Free Trade Deals Work Too Well

The idea behind free trade deals the US makes with other countries is that the standard of living will be raised in those other countries and in turn will buy more stuff from the US. And that is what happened until greed kicked in – everyone’s greed.

As an example against free trade agreements is Mexico and that manufacturing is down. At one time it was going up, Mexican workers had more money and were buying more at home and in the US. They had more money because wages went up which drove prices up. But the manufacturers needed low wages to stay competitive in the US market where everyone wants low prices and high wages, which is how jobs headed overseas or were automated.

Now there is the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agreement which will work just as NAFTA did, transient prosperity followed a decline to a level lower then it was before.

So success or failure?

Each free trade agreement should automatically become part of previous free trade agreements to eventually achieve global free trade, because getting a global agreement, all at one time, would be impossible. But there would be no place to hide from “genuine” price increases instead of “artificially” created low ones.

For free trade to work, it must be global without restriction and each nation become a component of the whole. I’m not talking world government, just nations working together like people work together to achieve a goal. It won’t achieve world peace,  but just maybe some tranquility by getting people to talk to one another.

And there must be a caveat that no nation can infringe on another as Russia has done in Georgia and Ukraine without UN approval. Every nation must be left to itself to work out it’s problems, that’s how lasting solutions are created. America wasn’t suddenly the America we know today, it took a hundred years and one massive civil war along with several smaller ones.

(no, I don’t like the UN, but it’s the best we have)

Stanford Researchers Unveil New Ultrafast Charging Aluminum-Ion Battery

Stanford Researchers Unveil New Ultrafast Charging Aluminum-Ion Battery

In an electric car, as stated by a Toyota engineer, that is given a 12 minute rapid charge of a car uses enough electricity to power 1,000 homes. This would seriously tax the electric transmission system and possibly cause brownouts if not worse with a one-minute charge. Tesla doesn’t talk about this with their push for rapid charging stations. In turn, Tesla makes fun of fuel cell cars but overlooks one prime advantage of FC cars. Rather then preserving the status quo vis-à-vis air pollution like EV cars do, FC cars “eat” pollution and reduce the amount of pollution every time the car is driven.

A drawback to current FC cars is its fuel needs to be produced though pollution causing sources, but then so does EV cars. In both cases, the source of pollution is shifted someplace else and both have a way to eliminate that eventually, but EV cars will leave mother nature to clean the air in years, more like decades, while FC cars will deal with cleaning the air now. EV advocates don’t like talking about NOW, but rather a future time when the nation relies entirely on alternative energy to generate electricity. Those advocates have invested a lot of political capital and prestige in EV cars to accept that there is a better alternative or discuss what EV cars truly mean. Like any other advocacy group, they wear blinders and see what they want to see and ignore anything that doesn’t suit their advocacy.

The advantage of the fast-charging battery is disconnecting from the grid. In fact, you could have a solar array on your home and an AL-Io battery and get off the grid entirely and not have to worry about EV cars breaking the system. But you’d have to make a choice, power your home or charge your car and then the one left out would need the grid. And what about when you go someplace and need recharged and you’re prohibited from fast-charging because of the strain it places on the grid?

The grid needs upgraded is not in doubt, but why should electric companies do it if everyone goes off the grid? How do EV cars get charged then? If Climate Change is what it is made out to be, and the air can be cleaned NOW and as we go with FC cars, what is the advantage of EV cars?

Electric vehicles are a short-term solution just as steam-powered cars were in the 1900’s till gasoline was widely adopted. Are you serious about air pollution and climate change? If so, then you’ll realize EV cars are the last generation’s solution and that FC cars are the long-term solution.

Elon Musk, owner of Tesla, would poo-poo this, but he has a lot of ego riding on his vision – and money. My answer would be, go land a rocket and work on fuel cells for cars.