[ close ]


Bg1

Spread this message with Digg, Del.icio.us, Reddit, or Stumbleupon, and subscribe to the RSS Feed to track articles

Ron Kirk Not Heeding Concerns of American Public

Published 05/20/09 Dustin Ensinger - Print Article
E-mail - editor@economyincisis.org

U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk has had a busy week, jet-setting around the world and offering world leaders mea culpa for American policies designed to protect domestic industries and save millions of jobs.   

Last Wednesday, Kirk was in the Swiss capital of Geneva assuring member-states of the World Trade Organization that the U.S. is fully committed to finalizing the Doha Round of global trade negotiations.   

"President Obama and I are both committed to a successful conclusion to the Doha Development Round," Kirk said. "We see it not only as a critical component of what the president believes should be an overall, worldwide response to the current economic crisis, but it's also critical to the sustenance of many of our least-developed countries." 

Yet, the WTO has not been beneficial to the U.S., the worldwide economic structure and certainly not to the least-developed countries of the world.   

The World Trade Organization is an undemocratic organization run by the rich, for the rich. 

Since the advent of the WTO, the percentage of people worldwide living on less than $1 per day has actually increased.  Moreover, 500 million peasant farmers have been displaced during the WTO regime by “agricultural modernization.”  That “agricultural modernization” has not only displaced poor farmers, but it has also brought us mad cow disease, the avian bird flu and melamine contaminated milk products.  

Since entering the WTO in 2001, trade with China has resulted in the loss of 2.3 million American jobs through 2007, according to the Economic Policy Institute.  In 2006 alone, the trade gap with China resulted in the loss of 366,000 American jobs.  Those fortunate enough to retain their jobs witnessed their annual earnings decrease by roughly $1,400.  American workers are put in direct competition with one another as more and more employers look to offshore production to nations with lower wage rates.

 

Despite those facts, Kirk seems determined to soldier on in his attempt to finalize the failed trade talks.   

"We haven't set a definitive timeline," Kirk said.  "We know everyone wants relief now, but we believe the substance of our talks will drive the process, which ultimately defines the timeline."  

On Monday, Kirk was back in America, soothing the fears of worried Canadian business interests.  He basically apologized for America implementing policies that protect its domestic industries and workers and blamed those policies on the American people.   

"Trade is a really tough sell in this environment," Kirk told members of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce after a speech in Washington.

Indeed, a recent New York Times/CBS News poll, conducted at the beginning of April, found that 60 percent of Americans believe that trade restrictions are necessary to protect domestic industries. On the other hand, just 28 percent of those polled said that “free trade" should be pursued at all costs.  

The poll demonstrates that perhaps Kirk has it all wrong: The American people are finding that protecting domestic jobs is a tough sell to the ignorant politicians in Washington. 

   

Source Asia Times Online:

The new US administration's first appearance at the World Trade Organization (WTO) headquarters demonstrated "a willingness to engage in dialogue, and greater openness", but in substance "it did not show major differences with the past," said one negotiator, commenting on US Trade Representative Ron Kirk's visit to the Swiss capital.

Kirk, appointed in March by President Barack Obama, was circumspect during his three days of meetings with colleagues from some of the 153 WTO member states, at a gathering that ended on Wednesday. He wanted to evaluate the situation, said the negotiator, who spoke to IPS on condition of anonymity.

Click Here For Solutions To America's Economic Problems

Click here to contact your Representative in Congress.

Unless the above article is already copyrighted, this article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License, EIC grants permission to use this article in whole or in part provided attribution is given, preferably in the form of a link back to EconomyInCrisis.org.

MORE OF TODAY'S NEWS | Comment on this Article | Read Comments


Spread this message with Digg, Del.icio.us, Reddit, or Stumbleupon, and subscribe to the RSS Feed to track articles

Register for newsletter

Bg2

Please Donate to EconomyinCrisis.org today



Please do your part, send a donation of $5, $10, $15 or any amount by PayPal or major credit card.

Bg2

Download our Podcast from iTunes

Itunes

Bg2



Bg2

Follow us on Twitter

Twitter


Download our Podcast from iTunes

Itunes

Bg2

Additional Recommended Articles from the Archives


Bg2

Follow us on Twitter

Twitter

Bg2

Donate Today


Bg2

Comment on this article

Subject

Comment



Bg2

Article Comments From Readers

gspencer says "Mr. Kirk, Mass Unemployment is a Big Problem!" on 06/26/09
Mass unemployment will foster mass civil unrest, crime, anger, riots, revolution, etc. Riots and insurrections are predictable, ala the French and Russian Revolutions, when the people find their situations economically hopeless. I would hate to live during or after a US revolution, when chaos, lawlessness, armed robbery, murder, rape, and cruelty will be the normal way of life.

If any future US revolution to overthrow the US government is successful (maybe to protest a hopeless economic situation), where will all of the food, fuel, water, sanitation, medicine, and other necessities to support the population come from after the revolution? These necessities will not exist. Chaos and total lawlessness will prevail. Only the very meanest and the most evil will survive in this climate. We will have then totally destroyed our civilization. Will all of the city residents starve after a revolution? The US population probably cannot live off of the land anymore. Will the city dwellers foray into the country, kill the farmers, and steal the farmer's food to feed their own families?

Only import tariffs high enough to prohibit imported products will create re-industrialization, stop the flow of title to US assets from the USA, re-create the value of the US dollar, and also create manufacturing jobs for US citizens. Yes the consumers will have to pay many times the price if things are made in the USA, but maybe we can avert a bloody revolution.

guest says "Ron Kirk" on 05/20/09
I think Ron Kirk is really smart. He figures, if we open up our market from 90% to 100%, then the world will start sending all sorts of stuff on the cheap and if the Chinese will not finance it, then others have to - just to sell their stuff. In 3 years, we will have a serious depression and take down the rest of the world who are itching to sell us stuff.

Better to take the rest of the world down with us to the world depression than go at it alone. That is, to him, smart strategy.

This is our clueless government at work. What we need is the unthinkable - a military coup.