Sure, and if that were all there was to it I might be okay with that. But dozens of economies around the world depend on our trade now. I suspect if we became more protectionist, we would become a global pariah.
We've pretty much already reached the point of global pariah. If we balance that out by withdrawing our military forces around the world and demonstrating a more peaceful and cooperative attitude, then that will win us respect and admiration from the world. I'm not saying to do away with trade altogether, but I think every country realizes that we have to look out for ourselves. If a trade deal isn't working out for us, then most of the world would understand, as it's something that they or any other country would do under similar circumstances. What they truly don't understand is our militarism and interventionist policies. That's what has made us into a pariah more than anything else.
I think the real problem is that America's ruling class has become far too dependent upon imperialism, piracy, and mobsterism that they just can't give it up. It's become too alluring and addictive for them. But if America's people can once and for all force the ruling class to stop these activities, then I believe the world would give us resounding applause.
Maybe a few tinpot dictators and former puppets might grumble, but I doubt that China or Russia would give us any problems. I doubt that Europe would get mad at us - at least not any more than when they found out the NSA was spying on their leaders. Most of Latin America would be relieved to be finally free of US hegemony. The Middle East would no longer have any reason to hate us. It could very well lead to a new spirit of cooperation and friendship between the nations of the world.
The collapse that would follow would probably be more in line with what happened in the USSR after the fall of communism. A complete collapse of everything we know. The outcome from there would be impossible to predict.
I don't think it would be a complete collapse of everything we know. That didn't even happen in the USSR - although if they had done it more incrementally rather than in one fell swoop, it probably would have softened the blow. I think that we could implement changes slowly and gradually, so it won't be such a huge shock, but that's only possible as long as there is a spirit of cooperation and an open-minded willingness to negotiate. The lack of those qualities in America today will lead to bigger problems than the USSR faced in the 1990s.
There is a reason why every politician of every stripe is trying to avoid that situation.
Most politicians nowadays are woefully myopic. They're only thinking in terms of the next election. All they can really do is promise instant gratification and try their best to delay the day of reckoning. They're in too deep with vested interests and beholden to political machines.
I think our moves forward have to be measured. Implement protectionist policies in limited up and coming markets. Solar power for example, is taking off. Protect that market and a few others like it and slowly build up a domestic industry.
Oh yes, definitely. Measured and incremental changes are the preferred way to go. It might be better to do that now rather than have to take emergency measures after disaster has struck.
The bigger problem that we're facing now is that too many politicians and other societal leaders don't even want measured and incremental reforms. There's too much of a "my way or the highway" attitude out there, along with poisonous rhetoric which only makes opposing factions more entrenched and stubborn.
But it's not likely to happen. Politics is controlled by money more than ever and those holding the purse strings are playing long ball. Even if a liberal president and congress pulled it off (unlikely in and of itself) the next administration can simply lift limits or restrictions. We watched this happen with Clinton and Bush. Reasonable regulations are implemented and the next administration dismantled them.
The root of all this is that the population isn't educated enough to understand what is going on. They are easily manipulated by rhetoric.
The population gets a lot of mixed messages, but I sense that a lot of people are vulnerable and prone to manipulation by rhetoric, as you say. But the rhetoric only works if people believe in it, and people will not believe in it if they see deterioration, decline, and despair all around them. The politicians have put themselves in a box where they have no other choice but to do whatever they can to keep the gravy train rolling and keep the public fat, dumb, and happy.
I think the politicians are worried less about how the world will respond to our trade policies than they are about how the American people will react when the gravy train stops and the goodies run out. But there's only so much that the government and the country as a whole can realistically afford and take on. We can't just go on sinking deeper and deeper into debt and not expect some consequences. We can't go on with a lopsided trade deficit indefinitely and not expect some consequences. We can't go on saber-rattling with our military forces all over the world and interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations and not expect some consequences.
The idea of employment guarantee or raising the minimum wage might seem good on the surface, but it doesn't correct the underlying problem.
