we were separating ourselves from the British People, the British King/Monarchy, and the "British Crown", another lable for the British commercial interests, a number of which had financed and supported the founding of colonies in the 'new world'. In our Revolution, we were liberating ourselves not only from lack of representation and associated taxes when the 'Crown' opposed and rejected paying taxes to the King and told him to 'get it from the colonies', but we were shedding the British intent to control trade into our society. The British Crown began aggressive punishment and interference of, and against American merchants and their trade, while we began actions of civil disobedience and aggressive efforts to separate/liberate ourselves from virtually everything British and Crown.

Contemporary versions of colonialist Crown trade, commonly known as 'Free' Trade agreements, play on the ignorance of those from whom this back-to-the-future piracy is targeting- the means of the ordinary voter and shareholder. Academics of virtually all levels in the US ubiquitously teach 'free' trade as if it is THE accepted, unquestioned form of international trade and commerce. College economics professors teach that 'barriers' trade hinder 'free' trade. Over time, the prevailing, predominant theme regarding trade has become 'Free' trade, where 'experts' site it as the way for advancement, enrichment, and something we must embrace in what they describe as our 'democracy'. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

The British and the current 5th Column within the US, let's calls these the 'Red Coats' or the Red Coat 'Free'Traitors, meanwhile, condemn those among us who aggressively advocate we keep, as well as call for our public servants to keep the Constitution where we indirectly tax, ie, charge duties, tariffs, and excise taxes/customs fees - on all imported goods and I would include services. They condemn us as protectionists and trade haters or opposing trade when again, nothing could be farther from the truth. We are not a society with colonies - that for which the British Crown purposed 'free' trade to exist. The British hated our Constitution's prohibition of the British Crown's preferred form of trade, now painted to ignorated Americans to mean 'open' trade when 'free' trade disingenuously means trade to suit special, middle-man interests. The slam of protectionist/protectionism attempts to argue for something that our Constitution - our Rule of Law- prohibits and which the Constitution makes no argument or support for it anywhere, even though the language is loose in ARticle 1 Section 8. The Protectionist epithet is a typical slam of those resentfully disenfranchised and deceitfully attempting to control the playing field to advantage themselves. Tariffs on ALL imported goods, and I would include ALL services, discriminates against no particular import, with the result that open trade exists, while we have our quality of life encouraged and promoted while tariffs, etc on all sorts of imports encourages us to do business with each other, and broadly developing wealth throughout our society among all of us, without the interference, problems, the greed, and ambitions of foreign commercial and sovereign interests of other societies. Our free trade with former colonialist societies and their former colonies has bailed out those counterparties, while we have financed their socialism and welfare states.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~NAFTA.Last year marked the 10th Anniversary of the North American 'Free' Trade Agreement, otherwise known as NAFTA. In addition to the terrible consequences of the final and unfinished part of NAFTA mandating to economically integrate the US with Canada, less economically asymmetric than the US, but also with Mexico, not only different culturally, but a 3rd world country economically, with all the problems and failures of a cronyist, post-colonialist, deeply divided, class-stratified, sectarian society. Unless we repeal NAFTA as well as other free trade agreements, the future for the US domestic economy looks increasingly bleak.

Management and those facilitating middle-man interests including the financial press, sidestep, supress, or avoid the truth. Meanwhile, 'free' trade in general continues to erode our domestic commercial environment with experts monitoring the melt-down. Academics involved in developing NAFTA have admitted the more disturbing truth about 'free' trade: Clement's (1999), et al's, "North American Economic Integration" describes on page 12: "political scientists also have reason to be uneasy about NAFTA (as an illustration). They tend to view free trade agreements as a problematic issue for political candidates irrespective of their ideological positions, ie, free trade is usually seen by workers in developed countries (AND IN OUR REPUBLIC) as a threat to their economic security, especially during periods of stagnating wages and massive restructuring 'downsizing', as was in the case in the early 1990s" (that particular recession was caused by a Democrat-lead Congress and Reagan's 1986 Tax Act, which contributed to the 'thrift crisis' and the 'banking' crisis. Corporations took advantage to the recession to conduct restructuring and charge-off the expense for this during a time when corporations were already reporting lower profits. Those write-offs related to restructuring charges, coincident with the passage of NAFTA and may have been, probably were used to finance manufacturing investment in Mexico, hidden in the income statement in the restructuring charges taken in a slow economy).

