Raymond Richman - Jesse Richman - Howard Richman
Richmans' Trade and Taxes Blog
Gloabalization Has Been a Disaster for the U.S., Especially American Manufacturing Workers
It is time to end the globalization foolishness begun by an academic, Pres. Woodrow Wilson and executed by an effete politician, Pres. Franklin Roosevelt. The former created the League of Nations and the latter, the United Nations, a much more serous subversive entity. Globalization has reduced the United States from its status as the world’s leading creditor to the world’s leading debtor, reduced its status as the world’s leading manufacturer to second place to China, cost the US millions of manufacturing jobs, caused the loss of millions of American jobs, and caused real wages of American workers to stagnate. The latest trade statistics show that the trade deficit in July was $43.8 billion but the details are even worse for American workers. The trade deficit on goods was $63 billion, an annual equivalent of about 6 million manufacturing jobs. The burden borne by US workers who lost their jobs can be conservatively estimated at $300 billion.
We’ve created huge international bureaucracies that are expensive to the American taxpayer and what they do that is worth doing can be done by agencies of the US government at much lower cost. Here is how much some of them cost us.
In 2012, the US contributed $7.5 billion direct to international organizations. This does not include the Department of State’s own Agency for International Development. The principal beneficiary was the UN which received $637 million in support of the UN itself plus an additional $75 million to UN’s Capital Master Plan or 22% of the cost of administering the UN, plus contributions to dozens of UN entities. This does not include the dozens of UN programs, some of which are listed below. Where possible, the list includes some the principal contributions of the US to all international agencies and in some cases the proportion of the budget of the organization financed by the US contribution.
UN Secretariat, $637 million (22%)
UN Capital Master Plan, $75 million (22%)
UN Peacekeeping, $2.1 billion
Inter-American organizations, OAS $48.5 million, 59%
Pan Am health organization, $63 million
Organization for European Cooperation and Development, $102.2 million
NATO, $71 million 22% (excluding US armed forces)
World Trade Org $26.9, million, 22 %
Total to this point: $3.7 billion
Special Voluntary Programs
Common market to East and Central Africa, $47.4 million
Food and Agriculture Org $106.8 million “
International Organization for Migration, $199.1 million
Joint UN Programme on HIV/AIDS, $49.8 million
United Nation’s Children’s Fund, $422.2 million
United Nation Development Program, $29.3 million
United Nation’s High Commissioner for Refugees, $696.7 million
United Nation’s Relief and Works Agency, $253.6 million
World Food Program, $1.3 billion
World Health Organization, $222.4 million
Total Special Voluntary Programs $3.7 billion
Total $7.5 billion
The $7.5 billion paid out is only a portion of the costs of globalization.
Much greater costs are the result of trade agreements the US has entered into with the World Trade Organization, with China, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Korea, and others. The trade deficits incurred with our trading partners as a result of these agreements converted the US, as we noted above, from the world’s leading creditor nation to the world’s leading debtor nation.
During the five years from December 2010 to December 2014, foreign holdings of debt increased by $2.5 trillion to approximately $6.2 trillion. During the same period, total publicly held debt increased by approximately $5.2 trillion to $13 trillion. So in December 2014, foreigners held 47.5% of the publicly held debt. Interest on the debt paid to foreigners in 2014 was $105.8 billion.
In place of globalization, organizations like the G-8 and G20, which meet regularly, could replace most of the international institutions listed above without creating massive bureaucracies, like most of those enumerated above.
A 2012 study authored by researchers at the Breakthrough Institute, Brookings Institution, and World Resources Institute estimated that between 2.009 and 2014 the federal government will spend $150 billion on clean energy through a combination of direct spending and tax expenditures (subsidies at taxpayer expense). So-called renewable energy, mainly wind and solar energy) accounted for the largest share of this expenditure, 32.1%, while spending on liquid biofuels will account for the next largest share, 16.1%. Spending on multiple and other forms of clean energy, including energy efficiency, electric vehicles and advanced batteries, high-speed rail, grid and transportation electrification, nuclear, and advanced fossil fuel technologies, will account for the remaining share, 51.8%. A how has this expenditure reduced the prospect of global warming? Not a whit¸ nothing at all! What a waste! Exactly what an eminent Danish Professor, Bjørn Lomborg, an acknowledged world-famous expert on climate change, has said and written recently.
Pres. Obama recently received fast-track authority to negotiate a free trade agreement with a number of Asian Nations bordering the Pacific Ocean. The principal cost of the trade agreements will be loss of millions of American manufacturing jobs. Most Americans are unaware that the agreement creates an additional international organization dedicated to foolish anti-climate change policies.
Globalization has resulted in a consider\able loss of U.S. sovereignty and cost Americans trillions of dollars, particularly American manufacturing workers. Isn’t it time to rethink our international commitments?
Comment by , 8/9/2015:
Hopefully, If we ever obtain leaders with integertiy, morals and most of all, courge to do what it right for America, we could put an end to all of the aforementioned!
Our federal government at present, will just borrow 328 billion and then call it income or tax revenue, which makes the deficit look smaller than it actually is.
Dr. Ben Carson in the recent debates summed it up when he was asked how much expirence he had with running a country. He replied that our congress together, has 9,000 years of expirence and have done nothing!!!
Last 100 Years
Real Estate Taxation
Journal of Economic Literature:
Atlantic Economic Journal: