The presidential candidates talk tough on China trade policy. How will they translate their rhetoric into concrete policies that will help the U.S. compete and create jobs.
Romney, as President Obama pointed out, is “familiar with jobs being shipped overseas” because Romney invested in companies that shipped jobs overseas.
Meanwhile, President Obama, while acknowledging that Americans had seen jobs being shipped overseas, is advocating working through a trade task force and the WTO, to “go after cheaters when it came to international trade.”
The president claims that the current administration brought more cases against China for violating trade rules than the previous administration had done in two terms. He mentioned recent cases the United States has won, making it possible for steel companies in Ohio and throughout the Midwest to sell steel to China.
The United States also pressed a tire case alleging that China flooded the U.S. with cheap Chinese tires. Obama claimed that the U.S. government “put a stop to it and, as a consequence, saved jobs throughout America.”
Still, the tire case was a short-term measure that was allowed to expire after Chinese retaliation.
As for jobs, the Obama administration has done next to nothing to reverse the outsourcing of jobs, especially high-tech jobs.
The President also proposes a change the tax code “so we’re giving incentives to companies that are investing here in the United States and creating jobs here. It also means we’re helping them and small businesses to export all around the world in new markets.”
Obama compared this policy to Romney’s preference for tax codes that allow U.S. companies that make profits overseas to avoid U.S. taxes.
Is Gov. Romney likely to remain tough on China? Is Obama’s China trade policy too idealistic? Do you think that changing the tax code to spur investment in the U.S., as Obama proposes, can really save jobs?
Let us hear what you think.