Clement continues, "Nonetheless, firms <> especially those in high-tech, export-oriented industries, tend to support 'freer' trade and through lobbyists, wield considerable influence with political candidates, hence, politicians may well lose voter support if they support 'free trade' and lose campaign funding if they oppose it - a classic 'no win' situation. Nevertheless, some political scientists looking at (foreign relations) which have fluctuated widely in recent decades use (these agreements) a tool for 'normalizing' the channels of ...discussion... on a wide range of economic and political issues..." .

The Fraud of the "New Ecomomy" and its non union, younger work force. For example, the 'tech' industries such as Information tech, computer hardware and software and 'enterprise' build-out including the Internet technology are relatively 'young' sectors, have little in the way of legacy benefits costs, often employ younger people with fewer responsibilities, less risk aversity, and less interest in work security in this time in their lives, so they will take jobs with less benefits, lower (these jobs are usually non union) wages, and less stable than more established companies which populate our S&P 500 group of corporations. These people are more manipulated by the promise of wealth of exercising options in a 'rising market' and will trade a better paying,more secure job with better benefits for a promise through working for a company that unfortunately is validated by the deceitful, racist globalism ploy. Moreover, many of these companies avoid unions and so going forward, a different, cheaper employee cost structure exists for management in those sectors.

As the better paying, better benefits in jobs with S&P 500 companies allowed by Congress through tax treaties to flee to foreign shores, PNTR, bashed tariffs and duties, more publicly traded companies' managements presume they have their operating strategy mastered to the letter, and in foreign societies employ people not contributory to the development of the American 'Brain Trust', while also not employing Americans in America that contribute and support the US brain trust of engineers, other scientists and mathemeticians. Meanwhile, 'free' trade also produces that pervasive 'race' to the bottom condemned by Senator Corzine, and most evident in the developed societies and economies, while seemingly desired by the reductionist, colonialist minded, as illustrated by that 'German efficiency' one could argue as evident with the nazis, and thus illustrative of the '4rth Reich' influence on contemporary American commercial activity.

In a very innocuous, yet revealing way, the authors on this book on international trade exposed the heart of the matter... that Corporate Management wants free trade to suit their own pockets, regardless of their employees, and elected officials want the lobbyists' wielding campaign contributions from corporate managements looking to line their own pockets. THE TRUTH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH (exporting ) DEMOCRACY, WHICH THEY HAVE TERMED TO BE SOMETHING FRIGHTENINGLY LESS THAN THE FRAMERS OF OUR REPUBLIC KNEW THAT WORD TO MEAN AND FOUGHT TWO WARS TO ESTABLISH IN THIS CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.

The ultimate waste of taxpayer moneys into management hands with much 'Free Trade' and the difference between our government gathering Constitutional taxes such as Tariffs, rather than having the Executive Branch take fruits of our labor with direct taxation aside from wage/salary/ and similar taxes, I would rather pay the Tariffs on imports I infrequently purchase so as to have back my salary, bonus, and returns from investments untaxed.
So, Qui Bono? The management interests paying their lobbyists, who make campaign contributions into political candidates and/or their campaigns benefit most from 'free' trade. Virtually always, management interests via lobbyists are looking for earmarked legislation that hammers down our Constitution, that pesky unspecified "barriers" to trade defined more specifically as duties, tariffs, and excise taxes coincidentally, indirect forms of taxation described in Article I Section 8 of our Constitution, our Rule-of-Law, and that to which our public servants pretend to take their oath of office to uphold. Note that the ordinary voting and share holding American is omitted as a benefactor, and actually indicated as disenfranchised, while lobbyists and corporate interests aggressively hammer down our Constitution so as to self-enrich and self-deal.

On what premises does 'Free' Trade exist, or "How-do-we-sell-this-to-the-huddled-masses"? "Comparative Advantage", and "an interdependent world" - double-speak expressions coined by economists and their corporate plantation masters, argue when a society has certain natural resources, these are its contribution back to the global economy. Those societies formerly under colonialism and in the reality of contemporary corporatism, meanwhile, remain subject to management and the developed societies attempting to pirate and control the world's resources for a select group. Let's call that group the 'Secret' or even the Corporate State, which never lets these commodity and/or 'developing' societies fully develop themselves to full self-sufficiency. An 'interdependent' world, meanwhile, in reality positions management - THE AGENT, THE MIDDLE MAN, to directly or de facto control everything. Recall the Middle Man, or the Agent, aka "Management" are those who originally were acting on behalf of the owners. Although the shareholders elect the board, senior management over perhaps the last 30 has controlled the nominating slate of directors - leaving the shareholders' representatives to self-deal and collude with management. With the past 50 years yielding an increasing number of non management, non-founder shareholders - uninvolved, absentee owners in the businesses in which they are invested via mutual funds, 401(k)s and other passive stock holdings - most fail to remain knowledgeable and active in the decision making of the company while also remaining ignorant and impotent in exercising more control left to the cozy dealings of management and their designated board of directors.

As a result, we see little arm's length decision-making at the board and senior management level, where the directors could mandate different operating strategies effectuated by management, including prohibiting management from siting abroad for the hidden agenda of accessing cheap labor regions, or hiring lobbyists and making large campaign contributions. As the American Wallet is the biggest and the most coveted by all global constituents, and our investment markets reflect this prosperity and history of abundance, management's disingenuous reasons for interest in foreign markets for their goods and services exists largely because via 'free' trade - import without Constitutional duties, tariffs, and excise taxes, as well as other taxpayer subsidized tax breaks, and programs in the form of 'export' insurance to insure payment to the exporter who may be exporting into regions incapable of affording the US good exported to it.

Both taxpayer and commercial bank funded, IMF and World Bank 'lending' into those vulnerable, often former colonial regions, frequently fund foreign crony purchases of those particular US military hardware and other trappings of western wealth, funds US corporate projects in those regions occurring largely to suit Western commercial interests in the resources in those regions while those indigenous peoples and citizens in those societies are left uneducated or under-educated, rivened with civil wars and other insurgent produced strife, etc.

So comparative advantage, as the reason for 'free' trade's argument by experts as benefiting the world, sadly prevents societies from self -sufficiency. The operative term in action acts merely as a source for cheap commodities and labor for managements' advantage.

The 'interdependent world' also parades its self as 'exporting our liberty', or 'we need to actively engage in the world so that they don't hate our freedoms', or so that they dont hate our 'way', or the most disingenuous - 'opening-up' foreign markets to our producers and goods. These deceits and frauds act as the mask of management's slick argument to cheapened the 'staff' and/or 'labor' costs on the income statement and pocket those cheesy labor 'saves', to continue to site abroad and shed labor unions which were/are a hated thing by the German and now American fascists whose influence on 2nd half 20th c. American commerce has come to us as the '4rth Reich' (Hartrich: "Fourth and Richest Reich" Macmillan, 1980, which describes German redevelopment there as well as here in the US after WWII, however, refers more to the deterioration of American private enterprise to a back-to-the-future mix of colonialisticness under the contemporized Anglo-American Crown). Compare the overlap and interaction of corporate interests with our elected and non-elected public servants, who appear to serve the corporate 'state' rather than we who elected them to represent and serve us in government. Management and the 'economy' operate above the law, while in reality, we even have the Uniform Commercial Code and state laws of incorporation to which Management and Corporate interests must answer, when they pervasively practice otherwise, let alone to force commerce to answer to rule of law we have with the Constitution. We are seeing cozy, crony-istic matrices which closely contemporaneously resemble the Nazi/german fascist state overlapped with British 'Empire', all largely achieved subsidized by the ordinary voters and non management shareholders.

How have we contorted our Constitution, where we seemingly have 'embraced' this disengenous form of commerce that not only violates our rule-of-law, but establishes a management operating strategy which is producing domestic economic deterioration, capital flight to cheap, labor regions to squeeze short term labor saves out of offshoring corporate offenders, and those saves when run through the income statement goosing it briefly for short term profits. Mexico and Latin America (NAFTA), now China with Permanent Normalized Trade Relations ("PNTR"). In this century, we could see it de facto with redevelopment of Japan, Taiwan and other previously cheap labor regions, be they former fascist societies or otherwise. Via the British influence in America after the 1820s, one could argue with De Tocqueville's analysis of 'Democracy in America', when he believed our lack of crime rooted itself in our pervasive practice and belief in Christianity and religion, perhaps where the faith in the 'Golden Rule', we could also source our prosperity in that conduct as well as respect and commitment to uphold the Constitution, including the indirect taxation and form of generating revenue for federal government described in Article 1 Section 8. With the American Revolution, the argument largely ceased regarding who controlled trade into and out of America.

