Protectionism is the hot subject of debate - so what?

Since the day Obama was sworn in, the French have been obsessed with what new protectionist policy Obama will or won't promote. Oh really? While I sympathize with the people of Roquefort in their battle against Bush's 300% tariffs against their cheese, it was Sarkozy who immediately talked about supporting the Societe Generale bank and not letting it fall into foreign ownership, such as fellow EU member Spain. How was that not protectionist? How loudly did the EU yell? Not so much. If anyone dared to attempt to buy Danone screams of protecting the French identity are immediately rolled out.

The politicians in Europe as well as the US always tout the benefits of free and open markets, but let's be honest about this one. When push comes to shove, none of them really like it. It's OK to talk about it but I suspect if we outsourced their jobs or put them on an uneven playing field, they'd be the first to cry. Just look at the no calling phone list in the US that doesn't allow business, but makes an exception for our glorious leaders. Sure, that's fair.

This past week Republicans - who always love an uneven playing field when business needs cheap labor - have been bellyaching about Obama and the "protectionist" stimulus plan that forces products to be made in America. And? It's a stimulus for the US, isn't it? Isn't the purpose here to get money into the hands of Americans and get them working? I automatically assume other countries will do the same until I see otherwise, regardless of what they say or how loudly they yell. If we're going to have a global stimulus plan, shouldn't people like Angela Merkel fork over more money? Pay up or shut up. I don't remember Merkel being very pro-Europe or pro-world when she forced the EU to back down on pollution laws so her German car manufacturers wanted to pollute. If there was ever a celebration to honor the 50th or 60th anniversary of the Marshall Plan in Europe I missed it and I live a stones throw away from where it was all signed so I think I might have noticed.

And let's talk about Brazil and Lula who is also making a fuss about tariffs and protectionism. Glad to see you at the party, old boy. Let's talk about those ugly import taxes you slap on software coming from the outside world. Since the corporate world in Brazil runs on US/European software, how about leveling that or does protectionism only work in one direction there as well? And then there's Medvedev in Russia who is also on the issue. Just how easy is it for foreign business to operate in Russia?

Over in the UK, Secretary of State for Business Peter Mandelson is now taunting the unions for sticking up for themselves. (And while on the subject, what the hell is anyone in this day and age doing referring to him as "Lord" Mandelson? Good grief, what democrat could sink so low as to use any such titles and yes, that includes the equally archaic "Sir" bullshit. Please.) British labor unions have had wildcat strikes recently to object to imported labor while UK unemployment has been steadily rising. The ever-clever Mandelson thought it would be a good idea to attack the unions and call them protectionists who could trigger a depression. Of course.

It would naturally be the unions who caused an economic depression and definitely not the idiots who led the economy (cough, Gordon Brown and Tony Blair, cough, New Labour, cough) into relying so heavily on the house-of-cards banking economy. I see. So the people who are going to suffer the most because of the dysfunctional economy are the ones to blame. Nice folks, those New Labour types. Hard to imagine why everyone hates them so much and think that a pompous silver-spoon-in-the-mouth Conservative is a better choice. Is there a difference?

From the unions perspective, these people are scared and rightly so. They will be the first to be cut and with EU now including what seems like the world, they have to struggle with much more competition from cheap labor. Imagine what banks or top tier businesses would do if they had to compete in such a way. They're more the hunters and not the hunted. Mandelson was then joined by a fellow minister as they told strikers that if they didn't like it, they could travel to Europe for another job, as if that would settle the debate.

In the EU, yes, this is in fact true. It's completely legal to move from one country to another for employment but of course in reality, this is the big lie. If you want to move from the UK or France or one of the other traditionally "rich" countries and head east to say, Hungary, you can. Whether you want to take a massive pay cut and then try and navigate the move for you and your family is another story. Even in the US where we have one country and one culture, it's not easy for workers to migrate. In Europe you are in a different country every fifty feet where it's a different language and culture, so how easy is that? It's not, but people like Mandelson already know that. They're just being obnoxious.

I get the whole argument about the benefits of the free market but as I've said in the past during the primaries, free trade has not delivered on its promises. Did the economists and politicians over promise? Maybe. Maybe the problem is that the benefits to average families just isn't as great as they were led to believe. Maybe it's time politicians engaged in a conversation about this rather than dictating from above. It's a complicated issue and not everyone has a title to rest on when times get tough, nor do they have the option to even ask for a $150,000 company car. Not everyone has contracts to do speaking tours for hundreds of thousands of dollars per speech.

As the global economy sinks, this will only become a bigger issue. The prosperity that was abundant on Wall Street (and campaign contributions) never trickled down to the rest and these are the people who are asking - rightly so - what's in it for me? Everyone at the top of business and politics seems to have prospered from the big talk though but for the rest, not so much. Maybe it's time to talk more about this instead of simply demonizing or kicking people who ask about what's in it for them. It's a fair question and deserves to be answered.