Charlie Rose

Damion  05/29/2008 01:47 PM Report

The rise in American exports is not so much cased by Free trade agreements but on the deflation of the Dollar. You cannot have a significant level of export increase if your exporting to poor countries.

Alex Gaal  05/20/2008 01:18 AM Report

Wheres the patriotism? If you're going to ship American jobs overseas and try to justify it by tellimg me how great Columbia is doing then Patrick Henry you're not. Just exactly what is patriotism? Is it embodied in the principles America was founded on? Is there a place for your fellow Amercians in your concept or does competition require that its every man for himself and may the best man win ...or the cheapest? When we set out to export democracy do we then include our trading partners in this patriotism? There's a hypocrisy in there somewhere. I'd submit that multi-national corporate managements are commiting the equivalent of treason when they prosper as individuals by destroying family livelihoods, otherwise call it what it is, a Battle Royale -- the WWF; not patriotism.

And face it, its corporations that wag this emotionally potent oversimplification known as big government, not the other way around.

scott  05/13/2008 11:02 PM Report

ok. we all have to realize that we live in a global economic world. In order to make money and stay in business you have to trade with someone. the rest of the world is trading and going to trade more and more as they become more successful and wealthy. we need to trade to stay in business and so we should be promoting more smart trade agreements toward greater prosperity for both or all parties involved. i am pro-workers rights, pro-cultural diversity and fairness and pro-greener planet as well as a pragmatist. not all countries (at present) are equal and all have their own problems and economies. but we could engage with them and help them succeed step by step by trading with them. we can't demand that everything be perfect or we sit out of the ball game. we have to help shape and promote the future world as we would like to live in it. a world that has stable working countries that have strong middle classes, respect for the environment, good relations with all other countries, and this means the world has to trade as a whole and we have to be a part of it to help lead the way.

i'm voting for Obama.

Mark  05/13/2008 09:17 AM Report

Let's outsource Susan Schwab's job to someone in India or China. Bet it will be cheaper to get somebody from there to do the same thing thing she is doing. She can use her connections to get herself another cushy job. She doesn't seem to have to do anything but ape lines given to her, so that means no retraining required! WHY IS IT THAT ALL THOSE WHO ADVOCATE RETRAINING NEVER SEEM TO HAVE TO DO IT THEMSELVES TO MAINTAIN THEIR EMPLOYMENT. IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO IT YOURSELF - SHUT UP!!!

fccm  05/13/2008 03:03 AM Report

Nice house, nobody home.

That was a waste of an interview. This 'trade representative' should have the easiest job on the planet with the US Dollar at historic lows against all major currencies, all US exports should be flying off-the-shelves with US industry trying desperately trying to keep up with demand.

Instead, the US is facing record trade deficits and US industries are slowing down. Sure a key driver to this massive trade imbalance is due to imported fossil-fuels, but that doesnâ??t explain why the trade imbalance extends to just about every other sector.

Clearly there is something grossly wrong with the ideological 'laissez-faire' rhetoric this brownshirt Bush régime loyalist is exposing.

This really is just more voodoo economics.

jaden  05/12/2008 10:00 PM Report

What does anyone expect Susan Schwab to say? Of course she has to tow the party line. She wouldn't have her job if she didn't. Regarding the trade issues with China (products and jobs): the only reason China can sell cheap products to the United States is that Americans are happy to buy them. People buy cheap products because it makes them feel richer to have all that stuff. It's the old "keeping up with the Jones" malady. If Americans had higher principles and better foresight, cared more about our society, economy and our children's future, and refused to buy cheap stuff, we wouldn't be in this sorry situation. The American people have no one to blame but their own greedy selves. How many of you shop at Wal-Mart? Anyone who does has no right to complain about our trade issues with China.

web duce  05/12/2008 09:22 PM Report

I am a free trader. Her lies have gone to a level though, where she seems like she is trying to convince herself and not us. China is importing Dick (VP) from us.

William Allport  05/12/2008 04:49 PM Report

On Monday 5-11-08 I was able to see the show aired which 5-9-08. It included Susan C. Schwab. First I must say I love your interview venue. Outstanding, you do your homework !

I was much impressed with MS Schwab, her appearance, her use of words, her delivery, her etc. What bothered me was, she said nothing that was useful. To be a Parrot of the Bush administration means little. I came away from that show with nothing. If you lose your job because it has gone overseas------get educated and find something else. Matters little that the education used for the present job took many months to acquire, don't worry about it you can still contribute by re-educating yourself. WOW now I feel better.

