Are Our Trade Policies Selling Us Out?

You say (“Scapegoat, Made in China,” editorial, April 16): “The U.S. trade deficit rose to a record $61 billion in February, in large measure because of rising oil prices.... “ But the oil prices are “rising” only because the dollar is falling, drastically. Instead of blaming the oil producers, we should blame ourselves for allowing the dollar to fall so much. At this rate, our national economic policy apparently needs to incorporate the “tools” for begging for debt forgiveness from our foreign creditors. All this while Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan’s low interest rate policies have enabled us to refinance our homes with 30-year mortgages, which has resulted in rampant inflation, at least in places where there are jobs and people want to live.

And as for the Chinese-American deal: The real issue is who or what has the upper hand, probably not the weak dollar.

D.A. Papanastassiou

San Marino

*

The best way to counter European subsidies of Airbus (“A Solution to Cool Their Jets,” editorial, April 16) would be for America to stop subsidizing Europe. Specifically, we should stop providing Europe with free military protection. How can European countries afford massive industrial subsidies, along with free healthcare and long vacations? Simple. They spend next to nothing on defense.

Setting aside the question of whether or not the Iraq war was justified, the fact is that even those European countries that supported us were unable to provide much more than token assistance. America is giving Europe a free ride on what should be its shared responsibility to defend the free world.

In the last century, America fought two major wars in Europe and stood guard against a possible third war -- all on behalf of “allies” who rarely miss an opportunity to show their ingratitude. It’s time to cut them loose.

Frederick Singer

Huntington Beach

*

Re “Sugar-Coated Nonsense,” editorial, April 16: There is more on the table than sugar when it comes to the Central American Free Trade Agreement. An article on the pros and cons of CAFTA would be of more interest than an editorial that says, “It defies all economic reason for the U.S. to grow most of the sugar it consumes.”

Historically in the demise of civilizations, one of the factors was dependence on outside sources for food coupled with the variable conditions of war and climatic conditions. What will be the effect of CAFTA on U.S. agriculture in general? For example, what will happen to the avocado growers and other sources of food production in California? Will these types of questions be addressed before CAFTA is pushed through Congress?

Carole M. Harder

Rancho Mirage