Free Trade Quotes by Anne McLellan, Mark McKinnon, Paul Romer, Elaine Chao, Bret Stephens, Anita Roddick and many others.
To open up new markets and create American jobs, we need to make global bilateral free trade agreements a priority as they were under the Clinton administration.
I am convinced that both markets and free trade are good, but the traditional answer that we give to students to explain why they are good, the one based on perfect competition and Pareto optimality, is becoming untenable. Something much more interesting and more complicated is going on here
We need fair and free trade.
Free trade was once a Republican conviction.
It strikes me as very strange that whereas Tennyson could support most of Mr. Buckley’s propositions about free trade, and the private sector, and private enterprise, Tennyson found no difficulty also in lending intellectual support to the idea of Women’s Liberation.
My fellow economists and academics fail to understand the economics of trade in the real world. Traditional models of academia respect free trade without considering whether it is fair trade.
In the 1990’s, a time of corporate capital‘s global ascendancy, the mildest restraints on its prerogatives have been peremptorily rejected. Automatically, under this designation, measures to protect national cultural industries, for example, have been ruled unacceptable infringements of “free trade.”
Too many countries that do not play by the free trade rules of the World Trade Organization – including, notably mercantilist China and monopolist Saudi Arabia – have been allowed in, to the detriment of both the WTO and the liberal trading environment it is supposed to sponsor.
I rise to oppose the Central American Free Trade Agreement, known as CAFTA, the latest expression of the disastrous trade policies of this administration which are, unfortunately, a continuation of the disastrous trade policies of previous administrations.
Protectionism is a misnomer. The only people protected by tariffs, quotas and trade restrictions are those engaged in uneconomic and wasteful activity. Free trade is the only philosophy compatible with international peace and prosperity.
Free trade with Colombia is something that’s a no-brainer.
Free trade is the serial killer of American manufacturing and the Trojan Horse of world government. It is the primrose path to the loss of economic independence and national sovereignty. Free trade is a bright, shining lie.
We need to fight protectionism with everything that we have because when there’s a level playing field and when you have open markets and when free trade is flourishing, American workers, American farmers, Americans are going to benefit.
Not only must we fight to end disastrous unfettered free trade agreements with China, Mexico, and other low wage countries, we must fight to fundamentally rewrite our trade agreements so that American products, not jobs, are our number one export.
It’s very hard to find things that rhyme with North American Free Trade Agreement.
I think that the important point is we’ve got to have a president who understands the benefits of free trade but also is going to enforce unfair trade agreements and is going to stand up to other countries.
I love trade. I’m a free trader, 100 percent. But we [the USA] need smart people making the deals, and we don’t have smart people making the deals.
I am more interested in fair and balanced trade between nations than I am in free trade that encumbers us in a multinational pact that is refereed by the WTO.
When you’re in an economic downturn, what you want is to create jobs and economic growth. And the recipe isn’t Republican or Democrat. It’s low taxes, low spending, less regulation, free trade.
The history of capitalism has been so totally re-written that many people in the rich world do not perceive the historical double standards involved in recommending free trade and free market to developing countries.
I think it is one of the fundamentals, not only of the European Union but also of free trade, that competition is fair.
A free trade agreement can be a win-win for E.U. and India.
There is a perfectly good alternative to the European Union – it is called the European Free Trade Association, founded in 1960. Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein are members. E.F.T.A. stands for friendship and cooperation through free trade.
I know something about trade agreements. I was proud to help President Clinton pass the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993 and create what is still the world’s largest free-trade area, linking 426 million people and more than $12 trillion of goods and services.
And you can’t have a prosperous economy when the government is way overspending, raising tax rates, printing too much money, over regulating and restricting free trade. It just can’t be done.
I believe in free markets. I believe in free trade. I believe in creating the conditions that will allow that to happen. And if we do that, American companies are going to be pretty darn competitive.
The progressive movement against the war of occupation in Iraq is a reason for hope, as is resistance to free trade agreements in Latin America. Those are moments that we have to celebrate: that people still find the resolve and energy to resist
Liberal politicians, in celebrating the benefits of modernization, free trade, diverse families, and the rise of more women and minorities into political and economic prominence, have often glossed over the pain of white blue-collar communities.
I think bolstering free trade is a boon to the dollar.
Any time you read that your government is erecting tariff barriers, supporting threatened industries with subsidies, or interfering in any way with free trade between individuals or nations, you must realize that your standard of living is being lowered as a result.
Manufacturing and commercial monopolies owe their origin not to a tendency imminent in a capitalist economy but to governmental interventionist policy directed against free trade and laissez faire.
Most of the expressions we use in economics are relative terms. All of us are votaries of free trade.
Free trade and economic stability do not, by themselves, guarantee success.
China is our largest trading partner in Asia. The normalization of our relations will create major opportunities for Norwegian businesses and for job creation. We also hope to resume negotiations on a free trade agreement with China.
Chinese mercantilism is not free trade, but it is far better than American militarism.
We want free trade but we want free trade that is good. We want free trade that levels the playing field.
Like so many free trade deals before and since, Nafta was sold as a massive opportunity for working people and their prospects. Forecasts spoke of hundreds of thousands of new jobs in all three countries. The reality could not have been more different.
Technology is probably the single biggest driver of productivity gains for the developed countries. For example, I think it’s much more important than free trade.