Very best to you Charlie

William Allport

Pete Murphy  05/12/2008 07:45 AM Report

Our enormous trade deficit is rightly of growing concern to Americans. Since leading the global drive toward trade liberalization by signing the Global Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1947, America has been transformed from the weathiest nation on earth - its preeminent industrial power - into a skid row bum, literally begging the rest of the world for cash to keep us afloat. It's a disgusting spectacle. Our cumulative trade deficit since 1976, financed by a sell-off of American assets, is now approaching $9 trillion. What will happen when those assets are depleted? Today's recession may be just a preview of what's to come.

Why? The American work force is the most productive on earth. Our product quality, though it may have fallen short at one time, is now on a par with the Japanese. Our workers have labored tirelessly to improve our competitiveness. Yet our deficit continues to grow. Our median wages and net worth have declined for decades. Our debt has soared.

Clearly, there is something amiss with "free trade." The concept of free trade is rooted in Ricardo's principle of comparative advantage. In 1817 Ricardo hypothesized that every nation benefits when it trades what it makes best for products made best by other nations. On the surface, it seems to make sense. But is it possible that this theory is flawed in some way? Is there something that Ricardo didn't consider?

At this point, I should introduce myself. I am author of "Five Short Blasts: A New Economic Theory Exposes The Fatal Flaw in Globalization and Its Consequences for America." My theory is that, as population density rises beyond some optimum level, per capita consumption begins to decline. This occurs because, as people are forced to crowd together and conserve space, it becomes ever more impractical to own many products. Falling per capita consumption, in the face of rising productivity (per capita output, which always rises), inevitably yields rising unemployment and poverty.

This theory has huge ramifications for U.S. policy toward population management (especially immigration policy) and trade. The implications for population policy may be obvious, but why trade? It's because these effects of an excessive population density - rising unemployment and poverty - are actually imported when we attempt to engage in free trade in manufactured goods with a nation that is much more densely populated. Our economies combine. The work of manufacturing is spread evenly across the combined labor force. But, while the more densely populated nation gets free access to a healthy market, all we get in return is access to a market emaciated by over-crowding and low per capita consumption. The result is an automatic, irreversible trade deficit and loss of jobs, tantamount to economic suicide.

One need look no further than the U.S.'s trade data for proof of this effect. Using 2006 data, an in-depth analysis reveals that, of our top twenty per capita trade deficits in manufactured goods (the trade deficit divided by the population of the country in question), eighteen are with nations much more densely populated than our own. Even more revealing, if the nations of the world are divided equally around the median population density, the U.S. had a trade surplus in manufactured goods of $17 billion with the half of nations below the median population density. With the half above the median, we had a $480 billion deficit!

Our trade deficit with China is getting all of the attention these days. But, when expressed in per capita terms, our deficit with China in manufactured goods is rather unremarkable - nineteenth on the list. Our per capita deficit with other nations such as Japan, Germany, Mexico, Korea and others (all much more densely populated than the U.S.) is worse. In fact, our largest per capita trade deficit in manufactured goods is with Ireland, a nation twice as densely populated as the U.S. Our per capita deficit with Ireland is twenty-five times worse than China's. My point is not that our deficit with China isn't a problem, but rather that it's exactly what we should have expected when we suddenly applied a trade policy that was a proven failure around the world to a country with one sixth of the world's population.

Ricardo's principle of comparative advantage is overly simplistic and flawed because it does not take into consideration this population density effect and what happens when two nations grossly disparate in population density attempt to trade freely in manufactured goods. While free trade in natural resources and free trade in manufactured goods between nations of roughly equal population density is indeed beneficial, just as Ricardo predicts, itâ??s a sure-fire loser when attempting to trade freely in manufactured goods with a nation with an excessive population density.

If youâ??re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, then I invite you to visit my web site at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com where you can read the preface for free, join in the blog discussion and, of course, buy the book if you like. (It's also available at Amazon.com.)

Please forgive me for the somewhat "spammish" nature of the previous paragraph, but I don't know how else to inject this new theory into the debate about trade without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory.

Pete Murphy

Author, Five Short Blasts

Frank  05/10/2008 06:11 PM Report

Oh BOY! PBS ain't what it used to be, huh? Letting frauds on their programing schedule like Charlie Rose. If I wanted to watch so-called journalists kissing up to the LOW GRADE THOUGHT PROCESSES of Conservative spokespersons like Susan Schwab I TURN ON FOX SPIN ...ahhh I mean News.

