Marco Rubio: To Fight China on Trade, We Need More Than Tariffs

Broad tariffs alone won’t do anything to stop China’s unfair practices. The U.S. should use every tool in its arsenal.


Comments: 167

  1. Excellent, excellent, excellent article. China has clearly chosen the path of a dictatorship. Which means that they will, more and more deliberately control, manipulate, and in fact damage the trade agreements between our two countries. I grew up in a steel town in Pa. It's economy has been obliterated by the destruction of the steel industry in the US. We need to face China's deliberate damage to fair trade. It's no small issue.

  2. Bob:
    I grew up in a steel town also, The biggest fault of our steel was the manufacturers refusing to upgrade their plants when the world was making new modern steel plants, and the government not insisting that they do it. We had a similar problem with the rail roads. But the government stepped in and almost nationalized them. It may be too late to do such a thing with steel.

  3. Joy is right on the mark. We import only 2% of our steel from China. Evene if you look at the countries Trump claims are transshipping Chinese steel, it only amount to 6%. Like many other goods (e.g. cars), out industries were wrecked by stupid overpaid mangers who only cared about their obscene compensation.

  4. China is most dangerous state to the Western World. First they silently stole Western jobs, now they start to oppose West more openly and more aggressively in many parts of the world.

  5. China didn't "steal" anything. Our business leaders, the "job creators" begged China to take their investment dollars all in the name of "creating shareholder value."

  6. We're never going to win the trade war with China as long as that country treats workers as slaves-- unable to organize effective unions and receiving meager wages, no unemployment benefits and inadequate health care. Free trade requires free workers.

  7. "...For example, the government should impose duties on Chinese industries that benefit from stolen American intellectual property, and those penalties should be equivalent to the size of the economic loss faced by American producers...

    Which industries...What property...What-size penalties...What American producers...

    Marco, you sound sincere - that's part of your shtick...

    "...I believe in the promise of free and fair trade, but to defend...against an adversary that has broken the rules with impunity, we have to be willing to fight with everything we’ve got...

    But you also sound vaguely non-actionable...consistently...

    For instance, Al Gore was always fighting for us - what makes you a better choice...

    Was he only fighting with half of what we've got???

    For historical level-set, they've been stealing our intellectual property since before indoor plumbing...

    Probably stole the design for that, too...

    Now what???

  8. Isn't it time for Florida to impose a tariff on California oranges? Here in East Baton Rouge Parish, home of Community Coffee, we are eagerly awaiting a tariff on Coffee imported from outside parishes and counties.

  9. Too late. The Florida citrus industry is in death throes due to "greening disease," a bacterial infection brought into this country by an insect that came in on imported (cheaper) lumber. More and more of the trees are being torn out and burned. But maybe Trump can just build more golf courses for one percenters on the newly opened up land!

  10. "The goal is better jobs and higher wages for American workers."

    Rubio, then, must be in favor of raising and indexing the minimum wage and strengthening unions. Universal health care would go a long way, too.

    No, he's not for any of that? Do tell.

  11. "No less bold" -- probably not.

    Between the lines one senses that Sen. Rubio believes all Chinese progress comes from intellectual property theft and currency manipulation. But China has also made major investments in R&D and education. We did that in the 1950-1980 period he refers to at the top of his piece, but we have pulled back considerably.

    To fight China on trade, we need to be both vigilant about their rule breakers AND better competitors, reviving American know-how and our technological and human capital advantages.

    Sadly Sen. Rubio and his party are not really ready to do that.

  12. "China, in pursuit of its goals of economic and regional dominance, has been among the most egregious rule breakers."
    I think that's the most essence of entire issue in this sentence. China were allowed participate in Western trade ecosystem, without bound by the same rules, as Western countries are.

  13. If Clinton actually thought that trade with the Chinese autocracy would result in freedom for the average serf living there, he was a bigger fool than we had dared suspect.

  14. The push to have China join GATT and then the WTO was wholly bipartisan.

  15. Actually it was Republic Nixon that pushed the opening to China.

  16. No, Senator, the goal is prosperity for all Americans : consumers, investors, intellectual property creators, service-economy workers AND manufacturing-sector workers.

    Go ahead and crack down on industrial espionage and disguised direct subsidies. More power to you! But please respect our intelligence before defending Trump's nonsensical tarrifs, which as unrelated to national security as they are to Chinese investment in US Treasury Bonds. The same bonds that we now must issue more of to pay for your party's new deficits.

  17. China will laugh at Marco Rubio's editorial. Because Rubio is calling for the USA to lock its barn door after the proverbial horse has been stolen. What Rubio neglected to say was that the USA ceded its last vestige of leverage over China vis-à-vis trade when we willingly acquiesced to Chinese demands that we scrap our quota-visa regime for their textiles to enter our commerce. Ostensibly a condition of American membership and good standing in the World Trade Organisation, this was the capstone of China's trade strategy. Soon textile and apparel exports from China to the USA increased by huge multiples, as they had long prepared for the glorious day when they could completely flood our markets. China will never play fair with this or any other country and will only do business in a way that gives them the largest advantage. With incalculable human capital to leverage, how could it be otherwise?

  18. Senator Rubio writes a simplified explanation of trade and Tariffs. Blaming China for the loss of American manufacturing jobs will appeal to the Trump base, but that doesn't make it true.
    Than again, I take everything Rubio says with a grain of salt. After all, when asked what he thought of global warming, he responded: "How would I know, I'm not a Scientist".
    The fact is Rubio is as beholden to big business and lobbyists as Paul Ryan. He wants the Presidency and will say and do what it takes.

  19. President Trump's tariffs on steel and aluminum will increase the price of American manufactured goods that require steel and aluminum as inputs. The tarrifs will simultaneously depress the price of steel and aluminum in China and thereby decrease the price of manufacturing goods with these inputs in China. The consequence will be increased exports from China to the US.

  20. From the mind that thinks more guns solves too many guns.

  21. “President Trump is correct when he says that America has been taken advantage of. The federal government had the tools to better manage the start of trade with China, but our leaders chose not to use them.”

    “Our leaders?” That’s YOU! YOU currently sit in office and you KNOW tariffs are a horrible idea. If issues like this are so important and so neglected, why has the GOP run campaigns on abortion, gay marriage, immigration, and guns guns GUNS for the last decade? Maybe focusing on something serious and relatable across party lines would be a grownup way to return to your roots, whatever those are these days.

  22. The ship is slowly coming about. I wonder what the US Chamber of Commerce or the Business Roundtable will think of the Senator's ideas.

