Trade is defined as giving in exchange for another commodity. Trade is barter; making an exchange. Trade means to engage in frequent buying and selling of (as stocks or commodities).
Free is defined as not obstructed, restricted, or impeded.
Free trade is defined as not subject to government regulation; not hampered or restricted in its normal operation; having no government restrictions; Free trade is a two way process. Free trade, in order to be optimal, requires that both trading partners buy and sell in equal amounts.
People used to think Salem Massachusetts was a country because there were so many ships from Salem in their ports. Tariffs were the primary tax of 19th century America when Ships from Salem Massachusetts did as much trade as entire countries. Perhaps if corporate taxes were considered tariffs on American products, politicians and economists wouldn’t loath the concept of an equal tariff on foreign products. Tariffs may equalize trade, thus increasing the total amount of the trade.
Would you rather buy a Toyota made in the USA for $25,000 while earning $50,000 a year, or be unemployed and buy a Toyota made in China for $20,000? Worse yet, be labeled by a callous government as a person who has “dropped out of the labor force” when your unemployment compensation ends. Tariffs protect the worker as much as they maximize and protect free trade.
US Industry pays more for employee benefits than some nations pay for employee salaries. How can trade between nations be equal and optimal under these conditions? Tariffs must be introduced to increase the trade. Tariffs protect and optimize free trade.
Government regulations tilt the playing field by giving one side the edge over the other. Tariffs can increase free trade (the total two way trade) by offsetting one government’s distortion of the trade markets.
H. Ross Perot called Free trade a “Giant Sucking Sound” that would suck jobs out of the USA.
Arguably, the present free trade policies are communistic to the extent that they facilitate suppression and equalization of wages and prices by government. Isn’t communism defined as equality of wages and living conditions? The Czars and CEOs, of course, will still have large salaries in a communist style system. “Free Trade” has suppressed total American manufacturing wages more than all other factors combined.
Justification for calling present Free Trade Policies Communistic proceeds from definitions such as the Wikipedia definitions for the words reactionary and communism:
In Marxist terminology, reactionary is generally used with a pejorative meaning to refer to people whose ideas might appear pro-working class but in essence contain elements of feudalism, capitalism, nationalism, fascism, or other ruling class characteristics.
Reactionary comes from the French word réactionnaire, coined in the early 19th century. It was the first of the two words coined (the other being conservative, from the French word conservateur) for the opposition to the French Revolution. “In parliamentary usage, the monarchists were commonly referred to as the Right, although they were often called Reactionaries.”[2]
Communism is a socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of a classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production. [1] It is usually considered a branch of the broader socialist movement that draws on the various political and intellectual movements that trace their origins back to the work of theorists of the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution.
The present Free Trade Policies are further right than conservatism. They are reactionary in that they promote extreme wealth simultaneously with extremely harsh conditions for the working class and those that cannot find work. The resulting society being similar to that of both communist and precommunistic Russia.