At this point, however what occurred in American society that has given seeming impunity to corporate interests and their corruptions to operate above the law? We could begin with understanding the British Crown's and European banking interests' determination to re-control America. The British Crown produced the "Irish Potato Famine" and engaged in bringing the Irish to the States, which altered the demographics and cultural mix in the States at that point. Although some states had larger populations of Catholics than others, generally throughout society, education and literacy was high as well as commitment to American Government being to only government to which all Americans would commit, without acknowledgement of Roman Catholicism's seat of 'government' at the Vatican. The British Crown, in introducing what culturally altered the relative homogeneity in American Society, later, although abolishing slavery in Britain in the late 1830s, continued to advantaged itself with the use of Slavery in the American South, meanwhile perhaps continuing to use barter as its exchange mechanism in the trade it did with the cotton and sugar plantations.

Barter is an inferior exchange mechanism and economic model largely as it ties the weaker counter party to the more powerful counter-party, which isn't exchanging the money of account as the unit of exchange. Use of the money of account in the exchange for products liberates the receiving party to engage in trade and production/services with other counter-parties. It left the American South vulnerable to looking to maintain its establishment as its means for enjoying and establishing wealth when Lincoln and Congress opposed future slavery in newly formed states entering the Republic.

The British practice of 'Free' Trade failed to override our Constitution while we kept it, however, over the many years that our perhaps mortally wounded Republic never officially declared peace after the Civil War, which had us under a military provisional government, and it had/has left us vulnerable to the ignorance of the voter, the public servants elected and sent to represent us, but compromised in part as a result of the failure for Congress under the Constitution to officially declare itself in session on December 1st of every year, ANY YEAR, AS IT HAS NOT SINCE 1859, and has left control of the federal government into the hands of the corporate interests (Dessie Andrews It was this status in part produced by the British Crown and perhaps the/part of the Faustian pact to which John Quincy Adams agreed when he went to Britain to negotiate their back-off from supporting the South in our Civil War, which Lincoln produced in part when sending troops to force South Carolina back into the 'Union', then bringing opprobrium of the other southern states, which only THEN seceded from the "Union" to assist South Carolina when it was militarily punished. The northern bankers and arguably the foreign bankers and foreign corporate interests still financed both sides of the war, however, we became the target of the European and British Elites' fears and ambitions to end the American Republic, conceived in Liberty and dedicated to the proposition that All Men are Created Equal, that in this society, all men shall enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

No imperialism exists in this Republic, no waste of voters' lives and resources, no federal assistance into private corporate fancies, interests, except for what appears to have been infrastructure development. Trade Promotion Authority and 'bi--partisan' ie, corporatist/ internationalist/ globalist domestic support among our public servants for 'free' trade and increasing statism we see illustrated forthwith. We must eschew every sort of contemporary colonialist/corporatist - 'shadow government' agenda which attempts and would disrupt our governmental system of Checks and Balances. Supporting 'Trade Promotion' formerly known as 'fast track', first gained during Ford's administration, then expired and re-proposed during the Clinton Administration (and as well as related 'trade' efforts such a NAFTA'S sister "Free Trade for the Americas") violate the system of checks and balances between the Executive and Legislative branches originally established in our government.

We should have cause for concern when Alan Greenspan, Colin Powell, and Charlene Barshefsky support Trade Promotion/Fast Track - and the umbrella Big Daddy - "Free Trade" - trade treachery and corporate management pork/welfare when one realizes the intentions. Although Ms. Barshefsky, Mr.Powell and Mr. Greenspan represent different constituencies, all share their membership in the "Shadow Government" and support corporate and special interests over those of the US electorate and the Constitution, and were not and are not subject to direct control by Congress and real scrutiny of voting citizens and Taxpayers.

Paul O'Neill verbalized their agenda to the Week end Financial Times, a London based daily financial newspaper - in its Saturday edition (May 18, 2001) Perhaps O'Neill thought only globalistic readers and the leaders who believe his comments are ambitious FT Week-end readers. Treasury Secretary O'Neill said that he wants to eliminate corporate income taxes, that the individual taxpayer would shoulder the heavier tax burden, the individual taxpayer now pays 80% up from 60% 20 years ago of 'income' taxes to the US government, and that able-bodied elderly can or should or would have to continue to work - as if in an adjustment to the current social security system. This is largely the shared agenda of Ms.Barshefsky, Mr. Greenspan, who calls us all 'consumers' and frets over the low savings rate, and perhaps even Mr. Powell, but time will tell.