  23. So the duplicitous Mr. NRA Rubio thinks that the US trade policy has been governed by benevolent American capitalists that happily extracted oil from the Near East and bananas from Central America for a century for the "mutual" benefit of all nations. If that were the case we would hardly need an army. In reality the US stole trade secrets (in textile manufacturing, iron production, etc etc) from its earliest post colonial roots. It then erected high tariffs to keep competitors out until after WWII when it became advantageous to do otherwise because all other nations were suffering from having their industrial capacities destroyed. Lets be real here. China is doing little more than we had done. And as for steel, Trumps tariffs have far more to do with an election in the steel producing Pennsylvania than they have to do with the 1 to 3 percent of steel imports that China is shipping to the US. dShall we start again Mr. Rubio?

  24. There are many areas we could, and should, go after the Chinese for violating the rules on trade. The Trump administration chose to focus on tariffs though, because it plays well with his base. You have to keep things simple with this president and his supporters.

  25. We get it--Republicans need a foreign bogeyman, and obviously it can't be Russia, so China will have to do.

  26. You think it is OK that China runs a huge trade imbalance without affording US firms the same opportunities Chinese firms enjoy? You are no patriot.

  27. This prompts two comments:
    (1) Large international corporations are not patriotic, even as they "hover" (to use Tom Friedman's term) over the United States. It is the responsibility of our officials to enact laws and regulations that look out for our long-term well being. As it is now, the lobbyists for these corporations are all too often writing the laws and handing them to Congress to pass.
    (2) The U.S. at a national level has turned its back on key technologies involving energy, particularly solar and wind energy policies. Google to see what the Chinese are doing with high-voltage direct curent (HVDC) power. Meanwhile our politicians deny global warming and think coal is the energy of the future. How do we fix stupid?

  28. Fix stupid? We can't even fix our roads which is easier than fixing stupid.
    Our slogan to be shown at our borders and airports should read, "Welcome to America where things used to work."

  29. Federal deficits drive trade deficits, that has been well established. Republican tax cuts since 1980 have caused tremendous federal deficits and the new tax cuts will cause trillions more. No Republican can tell us how to solve the trade deficit without dealing with this first. 98.6% of federal deficits 1950-2009 came during Republican administrations, mostly Reagan and the two Bush. Obama inherited the worst recession since the 30s, a financial crisis, two wars and the Republican tax structure. His deficits fell in his terms. Now the Republicans are giving us more deficits without any reason except to give the wealthy and corporations tax cuts they don't need.

  30. "Federal deficits drive trade deficits, that has been well established."

    A reference or some data might help us believe in this myth. For example we had deficits for 21 of the 27 years from 1946 to 1973. The debt increased 75%. Yet the trade deficit hovered right about 0 throughout this period. In the other direction, in the 90's the deficit shrank and became a small surplus by the end of the decade, but the trade deficit exploded.

    See the first chart at

    http://www.slideshare.net/MitchGreen/mmt-basics-you-cannot-consider-the-...

    or

    http://www.slideshare.net/MitchGreen/its-what-you-know-for-sure-that-jus...

  31. Portraying the US and its business community as fair trading, well-intentioned do-gooders undercuts Senator Rubio’s argument. If we are going to be honest and factual we have to take account of our trade and business history. After World War II, the United States helped build an international economic order. Some of its initiatives, to be sure, were beneficial to all, but most were self-serving for US business interests and often politically skewed to serve Cold War aims. And of course we have a long history of imperialist business policies that Europeans and Americans followed, exploiting others, stealing intellectual property. So now US business wants a fair and level playing field. We all do. But we must also take history into account. And don’t we want a vibrant and healthy China? Senator Rubio is leaving out more than half of the “whole truth.” Negotiate, indeed! But negotiate without the one-sided blaming. Try a little diplomacy based on good history and good economics. It's worth a try.

  32. "So now US business wants a fair and level playing field." .....whaaaa ? Why, when the arrangements are netting that handful at the top trillions, would they want anything to change.

    This dog and pony show is nothing more than another hit on the bong "of the people, by the people, for the people."

  33. You know, no. Really do not want a vibrant, healthy China. Really want a vibrant, healthy US, and both is not in the cards.

  34. This is so on point. It’s like the kid is crying for fairness right now when they found out they were no longer benefitting after cutting and altering rules of the game from the get go.

  35. Withdrawing from the Trans Pacific Partnership (of which China and North Korea were not party to) essentially cedes the leadership of 40% of the world's economy to China. This will have a much greater adverse effect on the United States economy than anything that has happened to date. Smart move, eh?

  36. Re: "Withdrawing from the Trans Pacific Partnership (of which China and North Korea were not party to) essentially cedes the leadership of 40% of the world's economy to China."

    Ludicrous. The TPP was first and foremost designed to maximize prices paid by other nations for patented goods, and to establish the ISDS - a system of courts staffed by corporate appointed judges, with the power to supersede sovereignty of local governments.

    Yes, Trump is ignorant, and is making huge mistakes. But we wouldn't have Trump as a president, if not for *decades* of huge trade deficits, declining real median wages, years of very high unemployment.

    Yes, China is a competitor - and we have been losing, with no national strategy for balanced trade. Some vague concept of "globalism", is used as an excuse to dismantle National policies which are needed to make capitalism work, because it benefits donors.

    Our national policies are decided by the wealthiest among us - donors. The bottom 99% does *not* have a seat at any of the negotiating tables where key policies are decided, and their long term interests are always what gets traded away, or ignored.

    There are always winners and losers in trade agreements. American workers have been the losers, for over two decades. Why should US workers accept ever more precarious finances, even as average income rises? And how realistic is a "post-National Utopia", when the world is lucky if it can even keep *Nations* from falling apart politically?

  37. Absolutely, we need to be smater and wiser than China, and that may be asking too much from the bunch of incompetent dilettante's, we have in Congress!

  38. Right, blame it all on China. What kind of moron does not know or can't find out that it is the US that transferred nearly all our manufacturing to China in our Walmart led race to the bottom? Rubio is a political coward and too lazy to educate himself.

  39. It is a mistake for the NYT to give this guy a platform -- he waffles terribly and he only really wants to be president at all costs. (And he'd be a bad one!) The NYT is just helping him polish his credentials -- you are being used!

  40. Senator, you are forgetting one very important fact. The customers who buy goods at -- oh, let's say Walmart -- want rock bottom prices. That's why they everything there including technology. They made a deal with the devil and would howl at properly priced products.

    While you can blame the Chinese for taking advantage of us, look to the American consumer for driving it.

  41. I assume if a few Chinese companies donate to his campaign his stance on this issue will drastically change. Children are slaughtered in his state and he keeps accepting NRA money, imagine what some of these corporations could do with a few contributions!

  42. While it is fun to see Republicans fight for justice to our workers, let's get real here. Unions were the pressure group that pushed for trade fairness. Starting with Reagan, who broke the air traffic controllers strike, unions have been declining. Absent strong industrial unions, trade will go against American workers.

    By the way, it isn't only China. Boeing started to send some of its manufacturing abroad to weaken the machinist's union. No one has said a work. Why?

  43. Good point. The United Steelworkers Union has been the driving force behind the steel and aluminum tariff. The AFL-CIO also supports the tariffs.

  44. It's really hard to pay attention to anything Rubio says. He's in the pockets of the NRA and anyone else who will support his lavish lifestyle.

    I agree with the Parkside students: They should change the name of the AR-15 to the "Rubio" because it's so easily bought.

    Him and the rest of the Republicans who just said that there's no collusion between the T campaign and Russia.

  45. Your op-ed would have more meaning, Senator, if you would call out Donald J. Trump for what he is -- an inept & reckless traitor!

  46. Senator - You have just demonstrated to me your continuing myopic view.
    What you are suggesting is simplistic.
    You should be calling out the American businesses that have set up shop in China to take advantage of cheap labor. My bet is you will not.
    Meanwhile.
    Our dear leader is in bed with the Russians, and who knows, with who else. That could be a huge security problem.
    Our children are being gun downed in our schools. You are a supporter of the NRA agenda.
    I think you are being disingenuous.

  47. Why The Times feels the need to give this lightweight space in it's columns is beyond me. To see him on display in front of an audience says it all. In the words of Traitor Trump, he will always be "little Marco."

  48. Great Marco. Your changing the subject your afraid to take a stand on guns so now you want to talk about trade.Your a puppet for the NRA and you should have done the nation a favor and kept your word and not have run for another term in the Senate. Your record as a Senator is a joke, time for you to hang it up.

  49. No you don't Marco... What about the guns???

  50. This is a deflection by Rubio - feigning to be some kind of statesman - which he is not. It's a detour of the real issue - that he is a puppet of the NRA. He wears the blood of 17 dead at Parkland.

    Rubio's political career is over in 2022. He will be lucky to be defending small-time thugs and traffic scofflaws in Dade County Courthouse.

    Rubio gets to kiss his children goodbye - who have a security detail to get to school safely while Andrew Pollack visits his daughter in cemetery and kisses the earth she is buried in.

    This Op-Ed is from the Trump playbook - one Rubio knows so well - change the vernacular.

    Shame on NYT for printing anything from this phony.

    See you at THE MARCH!

  51. Why can someone like this 'gentleman' with his dubious track record, who was summarily rejected by Joe Public, make an appearance in these pages? NYT, review your policies.

  52. China’s bad...China cheats..China’s unfair...China, China, China....so let’s attack...CANADA! That will show the Chinese what will happen to them....

  53. Wow, so clearly these manipulations and violations by China have been going on for many decades, covering the Obama and Bush administrations. So reluctance to engage China is and was a bipartisan affair. I have to wonder what was going on to not address this head on before? Was it the large campaign donations from companies seeking access to China’s markets? I think that the root causes of why the USA hasn’t effectively addressed this issue has much to do with why we don’t effectively address gun violence, climate change or many other issues. Our system of government allows and thrives on big money from very rich individuals and corporations to influence individual politicians and political parties. So let’s not blame China or polluters or gun manufacturers for getting away with the harm they cause our nation. Let’s focus the blame on our politicians and our political parties and our Supreme Court which has legalized corruption, and let’s look in the mirror and blame ourselves for not taking responsibility to repair our republic and for being the willing fools of the very rich.

  54. This is pathetic to have come from a US Senator.

    There are two parts to our trading relationship with Chine. One part is as a source of cheap labor. American consumers benefit from this with lower cost and often better quality products. Any American who prefers to pay more for clothes,shoes, electronics, games, etc., can buy American. May every American who wants more expensive steel and aluminum containing products raise their hands. For what--40000 more steel jobs? That's like four days of our current job growth.

    Yes we buy more from China that they do from us. A major part of the reason is that we refuse to sell them many high tech products for "national security" reasons.

    The bigger trade goal is giving American companies access to the 1,300,000,000 consumers in China. There are more middle class Chinese than there are all Americans. Rubio leaves this out of his discussion totally.

    Yes American companies give up some patent and technology rights to gain access in China But any person with any understanding of patents know that most have been worked around within a few years of issuance and have little long term value Mostly political crap. Copyright rules and drug patents are real issues and worth pursuing

    The TPP, which Rubio opposed, had many tough fixes for these violations, as well as improving NAFTA. But republicans want political noise, not real solutions. Just keep the pot boiling

  55. Like everything else in our economy, from taxes to trade, our system and policies have been designed, by both parties, to increase profits at Goldman Sachs and other large companies, and to amplify the wealth of the wealthiest among us. That has meant making "deals" with and for Chinese companies; opening access to cheap labor in China and Mexico; and keeping taxes and tarriffs on trade by big companies and the wealthy very low.

    Mr. Trump, and now Mr. Rubio, are finally taking some steps in the right direction on trade, against the wishes of Goldman Sachs types like Gary Cohn. This is a welcome development and is driven by the dissatisfaction of voters in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania. Pardon my cynicism, but Rubio will again try to run for President in 2 or 6 years from now, and is setting himself up to ride the same wave that Trump did.

    Cynical motives aside, we should support these efforts because China is the biggest threat to not only our prosperity, but also our democratic way of life and world peace and safety.

  56. We need clear leadership, not pandering wimps who bow down to corporate interests and the bully in the white house. Rubio is beyond a lost cause.

  57. This Floridian agrees with your comment.

  58. What is the not-running-for-senate-again senator from Florida not running for now?

  59. We need more Republican Senators with spine. Let's start with you and you mealy mouth disease on gun legislation.

  60. I admire your ability to use "spine" and "republicans" in the same sentence. I was ROFL when I read yor comment!

  61. Dear Marco:

    When you stop rubber-stamping dolts for Cabinet positions, when you apologize for violating the Constitution by refusing to consider President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, when you start drafting articles of impeachment to remove the current traitor from the Oval Office, I'll start listening to your opinions on international trade.

    Until then, you're part of the problem, not part of the solution. Forget about writing period op-eds, trying to remain "relevant." Start acting like a patriot.

  62. Let’s not forget that Marco has received somewhere around 3.3 million from the NRA. I agree with the original comment that Marco should start acting like a patriot. Until then Marco has next to no credibility.

  63. Leadership on trade comes from the top and the man at the top has no idea how the system works. The president is caught in a time warp of his own making. He insists on claiming that globalism is wrong for America. But that is how we have been operating for decades. His America first policies are from a different time. We are a member of the world community and we were once a leading force in it with our goal of free and fair trade. Rubio is right in a way, the Chinese don’t play fair and we let them take advantage of us. But burying our heads in the sand and withdrawing from trade packs is not productive. We need to make sure our state department is active with our trading partners and is fully staffed with bright people with an expertise in their fields. That has not been the goal of this administration and it looks like it will continue on that path with the new Secretary of State.

  64. USA citizens' tax dollars are spent by our military providing safe passage of enormous oceangoing vessels carrying huge containers of foreign manufactured goods to the USA. Our tax dollars are used to assist multinational corporations hollowing out our national manufacturing base in search of ever bigger profits by sending manufacturing jobs to the lowest wage countries. Enough! Let the corporations provide their own safe passage, why should Americans pay to enable their own jobs being offshored?

  65. Maybe Marco should partner more with the NRA to counter China with guns....
    Marco Rubio embarrassing for Florida dangerous for the US and world.

  66. seriously Marco, you've got bigger things to worry about than just trade policy. Your voice's lack of authenticity in defending your country against guns, Trump and Russia makes you complicit and probably irrelevant.

    Your party makes your country a joke to those us overseas who consider the US a monolith. I know it is not and there are good people in America - but many do not. No holding back, mate.

  67. Don't forget guns, Marco. More guns is part of the solution to any problem. (Sorry, just had to slip that in.)

  68. Yes let’s have Marco Rubio tell us about trade. The senator from Florida could not even look a high school student in the eyes and stand up to the NRA. It was ascertained some years ago that China would become a major player in the worlds commercial markets. The United States and our other leading allies helped them to become what they are today. One of the first to get into bed with China inc was Walmart. Walmart can easily be said to be an offshore retail facility of China. But the writing was and still is on the wall. China will dominate the 21st century. It is better to engage with them than to butt heads with. We may not like their politics and yet 300 thousand of their children pay full tuition at our universities every year. Mr Rubio why don’t you ask the heads of our leading manufacturers what they think of protectionism.

  69. Trumpism has removed us from the World stage;our withdrawl from the World means less power in the World. China has/will fill the void; in trade or politics. VOTE TRUMP/GOP OUT. Ray Sipe

  70. Marco Rubio is correct. We do need more than tariffs. Not only to fight China on trade, but to restore the values of our country.

    We need to oust republican politicians from office who cannot get off their knees to serve Donald Trump.

    The republican party no longer has any semblance of intellectual rigor or moral compass in their fealty to this administration. It's really time to put up or shut up.

  71. Why do we need to fight China on trade now? It makes no sense. We have a population who can't afford to pay the real costs of goods if they're manufactured in the U.S.; unless the plan is to pay U.S. workers low, low wages like the Chinese workers or to increase the use of prison convicts as slave workers at 24 cents an hour.
    I have no confidence in anything that Marco Rubio has to say. He's bought and paid for like the rest of the republicans and just as cruel and mean spirited.

  72. Why doesn't Senator Rubio note that tariffs on steel and aluminum from the European Union has nothing to do with "fighting China on trade"? We import practically none from China.

    Trump's actions hurt the people playing fair and by the rules, not the cheaters. He's fulfilling his stated belief that trade wars are good and easy to win.

    This is like Japan bombing Pearl Harbor and Trump declaring war on Canada because he thinks wars are good for America and easy to win.

    I've had it with people who are scared of looking sideways at Trump, because failing to call out the policy implicitly pretends Trump isn't going against everything Senator Rubio is talking about in the column.

  73. Why do so many people have trouble seeing what is a signal? You start negotiations by being able to credibly say "we're not bluffing about what's coming next". Sheesh, I don't like Trump either, but how do so many people suspend objectivity?

  74. Jim, stories abound about Trump having fake phone calls put through to him during meetings so he could put on a big show ranting and screaming to impress all the people in the room with his toughness. It's not much of a "credible" negotiating tactic when everybody knows what you're doing. I'm sure the Chinese have heard the stories.

    This trade issue has plenty of nuance. I doubt China forced Steve Jobs to make his iPhones in China. There was an advantage for our industries in making stuff there, and luminaries like Jobs didn't hesitate for one second worrying about putting Americans out of work. This lopsided blaming of China for every ill in America is just stupid.

    Nowhere does Rubio mention that one of the purposes of the TPP was to curb China. Trump ditched our participation in that because he doesn't know what he's doing on trade.

    Rubio is a hack. He's setting himself up for another presidential run. Read Thomas Friedman's op-ed for a little more intelligent perspective on the issue.

  75. Oh Marco Rubio, I would take you seriously if I weren't so sure that you will prostrate yourself before Trump as soon as he demands it.
    You voted for the republican tax bill but then afterwards admitted that "the bill went too far in helping the super rich"...
    your words mean nothing sir, you will vote in any way Trump, McConnell or the NRA order you to.

  76. Does anybody believe anything Rubio says, or writes about? He is the ultimate opportunist and hypocrite. Whichever way the wind blows will be the direction he bends. If tariffs as a weapon became popular, he would support them. If not, he would not. Another mouse trying to be a cat.

  77. Marco needs to realize it is deeds not words that effectuate change. He has been part of the GOP right wing flank that opposed anything and everything the Democrats proposed during the Obama Administration. Part of that was trade legislation.

  78. If only we had some kind of trans-pacific partnership that could counteract Chinas unfair trade practices. Oh well, I guess that would be too hard to coordinate and would probably take years to negotiate.

  79. To fight China we need to remove all internal hurdles for American businesses to operate freely in this country. This will increase the productivity of American businesses to compete against anyone and everyone at the things we do well. And it will create freedom for entrepreneurs - the creators of wealth in this country, which we seem to engender phenomenally more than any other country - to create new products and services and take back the pole position of economic progress.

    But liberals hate all that freedom, which is why they've continually and continuously dragged this country back into the muck.

  80. You mean operate freely in China? you think we have the right and power to do that? Or pay our workers a Chinese wage and permit Chinese working conditions and still guarantee the ownership class 11% return on their investments?

  81. Whoever actually penned this opinion piece seems to lack solid grounding in international economic history. The Opinion offers a distorted rationale for what amounts to a reasonable approach to combat egregious Chinese transgressions. Senator Rubio is right to argue that theft of intellectual property, the use of bureaucracy and regulation to stymie inward investment and subsidization of state-owned enterprises all need to be sanctioned. However, protectionism by the US is not an acceptable response. Its advocates overlook the costs to the citizenry that stem from higher prices and perverse incentives not to innovate.

  82. Marco Rubio, just the man I always look to for guidance, especially after selling out to the man he stridently, rightfully criticized during the campaign. Anything to keep your seat at the table, eh Marco?

  83. What is really frightening, is that Rubio is using the term "all the tools in our arsenal." Doe he neam to threaten China with military action?

  84. After his public wilting/debacle over the past three weeks in Florida, it's hard to take Rubio seriously on anything. He's a shill for the NRA - just like the president. He looked those students in the eye and lied again and again and has done NOTHING because he can't get approval from his NRA owners.

    Why would I listen to a coward like that on trade?

  85. Agree wholeheartedly with Rubio. Trump needs to do much more. We have been played for fools for the last 20 years. The Dems stood by and allowed unbridled audacity on the part of China. Take a train ride through our countryside and witness the vast devastation. And the human lives left behind are killing their pain with opiates and now fentanyl made in China. Clintons and Obama were fools, cowards, ignorant, corrupt and lazy not to correct this. The blacks and minorities suffered the most.

  86. Perhaps I missed it. Did Rubio do anything more than claim that multi-national corporations who do these trade deals for "short term gain" warrant more protection? The big elephant in the room is that their wage rates are much lower than ours. But he doesn't want to deal with that. It's always about "rules" that are broken but never listed, and currency manipulation that reportedly ended years ago. Without more, he's just trading on our ignorance to protect his political clients.

  87. This is precisely why I dislike Rubio so much. He speaks the good speech but fails to provide any resistance to Trump. He wants to score points with both the pro and against Trump groups. Sorry Rubio, I think your convictions are more flimsy then a wet noodle.

  88. Dear Marco Rubio. Your opinion is irrelevant. You are irrelevant. You have zero credibility and a intellectual thought peace to bolster you next Presidential run is disingenuous. You're not an intellectual. You have zero courage and are for sale to the highest bidder. Just go away.

  89. Why does the NYTimes give Marco Rubio a platform to spew his nonsense. The man has absolutely no back-bone. He could care less about his constituents lives, much less other Americans.
    He can always release a worthless press release, he doesn't need a NYTimes megaphone.
    Man, am I regretting renewing my NYTimes membership!

  90. Mr. Rubio suggests that a Strong Federal government is the solution to this economic problem. Interesting concept.

  91. He's suggesting nothing of the sort. It's called hypocrisy only.

  92. Why fight China? Why not simplly fight unbalanced trade in general? Grant all US exporters $ trade credits that importers must buy on a regulated exchange before releasing equivalent $ to pay for imports. Then, if others are foolish enough to sell us their stuff at a loss, let them. They will stop once they realize that they, not us, now are getting suckered in the process. With balanced trade there is nothing to be gained from this. No surplus dollars can be stashed away for use in buying US properties or political favors.

  93. What does Marco Rubio know about trade and the post-WW II world order? Nations looked to the U.S. because we represented what a democracy could be once unfettered from demagogues, racists, women-haters, and war lovers -- unfortunately, we those chaps are now back in command -- if only for a term or two.

  94. That the little Marco is a Trumpkin sycophant is beyond question. It's amusing to hear like minded RINOs push tariffs (otherwise known as taxes) as a solution.

  95. It's funny watching Rubio pretend that he has principles. OBVIOUSLY we need to arm longshoremen with assault rifles to keep Chinese ships out of our harbors (giant eye roll). Go pound sand, Marco. You have no credibility on any issue.

  96. Our country is in so much peril because we have people like Marco Rubio in our government. What on earth qualifies this troglodyte to be a Senator?

  97. One question: how do you know when intellectual property has been stolen by
    the Chinese? Do you think it comes with a stamp or watermark that says made in the USA? Unless it is a simple bribery case like Sinovel then proving intellectual property theft is very difficult.

    As far as joint ventures are concerned a lot of countries have the same requirement in some form. In some South American countries all mining companies have to be owned 51% by locals. So why are you singling out the Chinese?

    Senator, I am always open to concrete, well thought out policy ideas. When you have something other than talking points for your next presidential campaign please feel free to submit them to the NY Times.

  98. Too many readers are discussing our history, which they are implying is bad, to justify China doing somewhat the same types of things now.
    The logic does hold, if it is bad, then it is bad even if we used to do it.

  99. Florida reelected this cipher.

  100. Rubio=no leadership. Just look at the headlines today; our government is in complete chaos. At least he gets one thing right: we need more than tarriiffs. We need a competent president, and a Democratic majority in both the house and the Senate until we get one.

  101. Rubio makes three important, valid observations: increased trade with China has brought lower prices for consumer goods, higher profit margins for American corporations, and damage to our manufacturing workforce.

    Now let's take the next, logical step: if our corporate executives can increase profits by manufacturing more cheaply overseas, why shouldn't they be obligated to share those gains with other Americans whose lives they inflict damage? Instead of lowering taxes on those corporations and high earners, why aren't we looking at ways to support our lowest earners, many of whose jobs were sacrificed in order to generate those profits and salaries.

  102. ““Free” trade with China has yielded some short-term benefits for consumers, in the form of lower prices"

    Yes, but…

    The “free” market doesn’t exist, certainly for labor, because government has intervened.

    If an American worker loses a job due to Chinese imports, Americans must still pay taxes (rightly) to support that worker’s family with food, shelter, medical care, education, etc.

    I would rather pay the “tax” of tariff-induced, slightly higher prices in order to keep the American worker in his job in the first place.

  103. I would rather pay the laid-off worker a govt-paid and -guaranteed stipend for the rest of her life in compensation for her loss of income. Perhaps the company that profits from the import could pay a portion of that profit to the govt to compensate the govt for paying out the stipend. Otherwise, the company profits from the worker giving up her livelihood.

    Higher priced induced by tariff imply less demand for the product, which implies reduced production and fewer hours of work needed to produce the product, which implies companies will lay off workers, because executives don't have the wit to shorten work hours. Thus tariffs can cause layoffs and fewer job opportunities in an industry.

  104. Protectionism can save jobs. In the USA the best measurement of the cost per job saved to the rest of the country is about $1 million per job saved. Saving one job might provide $100,000 in gains to the worker and the employer who benefit from the protectionism, but cost the rest of the country $1,000,000. Since the million dollars is just one third of one cent per person in the USA, no one notices it.

    To save a million jobs via protectionism would cost the country a S1 trillion which would be about the same impact as a very severe recession. To save 10 million jobs via protectionism would cost the country a S10 trillion. That would make the USA a poorer country than Mexico. That would mean it would be likely the people born in the USA would be going to Mexico to work as servants and dishwashers. The degree of impoverishment that would result from that much protectionism is usually only associated with severe natural disasters or wars. .."
    http://seekingalpha.com/article/4032821

  105. Agreed, Senator Rubio. But it took Donald Trump to begin fighting for jobs and U.S. manufacturing by developing trade stratergies to protect American workers. More, such as you suggest, is to come. That is why he is President and you are not. Maybe you can continue his policies as President in 2024.

  106. I find the hypocrisy hilarious. You are most likely one of those Trump voters that has disdain for us supposed coastal elites; but look at you now. Perhaps Trump is your mounthpiece but those who think he has the workers in his heart when he is making uneducated knee-jerk decisions are delusional.

  107. Obama was working on the TPP which would have joined the US to 11 other Pacific nations in a way that would have benefited the US and put pressure on China. Donald Trump (and Hillary, let's not forget) campaigned against that program, withdrew - and we've watched the other nations take it up, without the United States leading.

    Trump's tariffs affect Canada, Japan and Europe more than they hurt China. The tariff he put on solar panels might have been justified, but it's another action (like the metals tariffs) that are affecting employment in the renewable energy field which had been booming under the Obama Administration.

    Trump's been against that booming industry and its rapid job creation, too. Instead he's been making empty promises about coal jobs that nobody really believes will come back.

  108. Which also means that Trump and his anti-fact cabinet are picking winners and losers for the entire country and the winners they are picking are losers for our future.

    Not only will we have a terrible standing in the world - which is not the end of the world but we are going to have less to show for it and a lower standard of living.

    So those who are super happy about bringing back coal are just telling me that they would rather have a new pair of Nikes or a mobile home in the driveway than clean air and water. Oh; and that they don’t want to move to where jobs are or improve education so we can fill the high paying jobs that are in this country now - Don’t worry China, India and Russia will fill those jobs for us. At least Trump voters will always have something that makes them angry enough to make bad decisions.

  109. You failed to mention huge investment in scientific research and education in the 3 or 4 decades following WW2. Starting Reagan, the US has dramatically scaled back this investment.
    You fail to mention that China annually graduates some 5 to 10 times more STEM folks.
    China now leads in super-computing. China has a pragmatic approach to climate change, developing solar, wind, etc. China leads in this also. You deny climate change, and science generally "Mr I'm-No-Scientist-Man". In YOUR state of Florida, in the largest city (Miami) in YOUR state, the sidewalks are being raised by 2 feet, and installation very many expensive pumps. Why? sea level rise due to climate change.
    If you cannot accept very obvious, simple, easily verifiable facts (basic reality), then why would I accept any narrative in any domain of discourse authored by you?
    Tariffs on steel is about as stupid as it gets. It has NOTHING to do with national security, or any of the mind numbingly dumb rationals offered by trump and his sycophants. It is simply about winning an election is western PA. Trump is a moron, and you are an enabler.
    Foreign produced steel using products imported to America will gain a competitive advantage due to availability of cheaper steel.
    American produced products using steel will move their operations to foreign countries (perhaps China) because steel is cheaper there.

  110. Patents are a phony construct to allow government to enforce a monopoly by the company that owns it. "Intellectual property" is a term invented to make it seem like this is a physical object to be "stolen", but it's not. Expecting other countries to obey our foolish laws is ridiculous. There are better ways to foster innovation than the ancient patent system.

  111. Oldbassguy: superb comment!

  112. So, because things are bad, we should not stop them from getting worse? How does that make sense?

  113. Why are you giving valuable space to this guy who is clearly wholly owned and operated by his billionaire donors? Please reserve your columns for people who actually have thoughts of their own and something useful to say.

  114. I am sure some think tank wrote the article and he put his name on it. He is not informed or smart enough to understand the basic economics behind “ free trade “.

  115. What we actually need, Marco, is for the Democrats to have a majority in both the House and the Senate.

  116. I'm rooting for China. The days of me rooting for this country ended with our last election.

  117. Oh for pete's sake Marco, sit down. You're no leader; you're just waiting it out.

  118. So, what's the definition of "fair". Because, during the Cold War, the mantra was just "free trade", because the premise was that the free market was self-regulating (because it was "natural"). Now that the US is crumbling, the motto was changed to "free - and fair - trade". So, I ask again, what's "fair"?

  119. Perhaps, Senator Rubio, if America was investing in its own infrastructure,roads, bridges, airports, alternative energies, science, trade schools and public education instead of billionaires, the gun industry, campaign bribery and the 'Holy Bible', we wouldn't have to scapegoat China, Mexico and other red herrings just so Grand Old Pirates like you and Daycare Donnie could dupe your way into elected office.

    Maybe if you weren't so corrupted by the $3,303,355 in National Terrorist Association, you might have an ounce of integrity that Americans could respect instead of rejecting you as the cheap political prop you are for Grand Old Profit.

    The Republican Party and you are not serious about helping non-rich America with anything except their premature deaths and 'thoughts and prayers'.

    Party First:Country Last is what you and the Republican Benedict Arnold Party stand for.

    Thanks for the fake concern, though, you political fraud.

  120. Dang, thanks, Socrates, you said it much better than this Floridian could have. Yeah, when you got Little Marco as your senator, you don't need enemies.

  121. The free trade genie was out of the bottle long ago. Trump's efforts to stuff it back in will simply lock us out of the global economy and Make America Last Again. If we really want to "fight China on trade" copy Xi's long-term strategy and concentrate investment and education in the jobs of the future -- hi-tech, artificial intelligence, aviation and renewable energy -- instead of starting trade wars and trying to revive coal mining. And take a lead role in international treaties and trade pacts like the TPP, the Paris climate accord and the WTO, instead of bowing out and letting China exert its influence.

  122. Why are we fighting China with tariffs on steel? Because you and Donald forgot to ask the grown-up economists how to balance tariffs, treaties, trade? Forgot to run the numbers on imports? If the only book you've read is Peter Navarro's, you're a bit behind. Go borrow what's his name Cruz lap-top. He's got a couple of videos you might like.

  123. Great, another voice from Trump's choir of idiots singing the praises of protectionism. Tariffs are not trade policy they are a tax on the American consumer by increasing the cost of good across the board. Mr Rubio has proven himself to be even move uniformed that Trump, a dubious distinction.

  124. A minor case, but likely typical of the Chinese mindset. I bought a small CNC milling machine on ebay for less than $1,000. When it arrived, all the paperwork referred to it as as shoes. Why? The import tax is less on shoes than the machinery I actually bought. A good friend from Taiwan understands the Chinese very well in this regard. He told me they view the world as a bunch of gold bars floating over their heads. All you have to do to get rich is reach up and grab one for yourself ignoring all international rules, ethics, environmental protections or anything else that might get in your way. Another friend working in the U.S. for a Chinese company was told we pay too much attention to the environment. The TPP was meant to create a level playing field, ignoring China who would then have to play fair if they wanted to join and compete. But Trump through a decades worth of effort down the drain not even understanding the implications. It is by far the worse decision he has made.

  125. Why must we be subjected to the musings of "Little Marco" on any subject in this newspaper? This is a senator who has accomplished precisely zero during his tenure, has been bought and paid for by special interests, and to top that off was an embarrassment as a presidential candidate

  126. From 1999 to 2011 America lost 2.4 million jobs to China. Let me point out that for 8 of those years, George W. Bush and the Republicans (and Marco Rubio) were in charge. Same old story, the horse is already out of the barn. Let's point out that the huge budget deficits due to the Bush Tax Cut and the mismanaged response to 9/11 facilitated the Chinese control of the American economy.

  127. Mr. Rubio, your editorial reeks of revisionist history, especially in relation to the years after WWII and this colors your interpretation of Chinese actions in relation to trade.

    One, the world, in the aftermath of WWII, was in rebuilding mode, whereas our manufacturing infrastructure was intact. This meant that we had an inherent competitive advantage and would become the world's supplier of goods in the years following WWII.

    Two, to circumvent what could have been a depression after WWII (conversion from wartime to peacetime economy), we passed the GI Bill, which provided funds for education, housing and small businesses for 12 million soldiers, which also helped fuel the boom.

    Three, when confronted by world events that effected corporate business in other parts of the world, the Dulles brothers were not shy in terms of using both the CIA and/or our military covertly in order to subvert the will of the people in these countries.

    That was the real aftermath of WWII.

    While true that some of the Chinese practices are questionable, no one forced a US corporation to get involved in a joint venture. No one twisted their wrists in terms of nearly giving away all their intellectual property. The Chinese have not thrown out an elected government like we did in Iran in 1953.

    Mr. Rubio, if your goal is a better life for your fellow citizens, then why not try something akin to the GI Bill for all Americans, or would that interfere with your definition of rugged individualism?

  128. Where was this Marco Rubio since 2003? Until this Op-Ed, Marco Rubio has ignored this issue. Now it reached the medias’ attention, all of a sudden (sic) trade is a big deal.

    Typical Marco

  129. For God's sake! The problem with China is not Chinese companies or for the matters of trade the Chinese government. It is American companies (corporations, US based international corporations they are now) that have moved their manufacturing to China. This started with the Counsel on Competitiveness under George Bush Sr., and it is entirely a phenomenon greased by Republicans and neoliberals. It is a Republican problem, not a China problem.

  130. "entirely a phenomenon greased by Republicans and neoliberals"

    True. But then this blames Republicans only. Neoliberals are the Democrats under the Clintons. Unless one thinks as I do that they are Republican-Lite, it is unfair to conclude, "It is a Republican problem."

  131. I have heard Marco Rubio speak publicly on many occasions. It is quite obvious from his speech patterns, vocabulary, and mannerisms that this was not written by Mr. Rubio. This begs the question of whose opinions and objectives are being promoted by this editorial. Since Mr. Rubio does not supports higher wages, union protections, national single payer health care, and other tools that actually help working American men and women, I have to assume this is simply more hot air from a man who feels he deserves to be the next President.

  132. Won't more tax cuts solve this problem Marco?

  133. If Senator Rubio cared for the people of his state and his country he would support a livable wage, universal healthcare, regulations on payday loans and sensible gun control. That he isn't for any of that tells me he is just a paid for lackey of the Koch Brothers too poor and too scared to stand up to the Trump machine and the dismantlement of our republic

    How do you look yourself in the mirror?
    Shame on you Senator Rubio

  134. This Floridian appreciates your comment. We would be much better off down here with no one in his office.

  135. Rubio tries desperately to stay relevant but his ship has sailed.

  136. Complicity, silence and an unwillingness to do the right thing will be your downfall Mr. Rubio. Your legacy will be that of an enabler and a sellout.

  137. We should stop importing Chinese H1-B STEM workers and Chinese students.

  138. those Chinese students are paying the wages of your academics and university workers.

  139. Why not have an educated journalist write about trade problems with China?
    If Marco wants to say something inane here, he can make it in the comments section like anybody else.

  140. Marco, just in case you didn't get it - your voice is complicit with not protecting the children of your own nation. We in the rest of the world look on not baffled. We are disgusted. Disgusted by you.

  141. There was a time when a contributor raising the most important issue of our time would have prompted an enlightened discussion in the NYT comments section, with eloquent, fact-based arguments for and against the position taken, as if in a court of law, that would left the reader with a deep respect for the quality of the readership of this newspaper.

    Sadly, those days seem to be over.

  142. Marco Rubio seems to be campaigning for a cabinet position.

  143. Lightening might strike me any moment but Senator Rubio does make a few good points. Undoubtedly China has not played fair or ethically on the world trade stage. I would agree that we should stand firm on the principles of the WTO and enact consequences for Chinese companies that cheat the system. However Senator, I think your article is missing a few things. For one, China alone is not responsible for the decline in manufacturing jobs. Factors like the free trade you so highly praise (which has seen companies move to seek tax-havens, cheaper labor, and a lack of regulation that prioritizes things like worker's safety and environmental damages), the incalculable impact of technology, and America's changing economy have all contributed to this decline. I'd also like to point out that the Trump Tariffs you're praising are not all sunshine and roses. Close allies and adversarial powers alike are already discussing similar tariffs in their wake. Reports on the American impact alone suggest tens of thousands of jobs will be lost, higher prices born by consumers, and significant economic problems caused by the retaliatory tariffs by other countries. If you genuinely cared about the jobs and wages of American workers Senator, then you would see that the economic impact on this country from these tariffs outweighs the very marginal gains. As other commentators have also pointed out, if you cared about American workers then why are you giving executives and corporations tax breaks?

  144. "Undoubtedly China has not played fair or ethically on the world trade stage." In my opinion, a statement like this has no basis in fact, but it does parrot Trumpian propaganda used to justify tariffs.

    There may be some Chinese person or company that has violated some law or principle, but blaming "China", the govt and all the people of China, is flatly preposterous.

  145. For me at least, any Republican who doesn't repudiate Trump is not worth listening to.

  146. "...the Chinese government is becoming even more autocratic." As is our own, thanks to enablers like Rubio. He wants to fight China with every tool in our arsenal, let's start by sending him to work in an electronics factory in Shenzhen. He'll do as much or more damage there as here.

  147. "China has also bought up American assets to inflate the value of the dollar"

    Translation: They bought our T-Bills, and so paid the credit card used by Dubya to run his wars, and used by Trump to fund his tax cuts. Those T-bills were also the only major economic stimulus that Obama could get through a Republican Congress. So -- blame China?

  148. "I believe in the promise of free and fair trade"

    Those are opposite political positions. It is like choosing both the right to choose and the right to life. It is saying something essentially stupid.

  149. Why does everything have to sound so violent..."fight China", use everything in our "ARSENAL". And NYT...when are you going to stop being a platform for right wing politicians. That's the job of The Post and Fox News. Don't we already know where Rubio stands without giving him OpEd space?

  150. Remember when Rubio was the bright, shining, young star of the GOP? Over time, he's proven himself to be a man of limited intellect and even lower values.

  151. The US economy started growing again in 2009, and adding jobs shortly after that. It has been growing at a sustainable rate ever since.

    We need no tariffs. At all. They are a bad idea from the 19th century.

  152. I agree in spirit with the thrust of your thesis, Senator Rubio, but some of the opposing posts here are well taken. I am in engineering, and when the U.S. somehow decided to turn to China for it's cheaper manufacturing, many of us rolled our eyes. The eye-roll accomplished nothing, and the U.S. is now dependent on a communist nation for well-being.

    China now owns the supply chain, so you are indeed correct, Senator, that tariffs do little good. The U.S. would have to relocate more supply chain channels on-shore.

    In terms of political expertise, the Republican Party nominated the worst possible candidate for president in their primaries... a man who insults everyone, including you. Trump is a man who is incapable of thinking strategically, let alone any other way, and the U.S. is depending on him to develop a beneficial trade posture.

    By being pro business, the G.O.P. is caught between industries that could raise their profits from an isolationist trade policy, and those businesses that benefit from globalization. It's an elephant on a tightrope. And whether consumers will tolerate higher prices... *and* possibly inferior goods that are made on-shore, is yet to be seen, as is their tolerance for inflation.

    Again, I do agree with the thrust of your thesis. We need to have an approach to trade that includes an industrial policy (something that is an anathema to Republicans who let business do what it wants to) and is not based on free-for-all profits for business.

  153. All dependencies, in this case, our addiction to cheap imported goods, are difficult to manage. It has always been a marvel, to me at least, that our economy (its dependency) has always been referred to (and accepted) as "consumer" based, when I nature, a balanced, self sustaining, food chain requires producers also.

  154. It's amazing how China has kept prices down. I restored an old house in 1981. I bought a reciprocating saw at Sears for $100.00, At the time it was an expensive purchase, but it would do a lot of work.

    Twenty years later I was at Lowes and saw the price of a reciprocating saw. It was $100.00.

  155. So Marco Rubio, are you in favor of major government policies and investment in non fossil energy sources? That is where the innovation AND good jobs are going to be.

    Are you in favor of taxing the 1% to help with the major investment needed to bring the US into the 21st century?

    Are you in favor of drastically cutting the war budget and reinvesting that money into clean energy and mitigating climate change?

    Are you in favor of investing in free and excellent public education for all including state colleges?

    Are you supporting single payer healthcare for all?

    Hey Marco, if you answer no to any of these questions, then you are not in favor of high quality investment and jobs.

  156. How can Senator Rubio write an article supporting President Trump's tariffs that is entirely focussed on China's trade policies while alluding only in passing to the fact that the tariffs scarcely apply to China at all but instead apply largely to American allies---two of whom have now been granted temporary "reprieves"?

  157. This revelation is a little late. US manufacturer's rushed to China in order to reduce labor costs and maximize profits. US consumers had no choice but to look for 'Walmart' prices, since many of the decent paying union jobs had been relocated overseas.

  158. Correct. That ship has already sailed. We now are feeling the hidden costs of those cheap imports with their "too good to be true" prices. We reap what we sow and cheap is not always cheap.

  159. Or moved to "right to work" Southern states with lower wages and "tax incentives."

  160. Rubio fails to acknowledge that the world's major economies were devastated after WWII. The US was the only major economic power able to repair war ravaged economies - Marshall Plan anyone? China, India, Taiwan, Brazil were just footnotes if that. The US prospered because our infrastructure remained intact and we could switch from war manufacturing to consumer manufacturing. World economic conditions that benefited the US in the 50's and 60's are long gone. Free trade had nothing to do with it.

  161. And don't forget, since our manufacturing facilities were intact after WWII we didn't have to build new ones and didn't bother to upgrade the old ones. So the countries that had to rebuild now have new more efficient manufacturing facilities, better public transportation, highways, etc. We've been too cheap to invest in our own country. No wonder we are further and further behind. And I haven't even mentioned the deteriorating educational system and the ridiculous cost of higher education.

  162. I can save money at Walmart and Home Depot, God bless!!! Isn't that all that matters???

  163. Senator, which lobby's campaign contributions were responsible for the formation of your opinion on this? Marco Rubio and AR15's; both easy to buy.

  164. Is Marco declaring that he is a "Globalist?" Sad.

  165. Americans could also just buy less nonsense and increase their savings rate.

  166. What Rubio fails to mention is the complete abandonment of the TPP by the current administration. Years of planning and soft power from a lot of smart people went into designing and implementing that deal in order to exert huge levels of soft power in the region to standardize practices, create an appropriate forum for agreements, and using a collective voice to chastise violators.
    By walking away form that, this administration walked away from any real negotiating power around trade in the region and turned its back on current and prospective partners in fair dealing.

  167. It seems you're suggesting that while the TPP fails to mitigate our trade deficits, and China fails to abide by the policies put fourth, we should stand by the TPP because people worked hard on it?