CHINA DEFICIT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED!!!! Op-Ed Response

This is my response to Wall Street Journal’s Op-Ed appearing March 15, 2018  by Alan Blinder titled: “This is Exactly How Trade Wars Begin”…. and as an added FYI…this Princeton University Professor has had over 70 Op-Ed pieces run by this publication in the past.

Your Op-Ed to the Wall Street Journal is wrong.

As I have an “economics” degree…I am, therefore, one more “economist” who agrees with Peter Navarro.

Your Op-Ed suggests that it is somehow in our nation’s best interest to continue to run a multi-billion dollar trade deficit with China year, over year, over year. And every other country on the planet which has benefited from the U.S. largess so the wealthiest of American’s don’t have to go without their BMWs or French wine???

 Really???  And your major concern is that Bourbon producer Jim Beam not be put in a precarious global export position so we can enable China’s communist regime to steal all intellectual property and supplant the U.S. and the world in the manufacturing of all capital goods, and/or the creation of all technological advancements?

The U.S. runs its largest trade deficits with those countries on the globe that are most “protectionist”…China being on the tippy top of that list. The “FAANG” tech stocks that are driving the NASDAQ  higher daily are prohibited in providing their goods and services behind the Great Wall, and instead, have Chinese government-backed competitors enjoying a captive Chinese consumer market while building their global presence to rival American’s Tech Titans. These unfair trade practices need to be stopped.

 In no way, shape, or form is it advantageous for any U.S. citizen to continue to support unfair trade practices with China that force American companies to provide free access to intellectual property and compromise the future of American industry.

 Adam Smith, author of “The Wealth of Nations,” who you quoted, built his premise on fair trade, open trade, “voluntary” trade, not a lopsided paradigm advancing the trade of only one nation.

China is completely protectionist, and communist to boot, America entered into positive trade alliances with China to create an ally and promote democracy and capitalism, not to provide generations of Americans with dependence on foreign investment so we could fill our landfills with Chinese made junk purchased with government-funded entitlement spending.

 Professor Blinder please re-evaluate your assessment of the U.S. China trade paradigm. Do you really think it is in our nation’s best interest to maintain our current massive trade imbalance with China? Rather than just condemn the current administration for trying to right the wrong of billions in annual trade deficit with China, which has translated into trillions over the past decade, why not offer your formula for the right path forward?

Sincerely,

Hilarie T. Gamm, Author of “Billions Lost: The American Tech Crisis and The Road Map to Change”

 


Go Back