Atlasia-Turkey Free Trade Bill (Law'd)

[Alexander Hamilton]

Turkey's record in oppressing journalists and suppressing discussion of their government's role in the Armenian genocide is quite worrying - and this is something that the Senate has criticized them for in the past.  I do wonder whether this would influence their desire to not remove tariffs on us while appreciating that we have removed tariffs on them?  (Given the wording of these bills, there is no guarantee that the other country will necessarily reciprocate the removal of tariffs.)

The sad thing about this is that it was the Ottoman Empire, not the nation of Turkey, that committed the genocide. And it is terrible that the US allows Turkey to blackmail us into not recognizing such an atrocity of human history.

[Alexander Hamilton]

I'm certainly glad I wasted my time writing that.

Well, your argument is certainly very feel good and all, but it has no sound backing in economic theory. Regulations on trade inevitably create inefficiencies in markets, meaning the society is not creating the wealth that it can. Universal free trade, minus some areas that we wish to hurt economically, increases total output, lowers prices, promotes specialization and actually benefits the lowest workers in the end.

I never pretended it did. Now, your RPP-esque rhetoric aside, I'm quite obviously under no delusion that my ideas are about "profit profit profit." This is, unfortunately, a sad side effect of our economic arguments in real life and in this fantasy nation. People attack "feel good" policies on the basis that they "have no background in economic theory" but the point of my "feel good" rhetoric is, ironically, to point out the fact that we have an obsession with doing as much trade, gaining as much profit, employing as much cheap labor, as possible.

I asked the question earlier "What should free trade, in your mind, do and what is it designed to accomplish." The answers, predictably, revolved around abolishing trade restrictions, doing more trade with nations, obtaining more profit, etc etc. But what I believe trade agreements are supposed to be doing is spreading the proper market model, developing communities, educating the world. Ravaging the world with our race-to-the-bottom trade mentality does nothing of the sort.

When it comes to the economic conservatives, free traders, and libertarians of this board and in the real world, it's only because libertarians are unable to abolish child labor laws, among other common sense laws, that they press so hard to live vicariously through other nations via trade.

My concerns about what message we're sending, about what we're creating incentives for, remain, just as I said before, as does my question at the end of it:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There's a double-standard from you and many others about work done here and work acquired elsewhere for our benefit here. By saying "regulations on trade hurt output" you may as well just make the argument "regulations in general hurt output" because the arguments can be used interchangeably. What difference is there? Are our people worth more? Superior to third worlders? Is the process in our market any different? No, to all of those, and there's no sense in trying to make the argument that free trade agreements shouldn't have any regulations or restrictions while simultaneously trying to implement new regulations and protections on our domestic market.

Ultimately, what "end" you're trying to shoot for here is critical to determining what policies we should take. If you, like others, want as much profit as possible then this method would be your best. If you, as I believe, think that the goal of free trade is fostering peace, and developing communities and nations desperately in need of being brought up, with the goal of creating a world where all nations and all their people are prosperous and liberal in their values, my route, the route of developing world economies through our image and our demonstration, is the way.

Hey now!

[Alexander Hamilton]

Turkey's record in oppressing journalists and suppressing discussion of their government's role in the Armenian genocide is quite worrying - and this is something that the Senate has criticized them for in the past.  I do wonder whether this would influence their desire to not remove tariffs on us while appreciating that we have removed tariffs on them?  (Given the wording of these bills, there is no guarantee that the other country will necessarily reciprocate the removal of tariffs.)

The sad thing about this is that it was the Ottoman Empire, not the nation of Turkey, that committed the genocide. And it is terrible that the US allows Turkey to blackmail us into not recognizing such an atrocity of human history.

Of course. But it is a crime in Turkey to explicitly recognize the Turkish nation's role in the genocide, or even to acknowledge the genocide itself.

I know. The fact that they can't move on, even though, it's been almost a century, it sidgusting. My aunt is a high school teacher, and every year she brings in Armenian speakers to talk to her class about the genocide.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Disappointing.