Even Ms. Barshefsky and President Bush agree that trade 'endeavors' often are a form of diplomacy, and at a future point may become some sort of entry to treaties. This is actually a VERY backward way to conduct US State Affairs and Foreign Policy, as well as ignoring that Senate ratifies treaties, these which likewise it also negotiates.

Permitting the Executive Branch dictatorship, with only the President elected once every four years - this is THE TRADE PROMOTION PLOY - our public servants in the Executive Branch doing corporate management's job when the Executive branch negotiates corporate foreign counter-party relationships. Any allowance of the Executive Branch to develop trade and trade agreements, export licenses, and other US Gov activities with foreign nations on behalf of corporate management without any FINAL step-by-step oversight by our Legislative Branch -people who we elect every 2, 4 years THE VOTERS' BOARD OF DIRECTORS, primarily exhibits a group of people very absorbed with their own self-serving corrupt ends and desirous of its own agenda without the historical successful oversight, rather than historical respect of checks, balances, and responsibilities left us in word and THEME of the ideals embodied in the U.S. Constitution.

'Free Trade' and its bastard off-spring 'trade agreements', thus are management pork and thus are management pork and support more management dinosaurs than any subsidized industry. Free Trade does not benefit US citizens with lower prices, as management for themselves pockets the savings from: not having to pay duties and Constitutional Tariffs accompanying the imports, avoiding the higher US wage levels, where with 'free trade' the intermediary processes of US off-shore manufacturing and tax-havened enters without the cost savings passing to end prices and end users - the voters. The 'free trade' argument is to largely enrich management with the difference saved by eliminating Tariffs and duties while avoiding issues such as labor problems and commodities with environmental impact concerns. Meanwhile the national wealth is undermined and revenues to the government similarly are undermined from fewer tariffs and lower tax revenues from marginally and underemployed voters when the 'jobs' have been allowed to flee to tax havens and foreign shores via and into the corporate interests of those on the BUSINESS 150 ROUNDTABLE.

Another fantastic kudo for 'free trade' and supposedly 'trade promotion' also declares that it 'exports our democracy'. Trade promotion and 'free' trade no more exports our democracy than does exporting garbage and sewage for dumping. Further, the countries to which we allegedly are 'exporting our democracy' are corrupt, authoritarian/ totalitarian (fascist or communist), sectarian, class-stratified societies with national religions, whose people remain in virtually the same deplorable condition as they were 50 years ago, when many were under their former dictator or colonial powers and/or controlled by Roman Catholicism or some other national religion or national church.

This revisits another reason for the half-nelson propaganda to push 'free trade': many of the countries with which we are practicing 'free trade' are former colonies of developed nations and our corporations are merely replacing the former colonial powers that extracted resources and exploited the remoteness and underdevelopment of those regions and societies. In a de facto way, it puts money back into the hands of our allies by 'trading' and doing business in their former colonies. Our presence in these regions actually more destabilizes that stabilizes due to the instability and corruption in those rule of man governments combined with the nature of the 'development' in those former colonies: they had their own cultural development disrupted by European colonialism, and then again disrupted differently by US Corporate colonialism.

Results from today's corporate welfare in the States and its international version in the manner of corporate colonialism (ie,"exporting our democracy" - siting abroad to lower labor and commodities expenses to give short term boosts to operating revenues) in underdeveloped regions include: civil wars which arise over strife from valuable commodities or water. Thieves armed and funded by corporate interests disrupt people who farm their land in these rural regions to relocate themselves elsewhere,leaving the valuable commodities for exploitation by financial backers of the armed guerillas (or conducted through an 'Iran-Contra' strategy). The span of examples finds Africa on the extreme end, with Latin South America on the other, as well as the PRC included. It uses a more creative form of control and destructiveness, however, against its people moving in unsanctioned forms of liberty and against the interests of that corrupt totalitarian regime.(I opposed PNTR and the plane incident and the deals to securitize the sour loans of its corrupt, failed banks continues to vindicate my assessment of capriciousness and irrationality of that absurd, wasteful, and mad government. I find it worse, however when my government acts as foolish as that of the PRC's.)

We are seeing little more than contemporized, state sponsored/supported, ie - fascist state/authoratarian - (British/European) colonialism, and 'free' trade was among ITS chosen ways of commerce.



Post a Comment

<< Home