Protectionism‏

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/11/business/economy/should-us-services-companies-get-breaks-abroad.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

Example of other countries protectionism

Often, though, countries ban or place quotas on services from abroad that make these imports prohibitively expensive. One 2010 study estimated discrimination against services imports in some of the major emerging markets like China, India and Indonesia is effectively equivalent to a tariff on these imports of more than 60 percent.

Example of other countries protectionism

In Malaysia, for example, 80 percent of television programming must originate from local production companies owned by ethnic Malays. Brazil has similar quotas for movie screenings.

Example of other countries protectionism

In other cases, foreign laws make it extremely expensive or complicated for American entrants. In India, foreigners are not allowed to own more than 26 percent equity in an insurance company, regardless of how much the local partners provide.

Example of other countries protectionism

China has many similar partnership requirements, along with other limits on foreign businesses. For example, the government tightly restricts the routes of planes operated by foreign delivery services.

Example of other countries protectionism

Cigna has been selling health insurance in China since 2003 (with a Chinese partner), but has been allowed to expand into only one new province a year.

Example of other countries protectionism

A director at a major international bank — who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation from the Chinese government, as did managers at other companies interviewed about expanding abroad — said the organization has scores of employees in China, and about 90 percent of them are there solely to deal with the country’s regulatory issues and licensing requirements for foreigners.

Example of other countries being against the USA having protectionism -

Developing countries have declared they (They being the USA) must liberalize trade in agriculture before even considering services, and Congress is reluctant to dismantle its generous agricultural subsidies. (US agricultural mega companies (ADM) have a lot of clout in congress)

Some business leaders also want to fight protectionism with protectionism rather than invest more efforts in trade negotiations. YES EXACTLY RIGHT. YOU FIGHT PROTECTIONISM WITH PROTECTIONISM. THEY GIVE US THE MIDDLE FINGER AND WE GIVE IT RIGHT BACK TO THEM. THAT IS THE CORRECT ANSWER.

Because some foreign governments allow only their own engineering firms to bid on state-funded projects, there are questions about whether American projects should remain open to international competitors. If they use protectionism then so should we. There is a reason why their economies are growing and ours is shrinking. We are really dumb!

“It’s not a level playing field,” said Greg’s Thomopulos, (Greg is a genius) the chief executive of Stanley Consultants in Muscatine, Iowa, and a past president of the International Federation of Consulting Engineers. He said the American government should retaliate by blocking foreign bids on American aid projects. I agree!

“We’re using American money and we need to showcase American experience,” he said. “What better way to help the job process than by employing American firms and American staff who pay taxes here?” I agree!

The possibility remains that some American workers could find themselves at a disadvantage if services are more easily traded, given that lower-level software developers already face competition from cheaper workers in places like India. I agree!

Greg should be brought to the White House and Obama should be putting a medal around his neck for being so smart. Then he should be presented to a joint session of congress where he should receive a standing ovation.

Mr. Jensen (Is an idiot!) , the trade economist (oooh a trade economist….. he must really know something.) at the Peterson Institute (Where?), acknowledges that some workers will be displaced, but said the United States would have a net gain in jobs (LIAR) if borders everywhere were more open. (They have been saying…. we are going to have a net gain in jobs for the last 30 years. The only problem is we don’t have it. When jobs leave more jobs don’t magically appear. That is called bullsh*t) His research (His research isn’t worth sh*t) also indicates that workers in business services displaced by trade have a much higher rate of re-employment than do displaced manufacturing workers. (How reassuring)

Perhaps the most basic legal constraint is not abroad but here in the United States, which has relatively tight immigration controls. (We have tight immigration? There are 20 million illegal aliens in the country. Tight immigration is not what we have at all) Services often require workers to travel freely across borders. Asking India to allow American consultants to parachute into Delhi willy-nilly is difficult if the United States cannot — or, more accurately, will not — reciprocate.

“We need to have a visa policy that allows businesses to operate efficiently at home and abroad, and that allows all professionals to be able to move back and forth between corporate offices,” said Jeffrey Schott, a former trade negotiator (With thinking like this from a former “trade negotiator” it is easy to see why our country is so f*cked up) and now senior fellow at the Peterson Institute. “If we don’t, why would anyone else?”