Funny how PBS started going down hill after that incompetent boob George W. Bush was elected... Sold out FOR DONATIONS? Instead of interviewing the Ivory Tower m'#*~/r's, why not get Charlie to grow a pair of heavos and do a show on ECONOMICS interviewing some of the 40 million PEOPLE struggling below the poverty level and ask THEM about TRADE AGREEMENTS.

I volunteer... give me 10 minutes to point out the HISTORY OF how REPUBLICANS with their lobbyists and think tanks SOLD OUT the American middle/working class...

THEN you just might IMPRESS ME AND ALL THE OTHERS ON THIS COMMENT BOARD THAT SEE right though you media COWARDS.

yOU better CONTACT ME or I'll get 1000's of Concerned Citizens to come at you in ways you can't even imagine

actspo.blogspot.com

Mark  05/10/2008 02:36 PM Report

U.S. workers will be able to retrain at retirement age to compete with overseas workers who make 10 cents a day! Just wait for the retraining programs while we move ahead with globalization!.......

Schwab = Wimpy from Popeye: "I'll gladly give you training tomorrow for all your jobs today."

JimHank  05/10/2008 02:23 PM Report

There is evidence that that the levee in New Orleans was not taken out by Katrina, but somebody breeched the levee, everything is a big scam in the United STates, these fascists have created every war since WWI and the Depression in the 20's and 30's was to rob the people of their money, the War between the States was not about slaves, their had been many comprises to the slave issue, but the War Between the states was about commodities and the fascists desire to control the Souths commodities.

People are going to be shocked about what is coming, because for the first time in the history of the United States we will be able to change the course of our country, we will be able to fight these fascists, we will be able to hang them for treason after a fair trail, we are currently at war in this country an invisible war that has been going on for about 15 years, make my words the American people will win this war, enough murdering our Presidents, JFK was shot by the drive of the limo, look at the Zupreder Film, so simple just watch the film, why was the Secret Service missing from back of the car, because they murdered Kennedy. The Secret Service shot Reagen, enough of this corruption in our society.

We must take our country back from these fascists.

d russell  05/10/2008 02:18 PM Report

I found susan schwab's interview unsettling for two reasons. one had to do with what she said, while the other results from the childish and uneducated comments people have made about her.

yes, china has abused the free trade system, competing in bad faith and failing to honor its own commitments except when it serves their own interests.

but colombia is not china. it has been one of our staunchest allies, and is home to some of the smartest and best entrepreneurs in the region. they have made tremendous progress in the last 5-10 years, as anyone could tell by looking at a chart of their stock market or their peso. after many years of honoring our requests and standing by our side, blocking this trade deal is no way to repay them.

I suspect that many of the people who oppose the trade deal with colombia are essentially the descendents of the ethnocentric america-first crowd who believe all other countries must be exactly like us, regardless of their own problems. this kind of head-in-the-sand obstinance worked during the cold war, when we were the world's dominant power. but today, it will only lead us to being an isolated and friendless nation. if our lawmakers cannot repay one of our best allies with a trade deal, why should any other country want to work with us?

this brings me to the second scary thing about what she said: that other countries will work out bilateral trade agreements with countries like colombia, eventually making it harder for us to export our products. that will force US factories to relocate overseas to keep serving foreign markets.

JImHank  05/10/2008 02:11 PM Report

Re: Susan C. Schwabe

Wow, this country is out of control, take a history lesson, look at every period of economic uncertainty, look at every period where the jails where full of disenfranchised people, and you will find "Free Trade" as the major factor, if the American people don't see a economic disaster coming our way you are crazy, Schwabe is a fascist, this world is control by fascists, they created Hitler, and they control Bush, their plan for a the New World Order is to destroy the United States of America as we know it today, these people got a free ticket into our society by Alexander Hamilton. The fascists are alive and well and are committing treason in the United States today, and we are under attack as a nation, and we must stop this onslaught from these sick people who believe they are God, and as such believe that they are the only ones worthy to control power and money, enough is enough.

Unfortunately both McCain and Obama are control by the fascists, so we are at a terrible time for our country, the Clintons are fascist, Jimmy Carter was control by the fascists, and Ronald Regan they tried to assassinate him also, they have always assassinated the President when they have had a fascist in the position as Vice President, look at Abraham Lincoln, go through the history books and you will be shocked, every time. How many times did they try and kill Andrew Jackson who fought these bastards.

The problem was that Alexander Hamilton was young and naive, and his wifes sister was married to a fascist, thats where he came up with these ideals that have been causing financial hardship in our country since the founding of this nation.

You want free trade when you control all the shipping and trading markets and they can be manipulate price. The buying and selling of commodities numerous times from the time the farmer grows the crop to the time the manufacture purchases the product. This is corruption, and they have been doing this and destroying anybody in their way for hundreds of years. They destroyed all the great monarchy's of the world. Now they want to continue to control the world through their free trade agreements which gives the fascists license to rob the wealth from the people and put the money in their own pockets for doing nothing but controlling the process. Just read about John D. Rockeffeller, Sr., he did not discover oil, he was able to make all of his money off the backs of the people that produce all of the oil, through control of the railroads, and if you did not sell out to him he drove you to bankruptcy.

I really believe that Charlie Rose is a fascists, and we have to start considering these fascists and the groups they belong to and create as terrorists organizations, creating treason against the America people.

Look at how many journalist are fascist and belong to the Counsel on Foreign Relations, the Tri Lateral Commission, the Bildenburg Group, the Brooking Institute all fascists organizations where by they buy off the education elite of our society to further their propaganda.

My God, what the hell is going on, we are at war with these people, and the faster that the American people understand this be better, however, these people control a lot of organized criminals, and use Federal Agencies to do their criminal conspiracies. Come on everybody knows our Government was behind 9/11.

Hist Ory  05/10/2008 12:45 PM Report

Susan Schwab fails to realize that globalization is leading to the destruction of our planet, all to enrich those who care little about the fate of our only home. Unfortunately, we've become too dependent on cheap products from other countries, paying little attention to developing locally what we need. Also, we don't adequately regulate the products we are importing, so we end up with low quality products that have a high probablility of being poisonous to us. 80% of US seafood is imported, much from China, a lot of it contaminated with toxic chemicals, and we test less then 1%. Support your local farmers!

John  05/10/2008 10:47 AM Report

What Susan Schwab conveniently fails to recognize is that the workers of America have been given the same line about "education and retraining" being their salvation for so long that they will no longer give that "solution" a free pass while good paying jobs and their ability to make a living deteriorate.

Can Ms Schwab give examples where an adversely affected US city or town's economic vitality has been revivified by the "education and retraining" the globalization/free trade advocates hang their argument on? If not, how long do they expect that empty promise to be good for?

What Americans now demand after years of job exports is proof of this solution, not more empty promises. When she can show the solution she advocates producing new jobs, and those jobs growing and positively impacting American workers, she will find resistance to these trade agreements will disappear. If her argument is simply to enrich friends in high places or union-bust, then "free-trade" is doing all that it is designed to do.

It is time to put-up or shut-up.

fair n balanced?  05/10/2008 12:43 AM Report

Our subsidies to our food exports damage our trading partners poor. The Mexican farmer can't compete so his help has to come here illegally to help his competitor. The African farmer is disadvantaged as well. Lastly, my prejudice was insurmountable, my disdain palpable. The lady was such a party-liner, I was glad to see her go. Her certitudes were distasteful. If she is related to Charles, she is further discredited.

Jo Kurtz  05/10/2008 12:31 AM Report

I really wanted Susan Schwab to delve into the objections the House is raising with the Colombian trade deal. She didn't really explain much except to say it's all politics.

Then China? What about them giving us poisoned food and plastic? Why do they manufacture two sets of toys...one for the US and one for Europe? You needed to call her on this.

And what about imports? She only talked about exports. NAFTA allowed Canadian and Mexican beef into the country in droves. What did that do to the price of beef?

I expected more.

RICHARD P JAGIELSKI  05/10/2008 12:30 AM Report

WITH IDIOTS LIKE SUSAN SCHWAB, THERE WILL BE NO CONSUMERS LEFT TO BUY THE GOODS SHE AND HER CRONIES WANT TO IMPORT. SHE IS EITHER IN LALA LAND OR JUST PLAIN EVIL

RICHARD P JAGIELSKI  05/10/2008 12:30 AM Report

WITH IDIOTS LIKE SUSAN SCHWAB, THERE WILL BE NO CONSUMERS LEFT TO BUY THE GOODS SHE AND HER CRONIES WANT TO IMPORT. SHE IS EITHER IN LALA LAND OR JUST PLAIN EVIL

RICHARD P JAGIELSKI  05/10/2008 12:30 AM Report

WITH IDIOTS LIKE SUSAN SCHWAB, THERE WILL BE NO CONSUMERS LEFT TO BUY THE GOODS SHE AND HER CRONIES WANT TO IMPORT. SHE IS EITHER IN LALA LAND OR JUST PLAIN EVIL

Charles Delehanty  05/10/2008 12:13 AM Report

You let Susan Schwab give you crappo answers and did not refute her, or clarify that she did not truly answer your question.

