As our ANNUAL trade deficit hovers around $0.5 TRILLION dollars, the U.S. finds itself assailed by the World Trade Organization for trying to protect its domestic producers against "dumping"... the practice of selling goods in the U.S. for less than it sells in the originating country.
This time-honored practice of dumping goods is intended to undermine competitiors by making it impossible for them to make a profit while at the same time, keeping the dumper's factories going full tilt.
The Japanese are renowned for their efforts in this arena. It exports products at or below cost for awhile to gain a foothold while weakening competitors in their target country. Meanwhile, it blocks all attempts by those competitors to gain a foothold in Japan by requiring unit by unit product inspections and piles of paperwork. It works:for example, Japan imported $6 billion of automotive products while exported $63 billion in 2002 - see code 781 on those links (the bulk of the imported automobiles came either from Germany or from Japanese-owned factories in the U.S. -- Japan imported BMWs and Toyotas... but virtually no Fords or Chevys).
But the U.S., in its attempts to prevent unfair competition, is now blasted for "illegal" legislation... the Byrd amendment which fines imports that are being dumped and gives the fines to the companies that are being harmed by the dumping.
So, there you have it. If countries use the U.S. as a dumping ground... that's "free trade", but if the U.S. tries to protect it's home industries... that's illegal.
In a recent conversation with my oldest son, I suggested that the U.S. consider an additional, flat 10% "port security processing fee" on all imported goods. This would cover the cost of 100% "security" inspections and personnel that are now highly necessary to ensure against dangerous terrorists and smuggling.
Think we don't need those inspections. Read here.
The objectionable Bryd amendment should then be repealed. After all, in international trade, it's not what you do, it's what you call it.