Like all Canadians, I was deeply frustrated by the decision of U.S. President Donald Trump to impose tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum. Conservatives are the party of free trade, and numerous Conservative MPs, including our leader Andrew Scheer, have travelled to the United States to help make the case for Canada.
I support the view that free trade in goods and services is a win-win situation. I’m not so convinced that free flows of capital without restriction is a win-win situation.
A Trump presidency – neutral between dictatorships and democracies, opposed to free trade, skeptical of traditional U.S. defense alliances, hostile to immigration – would mark the collapse of the entire architecture of the U.S.-led post-World War II global order.
By all means, let’s have free trade and no trade barriers and a common market. But where did it all suddenly become about our own economic and political destiny being surrendered to Brussels with agendas that arguably have very little to do with the interests of the British people and British voters?
We have to be vigilant against protectionism and be constantly making the argument for free trade.
I love free trade, but we need great leadership to have real free trade. And we don’t have good leadership. We have leadership that doesn’t know what it’s doing.
The case for open markets, free trade, private investment and technology has never been stronger in development. Over the decades, this combination has driven down poverty, helped to tackle disease, and created jobs across the globe.
Free trade creates jobs and prosperity in the Netherlands at the port of Rotterdam or the airport at Schiphol.
Free trade is not a principle, it is an expedient.
In response to a suggestion that total free trade would end in cheaper foreign products flooding the market and causing unemployment.
In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade.
I want completing the single market to be our driving mission. I want us to be at the forefront of transformative trade deals with the US, Japan and India as part of the drive towards global free trade. And I want us to be pushing to exempt Europe’s smallest entrepreneurial companies from more EU directives.
If you want India to lower tariffs and facilitate more free trade, then I think Indian producers also have a right to enter the European market.
Public protests against globalization – protests that occur by and large in the prosperous West – denounce free trade and the mobility of capital as instruments of exploitation and oppression.
The recent blind faith some Republicans have shown toward free trade actually represents more of an aberration than a hallmark of true American conservatism. It’s an anomaly that may well demand re-examination.
In a system of free trade and free markets poor countries – and poor people – are not poor because others are rich. Indeed, if others became less rich the poor would in all probability become still poorer.
Negotiating sugar trade in bilateral free trade agreements is a recipe for disaster for the U.S. sugar industry, and it is unnecessary.
I’ve always considered making it legal for Americans to import their prescription drugs a free-trade issue. Imports create competition and keep domestic industry more responsive to consumers.
Most states, for all their rhetoric in favour of free trade, are adept at trying to manipulate markets to protect and advantage their own producers.
Free trade is the way to bring jobs and prosperity.
I don’t know that free trade… is good for our country and good for Iowa and Iowa workers.
The ability to provide choices and the right to make choices that prove not detrimental, are the fundamental ingredients of free trade and independence.
We can restore E.U. growth through reducing regulation, strengthening governance, pushing ahead with free trade agreements and strengthening the single market.
The progressive movement against the war of occupation in Iraq is a reason for hope, as is resistance to free trade agreements in Latin America. Those are moments that we have to celebrate: that people still find the resolve and energy to resist.
Globally, we need to make sure that markets are open… If we see that there are restrictions on free trade, then simple economic logic will demonstrate that this is not beneficial.
Britain, the first industrial nation, had offered the world a remarkable public experiment in liberal, capitalist democracy whose success was premised upon free trade and world peace. Tuesday, 4 August 1914 brought that experiment to an abrupt halt.
While free trade purists have always rejected regional and plurilateral trading arrangements, the WTO’s charter chose to be pragmatic and regarded RTAs and FTAs as building blocks of, rather than barriers to, the multilateral trading system.
In my experience over the past 30 years in business, investment decisions can be slowed or stopped due to unpredictability in laws and regulatory framework or if free trade and competition is hampered or access to capital restricted.
America is the primary engine of growth in the world and we are the only beacon of free trade left, and open markets.
The effect of Bill Clinton’s NAFTA and Hillary Clinton’s Colombian Free Trade Agreement has been devastating to Michigan and most of the rest of the country, and accounts for the appeal of Donald Trump.
The pact creating a North American free-trade zone was President Bill Clinton‘s signature accomplishment; but NAFTA is also the bugaboo of union leaders, grassroots activists and Midwesterners who blame free trade for the factory closings they see in their hometowns.
I think Brexit‘s going to be a wonderful thing for Britain. I think when it irons out, you’re gonna have your own identity and you’re going to have the people that you want in your country and you’re going to be able to make free trade deals without having somebody watching you and what you’re doing.
They [the Kochs] want free trade and cheap labour. They own the second-largest private company in America, which is a huge multinational corporation. So they are on a different wavelength.
We have to change the kind of free trade deals we sign. We would have to change the absolutely central role of frenetic consumption in our culture. We would have to change the role of money in politics and our political system.
This system, built on free markets, free trade and free peoples and American protection, that’s what got us from the end of World War II to the extraordinary events of the end of the Cold War and a system that was one of prosperity and peace for a lot of people, including for the United States.
I’m in favor of free trade, but I think if you had to make a choice between having technological progress versus free trade, you had one or the other, you should always pick technological progress. I think it’s an incredibly important variable for creating more prosperity.
You ask, “Could we have an honest discussion about earnings insurance?” I think we could, if people understood that the alternative was to build up a backlash against global capital, against free trade, against technological change.
Free trade should not mean free labor.