I am president and co-founder of the company, THIEL Audio, Mr. Shapiro was kind enough to mention on the Lou Dobbs program. First, I applaud Gary’s willingness to go on a show in which he had no control and one in which Mr. Dobbs has a reputation for talking over his guests, and ridiculing them. This takes some guts to put yourself in such a situation, and I am very appreciative. I can also tell you that without free trade, my company would have significantly down-sized or, more likely, disappeared without it.  I cannot express deeply enough my gratitude to Gary for taking on a demagogue whose popularity rides on his ability to fan fears based on economic ignorance.

I encourage anyone interested in using reason and and evidence on the subject of free trade to visit the recently published 2008 Index of Economic Freedom and, at least, read the Executive Summary. It is a compelling piece of work and would elevate the debate about free trade and its benefits out of the emotional sound-bites that do not educate or enlighten listeners.

The greatest asset humanity has is the free human mind: free to solve problems, innovate, invent, produce, create, invest, take risks and work hard. We are all the beneficiaries of the miracles humans produce! It is also important to realize that trade is not a geo-political phenomenon, but a human phenomenon. When I sell my speakers to Richard Tang, it is not America trading with China, it is Kathy Gornik Trading with Richard Tang! This is no different from my trading with my dealers and customers in Ohio or Tennessee.

Trade is the one human activity the brings people together who might otherwise be at each other’s throats. When mutual benefit can be realized through voluntary exchange, all other ethnic, gender, religious, and political differences evaporate. It is said that no two nations who sport the McDonald’s Golden Arches have ever been at war. And I really like Frederic Bastiat’s, a 19th century French economist, insight when he said, and I’m paraphrasing, if goods and services do not cross borders, soldiers will.

So, thank you, Gary, for putting yourself in such a tough situation to defend free trade. And pooh on all the elitists and egomaniacal Central Planners who wrote in to this blog who think they know how best to create a world through their redistributionist and protectionist schemes that leave Americans and all humanity poorer for their efforts.
Kathy Gornik

I doubt anyone would argue Free Trade is not beneficial can be taken seriously. The real point is FAIR trade. When you sell to China are you treated FAIRLY as the Chinese selling to you? Thats the real question. Or are you only buying from China to sell to Americans?

Dear Ranger Digital,
Thank you for your very good question and one I think that many folks have. Here’s my response.

Mr. Tang and I are in a voluntary trading relationship. What I know is that he wanted my speakers for the price I requested, and I and my employees are thrilled, profitable, and looking to grow this year, so we will be creating new jobs here in Kentucky.  It also makes me happy to think that Mr. Tang’s customers can have access to the great sound we have spent 30 years developing.

If Mr. Tang’s government places an import fee on my products causing them to cost more in his market, it certainly diminishes both his and my ability to trade. But there is nothing “unfair” if the U.S. government does not return this favor or vice versa. Mr. Tang and I will still try to go on trading, and all of our employees and customers will benefit. Mr. Dobb’s specious argument that some kind of equality or reciprocity about trade policies among governments is required as a basis for making trade “fair” misses the point entirely. Trade benefits all, regardless, under any and all circumstances.

Kathy Gornik

Mark & Stupidpuma,
I find the tone of your responses to be typical of most lefties. Instead of debating the merits of my response you go strait to attacking the person. You could not be more wrong in your assumptions about me.
For your information Wikipedia is considered valid resource at the accredited university I am attending for the masters degree I am working on. Seeing as how this forum is NOT a masters dissertation, I did not feel the need to research my responses to that level.
You both argue that health care should be widely available to anyone who needs it. This is lofty idea that sounds great, but runs into problems when one goes to implement it. If someone can figure out a free market oriented method to provide free health care to the masses, I’d be all for it. The problem is most schemes seem to involve a massive government takeover of the health system and/or significantly taxing the “haves” to pay for it. This might seem like a perfectly reasonable policy to you, but I disagree. History shows that government run processes are less efficient, not more.
In addition, I see health care as just another one of life’s expenses. It is not a right, (check the constitution). There are many needs people have that are also not free: cars, refrigerators, clothing, to name a few. Does this mean the system can not or should not be improved? No, of course it should be improved. The debate is on how.
Should the genuinely poor and disabled be helped? Sure they should; we can afford it as a rich nation. Again, the question is on how. Most of the lefty solutions involve some kind of handout, which I believe leads to dependence on the government, (yes my supposition is that this is bad).
Anyway, I said this is not a dissertation, but it’s turning into one.
I invite you to respond based on the argument and not personal attacks. I’ll be just sitting here in my “dustbin of history”; cough, cough.

Cheers,
jlgelbm3

Kathy, thank you for your respectable response. I was not able to ascertain if the govt’s trade fairly. OK, I understand you and Tang are happy but does Tang pay more of an import fee than you pay? Thats where the debate I believe should be. We pay China way more than the 2% they pay us for import fees is my understanding. If that is correct then its NOT fair regardless of how happy each party may be.

I disagree with your statement of ” Trade benefits all, regardless, under any and all circumstances.” I do agree trade DOES benefit but the long term benefit does NOT benefit under ALL circumstances.

Respectfully. RD

jlgelbm3 stated “For your information Wikipedia is considered valid resource at the accredited university I am attending for the masters degree I am working on.” while being off topic, I simply don’t believe your statement. I have yet to find wiki’s cited in any peer reviewed publications from the STEM fields here at Umich. This is all besides the point.  The conversations here are no longer even topical. If they do allow wiki as a credible source, as a department or college standard, then your degree isn’t worth the paper it will be printed on.

There are other government institutions: Libraries, Parks and Rec, USPS. They all seem to do a fine job. I just shipped 12K of equipment via USPS. It was fast, efficient (they came to my door), and cost effective. The libraries here are modern, great selection and extremely community focused. These are examples are large government organizations that work. This is also besides the point.

What exactly is the point of even unfair trade being beneficial? The point is free and fair trade. I am glad for any company (including the one I own) to have opportunities to freely and fairly trade across our borders. Honestly, I am all for it. I am also for a level playing field that doesn’t:

1. Blunt my gifts, talents, abilities
2. Allow someone else to benefit without the output of human ingenuity, creativity, drive etc…?

What would THIEL do if a Chinese company took their design and started producing knock-off’s en-masse and flooding their traditional market/s? Right now American companies that are less than whole due to that issue have a very uphill battle to fight.

Mark, you aren’t really comparing the operation of a park or library to a medical system are you? The USPS is government sponsored private organization which is responsible for its own profit and loss, hence why it runs so well. For a better example of the inefficiencies government bring us, you need look no further than your local DMV.

I agree we are too off topic. The concept of “Fair trade” is a false one. Trade barriers only hurt the consumers in the barrier nation. If we erect a barrier in the US, traded goods cost more to consumers in the US. If someone can make something of equal or better value than we can, for a lower price, the consumers only benefit. As shown by the former Soviet Union, governments are not good setting prices in a free market. Government intervention into market pricing only serves to warp the market into producing inefficient products and supporting inefficient business. We need to let go of the nostalgia of being a manufacturing nation, just like we let go of the notion, (mostly), we are agrarian based economy. Our economy is now based on services, technologies, and high-value products such as semi-conductors and THIEL speakers. The sooner people embrace this and quite whining about what we’ve lost, the sooner we’ll move forward.

PS: Mark, I’ll let the University of Denver know their degree is “not worth the paper its printed on”. Maybe I’ll be able to get a refund on my $60,000 tuition and then I’ll be able to afford a pair of those THIEL speakers.

Wow, $60K for a masters and they let you use wiki as a source. I’ll take the PhD from Umich and the masters from OSU both where they paid me to attend instead of the other way around. Nice to hit the job market with the PhD and no debt.

Anyways, this thread has run itself off course just to be at the point that it always is: No real consensus. You go your way, I’ll go mine.

Wikipedia is an excellent source of information, largely because it is aggregated from many credible sources, thereby being a credible source itself. If you look to the footnotes on most wikipedia articles you will find the sources of the information contained in the articles, the ones without citations will blatantly say “citation needed,” which also leads to rather amusing web cartoons: http://xkcd.com/285/

Dear Ranger Digital,
Thank you for your response.
It is true that Mr. Tang’s government would be able to take more money from him than my government would from me if they had a 2% surcharge and we did not. What is important to realize is that Mr. Tang’s government hurts Mr. Tangs’s business and his customers by making our speakers cost more money in his market, and makes them all poorer for it. I and all of us, on the other hand, are far better off if our government does not “reciprocate”. The products coming to us from other countries will be cheaper and thus more affordable for all citizens to buy while at the same time keeping our home economy stronger as businesses are able to be more competitive when they buy materials and services from other places.
So “unfairness” among government-takings benefits those who are taken from the least and hurts those who are taken from the most. Taxes are a dead weight on all trading activity and only benefit governments, not consumers and producers. As a private-sector activity, trade continues, regardless of the behavior of the governments, and still benefits everyone, regardless of who is taxing whom by how much.
Thank you,
Kathy Gornik

I’m frustrated to see that our email addresses are in no way being hidden from SPAM bots on this website. In plain view as a hyperlink. This should be fixed.

One of the biggest mysteries of trade imbalance between China and the US is that the US refuse to export high-tech equipment to China. The US government often cites potential military application to deny the sales. Since the US don’t produce many low-tech goods except agricuturals, the consequence is trade imbalance. Free trade has to be free from politics.

I decided to peek back in to see all of the relevant comments on this vital, oh so captivating topic.  And I see that the Whale and the Camel have been arguing.  Thank you Mark and jlflglajflj3…(whatever your name is)...Gesundheit!  You’ve successfully helped me to waste 15 minutes of my work day, thereby lowering my productivity and allowing the evil menace in China to further erode my economic standing. 

Oh and Ms Gornik, let us know how it’s going in a couple of years when Mr Tang is making speakers just like yours for 30% less and no import duties.

And since I’ve just dootied on the blog I’ll excuse myself and see if I can Soduko myself right into lunch.

Way to go Lou! You are the only one who seems to know what these companies are leading us into. I work in a store that has a shoe department that has over 400 models. How many of them are American made? 2 of them, only 2. The rest? China.