You asked her if the trade imbalance between the US and China didn't mean a loss of American jobs. She said no. To support her claim, she cited some manufacturing US jobs which send goods to China. You asked about the 20 million in goods WalMart gets from China. She said that Americans get the benefit of those lower cost goods.

You did not ask the right follow up question. You should have asked if the goods WalMart imports from China could not be made here by Americans. That the Chinese make and ship the goods to the US for less than Americans are willing to make them. You let her cleverly continue to dodge the answer to the question you originally asked. Why did you let her get off the hook and not justify her position to the question? Why did you not challenge her like you did Arianna Huffington? You let her get away with spouting pro business owners' claims. You never seriously challenged her claims.

Charles Delehanty  05/10/2008 12:13 AM Report

You let Susan Schwab give you crappo answers and did not refute her, or clarify that she did not truly answer your question.

You asked her if the trade imbalance between the US and China didn't mean a loss of American jobs. She said no. To support her claim, she cited some manufacturing US jobs which send goods to China. You asked about the 20 million in goods WalMart gets from China. She said that Americans get the benefit of those lower cost goods.

You did not ask the right follow up question. You should have asked if the goods WalMart imports from China could not be made here by Americans. That the Chinese make and ship the goods to the US for less than Americans are willing to make them. You let her cleverly continue to dodge the answer to the question you originally asked. Why did you let her get off the hook and not justify her position to the question? Why did you not challenge her like you did Arianna Huffington? You let her get away with spouting pro business owners' claims. You never seriously challenged her claims.

RE Mant  05/09/2008 11:59 PM Report

Exports of what? The US has become like Argentina. The number of jobs is irrelevant; the quality of them is. The location of corporate headquarters is also. There is nothing that says that free-trade leads to competition, which leads to education and improvement and a lot that it does not. This is not to say that the opposite will either, but we must realize that you cannot separate trade from individual ability. Ppl have to be able to buy what they produce and produce what they buy. If they can't do either it is exploitation. It is also inefficient. Sherrod Brown has written quite a good little book about this, which I do not think is propaganda. We cannot afford to continue to pursue foreign policy goals via adverse commercial concessions. I would suppose that you could reduce the drug traffic as well by improving our economy as improving Columbia's at our ppl's expense. Would it not be more reasonable to simply give third world countries factories and teach them how to use them, than to hold them hostage on the one hand, and our own ppl on the other? I would think trade agreements between third world countries that lock us out quite a good thing.

christoph randall  05/09/2008 11:40 PM Report

you may have just finally shown to the world how deep within the bush administration that complete idiocy exists at every level, in your interview with the non-thinker susan schwab; her lack of reality was only matched by the gaudy pinstripes on the interviewer's suit.

who are these people?

her noneense about china, and complete avoidance of human economics had such an overtly overwhelming whiff of cheap drugstore perfume that only the chinese could manufacture . . . and she could so gleefully slather on.

(i am certain that the bloomberg building was thrilled to have the timeliness of the monthly exterminator arrive so soon.)

without a doubt, this is the most on-the-bullseye reality show that has ever been allowed to waft over the airwaves . . . and how grateful we all can be that we are shown that industrial inbreeding makes for very bad policy, and even worse fashion.

cr

christoph randall  05/09/2008 11:40 PM Report

you may have just finally shown to the world how deep within the bush administration that complete idiocy exists at every level, in your interview with the non-thinker susan schwab; her lack of reality was only matched by the gaudy pinstripes on the interviewer's suit.

who are these people?

her noneense about china, and complete avoidance of human economics had such an overtly overwhelming whiff of cheap drugstore perfume that only the chinese could manufacture . . . and she could so gleefully slather on.

(i am certain that the bloomberg building was thrilled to have the timeliness of the monthly exterminator arrive so soon.)

without a doubt, this is the most on-the-bullseye reality show that has ever been allowed to waft over the airwaves . . . and how grateful we all can be that we are shown that industrial inbreeding makes for very bad policy, and even worse fashion.

cr

james  05/09/2008 07:00 PM Report

mosey did good to word charlie a good hyding. Does this guy really think what he did about the obama and the priest? Way to step on on older man's heart charlie